Track Structure

On 2007-01-09 11:08, organix wrote:

my friend nystagmus does an entire drum track first with no bass or leads, then fills in the blanks...

On 2007-01-10 09:29, Djones wrote:

Quote:

On 2007-01-09 11:08, organix wrote: my friend nystagmus does an entire drum track first with no bass or leads, then fills in the blanks...

I've heard this before, but where are you gonna find inspiration to write 6 minutes of drums without anything else?

On 2007-01-10 06:33, soulfood wrote:
Ah the age old structure question. To me the difference between letting the track flow and forcing it to do something is to start off with what I call "the concept".

This is very important and once you have the grasp of this idea you change from being the builder who wants to build without reason because he likes to build things... and the builder who designed and created a bridge so the locals could get across the river, without getting wet.

Imagine your audience, mine when I am creating music being myself, just standing there. If you are your own audience, you should have a damn good idea of what your audience wants to hear. Now a track has to have some positive effect on its listener, otherwise it isnt worth while. Now the obvious and foremost outcome of a track, be it folk, rock, ambient or sea shanty's is the mood it creates to it's listener. Once you have a good idea of the mood you wish to create, this will point you in a good direction for note choice, sounds, tempo, groove and so on. If everything you create points to the same sort of mood and energy, you should by now have a definitive "Sound world". Once a suitable sound world has been created (be it a robotic, screamy, scratchy, atmospheric or what not) before you copy and paste what you have over and over, think about the physics of your sound world. How does it act? Is it erratic and jolty, is it soft teaser or is it all squelchy and bounce? What would I do if I was it? I suppose I could do many things... I'll tell you what! I'll do them all and then pick the best one (roughly of course, as inspiration only strikes once). Now I always go for 2 options when it comes to sketching. Do I let the melody dictate the sounds or do I let the sounds dictate the melody? Heck, one always seems to inspire the other. I usually end up sketching lines of sound, usually in the vein of some strange being that takes it in turns to talk with its many heads, so they are all pulling towards the same direction but in different voices. By this time I may hear one or two notes in my head. Now do I insert a huge riffy motif or do I place a lone note in the background, just to add the slightest hint of emotion?

That should have gotten me past my first main section. I'd also like to note that I never do an intro til I've finished a track due to the fact sounds I make later on may work well as a sneak preview in the begining, or sometimes a melody can come out of nowhere and requires prior relevance.

Once you have something built up ask yourself, do I want to go crazy or do I want to take it a little deeper so my audience will be more hooked on the groove when I go crazy in a little while. Maybe I won't go crazy at all? Maybe a meditive thing is what this sound world is all about?

Well I could go on forever with all the schizo-questionairreing, but above all once you step onto the pavement, have a vague idea of what it is you are walking to and what goodies you want to pick up on the way to make your destination all the more enjoyable. Keep listening back to what you have all in one go and when you get to the end, try to keep the track going in your head. This is also good practice for creating sounds from your mind, rather than just messing with the synth until something comes out. Once you start thinking in sounds the whole process becomes much less painful. I also advise against making sounds before you start as you end up trying to make them fit, rather than designing a sound for a specific purpose.

Anyways thats a heck of a lot to read! I hope it at least makes sense as I still very much consider myself to be a beginner in all this crazy stuff. Just remember that you are making these tunes because psy trance isnt performing to its full potential. You've heard the music and it's kinda cool, but it can do so much more, as either tools to make the world stomp its feet that little bit harder, or as an aid for the perfect psychedelic experience.

I perfer the latter

On 2007-01-11 17:11, psylevation wrote:

bravo!!!

Great advise. I swear you just spoke what has been going on in my world for the last few months exactly...:tu:

On 2007-01-15 19:11, kaz wrote:
Copying a track structure from an existing track... sheesh, the audacity. You suck. You seriously do. People like you redefine "copy paste music" in ways that are absolutely sickening. Please, stop this. Try SOME creativity, like... doing what you feel like? A bit of "self expression" in your "music" wouldn't kill anyone.

On 2007-01-15 21:34, Saf wrote:

Quote:

On 2007-01-15 19:11, kaz wrote: Copying a track structure from an existing track... sheesh, the audacity. You suck. You seriously do. People like you redefine "copy paste music" in ways that are absolutely sickening. Please, stop this. Try SOME creativity, like... doing what you feel like? A bit of "self expression" in your "music" wouldn't kill anyone.

You do the same thing to learn how to draw, you look at someone's art, and you draw your version. In programming, someone has a bit of code, you look at theirs and type it out yourself. People study classical music, people learn to play other people's songs on the guitar.

If you can't see that this is a valid way of learning something then you are a fucking idiot.

I'm only justifying a response to your post to stick up for this idea, so other people who are learning don't wrongly think they have to learn everything in a fucking isolation chamber just so they can impress the likes of you.

I remember you bitching about Mike A's bassline tutorial, get fucking real.

I'm not even talking about writing trax, I'm talking about copying as an excersize which is fun and teaches you.

On 2007-01-17 13:04, bukboy wrote:
I think some knowledge of form will also help in determining a consistent and professional sounding form as opposed to a random gut feel kinda approach.

I think both gut feel and knowledge are important.

For example u could choose to have paired phrases (which sound more solid), u could have triple phrases (which sound more airy), u could interrupt the balance by offsetting the group length in specific sections for effect like anticipation or acceleration.
But if u only take your intuitions in2 account then its like discarding a wealth of knowledge that already exists.

Just my 1 pesos worth.

On 2007-01-18 08:26, bukboy wrote:
I dont believe that.
I dont think anyones intuition is so good as to reconstruct all of bits of knowledge relevant to a section, to be able to make it completely self consistent in intent. But then again Im a perfectionist.
I think thats years of experience with musical exposure of your own and extra tips from other musicians.
I dont think its impossible to make a style which is even fairly interesting without any previous knowledge, but all the really amazing pieces of music Ive heard, If u speak to the makers they all did theory to some degree. Probably years.

I think with your intuitions its more likely ul just copy with light improvisation instead of doing any real synthesis of new stuff(in the creative sense).