Should beginers be so experimental?

seannash

So i was thinking about this today.
Would people wh are new to production be so experimental with there music.
Is it better for them to have a definite comparison for there music whilst they find there production feet.
I often see good ideas lost because of someones lack of experience and to be honest i find it hard to offer advice on tracks because there is nothing to draw comparison from.

I know people will say artistic vision shouldnt be stifled in any way but surely a bit if restraint would be an advantage and let people focus on technique.

If you think about how you learn an instrument.
Beginners are taught by learning existing musical pieces so that they can asess how well they are doing by comparing it to the original song.

Is this the best approach?
Also people tend to be defensive about there music no matter what stage there at and ive seen instances where people offer advice only to be met with the reply of "oh i meant it to sound like that"

There is no comeback to that,but if you have a bit more clarity about what your trying to achieve i think feedback would be alot easier to recieve and also learn from.

So does anyone agree that its best to advise beginers to stick with a defined genre.

I remember KRD was asking about psytrance.He said he wanted to learn the clichés,the classic techniques as he was new to it.
I think thats the way to go when approaching something new.

Maybe people still think dance music is so simple to make that they dont need to worry about the basics

Oh id like to add that im not exactly a pro either

krd

seannash wrote: »

So i was thinking about this today.
Would people wh are new to production be so experimental with there music.
Is it better for them to have a definite comparison for there music whilst they find there production feet.

For learning technique, absolutely. Without mastering the techniques - no matter how experimental and avant garde you are - you will still just sound like a Noob playing with plug-ins.

There's even plenty of stuff being released by proper record companies - and even my skills aren't up to making releases - sometimes I can hear some Noobishness in among the good production.

I often see good ideas lost because of someones lack of experience and to be honest i find it hard to offer advice on tracks because there is nothing to draw comparison from.

That's what Noobs do - take good ideas and burn them.

I know people will say artistic vision shouldnt be stifled in any way but surely a bit if restraint would be an advantage and let people focus on technique.

The other side of artistic vision is in the execution. If you don't have the technique to execute the vision, the vision is lost.

If you think about how you learn an instrument.
Beginners are taught by learning existing musical pieces so that they can asess how well they are doing by comparing it to the original song.

The DAW is an instrument - I'm caught out, most of the time, knowing something is wrong and not knowing how to fix it. Or wanting to do something but having no idea how to do it. Or something like drums, getting a great idea in my head but being unable to program it.

Most of what I've discover has been through experimentation. I still haven't learned and mastered enough of the different techniques to be able make what I do know all come together at once. There are many many techniques - and most of them don't even have names.

Is this the best approach?

To learn as many, if not all the techniques, I believe is the best approach, for many reasons. Like having the skills to pull down the stems from one of those remix competitions, and knock up a remix that they're going to want to use and will get attention and stuff.

I may have reached the top 20 of the Souncloud Community Techno charts - August - Noobian Prince http://cloudycharts.com/techno/2010-08-21
But I'd like to take it further.

Also people tend to be defensive about there music no matter what stage there at and ive seen instances where people offer advice only to be met with the reply of "oh i meant it to sound like that"

You really can't be to precious about it. And if you post on a board looking for advice you can't really complain when people offer their opinions. Some people don't want advice - they want some adulation. Offer some criticism and they can turn nasty. I mean - the obvious question - if you think it's so perfect, why are you bothering with a production board - why not just got straight to the label with your "perfect" composition and recording and .....

This board is actually all right in comparison to others. I mean, in some other place - I've made the suggestion on a singer songwriter thread - when asked for an opinion - that the song was good but the lyrics were a little clichéd and it's possibly not the best idea in the world to quote Nietzsche in a love song (what doesn't kill you only makes you stronger --- baby) - and the torrent of personal invective I got in response.

There is no comeback to that,but if you have a bit more clarity about what your trying to achieve i think feedback would be alot easier to recieve and also learn from.

I think any feedback is good - even if it's not my track. Sometimes you can learn a lot very quickly by somebody point out something they think is wrong or could be better.

So does anyone agree that its best to advise beginers to stick with a defined genre.

What genre is the thing.

House can be a lot of things. Techno can be a guy spinning randomly on a Electron Machine Drum for 45 minutes and posting it. Some people are even calling Drum and Bass Techno at minute.

Minimal is too minimal to learn all the techniques. And it can use all the techniques other genres use - just it uses them so sparingly you may have to create a huge number of minimal tracks to cover all the basses.

Another part of the techniques is knowing how to build a track that if you say it's minimal or deep house - it will sound enough like contemporary minimal or deep house, that a DJ could conceivably fit the thing into his set. If it's deliberately experimental than it should be labelled experimental.

I remember KRD was asking about psytrance.He said he wanted to learn the clichés,the classic techniques as he was new to it.
I think thats the way to go when approaching something new.

I found a good place to get lots of high quality psytance for free.
http://www.ektoplazm.com/downloads

I found the stuff I was looking for. Cleanly put together Psytrance where they've thrown the kitchen sink at the recordings. Lots of techniques and nice twists on very common ones. lots of really good ideas that would and do work in and genre - once you have them mastered. And can execute them without burning your track - or turning it into an indeterminate genre.



