Dance music production

Gordon

I'm interested in learning how to create dance music. I use Reason and Garageband at the moment and I'd classify my music as electro-rock maybe. But I can't seem to get those dance sounds. Should I get a sample pack? Any ideas on good dance sample packs? I've heard fruity loops is (or was a while ago) a good piece of software for dance music, but to me it's just another sequencer with different samples.

So, where do you start when creating dance music, and how do you master it?

DamagedTrax

hey gordon.

not sure about garageband (im on pc) but reson is a very good starting point to learn about synthesis. for the moment its probably all you will need until you start getting deeper into production - from then, as you're on mac i'd suggest you invest in logic (down the line sometime).

as far as sounds go, besides the reason synths (which are extremely powerful) you could check out a company called vengeance-sounds http://www.vengeance-sound.com/ - the have some great dance orientated samples packs at decent prices.

fitz

Reason's a great starting point. Once you get the hang of it, you can get some good results from it, though you will outgrow it.

When I started using Reason, I got to know the drum machine pretty well first off...
Use it to come up with drum patterns then use the "Copy Pattern to Track" feature to get them into the sequencer track.

Another great tool is the Matrix Sequencer.
Open a synth, create a Matrix Sequencer for it, then start creating a pattern by pulling note velocities (at the bottom) down completely...so you have the same note being played in the pattern you want. Now start pushing the location of those notes up and down the scale to create your melody line....

Doesn't always work as a creative process, but as a way of getting something from nothing, it can be surprisingly good.

If you're recording audio, Garageband is your man for now...again, you'll outgrow that too. Have a look at the resources sticky up the top of the forum.
KVR Audio is a great site for finding some good free plugins/virtual instruments. Download some of them, and play around with them in Garageband (you'll want Audio Unit format for mac).
Also, mess around with the Apple Loops that come with Garageband, they're brilliant for someone starting out, and more Jam Packs (Apple sample packs) are available direct from Apple.

frobisher

Aloha Gordon. I'd say it depends on what kind of level you're talking about. If you're a rock guy looking add some dance then try and stick with the tools that you're already comfortable with and build on them. Reason used with Rewire is a pretty powerful tool and I've heard some savage dance tracks that were done on nothing other than Reason.

What are your song structures and forms like? When I first started trying to make dance I couldn't break from the verse-chorus etc mode and it definitely made it sound less dancie.

If you're after more dance like sounds and feel I'd look at the programs you're using and your sound source. I don't know anyone using fruityloops that much these days, although I'm sure they're there. Most of the dance producers I know are on Ableton (and/or Reason).

As for mastering? SQUAAAASH IT!! :D:D

I'm sure of the dance (and dudetes?!) will chime in with more experienced words than me.

I'm a rock dude but I love bashing out the odd dance track. I've even been looking for a pseudonym to work under with the idea of bring it up a level and getting it out there. It's great fun :-)

ICN

fitz wrote: »

..Another great tool is the Matrix Sequencer.
Open a synth, create a Matrix Sequencer for it, then start creating a pattern by pulling note velocities (at the bottom) down completely...so you have the same note being played in the pattern you want. Now start pushing the location of those notes up and down the scale to create your melody line.....

+100

The Matrix Sequencer is my favourite feature of Reason.

Wish I could stick it in Logic. Boy do I miss that little fella!

Gordon

Thanks guys, I'll check out those samples. So it seems like the software I use is also used by Dance production people, it's just a case of doing it right, or getting the right synth sounds maybe.

ICN, can you not sync Reason with Logic? Can you sync Reason with Ableton? I'm pretty sure you can sync it with Protools.

Daroxtar

If only there was a dedicated Dance music production forum, we could offer so much more help and advice.... oh well:rolleyes:

you should check out these sites, they have lots of advice

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/forums/

http://www.djforums.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=21

Gordon

Daroxtar wrote: »

If only there was a dedicated Dance music production forum, we could offer so much more help and advice.... oh well:rolleyes:

you should check out these sites, they have lots of advice

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/forums/

http://www.djforums.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=21

Huh? I'd have thought being here you would have given your advice instead of offering other people's?! Oak trees come from powerful tiny things. If one thread/branch can't survive, how can a full forum?

