stepping it up a gear

seannash

So lately ive been getting a bit frustrated with my tracks.
i like the actual songs but the execution and sound of them isnt as good as most of the stuff i hear by my favourite producers.

i honestly am trying everything i can think of to improve of but im really drawing a blank.i kinda feel like i have a certain way i make tracks and this is causing me to have this sub par sound.

id really like to break the habit of the routine of making tracks but i cant seem to do things any other way that improves the overall sound quality of my tracks.
i understand experience has a bit to do with it but maybe some people can share what tricks or techniques really push there productions into the pro sounding category.

jtsuited

Since I know you're stuff fairly well I'll chime in here. Take all this as consructive criticism and nothing personal. also I'm fairly sure you've been working on these things lately judging by your most recent tracks.

1. I think you need to work on your groove/swing. You're using sounds that are associated with a genre that has very significant amounts of 16th note swing, so it sounds a bit flat and lifeless when you do tracks with these sounds but without the shuffle feel.

2. You suffer from club-kick syndrome where your kicks are too prominent throughout the whole frequency spectrum. I know you want the kick to cut through but I feel you're imagining what tracks sound like in a club with a pounding kick. This makes the tracks sound too banging and not groovy enough.

3. You need to focus more on your kick, snare and hats to provide the core rhythm and sound of the track. Sometimes they sound more like an afterthought in your stuff. And then you fill in the gaps with claves etc.
Get the track to sound full with kick,hat and snare and you'll find your stuff will have a whole load more presence, punch, and assertiveness.


4. I know it'd be a lot easier if you were to be told some advice regarding your mixdowns etc., but I think your main issues are in the composition right now. Stuff needs more fills, sweeps, reverb tails, etc. to keep it sounding interesting.

Try and listen to your stuff and if it sounds like it's on a loop, put something that evolves over it. This stops the track sounding repetitive.

Hope that helps.

seannash

cheers man.definitely some things i gotta work on.definitely not happy with my kick,snare hat combos but always try and make percs do the job they should be doing.im gonna have to sit down and work on a few more hat rhythms.

PaulBrewer

seannash wrote: »

So lately ive been getting a bit frustrated with my tracks.
i like the actual songs but the execution and sound of them isnt as good as most of the stuff i hear by my favourite producers.

i honestly am trying everything i can think of to improve of but im really drawing a blank.i kinda feel like i have a certain way i make tracks and this is causing me to have this sub par sound.

id really like to break the habit of the routine of making tracks but i cant seem to do things any other way that improves the overall sound quality of my tracks.
i understand experience has a bit to do with it but maybe some people can share what tricks or techniques really push there productions into the pro sounding category.

Sean, Equipment HAS to play a part here.

I've rattled on about this a million times but if you're happy with your music then it's gear letting you down.

The two likely culprits are your D to A and Monitors.

No matter how good your Soft Synths etc are if they're being squeezed through an inferior D to A while you're mixing you aren't optimizing your work.

Monitoring is , in my experience, the thing most people get wrong. (when I say monitoring I mean the whole room/speakers system)

If you can't hear what you're at , you're guessing - which is no way to make a track , I think.

However, acknowledging you're not happy is in itself a progressive step.

Best of Luck!

Four-Percent

Try setting aside an entire day just for music, lock yourself in a room with laptop, monitors etc and spend the whole day working on one song.

Also dedicate a while to figuring out that moog modular inside out.Get confident with it and you'll be sorted.

Neurojazz

PaulBrewer wrote: »

Sean, Equipment HAS to play a part here.

I've rattled on about this a million times but if you're happy with your music then it's gear letting you down.

The two likely culprits are your D to A and Monitors.

No matter how good your Soft Synths etc are if they're being squeezed through an inferior D to A while you're mixing you aren't optimizing your work.

Monitoring is , in my experience, the thing most people get wrong. (when I say monitoring I mean the whole room/speakers system)

If you can't hear what you're at , you're guessing - which is no way to make a track , I think.

However, acknowledging you're not happy is in itself a progressive step.

Best of Luck!

Lol, Paul. I've made myself very happy with some of the crappest gear in the universe - writing has little to do with it in real terms. Writing is a process of self actualization and can be made in very limited environments.

I mean.. look at Robert Johnson.