Any time I've ever heard psytrance played "live" by a DJ it's been terrible. They always push the volume up into the red and it turns into distorted mush. Psytrance is the only genre I know that when you put it on, you can always undeniably say it's psytrance. Distort it and muddy it, every track will sound absolutely identical to the other. It can drive people nuts. The other thing drives me nuts about it, is the stupid chop chop hand signals the PsyT DJ makes to the crowd. Some stupid thing that spread from god knows where. Or what I saw on a PsyT board that I can agree with "I love the music, but it makes pretty girls look ugly and stupid when they dance to it" - the whole "style" that goes with the music is questionable - Dreadlocked Trustafarians (Another warning; these people are absolute ****** - a "hippy" is just a fascists with long hair).

Maybe people still think dance music is so simple to make that they dont need to worry about the basics

People usually loose that attitude when they attempt to make a track and their result falls short of their expectations of their own brilliance.

It's probably very easy to make a very good track ---- once you've mastered all the techniques - which isn't easy.

red dave

good points, one of the many problems i have is not been able to focus on one genre. doing little bits of different genre's (and doing them wrong) therefore not getting the point of intended genre across.

Anima

I've been thinking about this for a while. I think nearly everyone starts out like what you described but its a bad road to go down in the long run.

There is no better time to make music than now. There is so much good software and free software out there that anyone can learn to make music. You would think that could only be a good thing with lots of new and fresh ideas emerging but what you end up with is everyone making exactly the same sounds. There has never been so many garbage tracks around than now.

I think its partially because it is simply not easy to make a good track. There really is so much to learn to make good music, that sounds good as well. So because its difficult people take the easy route, copying other peoples ideas. Which is why there are loads of forum posts about "how do i sound like this, how do i make this sound, what software/synth to sound like this band".

This way doesn't work in the long run. If you read about any successful artist, they always have similar stories. They did it all themselves, worked hard and did things their own way. Which is why they have their own sound. Burial is a great example. He had no clue about the technical side of production but he knew the sound he liked and what he wanted to create.

Of course all this only applies in the long term really. If you just make some tracks in your spare time and for fun then I say do whatever to get the results you'd like. I think if you want to mature as a producer though, you have to grind it out.

seannash

But shouldnt there be at least a good foundation first before people start to experiment?

Ive read about Burial not knowing anything about technique but i find it hard to believe that he didnt read up on techniques about how to get certain sounds when he was struggling.Also i know you were talking about respected artists as opposed to successful artists.Theres alot of successful artists out there that tend to not stray too far from the norm

i listed learning an instrument earlier but when learning anything there are some basics that people need to learn first in order to express themselves.

Electronic music seems to be different though.

I know what you mean about there being alot of the same sounding stuff out there but to be honest alot of dance music hasnt changed for a long time.
for example soulful house still uses bass,keys,vocal as its main basis of most of its tracks.

Sky King

I make tunes purely for my own interest and amazement.

It is my hope that some day people will listen to my audio doodles and like them but I am not busting my balls trying to get stuff released because to do that i would have to go to beatport, examine what is popular and then attempt to emulate it, then send my emulation to a **** load of labels and hope to get somewhere that way.

I am pretty sure that what i am doing now will lead nowhere success-wise but i don't care, I am happier doing this than producing generic derivative sh|t that I hate and i am far happier at this than I was when I was subjecting myself to the massive creative vacuum that is DJing.

Also, I firmly believe that the foundation should be in the mechanics of music in preference to technology and I am philosophically opposed to the way music is beaten into kids by rote. It's horrible and nearly turned me off it.

seannash

kilkenny flyer wrote: »

I make tunes purely for my own interest and amazement.

It is my hope that some day people will listen to my audio doodles and like them but I am not busting my balls trying to get stuff released because to do that i would have to go to beatport, examine what is popular and then attempt to emulate it, then send my emulation to a **** load of labels and hope to get somewhere that way.

I am pretty sure that what i am doing now will lead nowhere success-wise but i don't care, I am happier doing this than producing generic derivative sh|t that I hate and i am far happier at this than I was when I was subjecting myself to the massive creative vacuum that is DJing.

Also, I firmly believe that the foundation should be in the mechanics of music in preference to technology and I am philosophically opposed to the way music is beaten into kids by rote. It's horrible and nearly turned me off it.

Thats all well and good but you surely want your stuff to sound as good as possible.

Noone said you had to make generic derivative ****e you just need to learn basics so your more creative tracks can sound there best.

again learning anything requires you to learn certain procedures and rules before you can attempt to break them.

Also you may be the exception as alot of people want to make what you hear in the charts or what djs play out and theres nothing wrong with that either.If thats the extent of there musical creativity than surely what they make is just as special to them as your non conforming music is to you

Also(and honestly this isnt a dig at you ) for someone who makes music for themselves you have spent alot more time on self promotion than most producers(website)
Theres nothing wrong with this but theres obviously some concious effort to have people hear your work

Sky King

I also design posters and rend out sound and light. I like networking and kilkenny is a small place. And I also enjoy messing with wordpress web design. Hence the site.

again learning anything requires you to learn certain procedures and rules before you can attempt to break them.