/sorry for off topicness

PaulBrewer

Gordon wrote: »

Huh? I'd have thought being here you would have given your advice instead of offering other people's?! Oak trees come from powerful tiny things. If one thread/branch can't survive, how can a full forum?

/sorry for off topicness

Gordon, them dancey boys are full of guff.
If they had anything to say they'd be saying it.

The only sound you'd hear on a Dance Music Production Forum would be the sound of tumble weed blowing down the main street ....;)

Daroxtar

Gordon wrote: »

Huh? I'd have thought being here you would have given your advice instead of offering other people's?! Oak trees come from powerful tiny things. If one thread/branch can't survive, how can a full forum?

/sorry for off topicness

Well the above links seem to suggest that dedicated dance production forums can indeed survive.

Do you think you'll be able to learn everything you need to know about Electronic music production from 1 thread? Honestly?

/Apology for off topicness accepted

jtsuited

and this has nothing to do with the request for a dedicated dance music forum then?

jtsuited

may as well take part in this test (which i strongly suspect this to be).

learn subtractive synthesis (far too deep to get into here).
learn your genre. figure out what your producer heroes use and figure out how they do what they do.
completely depends on what type of stuff you're going for.

'Dance music' is such a broad term that it is essentially meaningless for the purposes of garnering the information you require.

If you asked 'how do you make tech-house/minimal like dubfire, stephan bodzin, etc.' we'd be able to point you in the right direction regarding which synth techniques are popular within that genre.

For most types of 'dance music', you need a huge knowledge of your preferred genre, massive grasp of synthesis techniques, a deep understanding of rhythmic structure, and a whole host of other things that really can't be dealt with in one vague thread.

jtsuited

PaulBrewer wrote: »

Gordon, them dancey boys are full of guff.
If they had anything to say they'd be saying it.

The only sound you'd hear on a Dance Music Production Forum would be the sound of tumble weed blowing down the main street ....;)

well if you had been following this at all, you'd know that most of 'them dancy boys' don't even visit this forum because of the perceived tone of the place.

VinylJunkie

PaulBrewer wrote: »

Gordon, them dancey boys are full of guff.
If they had anything to say they'd be saying it.

The only sound you'd hear on a Dance Music Production Forum would be the sound of tumble weed blowing down the main street ....;)

Yeah because your insight is deafening :rolleyes:, if you have nothing to add to the thread don't post, you will only antaganize people. Plus its this type of response that shows up the undercurrent in this forum the very reason I refuse to post in here.
Also please show respect to all kinds of music I thought that would have been a given considering the length of time you are in the business.

Gordon

jtsuited wrote: »

a deep understanding of rhythmic structure

You know, this is my real weakness, rhythm. Is rhythm the be all and end all of dance music? (Hope not, or I will never write a dance tune!)

jtsuited

Gordon wrote: »

You know, this is my real weakness, rhythm. Is rhythm the be all and end all of dance music? (Hope not, or I will never write a dance tune!)

haha hate to say this again, but what type of dance music you talking about?

for instance minimal/tech-house and the newer forms of techno rely on a lot of 16th note shuffle and exagerrating these notes (as in the 2nd and 4th 16th notes of the bar).

More straight hard techno tends to have little or no swing and relies on the more dominant rhythmic components being on the downbeats.

In most genres, the rhythm component is fairly crucial, but relax - the machines do the hard work, and it's great fun messing with sequencer type composition (as has been mentioned above by other posters).

tubedude

Gordon wrote: »

You know, this is my real weakness, rhythm. Is rhythm the be all and end all of dance music? (Hope not, or I will never write a dance tune!)

Rhythm is a big part of music, but it is also subjective, and can be easily studied. I would say to you to get your hands on a fairly basic music theory book, and read about different time signatures, and rhythmic patterns, nothing too in dept, but to get a grasp of the basic fundamentals of rhythm in music will help you understand, like when people are talking about 16ths or 8ths, how a 3/4 time sounds different to a 4/4. A lot of dance musicians don't no much about music, but it will help you. But yeah don't get too caught up in music theory, as it is dance music after all!

jtsuited

tubedude wrote: »

But yeah don't get too caught up in music theory, as it is dance music after all!

yeah, good man.
Speaking as a classically trained musician who has played most instruments to a professional level (as in I've worked as a session drummer, guitar player, and bassist), I'd be fairly willing to bet that this dance music producer has a fairly good grasp of music theory.

jtsuited

tubedude wrote: »

A lot of dance musicians don't no much about music, but it will help you.

