| Author
|
Engineering approach to song writing
|
Architekt
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
22
Posts :
110
Posted : Feb 23, 2012 02:13:40
|
Hey guys, just wanted to share some songwriting thoughts and ideas. I know some of it is obvious, but it helps to draw solid conclusions to state it, so bear with me 
I'm currently doing my 4th and final year of electrical engineering and I've been trying to develop an engineering approach to songwriting. Engineering essentially is a way of thinking that makes it possible to transform ideas into reality consistently, quickly, and to a high standard.
That got me thinking - what is the quickest and best way to make a good track? I've found it is to have an idea in your head, and transform that idea into sound (as opposed to experimenting until something sounds good). Ideally, you just keep adding every idea you have in your head until the track is complete. This method involves next to no back-tracking and wasted time. Of course you need to know how to create the sound you want, but that's just practice with your synths, effects and samples. There is no way around that, just practice.
The question is; what happens if you have no ideas? Well, the part of your brain that involves listening to something, hearing the space where something is missing, and constructing that missing sound in your head, is just a network of neural pathways. The more you use these pathways, the stronger they get. I've found if you just sit there and listen over and over, listen in the car, listen after a bong, eventually you will know exactly what needs to happen.
So what is the best method of training these pathways up to be quick and reliable? I've found that it is to never add anything to your track until you hear exactly where there is something missing. Never tweak anything until you know what needs to be tweaked. This way, you train your brain to naturally use these specific neural pathways when creating a track. After a while, it's just a series of listening, adding, listening, tweaking etc.
I'm hoping that eventually you get to the level of hearing multiple sounds in your head, kind of like a chess player thinking of multiple moves and their consequences. It involves a lot of sitting and thinking, listening, thinking. It's slow at first, but I reckon that process will get faster and faster.
My conclusion is that this method of songwriting, if developed, has the most potential. Experimenting is good, and certainly has it's place learning how to create new sounds. But it should almost be a separate exercise from songwriting.
I'm really interested to hear anyones thoughts on the subject!
  http://www.soundcloud.com/architektnz
http://dj.beatport.com/architektnz
http://www.facebook.com/architektpsynz |
|
|
|
TuneUnit
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
49
Posted : Feb 23, 2012 02:51
|
Sounds like a plan im no Neuroscientist and so dont know if the brain actualy works quiet the way you say, not saying it dont, but your method implyes it, and that was what first caught my eye  either way, focusing the perseptivness on finding the "missing" parts without adding "wrong" parts (and hence cluttering the tune up and blocking the "right" sounds) will probably work if you like working that way "most potential" is probably subjective. but it sounds like a method one might apply many many good, boarding on greate, songs is the result of experimenting.
If music were god, then genres are a lot like religion
... |
|
|
|
Suloo
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
87
Posts :
2822
Posted : Feb 23, 2012 03:21
|
often i get a good idea when actualy leaving the room and listen from the kitchen or somewhere..then i realise what is missing or what can be improved better..don`t know why but works usually 
-------......-------...-..-..-..-.-.-.-.- |
|
|
|
jsrobinson
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
29
Posts :
85
Posted : Feb 23, 2012 04:08
|
|
The number one source of creativity is silence |
|
|
|
Architekt
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
22
Posts :
110
Posted : Feb 23, 2012 04:16
|
Quote:
|
On 2012-02-23 04:08, jsrobinson wrote:
The number one source of creativity is silence
|
|
That is so true - Great quote!!
Yeah I'm not saying this is the best method in every way, merely that if you are looking to produce consistent results each time you sit down (what engineering requires), it helps to look at things this way.
I think the neural pathways thing is probably true; it's what is believed to be the cause of memory loss and can even lead to Alzheimers disease in old age by not keeping your brain active (using the neural pathways). There's been a lot of research done into it.
http://www.soundcloud.com/architektnz
http://dj.beatport.com/architektnz
http://www.facebook.com/architektpsynz |
|
|
|
Alien Bug
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
27
Posts :
682
Posted : Feb 23, 2012 04:48
|
|
knocz
Moderator
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
1151
Posted : Feb 23, 2012 05:52
|
Quote:
|
On 2012-02-23 02:13:40, Architekt wrote:
The question is; what happens if you have no ideas? Well, the part of your brain that involves listening to something, hearing the space where something is missing, and constructing that missing sound in your head, is just a network of neural pathways. The more you use these pathways, the stronger they get. I've found if you just sit there and listen over and over, listen in the car, listen after a bong, eventually you will know exactly what needs to happen.
So what is the best method of training these pathways up to be quick and reliable? I've found that it is to never add anything to your track until you hear exactly where there is something missing. Never tweak anything until you know what needs to be tweaked. This way, you train your brain to naturally use these specific neural pathways when creating a track. After a while, it's just a series of listening, adding, listening, tweaking etc.
|
|
The thing about the human's neural network is it is closer to a non-supervised learning system, contrary to normal computer neural networks. Indeed, with practice we are able to strengthen the weights and paths of the network, but that's a lot of effort just to perfect what we already know. I agree that better knowing what you are doing leads to better results, but that hardens the learning progress.