Totally agree.

Have you ever wondered why so many 'producers' are averse to learning music theory though?

surely what they make is just as special to them as your non conforming music is to you

I am sure it is.

krd

Anima wrote: »

Burial is a great example. He had no clue about the technical side of production but he knew the sound he liked and what he wanted to create.

I think that story about Burial knowing nothing and figuring it all out for himself may be complete and utter bull****.

Showbusiness is full of bull****ters with bull**** back stories. People making claims to being very street, when they're not. People pretending their not well educated nerds when they are. Wearing their hoodies and looking tough for the camera.

Saying you come from a broken home sounds cooler than saying you came from a comfortable middleclass background. Pretending you never had music lessons - or that your family connections didn't help you get your foot in door is another important part of being cool. Nepotism turns people off (not music journalists and media types - nearly all of them are in their jobs through nepotism, so they keep quite about these things)

Burial went to the Elliot school, London - look it up in Wikipedia. It's a school where the media elite of London send their kids - especially the more "artistic" ones. They have a very strong arts tradition. It's a "fame" style school - I want to live forever.,, blah blah blah.

Burial would have studied music there. I've heard about the school before. I believe they teach music technology in there. And it being London, and the kind of school it is, they would have serious London Pros come in and tutor the kids.

Hey, if I had serious production pro to go over my stuff with me a few times - iron out a few of the kinks - I'd lose my noobishness pretty quickly. If I had come from the right family and had the grooming (get rid of more of the noobishness) I could have a regular slot in Tripod playing sets of very mediocre deep house - People would ask how I got there and I'd say "I grew up a poor negro child in the projects....blah, blah, blah"

Burial probably learned tap dancing from an early age and had roles in Oliver and Buggsy Malone.

jtsuited

There has been major inconsistencies in the few burial interiews I've read. Yeah and he went to that school.

krd

jtsuited wrote: »

There has been major inconsistencies in the few burial interiews I've read. Yeah and he went to that school.

Burial is on Hyperdub. Owned by Kode9 (Steven Goodman)

And from Goodman's Wiki entry - As of 2006 he was working at the University of East London as a lecturer in media production, and course tutor for a master's program in sonic culture and taught several musicians, DJ's such as Pixel 82 & Shem Booth-Spain sound/music theory and production.

Goodman has been doing Drum and Bass since 1991. Hey, if you were willing to work at it, and had the guy's ear and help - you wouldn't be long losing the smell of noob - the smell of failure.

When I first heard of Burial - I heard it was a collective project. Which is probably what it is. The idea it's one young guy tossing off tunes in his spare time (his day job being a London gang banger - slinging rocks and keep it real), who then gets famous through his Myspace sounds better than a bunch of 40 something veterans, with the skills and connections, knocking stuff up. There's a little Milli Vannilli in nearly every successful music production since the year dot.


There are always people who truly come out of nowhere. Basshunter, was making music on his mothers computer in the family kitchen. He was putting the stuff on the internet - he didn't even have broadband - people were pressing the stuff to vinyl and releasing it and people were buying it. I even know someone who bought his stuff - had he known it was a semi-autistic Swedish teenager making it he probably wouldn't have. The audio quality on those records was poor - but they had something about them that generated a genuine grass roots following.

Say what you like about the man - all he had was his mother's computer and copy of Fruity Loops. And not the fruity loops you have these days and not the flash home computers you have either.

The boy has cheese running in his blood.

In marketing these days, there's a technique known as Astro turfing (fake grass). Where you fake a grass roots following - a band like the Artic Monkeys were given money and some free publicity by Rupert Murdoch (who had just bought Myspace) to pretend they'd got famous through Myspace, even though they were already signed and being promoted by a major record company.

In sound on sound there's a really great piece on the production of Tricky's Maxinquaye. Tricky had the ideas and knew what he wanted - but his engineer really put the whole thing together for him. Had had to do it all by himself, he would have just sounded like a Noob.

Android 666

I think some interesting points and both sides here. I think most people start off just messing about and playing with whatever DAWs or programs they have making any old sh!te without any real clue what they're doing and then tend to make tunes in a variety of different genres which are all usually incredibly bad and don't any decent structure or are in anyway close in style or quality to the genre's they think they're aping. I was extremely guilty of doing all this. But in doing all this horrendous stuff most people pick up different bits and pieces and going on to forums like this they learn more techniques and theory and tips about what they should be doing to try and get a better sound.

I think at some stage though to fully develop you need to nail your colours to the mast and concentrate on one or two genres and try and stick to them because I think that's the only way you can truly start to develop your own sound and style and actually do stuff of interest. It is really helps to sit down and listen to tracks in a particular genre and try and break them down and work them to help you understand how those tracks work. I'm trying to do songs in certain style at the moment and when I have a couple I think don't sound too bad I'll post them up here to try and get some feedback to see what I might be doing wrong or right. And I'm not talking about being derivative. All music is derivative at this stage that doesn't mean that it can't be interesting or exciting. There's a thread over in the Electronic Music/DJing forum called The Techno/House/Dubstep crossover hybrid thread and it really shows how fluid genres can be. But you still need to put in the research and figure out how their programming their drums, how they use stabs and what way melodies and tones are played with.