It's not what you've got, it's what you do with it

splitrmx

What professional producer tracks are you comparing yours to? Maybe you could post up an example and people might be able to give hints about how to achieve a certain sound you're after.

As for equipment, good studio monitors would be a sound investment. What ones are you currently using?

gsparx

Neurojazz wrote: »

Lol, Paul. I've made myself very happy with some of the crappest gear in the universe - writing has little to do with it in real terms. Writing is a process of self actualization and can be made in very limited environments.

I mean.. look at Robert Johnson.

It's not what you've got, it's what you do with it

In fairness, Sean did say it was the sound of his tracks he wasn't happy with. He said he likes the actual songs.

I'd say good professional mastering is essential to get a good professional sound. If nothing else it gives somebody who doesn't know the track a chance to work on it in a different room with a different perspective. And mastering is a specialised skill.
Having said that, I think your tracks are really good.
Everyone always feels they have areas in which they need to improve. It's when that drive goes away you're in trouble.

Neurojazz

gsparx wrote: »

In fairness, Sean did say it was the sound of his tracks he wasn't happy with. He said he likes the actual songs.

I'd say good professional mastering is essential to get a good professional sound. If nothing else it gives somebody who doesn't know the track a chance to work on it in a different room with a different perspective. And mastering is a specialised skill.
Having said that, I think your tracks are really good.
Everyone always feels they have areas in which they need to improve. It's when that drive goes away you're in trouble.

Execution and sound - i get what you mean, but this forum is about dance music and pauls post was running over old issues we had with the MP forum where non-writers would be poking fun at the DMP people because they get results in different ways. I think a lot of the misunderstanding also comes from the terminology used also.

I expect Jtsuited will go duff sean up personally about it anyway - so all good

I personally think that the execution thing is the main point - the sound part gets sorted over time and as split said - comparing to others. The execution part is a fair long journey for a writer as most of it is discovered by accident/trial and error.

I'm sure if Sean gets to the point he's happy with his own techniques and skills that he'd looking for a studio or other gear to boost weak points in something that is 'working' - if it even needs it.

Also, if it makes you jump around, it's likely to make others do the same

seannash

hey folks thanks for the replies.
okay so my setup currently is macbook pro running logic.
soundcard is RME hammerfall dsp and my monitors are the yamaha hs50(im really pleased with these actually)
i had genelec 8030as before and i really like them but as im on the move lately i could only afford the yamahas.that being said i reckon they are great and dont see them as being an issue when it comes to my tracks.

ive been wondering about mastering though.
i reckon i shouldnt need it in order to get the sound i want and i dont want to fall back on the old excuse of "oh its not mastered yet" so i dont think its an issue.


there surely has to be some sort of techniques that seperate the bedroom producer into the bedroom producer who can compete with the big boys(production values wise not actual composition)

oh also to answer four percent.i actually set alot of days aside for just music,much to the dismay of the girlfriend:pac:

i guess the old response of keep working hard could just be the answer though.:D

old gregg

hi there, just to momentarily pipe in from someone who does ambient electronic but not dance music (yet anyway, but who knows) ... what I've found an interesting exercise from time to time is to spend a day or so working on new music in a genre that I've never tried before just to help me move out of my comfort zone which can be a wonderful release. In my case I recently spent nearly a week creating a House/dub Techno style track that I'd never have the nerve to allow leave my computer 'cos it was so basic but which threw up a whole bunch of ideas and new ways of working that will filter into my ambient and make my live work a little more fluid. I've enjoyed your sounds though Sean so keep it up mate.

PaulBrewer

seannash wrote: »

hey folks thanks for the replies.
okay so my setup currently is macbook pro running logic.
soundcard is RME hammerfall dsp and my monitors are the yamaha hs50(im really pleased with these actually)
i had genelec 8030as before and i really like them but as im on the move lately i could only afford the yamahas.that being said i reckon they are great and dont see them as being an issue when it comes to my tracks.

The RMEs have a great rep (though I've never used one myself) and the Logic stuff sounds good.

Where exactly do you feel the problem is?


With regard to monitors we obviously can all have different opinions.

However science does come into play here.

I can't of course comment on your room but I can say this about speakers.