A lot more rock musicians know even less. Careful with those comments.

DamagedTrax

+1

tubedude

jtsuited wrote: »

A lot more rock musicians know even less. Careful with those comments.

lol, I meant music theory...

jtsuited

tubedude wrote: »

lol, I meant music theory...

yes and my point still stands.

Anima

Music theory isn't that important, theres always the brute force method of trying everything until something works like most people do! It would help to know a little bit though. Particularly about time signatures and stuff like that.

as it is dance music after all!

:rolleyes:

tubedude

Anima wrote: »

Music theory isn't that important, theres always the brute force method of trying everything until something works like most people do! It would help to know a little bit though. Particularly about time signatures and stuff like that.


:rolleyes:

Yeah that's all I would say to have a look at, but no it isn't that important, and yeah just gettin' your hands dirty will definitely prove the most creative.

And what I said 'bout dance musicians not knowing much bout theory, I didn't mean that in a negative way, I mean you could replace the word dance with rock, or rap, or pop, or whatever. It's just not that important...

fitz

PaulBrewer wrote: »

Gordon, them dancey boys are full of guff.
If they had anything to say they'd be saying it.

The only sound you'd hear on a Dance Music Production Forum would be the sound of tumble weed blowing down the main street ....;)

Paul, I've already warned about being antagonistic. Once more and you're gone for a week.

PaulBrewer

fitz wrote: »

Paul, I've already warned about being antagonistic. Once more and you're gone for a week.

Fitz , sorry again - was just meant as a bit of humour.

ICN

Gordon wrote: »

Thanks guys, I'll check out those samples. So it seems like the software I use is also used by Dance production people, it's just a case of doing it right, or getting the right synth sounds maybe.

ICN, can you not sync Reason with Logic? Can you sync Reason with Ableton? I'm pretty sure you can sync it with Protools.

How are things Mate..

Nope.. Its just all Rewire.

Basically Audio only.. Like a virtual lead hooking the 2 programs up. Reason & the Host.. whatever.. Logic / Ableton / Cubase etc..

I wish you could send midi.. 99% sure that it cannot.

If someone else knows, feel free to tell us how! :pac:

DamagedTrax

ICN wrote: »

How are things Mate..

Nope.. Its just all Rewire.

Basically Audio only.. Like a virtual lead hooking the 2 programs up. Reason & the Host.. whatever.. Logic / Ableton / Cubase etc..

I wish you could send midi.. 99% sure that it cannot.

If someone else knows, feel free to tell us how! :pac:

not sure about logic (i presume its the same) but in every other sequencer you can send midi data from the master host to reason. just create a midi track and select the reason module you want to control from the midi output of said track.

ICN

Oh..

& btw..

If you are looking for Genre specific samples.. Electro / Techno / House / Minimal / Whatever..

Check out Loopmasters & Sample Magic.

LM's do a lot of different packs & are priced from about €20ish. Fast way to get some fresh sounds.

Sample Magic are a bit more expensive.


Goldbaby sample packs 909 / 808 are excellent "stock" drum sounds for Dance / Electo type music. They're about $24's or somthing.

ICN

DamagedTrax wrote: »

not sure about logic (i presume its the same) but in every other sequencer you can send midi data from the master host to reason. just create a midi track and select the reason module you want to control from the midi output of said track.

Ok..

But I''d like it the other way.. Matrix to Logic.

I dont think you can do that.

DamagedTrax

ICN wrote: »

Ok..

But I''d like it the other way.. Matrix to Logic.

I dont think you can do that.

unfortunatly not possible but if you're after a good pattern sequencer for logic have a look at audio damage "big seq 2" - its avail in au as far as i know and is a blinding little step sequencer.

fitz

Sweet, I'll be checking that out.
Gordon, jt's advice is spot on. Take a track you like and using the tools you have, try and replicate parts you like. You'll learn a lot. Articles and tutorials can also be a great source of tips/tricks that bring your knowledge along quickly.