I think doing different styles is beneficial at the beginning, even if its to show that you don't have a clue what you're doing. Also I truly believe one properly constructed piece of criticism is better than a thousand fake compliments on soundcloud. If someone can tell you what you're doing wrong and can point you in the right direction it is way better than a 'That was pleasant' comment.

Chloroplast

For starting out, id say if its purely for hobby, id say experiment,learn,have fun. if you want to get music out, then learn structure, arrangement, music comp.

When your producing long enough, you should be at the stage where your mature enough to know weather your own music is good or not. you should not have to depend on other people for feedback. lets face it, your friends will always tell you your stuff is good, and the internet is too big, and too many mixed views, too many "cool track man" carry on.

if your mature enough, doing music long enough, you should just know. and if your music is good, then there is certainly no need to be mailing hundreds of labels, not even 10 labels. you should only have to mail 1 or 2, 5 at the max and it should be whipped up straight away.

as kilkenny flyer said :

It is my hope that some day people will listen to my audio doodles and like them but I am not busting my balls trying to get stuff released because to do that i would have to go to beatport, examine what is popular and then attempt to emulate it, then send my emulation to a **** load of labels and hope to get somewhere that way.

i hope you don't pursue this road, no offence, but because of your frame of mind as regards getting music out on beatport, this is exactly why it is harder to find good music on beatport and its why the planet is now currently full to the brim with ****e music, because people cant seem to come up with something original and are just copying off everyone else and they believe that in order to get stuff out on beatport, it must be a certain way and style etc... whatever happened to just having good music that's good enough to be released.

i would never produce generic derivative ****e that I hate becasue i would not waste valuable man hours producing something i don't like to produce.

i make tunes that i like, and it is not the case of "is it good enough to send to a label? " it is a case of "making it good enough for a label"... ie making it rock and making labels drool over your track because your idea is so good. when your at that level, then you will be successful and there will be no need to copy off anyone,nor will there be a need for a facebook like page with a million likes, or a myspace page with a million friends, it would just be a case of letting the music doing the talking.

Techno, prog, house, what ever the style may be, people seem to think its a doodle to do, yet they dont realise that you still have to have an exclusive idea, arrangement and sound and the longer your spend on that, the better for yourself, the label and society.

quality over quantity, i cant stress this enough, i would rather have 1 good track out, than several okish tracks out that all more or less sound the same. when i produce something and it moves me and i think its really good, i give it another listen a month later, yep a whole month, not a week, and if it still sounds good then, i might even wait another month and give it a few plays, to see if it still blows me away, to see if it still has sustainability. then i will send it to a few labels, 5 at the max, and i can garentee that if it still sounds good to you a few months later then a record label will definitly love it.

seannash

who are you directing that last paragraph at chloroplast

krd

Chloroplast wrote: »

i hope you don't pursue this road, no offence, but because of your frame of mind as regards getting music out on beatport, this is exactly why it is harder to find good music on beatport and its why the planet is now currently full to the brim with ****e music, because people cant seem to come up with something original and are just copying off everyone else and they believe that in order to get stuff out on beatport, it must be a certain way and style etc... whatever happened to just having good music that's good enough to be released.

Well, the thing is you have to remember what DJs do. Or at least many DJs.

They find records that are very similar to each other and mix them in together. So it's considered an achievement when the DJ creates a set where every track sounds the same - to the point that it can sound like the entire set is the same song.

The DJ doesn't care that everything in a particular genre on beatport sounds identical to everything else in that genre - that's precisely what they are looking for.

And tracks are often arranged in a DJ FRIENDLY FORMAT - I'm not meant to use that term here, but it's what many DJs want - because it's easier for them - it stops the tracks from being more PITA than HITA. Easy mix in points and one, two, or three easy mix out points. DJs may complain about predictable structures and arrangements - but if the arrangements weren't so predictable they wouldn't play the records.

There is great scope for creativity. But if you're making genre music you can't stray very far from the key elements that make the genre.

So, I imagine - since I'm really a noob, I'm only guessing - that when pro producers are making their records - they check what's selling on beat port - they find out what's playing. Then they write their tracks to FIT IN with what's selling. They know the DJs have bought lots of X and Y - so they write something that will fit in in between X and Y. Because they know once the DJ has bought X and Y they NEED more tracks to fit in around X and Y.


Everything though could get turned upside down. It could conceivably become seriously unfashionable for DJs to play an entire set of the same genre. DJs themselves could become seriously unfashionable.

Chloroplast

seannash wrote: »

who are you directing that last paragraph at chloroplast

what, the quality over quantity bit ? anyone really..

people have different perceptions on what they have to do if they want to sell music. one of them would be to build a long list of releases fast, or another would be to make 1 good track or ep and work hard on promotion of it.

Well, the thing is you have to remember what DJs do. Or at least many DJs.

