I do enjoy the track, and after a couple of listens there was something bugging me about it. The basic structure of the track goes like this:
Intro - Build up - Chorus - Bridge - Chorus - Outro
The Choruses are virtually identical and that weakens the track. It doesn't really have a sense of conclusion. I prefer trance that either ends after the first chorus, or have some kind structural component to let you know the track is over. Just something that gives you that sense of conclusion.
The original sandstorm goes like this:
Intro - Build up - Chorus - Bridge - Chorus 2(modified with a different bassline) - Repeat of half of Chorus 2 - Outro
It has that stereotypical repetition of the chorus to let you know its over.
There are quite a few trance tracks that I have listened to where the chorus is just repeated almost verbatim and I really do not care for it. You get that whole "been there, done that" feeling, and it just doesn't sound as exciting as when you heard it in the first chorus.
Senator Clay Davis
i like tracks that goes like this: intro - outro.
sako487
What sucks is most djs don't want to play anything outside of the basic structure that you just said. Gets in the way of creativity =/
Senator Clay Davis
it doesnt get in my way :conf: :conf: :conf:
no dj is to say what im gonna make.
Zombie0729
my tracks go innnnnntroooooo, bassline, breakdown, bassline, outro. whatever works man :) regarding rehasing of sections, quite common in all forms of music, only in trance and progressive house do you guys feel like every second of every bar needs to be different. i personally loathe a track that reaches the point at 5minutes. there's something to be said for anticipation but come on
Senator Clay Davis
on a serious note though, my tracks lately could look like this:
intro - part1 - part2 - part3 - part1+2 - part2+3 - part1+3 - outro
each part 1min resulting in a 8min track. basically when i have made part1,2 and 3 (3 minutes worth of music), the song is close to finished. no hesitation or wondering once those parts are decent, just a little work with transitions. i usualy try to make three parts and then put them together in various ways. man didnt i just make a thread about this?
DJ RANN
I like this kind of discussion, mainly because I never think about it and always struggle with it then have to think backwards about the way the track should have been arranged in the first place which wastes a whole lot of time.
I find it really varies from track to track and by that I mean genre to a degree;
House tracks have a very different progression to trance, and sometimes the content of the track really dictates the form.
For instance (and it's an extreme one) Pryda - The End:
The structure is really based around that one big synth line and the main bassline with a few bridges, which works becuase if the simplistic number of elements in the track.
Whereas something like tilt - rendevouz has such a particular structure because of it's elements - it's far more traditional in it's arrangement (in terms of songwriting) but it's way more compley as an overall production.
I have no idea what my ing point is, apart from the fact I wish there were a simpler way for me to introduce structural form in to my productions.
Beatflux
quote:
Originally posted by Senator Clay Davis
on a serious note though, my tracks lately could look like this:
intro - part1 - part2 - part3 - part1+2 - part2+3 - part1+3 - outro
each part 1min resulting in a 8min track. basically when i have made part1,2 and 3 (3 minutes worth of music), the song is close to finished. no hesitation or wondering once those parts are decent, just a little work with transitions. i usualy try to make three parts and then put them together in various ways. man didnt i just make a thread about this?
I'm interesting in hearing this.
MSZ
im trying out different structures with my newer tracks but its not too significant, mainly the bassline being the changes.
my latest would be
intro > part 1a > part 1b > breakdown > bridge > part 1b > part 1a > small break > part 1a > outro
on a remix i did recently was.
intro > small break > part 1a > breakdown > bridge that acts as a chorus for a while, a little unexpected i suppose > part 1a > outro
ill be trying to dive deeper into structure in the near future.
for a long time i was just doing, intro break climax outro, when i was beginning.
kitphillips
Cross postng from the song writing thread because I think its relevant...
quote:
I don't really understand the whole thing with "sections" either tbh. To me, dance music is about bringing a different progression or element in while keeping the others constant, you go for small changes, hopefully enacted with automation. That hopefully goes some way to keeping the audience entranced, rather than jarring them from one section to another.
I don't really understand the way that you people formalise your song structures to that degree, to me it should all just flow a bit more fluidly, one sound to another.
Senator Clay Davis
thats really the difference of prog and pop imo. depends on what you wanna do.
Rodri Santos
from a dj viewpoint i personally hate the tracks that have a first short breakdown around minute 1 or so, i don't like when there are mini breakdowns after every part, you can be very original with the structure of the track and i know some tracks whose structure is really addictive, the structure itself makes the track great. But some producers push the boundaries too much.