I've spoken with Philip Newell who, with Keith Holland reviews speakers for Resolution Magazine and has written for many Magazines including Sound on Sound about Genelecs and Yamaha HS50s.

Newell has build the original Manor Studio and the legendary London Townhouse studios.

Coincidentally Resolution reviewed the bigger Genelec 8040s last month.
It's reasonable to expect the findings will be similar on the 8030s with the obvious reduction in power and a less extended bass end.

When I say 'review' it was a technical review i.e. they measured what the speakers do in an anechoic chamber.

The 8040s got a fairly good review as I'd expect. The mid and high ranges performed well, as is my experience. The mids can be a little shouty at times but this is a mid range price speaker so there will be compromises.

However as with any speaker with a Bass Port it got a mixed review for it's Low End. This is where science explains what you know to be the case.

On the positive side, the review said, the bass extension is very good on the Genelecs i.e. they 'reach' down further than many boxes that size.

However the downside with that, and most speakers with ports is that the bass 'definition' is badly compromised.

This can be graphically shown by the 'Waterfall' response of the speaker.
This represents how a speaker reacts to an impulse at each frequency .... a Ported speaker will often measure very badly in this way taking a long time for the speaker to return to 'stillness' up to around 100 ms + in our example .

Here's a pic of same , not of the Genelec I should clarify -



As you can see a speaker with a response like that CAN'T give you clear Bass End , EVER!
This is simply because no matter how 'tight' a low end you give it, what it will play to you is your input, plus up to 100 ms of what is an effect similar to 'reverb' .

What da feck good is that? Is it any wonder why getting the bass right is so hard?

That is one of the main reasons why I like speakers like the NS 10. It's a sealed box and whilst there may be other issues, impulse response isn't one of them.

With regard to the HS 50 it too has a Port and so the same problems as above.

Newell has words too on this as he and some others listened to a pair of HS50s recently. They haven't been measured yet.
This is the opinion of him and four other engineers present.

" The concensus of the listenig was that the HS50s had less bass, less punch, less overall loudness and a less workable mid-range than the NS10s. Nobody said that they would be happy to do serious mixes on them. "


Monitoring may still be a major issue why you can't get what you want.

ICN

PaulBrewer wrote: »

..Monitoring may still be a major issue why you can't get what you want..

V.interesting.

What Monitors would you recommend Paul?

Apart from NS10's or NS10.3k's of course?


And preferrably something that would be in most peoples grasp, €-wise

jtsuited

Wow, a pro audio dealer telling you it's the gear you need to look at. Didn't see that coming.

What kind of production values we talking here sean?

PaulBrewer

ICN wrote: »

V.interesting.

What Monitors would you recommend Paul?

Apart from NS10's or NS10.3k's of course?


And preferrably something that would be in most peoples grasp, €-wise

I won't !

I'm just presenting facts as I and the Experts understand them.
Facts is Facts !!

seannash

jtsuited wrote: »

Wow, a pro audio dealer telling you it's the gear you need to look at. Didn't see that coming.

What kind of production values we talking here sean?

well not anyone in particular but just that stuff done by the tech house pros sounds alot crisper and brighter than my own stuff.there also is alot fo good seperation of the elements in there tracks compared to mine.

i pan but cant seem to get every element to stand out in its own space.

like i said before i dont think mastering is the problem.it will help but i think the problem is down to me

ICN

PaulBrewer wrote: »

I won't !

I'm just presenting facts as I and the Experts understand them.
Facts is Facts !!

Pity.. You appeared to have an understanding of what you are talking about (:)) - Thought you might be able to develop the facts you were presenting.

Ah well..

PaulBrewer

seannash wrote: »

well not anyone in particular but just that stuff done by the tech house pros sounds alot crisper and brighter than my own stuff.there also is alot fo good seperation of the elements in there tracks compared to mine.

i pan but cant seem to get every element to stand out in its own space.

like i said before i dont think mastering is the problem.it will help but i think the problem is down to me

Certainly Mastering can play a part , but as anyone who has mastered a less than stellar mix (and I include myself in that !) ya can't turn shyt into chocolate ....

i pan but cant seem to get every element to stand out in its own space.

Clocking (not necessarily external) and D2A quality are critical in stereo width. FACT.