They find records that are very similar to each other and mix them in together. So it's considered an achievement when the DJ creates a set where every track sounds the same - to the point that it can sound like the entire set is the same song.

The DJ doesn't care that everything in a particular genre on beatport sounds identical to everything else in that genre - that's precisely what they are looking for.

yeah this would be true, but it wouldn't be what im looking for,different strokes i suppose. i like each tune to have its own little variation and although the style im playing is the same genre, weather tech-house or minimal etc, its still good to put variation in to your sets, and keep things interesting, i find it very boring when i listen to dj sets where there's a tune playing and the next one after it sounds the same as the last one with no interesting transition,just 1 minute of beatmatching near the end and thats it, no actually mixing of sound itself.

just off the top of my head, have listen to Adam beyers fabric 22 mix, its techno, its minimal. but each track is carefully picked. each track sounds totally different to the previous. yet its a sustainable and very well done mix thats still enjoyed by myself today and its 5 year old.

all down to preference i suppose.

seannash

Chloroplast wrote: »

what, the quality over quantity bit ? anyone really..

people have different perceptions on what they have to do if they want to sell music. one of them would be to build a long list of releases fast, or another would be to make 1 good track or ep and work hard on promotion of it.



yeah this would be true, but it wouldn't be what im looking for,different strokes i suppose. i like each tune to have its own little variation and although the style im playing is the same genre, weather tech-house or minimal etc, its still good to put variation in to your sets, and keep things interesting, i find it very boring when i listen to dj sets where there's a tune playing and the next one after it sounds the same as the last one with no interesting transition,just 1 minute of beatmatching near the end and thats it, no actually mixing of sound itself.

just off the top of my head, have listen to Adam beyers fabric 22 mix, its techno, its minimal. but each track is carefully picked. each track sounds totally different to the previous. yet its a sustainable and very well done mix thats still enjoyed by myself today and its 5 year old.

all down to preference i suppose.

yep thats all well and good about djing playing different genres and alot of people are doing it nowadays but the techno,minimal tracks on that mix might not be too original for the genre there in.
what i mean is there are no more original ideas,we can always describe someones sounds as resembling something else.

Again most people are making music they would like to hear out and it is rather a self indulgent act even if the are making generic dance music its what they want to make.

People are happy making generic stuff the same way people are happy to listen to pop music all there lives.

Joey negro springs to mind as a person who has significant technical ability as well as musical knowlege and he still predominantly makes vocal house track(im well aware of all the aliases in other genres).He seems very happy to be doing that too

But getting back to the learning part is it better to tell a newbie to stick to a style they like and learn the tricks of that genre instead of regurgitating a mixture of ideas into one track with no direction

Rockshamrover

It's an interesting question.

I think a mixture of both, basic knowledge and the curiosity to try new things is probably the best path to follow. The basic knowledge will grow over time.

Stick to rigidly to the rules and regulations of your chosen genre and you end up just mimicking others and killing your own creativity.

Jump in without a clue and you'll sound like someone who hasn't a clue:D (me)

No harm in trying as many styles as you can too. You'll learn something so it's not wasted effort.

jtsuited

Y'all lost me at the mention of Adam Beyer.

cloudydsound

richard d james would be turning in his grave

if he were dead that is

electrogrimey

I'm not sure to be honest. At the moment I know I'm guilty of 'noob-messing-with-presets' syndrome, but I'd prefer to be making music I thought was interesting, even if it sounds ****e, then spending a year or two recreating other music until I can sound professional.

You said about people learning instruments learning how to play other people's music first, before expressing themselves. I think that's a problem. The reality is that most people who learn instruments never play anything they wrote themselves, they just spend the whole time playing other people's songs.

Classical musicians are very guilty of this. I know so many amazing classical musicians, who, if asked to improvise, or write a little groove on the spot, would just freeze, or just slightly change a melody they already knew. So I'm on the fence with this one.

jtsuited

Lads, the main weakness of all the sh1te music out there right now, is the fact that most of the people responsible have little to no musical knowledge.

Nearly every artist that breaks and has staying power nowadays come from a musician's background as opposed to a dj background.

Every so often you'll have guys who are completely non-musicians (burial allegedly), but you do have to appreciate the fact that they are just exceptionally gifted artists. I'm not saying any of y'all are not, but to think you can get away in music without developing your musical aptitude is ludicrous (and yet everyone does it anyway).

Of course, if you're making tunes for the love of it, and show them to a few mates, then do what you feckin want.

But if you think you're gonna strike gold before you put in the hard hours to understand music production, you're very much mistaken.

Then again, I actually think you either have it or you don't, so what i've just said probably doesn't apply.

dasdog

electrogrimey wrote: »

The reality is that most people who learn instruments never play anything they wrote themselves, they just spend the whole time playing other people's songs.

I'm sure you don't mean that. I have trouble thinking ahead to the next bar and start sweatin inside...unless it's my own stuff.

jtsuited

electrogrimey wrote: »

I'm not sure to be honest. At the moment I know I'm guilty of 'noob-messing-with-presets' syndrome, but I'd prefer to be making music I thought was interesting, even if it sounds ****e, then spending a year or two recreating other music until I can sound professional.