ICN

DamagedTrax wrote: »

unfortunatly not possible but if you're after a good pattern sequencer for logic have a look at audio damage "big seq 2" - its avail in au as far as i know and is a blinding little step sequencer.

I think that its just a Gate / FX / Mod device really..

I've seen it before.. was hoping it could do what I wanted. Just read the manual there again. Dont think that it can send pitch / notes like Matrix.


The ideal thing simply would be "My 1st Step Sequencer" - but its not in UB.

Insignificance - Step Sequencer - But its not in UB.

ERA - Not in UB - And now SugarBytes have Consequence - which is about €200!

I'd love to hook up one of the Reaktor Sequencers to a 3rd Party synth in Logic but I've read that the "loopback" code - if thats the right terminology - is missing from Logic 8 or OSX - Bring on Snow Leopard!

jtsuited

eh lads you do realise working with midi parts in logic (when you loop them out) is the exact same as using a step sequencer like matrix?

DamagedTrax

jtsuited wrote: »

eh lads you do realise working with midi parts in logic (when you loop them out) is the exact same as using a step sequencer like matrix?

its the same as working with midi regions in any sequencer when you loop them out but it doesnt give you the randomness that sometimes happens with step sequencers. end of the day its just another way of doing things.

doesnt sonar have its own step sequencer now?

ICN

jtsuited wrote: »

eh lads you do realise working with midi parts in logic (when you loop them out) is the exact same as using a step sequencer like matrix?

Thats what I do now actually - I've been using the randomiser in the Transform part of Logic.. Similar, but not the same.

I used to like hitting random in Matrix & moving the notes around to get odd grooves going.

jtsuited

DamagedTrax wrote: »

its the same as working with midi regions in any sequencer when you loop them out but it doesnt give you the randomness that sometimes happens with step sequencers. end of the day its just another way of doing things.

yeah it's just a few of them were talking about their fondness for the matrix sequencer in reason.

Seziertisch

Hey Gordon, obviously, as has been said a knowledge (formal or otherwise) of rhythm is important, but don't forget harmony (depending on what you want to achieve).

I know lads who are reasonable at getting beats together yet suffer big time from a limited knowledge/ability with chords. Its hard to get a moody sounding piece together if you are unable to get your head around anything other than basic major chord patterns.

Also, probably the most important thing for making music yourself is "instinct". This is a bit harder to pin down. You can know all the theory and competently play a number of instruments but if you don't have the feeling to really nail a tune or part (in whatever genre you are working in) then it doesn't really matter how good you are technically or whatever. You need to imagine what you want to hear (not in a note to note or beat to beat sense) but rather what kind of reaction you are looking to achieve in the listener and then make it happen. Instinct also means that if you are working with other people that you know how to push their buttons (in a good way) and know when to step in and put a little direction on something versus just letting things flow.

That said, having a knowledge of the theory and musicianship is a big plus and can certainly get you where you want to go a lot faster, and can cut out a lot of messing on the way.

Also, dance tracks are as much about the production and mixing as the music itself. Side-chain compression (have a look around online to find an explanation) is used in quite a lot of house/dance genres. Benni Benassi wouldn't exist without it ;-). Also look to panning techniques and filter sweeps as a way to keep things interesting. Electronic music is more about having change on a micro level. This is why it gets dismissed a lot, with people saying that it is just the same stuff cycling again and again. It can be repetitive (in one way) but it definitely shouldn't be static, there should always be movement in the mix or slight alterations in the arrangement.

SteveDon

jtsuited wrote: »

yeah, good man.
Speaking as a classically trained musician who has played most instruments to a professional level (as in I've worked as a session drummer, guitar player, and bassist), I'd be fairly willing to bet that this dance music producer has a fairly good grasp of music theory.

what kind of theory do you apply to dance music jsuited? id be interested to know.

i sometimes use scales in my melodies to try to get to the sound i want, for example if im trying to make a minimal track thats slightly unharmonious i would tend to focus on using diminished scales and the likes

but more often than not i just go with what sounds good to me and improvise on a loop until ive got something i like, i used to play in many a jam band back in the day and the focus there was just making songs up as we went along

back to the point though, definitley spend the time to master synthesis, its so important, you could have a great harmony going but if its being played out through a flat sounding synth its going to sound very cheesey regardless

jtsuited

SteveDon wrote: »

what kind of theory do you apply to dance music jsuited? id be interested to know.

i sometimes use scales in my melodies to try to get to the sound i want, for example if im trying to make a minimal track thats slightly unharmonious i would tend to focus on using diminished scales and the likes

well when I was doing that Silent track, I had to do a lot of figuring out with the chaotic melody, you know stuff that didn't clash.