Are you coming over to the dark side Sean ?

You're coming to a point of realisation I think

PaulBrewer

ICN wrote: »

Pity.. You appeared to have an understanding of what you are talking about (:)) - Thought you might be able to develop the facts you were presenting.

Ah well..

That's enough tough vegetables for one day ! Eat your greens ...

jtsuited

I wonder if Paul is joking?

I hope so.

Neurojazz

jtsuited wrote: »

I wonder if Paul is joking?

I hope so.

The topics Paul is covering is more suited to the MP forum. 99.99% of the people here will never need to worry about clocking or anything like that to be honest.

As per the 'Purpose of this thread' sticky, the gear tech talk belongs over there.

seannash

PaulBrewer wrote: »

Certainly Mastering can play a part , but as anyone who has mastered a less than stellar mix (and I include myself in that !) ya can't turn shyt into chocolate ....



Clocking (not necessarily external) and D2A quality are critical in stereo width. FACT.

Are you coming over to the dark side Sean ?

You're coming to a point of realisation I think

sorry man i dont subscribe to the idea that more expensive gear is better gear.
i look at all the producers who are using krk rockits,yamahas,m audio bx8a as the monitors but are still turning out fantastic sounding stuff.

even jtsuited's own productions are well above most of what you hear out there and he is using the yamahas i have.

cant blame gear for my mixes sounding bad when hes producing on the same ones in an untreated room and getting a sound that any techno producer would be more than proud of.

im not going to argue that the higher priced monitors are better but more that you can use the monitors i have to get the result i want.

i know there is no set technique to give me that sound.i realise its a combination of techniques but im at a stalemate with my productions and my sound hasnt progressed in a while.
its a bit frustrating

PaulBrewer

seannash wrote: »

sorry man i dont subscribe to the idea that more expensive gear is better gear.

That's not what I said.

Have you tried any of what I have said?

I've offered practical improvements to the problems you've described.

Have you tried better sounding equipment?

PaulBrewer

Neurojazz wrote: »

99.99% of the people here will never need to worry about clocking or anything like that to be honest.

No, you'd only be interested in such like if you were keen on learning, understanding and making things better.

So perhaps you're right

Neurojazz

PaulBrewer wrote: »

No, you'd only be interested in such like if you were keen on learning, understanding and making things better.

So perhaps you're right

Learning from peoples experiences within dance music yes - as per the 'purpose of this forum sticky'

Knowledge has nowt to do with experience until applied (and the context of your posts are not presented or aimed at users of this forum)

Use the problem instruments in dance music as examples etc... or it just looks like you don't know anything about the genres and the tools they use.

PaulBrewer

Neurojazz wrote: »

Use the problem instruments in dance music as examples etc... or it just looks like you don't know anything about the genres and the tools they use.

I don't know anything about dance music !

However it doesn't exist in a vacuum.

The points I'm making are common to all music reproduction, namely the ability to hear is what allows you to make great mixes predictably.

The inability to hear what's going on accurately means you're guessing.

From Sean's problems descriptions that may be part of his issues.

Neurojazz

Sean, what paul is saying is to stick some socks in your bass ports so you lose that lovely warm omph that is bouncing around your room

Neurojazz

PaulBrewer wrote: »

I don't know anything about dance music !

Yep, dance musicians keywords:

N.A.S.A. vicks and a whistle.

If anyone gets that - or am i getting old

ICN

Neurojazz wrote: »

Yep, dance musicians keywords:

N.A.S.A. vicks and a whistle.

If anyone gets that - or am i getting old

Vicks & Whistle - Of course.. That Pub on the M25.

Buts whats N.A.S.A? Never heard of that one.

Neurojazz

There used to be guys/gals walking around clubs with N.A.S.A. on bomber jackets and i never knew for ages.. was 'Nice And Safe Attitude'

ICN

Neurojazz wrote: »

There used to be guys/gals walking around clubs with N.A.S.A. on bomber jackets and i never knew for ages.. was 'Nice And Safe Attitude'

Thats made me remember something.

Used to know this "Seasoned" Raver years ago from the UK.. Real nice Guy. A real Geezer.

No matter what you'd say to him, he'd always go.. "Safe..Safe.. Thats Safe Mate.. Yeah, Safe"

Safe

frobisher

ICN wrote: »

Vicks & Whistle - Of course.. That Pub on the M25.