You said about people learning instruments learning how to play other people's music first, before expressing themselves. I think that's a problem. The reality is that most people who learn instruments never play anything they wrote themselves, they just spend the whole time playing other people's songs.

Classical musicians are very guilty of this. I know so many amazing classical musicians, who, if asked to improvise, or write a little groove on the spot, would just freeze, or just slightly change a melody they already knew. So I'm on the fence with this one.

errr....false syllogism alert.

what you're saying is..
Most musicians aren't artists. True
Therefore artists don't have to be musicians. True but not because of the above premise.

The fact that classical musicians don't have to have any creative ability is caused by the fact that by definition, a classical musician is supposed to perform as opposed to compose.

My grandmother who was a teacher in the Royal Academy used to go mental when she'd hear me doodlin away on the piano without sheet music. Why? Because creativity is genuinely a hindrance to somebody who wants to be a serious classical musician. It's about discipline and 8 hours of practice a day.

Classically trained classical musicians are not the only types of musicians.
And anyway, it's a completely different area. A producer is a composer, not a musician in the classical context.

electrogrimey

@dasdog Yes I do, in my experience of every genre besides jazz, most musicians only ever emulate other things, rarely create original things. Songwriters are the obvious exception, or people in bands, but I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the average bloke who whips out a guitar at a party.

@Jeff Oh I know, I realise that being a classical musician is a skill unto itself, and the creativity comes from how you put your own personality into someone else's work, and I have no problem with that.

I'm not referring to just classical musicians, it's the same with many people who play guitar or sing or whatever, they learn hundreds of songs they like on guitar, or how to sing them, but most will never play anything completely original.

I disagree that producers are simply composers. Producers play everything they compose, so they're both composers and musicians. I see producing as not too different from a one man performing artist, say a guy with a guitar, a mic, synths and a loop pedal playing live. The difference is that a producer is both this artist and their sound engineer.

Of course composers learn the basics of theory and harmony before starting to compose, and get to a very advanced level at it, but they don't write full pieces copying already written pieces, they'll just analyze them, and maybe copy segments of them in order to learn a specific technique.

So I disagree that a new producer should make loads of tracks sounding like other tracks. They should moreso spend time emulating the synths sound in another tracks, or the drum loops, as technical exercises, before making a full track. That's what I'm trying to say I suppose.

dasdog

That's a bit more explanative

On the subject:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIkQNti8_EU

...but it's blues

seannash

but most will never play anything completely original.

Just to be pedantic,has not every combo and chord progression been done by now so no real originality left bar sound.

Producers play everything they compose,

Again being pedantic i know but ive never played anything in my life.I would call myself a producer but not an artist

So I disagree that a new producer should make loads of tracks sounding like other tracks. They should moreso spend time emulating the synths sound in another tracks, or the drum loops, as technical exercises, before making a full track. That's what I'm trying to say I suppose.

Im not singling your stuff out but you really would benefit from copying a few tracks(as could I and alot of people on here)
Emanulating drum loops is pretty much copying rhythms of certain tracks so you agree to a certain extent.

Lets be perfectly honest very very few of us on this forum are going to create anything that doesnt sound alot like whats out there at the moment.Were all copying one way or another but like to think otherwise.

I just think a more structured way of learning could get people to a point where they can express themselves more effectively quicker and not have these good ideas lost due to ****ty production

seannash

Lads, the main weakness of all the sh1te music out there right now, is the fact that most of the people responsible have little to no musical knowledge.

Definietly guilty and its a huge hinderance to me right now

Nearly every artist that breaks and has staying power nowadays come from a musician's background as opposed to a dj background.

True,dance music has become more acceptable and as such i guess more musicians arent looking at it with such disgust and are embracing it

Every so often you'll have guys who are completely non-musicians (burial allegedly), but you do have to appreciate the fact that they are just exceptionally gifted artists. I'm not saying any of y'all are not, but to think you can get away in music without developing your musical aptitude is ludicrous (and yet everyone does it anyway).

Guilty again but currently trying t do something about it

electrogrimey

Oh I agree that I should start emulating music I like, in order to learn how to make that kind of music.

However, I think the best way for me, and other new producers, to learn to be an original producer, is to open a new project, spend hours on a drum loop copied from a track you like, until it sounds perfect, and then trash that project. Instead of copying a full track, just changing the melody and whatever, and putting it on Soundcloud and calling it x- y (original mix).

If you get me...

I think I need to do that more, and young producers should, and then when the start a project to make a full track, they should be experimental.

seannash

electrogrimey wrote: »

Oh I agree that I should start emulating music I like, in order to learn how to make that kind of music.

However, I think the best way for me, and other new producers, to learn to be an original producer, is to open a new project, spend hours on a drum loop copied from a track you like, until it sounds perfect, and then trash that project. Instead of copying a full track, just changing the melody and whatever, and putting it on Soundcloud and calling it x- y (original mix).

If you get me...

I think I need to do that more, and young producers should, and then when the start a project to make a full track, they should be experimental.