You've always got to be checking some grace note on the bass line or even toms isn't clashing with something in the more obvious areas.

When doing more underground stuff, I tend to use a lot of 'hocketing' (actually a lot of good dance music nowadays is all about hocketing).

It's a technique Cage, Glass and all them buckos were into in the 60's, and nowadays Trentemoller is probably the most obvious and popular exponent of the technique.

Bit too detailed to go into here but it's basically using a different sound source for each note in a musical phrase. When the stuff isn't perfectly in tune and has a completely different timbre it it gives a very distinctive sound to a track and pretty much every track in the top ten beatport charts in techno, tech-house and minimal uses this technique to an extent.

A lot of new techno draws on 20th century classical music like Cage, Glass, Steve Reich and all those other geniuses.
jaysus....
We DEFINITELY need our own forum for this discussion!

SteveDon

jtsuited wrote: »

When doing more underground stuff, I tend to use a lot of 'hocketing' (actually a lot of good dance music nowadays is all about hocketing).

It's a technique Cage, Glass and all them buckos were into in the 60's, and nowadays Trentemoller is probably the most obvious and popular exponent of the technique.

thats very interesting... i might try to give that a go

do you mean having different tracks for each note? but having the same synth sound basically with just a parameter change on each?

if thats the case i might not be able to do that since im working with hardware that only has 6 tracks for synth sounds

seannash

SteveDon wrote: »

thats very interesting... i might try to give that a go

do you mean having different tracks for each note? but having the same synth sound basically with just a parameter change on each?

if thats the case i might not be able to do that since im working with hardware that only has 6 tracks for synth sounds

steve well have to get you using logic.
i think it can be completely different synth sounds(not too disimilar to each other) and the same sound with different parameters.

SteveDon

seannash wrote: »

steve well have to get you using logic.

NEVER!! haha

jtsuited

SteveDon wrote: »

thats very interesting... i might try to give that a go

do you mean having different tracks for each note? but having the same synth sound basically with just a parameter change on each?

if thats the case i might not be able to do that since im working with hardware that only has 6 tracks for synth sounds

yeah well this is one of the main effects of people becoming DAW based. Hardware limits you in this way, which can be great for some stuff and not so great for things like hocketing.

You mean you're not on Logic yet??????:eek::eek::D

jtsuited

SteveDon wrote: »

thats very interesting... i might try to give that a go

do you mean having different tracks for each note?

yup, then you tend to be doing a lot of rendering them down to one line for ease of arrangement.

seannash

SteveDon wrote: »

NEVER!! haha

aw mate you have to try it.but your on cubase anyway right?to sequence your stuff

jtsuited

seannash wrote: »

aw mate you have to try it.but your on cubase anyway right?to sequence your stuff

cubase, logic - much of a muchness when it comes to dance music production anywho.

SteveDon

seannash wrote: »

aw mate you have to try it.but your on cubase anyway right?to sequence your stuff

no i dont use the computer at all at the moment, i sequence on the hardware, then just play it live and record it all in one take into audacity!

Four-Percent

Am i right in thinking this is hocketing -

I could never be arsed to go to that much effort although i do like it in some cases...

seannash

SteveDon wrote: »

no i dont use the computer at all at the moment, i sequence on the hardware, then just play it live and record it all in one take into audacity!

man you should try it.did you start on software?

SteveDon

seannash wrote: »

man you should try it.did you start on software?

yeah i started out on reason, ive used pro tools to record some band tracks

i think the workflow with hardware is a huge plus, and the fact that im limited in some ways i think works to my advantage because i dont bucther tracks by adding unnessecary bits

i know im eventually going to have to make the move but for the moment im pretty happy