Hahahahah.... I remember walking into Sides back in D'day and smelling the vicks. Good times....

seannash

PaulBrewer wrote: »

That's not what I said.

Have you tried any of what I have said?

I've offered practical improvements to the problems you've described.

Have you tried better sounding equipment?

well from what i can tell my equipment is pretty good sounding.
i was using genelecs before and having this problem(i think there a better than average monitor).

like i said i dont think its my monitors because i know of a few people who use them and are making great sounding stuff.so if they can do it i should be able to do it also.

as of right now i cant rush out and buy better sounding equipment so even if i did take your advice i couldnt impliment it unfortunately,so for my immediate improvement telling me to buy new gear isnt a good option.
regardless of whether your right or wrong.:)

PaulBrewer

seannash wrote: »

well from what i can tell

That's what I'm saying !

I take your point regarding changing equipment though - if you can't try stuff you can't.

My point is, just be aware of the things that will allow you to do stuff easier and hopefully better in the search for improvement.

Don't be afraid of a bit of science in that search .

Best of Luck !

seannash

PaulBrewer wrote: »

That's what I'm saying !

I take your point regarding changing equipment though - if you can't try stuff you can't.

My point is, just be aware of the things that will allow you to do stuff easier and hopefully better in the search for improvement.

Don't be afraid of a bit of science in that search .

Best of Luck !

i hear ya.
obviously if i had the option of better monitors,better room,hardware synths,better plug ins etc id take it.

but my point is that theres producer out there with inferior setups to mine making fantastic sounding stuff.so take the equipment out of the equation for now and it must be down to technique.

PaulBrewer

seannash wrote: »

i hear ya.
obviously if i had the option of better monitors,better room,hardware synths,better plug ins etc id take it.

but my point is that theres producer out there with inferior setups to mine making fantastic sounding stuff.so take the equipment out of the equation for now and it must be down to technique.

Aye - great Music has been made on below stellar gear since time began.

I'm just talking about making things easier.

I presume you leave the HS and Gens up together, switching between both?

splitrmx

Just a few points:

1) I don't think gear talk should be discouraged in the dance music production area, even if a lot of people are using laptops and software it's still valid.

2) The Genelec monitors are great. Monolake has produced all his stuff using a pair of 8040s. Donnacha Costello uses a pair of 8030s, Dubplates and Mastering in Germany use a pair of 8040s (amongst lots of other things). If they're good enough for them they're good enough for us!

3) As for the NS10 recommendation, if I remember correctly they're not in production any more?

seannash

PaulBrewer wrote: »

Aye - great Music has been made on below stellar gear since time began.

I'm just talking about making things easier.

I presume you leave the HS and Gens up together, switching between both?

nope im traveming at the moment so im only using the hs50s.the genelecs are back in the emerald isle:D

PaulBrewer

seannash wrote: »

nope im traveming at the moment so im only using the hs50s.the genelecs are back in the emerald isle:D

Ah, that's a pity.
I find that switching between speakers is good for 'resetting' the head mid mix.

PaulBrewer

splitrmx wrote: »

Just a few points:

1) I don't think gear talk should be discouraged in the dance music production area, even if a lot of people are using laptops and software it's still valid.

2) The Genelec monitors are great. Monolake has produced all his stuff using a pair of 8040s. Donnacha Costello uses a pair of 8030s, Dubplates and Mastering in Germany use a pair of 8040s (amongst lots of other things). If they're good enough for them they're good enough for us!

3) As for the NS10 recommendation, if I remember correctly they're not in production any more?

1. Cheers !

2. I often use 8050s myself ! They are good speakers.
However the scientific limitations of Ported designs are what I was talking about. Gens/HS50 where used as an example as Sean has been using them.

3. NS10s are indeed well out of production (2000 I think).
Again it was the superior impulse response I was referring to as a product of the sealed box design. The NS10s were only mentioned as I've recently rebuilt a set.

Neurojazz

So your'e talking about 1500 quid a pair? for a marginal improvement on a mix - this is MP forum stuff guys... seriously.

splitrmx

Neurojazz wrote: »

So your'e talking about 1500 quid a pair? for a marginal improvement on a mix - this is MP forum stuff guys... seriously.