But finishing a track is a huge part of it.how many sketches have people got going on in there daws.
Its hugely beneficial to finish as you learn about arrangement,buildups,how to build tension,how to get that drum loop sounding great in a track etc.
These things will turn you into a better producer

Like I said i dont think many of us are gonna make anything thats totally new.With dance music technique is really important.

seannash

also its not about copying the melody but more the elements you like and how they fit together.
If i make a straight up house track id know id need a real sounding bass,come keys,maybe some pads and a vocal.

Noone has to tell me what chord progression to do or words to sing or bassline to play but by sticking to the basic building blocks of the genre i can have an actual goal and compare it to something.

Again its the sum of the parts that make a track so best to work with all them parts

jtsuited

electrogrimey wrote: »

Oh I agree that I should start emulating music I like, in order to learn how to make that kind of music.

However, I think the best way for me, and other new producers, to learn to be an original producer, is to open a new project, spend hours on a drum loop copied from a track you like, until it sounds perfect, and then trash that project. Instead of copying a full track, just changing the melody and whatever, and putting it on Soundcloud and calling it x- y (original mix).

If you get me...

I think I need to do that more, and young producers should, and then when the start a project to make a full track, they should be experimental.

At the risk of this sounding like condescending advice, I think you need to really sit down and spend a while getting your mixing chops together. You've clearly got the music in you, but you're really not doing any justice to your ideas with your mixes.

The only way you learn how to mix is constant constant constant repetition and comparing to other tracks in a similar genre.

There are certain methods and techniques you find in all music production, from stevie wonder to Sandwell District, and they don't come about by fiddling around and experimenting. They come with hours upon hours of studying the craft.

jtsuited

seannash wrote: »

But finishing a track is a huge part of it.how many sketches have people got going on in there daws.
Its hugely beneficial to finish as you learn about arrangement,buildups,how to build tension,how to get that drum loop sounding great in a track etc.
These things will turn you into a better producer

Until you've heard your track properly mastered and after separating yourself from it as a work, you're not hearing it. The distance between having a sketch and having an actual track, is soooo much longer than most people would like to believe.

jtsuited

oh and btw, I have no idea if there's anybody here actually experimenting. I mean if you're in the standard setup of a DAW using midi, plugins, etc. , it's not experimental.

If you're using Max or Pure Data or CSound or whatever then yeah it's experimenting. If you're whackin a load of wacky fx on in ableton, that's not being experimental, that's just mangling sh1t in a way a billion and one other bedroom producers are doing. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I always find the 'experimental' word pulled out when people are lacking in talent or cohesion or vision.

seannash

jtsuited wrote: »

oh and btw, I have no idea if there's anybody here actually experimenting. I mean if you're in the standard setup of a DAW using midi, plugins, etc. , it's not experimental.

If you're using Max or Pure Data or CSound or whatever then yeah it's experimenting. If you're whackin a load of wacky fx on in ableton, that's not being experimental, that's just mangling sh1t in a way a billion and one other bedroom producers are doing. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I always find the 'experimental' word pulled out when people are lacking in talent or cohesion or vision.

yep,seems like it cover a multitude of sins because it give the producer a get off jail card when there criticized.Not everyone can be a musical prodigy and theres not shame in admitting it

I do think OldGregg does some experimental work.Its not that it hasn't been done before but I do admire the effort that goes into his music

jtsuited

Yeah if Old Gregg's not experimental I don't know what is.

electrogrimey

jtsuited wrote: »

At the risk of this sounding like condescending advice, I think you need to really sit down and spend a while getting your mixing chops together. You've clearly got the music in you, but you're really not doing any justice to your ideas with your mixes.

I agree 100% with this, don't worry.

Ok, fair enough there are few people doing anything experimental, but at least young producers could be progressive and new. i.e. playing around with different tempos, different drum patterns, time signatures etc, playing with modes and dissonant harmony etc.

jtsuited

electrogrimey wrote: »

I agree 100% with this, don't worry.

Ok, fair enough there are few people doing anything experimental, but at least young producers could be progressive and new. i.e. playing around with different tempos, different drum patterns, time signatures etc, playing with modes and dissonant harmony etc.

I very much disagree for the simple reason that you can only fcuk about with these things when you know them. Pulling off dissonance is tricky and 99% of noob producers get it horifically wrong.

I've been hearing the time signature thing for years, but I can't remember the last time I heard a track not in 4/4 in electronic music (as we discovered earlier the Swedish Sh1t Mafia don't work outside this ever so archaic structure).

Experimentalism and 'creativity' are buzzwords used by companies to sell music equipment to non-musicians.
Originality etc. will naturally come about by being good.
Or as Jimi Hendrix put it, 'originality comes about from not being able to copy properly'.

electrogrimey

Well noob producer doesn't necessarily mean noob musician. Someone could have have a degree in music theory but never have used a DAW before. They'd know about different possibilities of drum patterns and dissonance.