Now, as in all arts, everything can be contradicted, and even in science there has been many great discoveries by accident. Say making a drum pattern, you accidently missplace a hit and it changes the groove of the track, in a good way..
Well, it can't be all based on accidents or it'll be too chaotic, but when that "good" accident happens, the brain creates new pathways as it learns.
There is also good qualities in "negative learning", like: "don't do that again". It's not necessarily erasing paths, but new knowledge of how not to do.. Probably to later on figuring out a way to make it work
This method you describe sounds nice to increase the attention and focus during production, but faults in the fun of making something totally new and surpass yourself.
Super Banana Sauce http://www.soundcloud.com/knocz |
|
|
|
SineFreq
Started Topics :
1
Posts :
139
Posted : Feb 23, 2012 06:03
|
|
I like getting the timing of my ideas in sync with my workflow |
|
|
|
PsiloCybian
Mammal Footwork
Started Topics :
92
Posts :
557
Posted : Feb 23, 2012 09:48
|
|
minus
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
103
Posts :
1614
Posted : Feb 23, 2012 10:19
|
lots of well established artists using mathematics as base for thier creations,, with complex tight knitted patterns interwoven intellegently using basic natural structures and mathematic patterns to break it down, i think it has same approach as an engg approach, but to have a fruitfull creative session, i dont think the process can be bound by pre concieved notions and designs,, but a balance between intricate designs and those" good accidents" all of which really says is just shutup and work, and dont think too much, jus work
|
|
|
|
Architekt
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
22
Posts :
110
Posted : Feb 23, 2012 10:22
|
Quote:
|
On 2012-02-23 09:48, PsiloCybian wrote:
I learned if I'm stuck to not force the music, because it will sound forced and uptight.
|
|
That's really interesting. I think it is true, but it depends what you define as forced.
I'm looking at it like this: you cannot force yourself to go to sleep, but you can create the environment to sleep whenever you want by altering your thoughts through meditation/self hypnosis/certain actions etc.
Sleeping seems to be similar to making music (creativity) because it's one of those things that if you think about it, you can't do it, but you can do it on demand if you create the necessary environment for it to happen.
Reading textbooks consistently puts me to sleep, but yet I can't 'force' sleep. Can the same environment be made to access that part of your brain and be consistently creative?
Another good thing about producing is that there are heaps of activities like experimenting with sounds, arranging, eqing, that can put you in the creative headspace anyway.
My theory is that listening and thinking about where sounds can go and what they might sound like, and focusing on this and not thinking about being creative, can actually put you in the creative space provided you have good focusing skills.
http://www.soundcloud.com/architektnz
http://dj.beatport.com/architektnz
http://www.facebook.com/architektpsynz |
|
|
|
jsrobinson
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
29
Posts :
85
Posted : Feb 23, 2012 10:38
|
Quote:
|
On 2012-02-23 10:19, minus wrote:
lots of well established artists using mathematics as base for thier creations,, with complex tight knitted patterns interwoven intellegently using basic natural structures and mathematic patterns to break it down
|
|
IMO this seems like nonsense. Name an artist you believe takes this approach?
You might find a group like Tool doing this now and again as an aside.
You might also find artists like Steve Vai who, imo, play way overly technical to really enjoy, and get into.
But to imply this is a common, or even professional approach, seems really inaccurate. |
|
|
|
Architekt
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
22
Posts :
110
Posted : Feb 23, 2012 11:07
|
Quote:
|
IMO this seems like nonsense. Name an artist you believe takes this approach?
You might find a group like Tool doing this now and again as an aside.
You might also find artists like Steve Vai who, imo, play way overly technical to really enjoy, and get into.
But to imply this is a common, or even professional approach, seems really inaccurate.
|
|
Yeah I tend to agree. However, there is a good chance we use these patterns instinctively. When something sounds 'right' to us, it may be that the ratios of frequencies or volumes or structures combine in such a way that resonates with us. The ratios may conform to phi...
http://www.soundcloud.com/architektnz
http://dj.beatport.com/architektnz
http://www.facebook.com/architektpsynz |
|
|
|
PsiloCybian
Mammal Footwork
Started Topics :
92
Posts :
557
Posted : Feb 23, 2012 11:11
|
Quote:
|
On 2012-02-23 10:22, Architekt wrote:
but it depends what you define as forced.
|
|
when i reeealy want to make music, but nothing good comes out
happens once in a while, and then i stop makin music, start painting or reading books, and in a couple of days my batterys get charged again
www.psilocybian.com / www.facebook.com/psilocybian |
|
|
|
jsrobinson
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
29
Posts :
85
Posted : Feb 23, 2012 12:30
|
Quote:
|
On 2012-02-23 11:07, Architekt wrote:
Yeah I tend to agree. However, there is a good chance we use these patterns instinctively. When something sounds 'right' to us, it may be that the ratios of frequencies or volumes or structures combine in such a way that resonates with us. The ratios may conform to phi...
|
|
Check out the "Art of Mixing" movie by David Gibson.
He discusses how the various frequency ranges may well correspond to our various chakra centers, among all sorts of other cool topics. |
|
|
|
|