Is this the dance music production forum or the budget dance music production forum?

Neurojazz

As per the 'purpose of this forum' sticky - it's aimed at the mass users, not the top end users.

splitrmx

I wouldn't consider 1500 Euro on a pair of studio monitors "top end". The laptops people are running Logic on probably cost the same! Any opinions from anybody else?

Neurojazz

I think people are missing the point - you guys are pretty much the knowledge base for new users arriving at the forum.

Most people will probably be using small amounts of software or hardware and not able to even dream about buying speakers that cost that much.

If you want a gear v gear thread then really take it too MP as there are many more people over there with experience and empirical/practical advice.

woodsdenis

Neurojazz wrote: »

As per the 'purpose of this forum' sticky - it's aimed at the mass users, not the top end users.

First time post on this side of the board. Good posts and very informative stuff.

I would agree with you about not getting into high end stuff per se but this is very subjective. A Macbook pro and a Virus TI which costs thousands are discussed
here as tools of the trade. Most users on this forum, or on the any for that matter, would not have these. Definitely high end I think, but surely should be discussed as they are used in the making of dance music.

This is not intended as a debate against high end v low end as I agree it doesn't matter, but is it true to say that dance music is solely created on lo end gear? My old sparring partner jtsuited has a pretty impressive setup.

Your the Mod and have to draw a line as you see fit

My 2 cents:D

Neurojazz

Yep virus is top end - but i'm not pushing it as the solution - you'd find more posts i make contain references about sylenth (1 tenth the cost) and would run on a scabby dog.

A little 1.1ghtz centrino would run Reason for example - and probably older macbooks (though i'm no mac expert, so you'd have to ask the mac guys what a budget could get you for example.)

splitrmx

Neurojazz wrote: »

If you want a gear v gear thread then really take it too MP as there are many more people over there with experience and empirical/practical advice.

What about gear vs. gear discussions in the context of purely dance music production?

Neurojazz

splitrmx wrote: »

What about gear vs. gear discussions in the context of purely dance music production?

We were trying too, i believe paul even mentioned clocking at one point in regards to quality - which is relevant if your'e at the extreme high end of things and out of context with the forum purpose.

jtsuited

woodsdenis wrote: »

My old sparring partner jtsuited has a pretty impressive setup.
D

really? I have a very very low end setup compared to what I grew up on. Just some 8030's, hs50's, a duet, and everything else is ITB.

Basically this thread started with some constructive advice and soon turned into discussion of clocking (wtf?) and the impulse response waterfall of the ns10's (which by the way has been repeated so many times by so many people in the audio world that it's becoming banal at this stage).

I can guarantee I could make better sounding productions with sh1tty hs50's and Logic's built in synths and plugins than many many many people I know who spend a fortune on high end gear. Cocky I know but if any of the high enders want to take me up on the challenge they are welcome to.

Honest to god, as soon as clocking is mentioned in relation to DAC (it's maybe excusable when it comes to ADC), people are genuinely taking the piss. Esoteric nonsense does not even begin to describe it.

Some people want it to be all about the gear that determines the quality of your music (ironic that they're bread and butter is selling gear) but it's just not the case. At the end of the day, it's 99% skill, 0.99% luck and 0.01% gear.
End of story. I've used so much software and hardware over the years in so many different contexts and what I've found to be good for me, others who are brilliant hate them. And vice versa, there is stuff I think is woeful but some of my favourite producers get phenomenal results out of them.

It's the ultimate laziness to think that 'if i had this gear, i could make the records I really want to make'. And a lot of people fall into the trap (spurred along by audio salesmen). With software these days, if you can't get the results you want out of a computer, you really need to reassess how you're going about things.

A lot of people won't like to admit it, but it is the truth.

splitrmx

jtsuited wrote: »

With software these days, if you can't get the results you want out of a computer, you really need to reassess how you're going about things.

While I would agree with the exclusion of clocking discussion I would 100% disagree with the above statement. Aphex Twin's records wouldn't sound the same if he did them only using software. There's a reason many of the world's best productions use certain hardware, it's because they want to get a certain sound. Software can currently emulate a lot of and get close to perfect in some areas but not close in others.