Shpongle - Divine Moments of Truth changes from 4/4 to 6/8 halfway through, and it works amazingly, so I see no reason why producers couldn't experiment more with time signatures! A lot of IDM is in 7, or 5 etc. I'd like to see people write more repetitive (than IDM) tracks in different time signatures. Has 128 house in 7 been done? :P

seannash

electrogrimey wrote: »

I agree 100% with this, don't worry.

Ok, fair enough there are few people doing anything experimental, but at least young producers could be progressive and new. i.e. playing around with different tempos, different drum patterns, time signatures etc, playing with modes and dissonant harmony etc.

Of course they can but the outcome,whilst it might be musically great,will sound ****.

Dance music has this unfotunate habit of needing to work on the dancefloor and if it dont hit right it doesnt work

I do get where your coming from and im not trying to stifle creativity but i think learning should outweigh creativity for the begining.

I remember encountering Jeff on an ableton forum when he was very new to this sort of music but even though he was new he still had the technical chops to make fantastic tracks.
His first few months were spent copying tracks he liked for the most part to understand them(I still have some of his electrohouse tracks )

jtsuited

perhaps, but normally what happens regarding time signatures is, a producer makes something with slightly syncopated broken beat and the non-musical journalists and fans think it's not 4/4.

Actually, something like this always gets called experimental or whatever, because it's just slightly different than normal. nothing in the least bit experimental about it though.

See I am actually in the middle of work and posting on the internet so I don't burn out!

electrogrimey

I suppose my only objection really is people actually sending these practice-emulation tracks around to people, blogs/DJs/labels etc. My objection is to the people that are copying the tracks not as a means to get better at producing, but to have people say they're a good producer.

jtsuited

seannash wrote: »

His first few months were spent copying tracks he liked for the most part to understand them(I still have some of his electrohouse tracks )

haha, I was an electrohouse beast.....fcukin anthemic rubbish. Still can't believe some of the sh1t that I put out under Kid Handsome. Fcuk me...shockin sh1te altogether.

jtsuited

electrogrimey wrote: »

I suppose my only objection really is people actually sending these practice-emulation tracks around to people, blogs/DJs/labels etc. My objection is to the people that are copying the tracks not as a means to get better at producing, but to have people say they're a good producer.

again, it comes down to what I've said a million times....don't put into the public something while you're learning. It's great for the ego, but absolutely horrific for your long term reputation......
Trust me on that!!:D

electrogrimey

jtsuited wrote: »

again, it comes down to what I've said a million times....don't put into the public something while you're learning. It's great for the ego, but absolutely horrific for your long term reputation......
Trust me on that!!:D

I imagine this is a hard rule to stick to! I'm grand though, not using any moniker at the moment, so if ever I get any good I can just make up one then and release under that

To be honest, the only reason I put stuff on Soundcloud etc is for the feedback thread here, and similar threads on other forums, and to get c&c from other producers/DJs I know.

seannash

electrogrimey wrote: »

I suppose my only objection really is people actually sending these practice-emulation tracks around to people, blogs/DJs/labels etc. My objection is to the people that are copying the tracks not as a means to get better at producing, but to have people say they're a good producer.

Thats true i guess but some people are genuinely happy to make those sorts of tracks(probably those that arent from a musical background:o)

That could be the height of there musical expertise and alot of producers happily sit in those genres.
Alot of producers i respect make vocal house but they are incredible musicians.
Ill never forget seeing Chuck Love djing.he sang,played trumpet,guitar and did drums on a midi keyboard all whilst mixing tracks.
Very impressive musician but alot of people would find his music cheesy

jtsuited

electrogrimey wrote: »

I imagine this is a hard rule to stick to! I'm grand though, not using any moniker at the moment, so if ever I get any good I can just make up one then and release under that

To be honest, the only reason I put stuff on Soundcloud etc is for the feedback thread here, and similar threads on other forums, and to get c&c from other producers/DJs I know.

didn't you have something up on some blog???

soundcloud feedback's cool and you'll learn loads but don't let blogs get their hands on it.

Oh and start with a moniker for the simple way tha discogs etc. works. Don't start with your real name.

Speakin of which I'm releasing my first track on my proper name soon.

seannash

jtsuited wrote: »

haha, I was an electrohouse beast.....fcukin anthemic rubbish. Still can't believe some of the sh1t that I put out under Kid Handsome. Fcuk me...shockin sh1te altogether.

Ha ha i do believe I own a track of yours called Epic Win.:D:D

When you blow up im gonna blackmail you with them.

(Actually the last time i dj'd,which was a good while ago,I played your Drunkard track)

seannash

jtsuited wrote: »

Oh and start with a moniker for the simple way tha discogs etc. works. Don't start with your real name.

D'oh

jtsuited

seannash wrote: »

Ha ha i do believe I own a track of yours called Epic Win.:D:D

When you blow up im gonna blackmail you with them.

(Actually the last time i dj'd,which was a good while ago,I played your Drunkard track)

Jesus man, they're the good ones. If we go way back to the Slated and Addict sh1t then we're talking proper blackmail material.

jtsuited

seannash wrote: »

D'oh

you didn't think of that did you????

Your real name is something you can't really control on any moniker you ever do, so you better make sure it's not embarassing.