Hd
when arranging..
-
heavensdaw
- Posts: 1825
- Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 12:01 pm
- Location: inbetween the inbetween
good tips Neb!
Hd
Hd
http://soundcloud.com/marcusvandell
http://soundcloud.com/acrossdigital
http://www.myspace.com/theinpsyda
'enjoy what you can while you can'
http://soundcloud.com/acrossdigital
http://www.myspace.com/theinpsyda
'enjoy what you can while you can'
Yeah, thanks. That my first experience with Sylenth1 and I was soooooo blown away. It was basically drum samples, vocals, and all Sylenth1. I think the Love Comes First remix I did for Techno Squirrels is a bit better, but this one was basically a homage to Sylenth1.thefool wrote:Surenebulae wrote:happy to help - let me know how they work out for you guys
btw you did the remix of Techno Squirrels - Unbelievable at the sylenth1 page?
Its sweet
Also, I had first started out the remix with an entirely different idea, but then I kept playing with it in the Session, and eventually, what emerged was the remix that you finally heard there.
Alright found the stuff at your page
I have to agree with you, its a better song. That trancy feeling it got is undescribable. I just switched from headphones to my monitors and even though i listen at a low volume it still catches me..
Interesting!
Sylenth1 is def. at a top of my gear-want list (yeah vst's are on there too), but still a bit wandering around because i can get Reason for the same price. If this technique with session view can remove my creativity block i get when in the mood for music, i'll probably buy both and lots of other stuff in a 'high' of happiness hehe
I have to agree with you, its a better song. That trancy feeling it got is undescribable. I just switched from headphones to my monitors and even though i listen at a low volume it still catches me..
Interesting!
Sylenth1 is def. at a top of my gear-want list (yeah vst's are on there too), but still a bit wandering around because i can get Reason for the same price. If this technique with session view can remove my creativity block i get when in the mood for music, i'll probably buy both and lots of other stuff in a 'high' of happiness hehe
Thanks for listening That Love Comes First was me fucking around with Sampler on the vocal, and that backwards part was a happy accident Like I said, those are great!!
As for Reason, I know most won't agree, but I don't really like how it sounds. I've got a few excellent pieces of software, and that's all I really need. Reason doesn't sound fat to me, not like Sylenth1 or Zebra or Z3ta. It's great and had a ton of options and such, but to me, I'd prefer the integration of VSTi into a Live session over the whole PITA of rewire.
But don't let my opinion deter you in any way. Plenty of people make great music with Reason.
That Love Comes First was me fucking around with Sampler on the vocal, and that backwards part was a happy accident Like I said, those are great!!As for Reason, I know most won't agree, but I don't really like how it sounds. I've got a few excellent pieces of software, and that's all I really need. Reason doesn't sound fat to me, not like Sylenth1 or Zebra or Z3ta. It's great and had a ton of options and such, but to me, I'd prefer the integration of VSTi into a Live session over the whole PITA of rewire.
But don't let my opinion deter you in any way. Plenty of people make great music with Reason.
my work is divided (in time) to about 15% in Session, 85% in Arrangement
although the importance of that first 15% is large.
I create the rough building blocks in Session, I get the groove going there. And I go through many iterations of patterns and sounds in there until it sits right.
Then I lay it out in arrangement, but normally only 16 or 32 bars worth. Not the whole song.
After that it is all in Arrangement, I will quite often re-write the drum parts, add little grace notes and do micro editing, and often I create whole new sections in there. It gets very involved.
I'd do more in Session if I could, but it is too limited for some tasks.
although the importance of that first 15% is large.
I create the rough building blocks in Session, I get the groove going there. And I go through many iterations of patterns and sounds in there until it sits right.
Then I lay it out in arrangement, but normally only 16 or 32 bars worth. Not the whole song.
After that it is all in Arrangement, I will quite often re-write the drum parts, add little grace notes and do micro editing, and often I create whole new sections in there. It gets very involved.
I'd do more in Session if I could, but it is too limited for some tasks.
Last edited by Angstrom on Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Jagermaestro
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:16 pm
As usual, Angy, you have summed it all up very nicely!Angstrom wrote:my work is divided (in time) to about 15% in Session, 85% in Arrangement
although the importance of that first 15% is large.
I create the rough building blocks in Session, I get the groove going there. And I go through many iterations of patterns and sounds in there until it sits right.
Then I lay it out in arrangement, but normally only 16 or 32 bars worth. Not the whole song.
After that it is all in Arrangement, I will quite often re-write the drum parts, add little grace notes and do micro editing, and often I create whole new sections in there. It gets very involved.
I'd do more in Session if I could, but it is too limited for some tasks.
-
musicmachine
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 3:40 pm
I never used to like the sound of Reason and even sold but i came back to 4,If you set up th rack right it can sound as good as anything else(imo)and Thor can sound huge.With external instrument it's a lot easier to integrate reason into live and you can even freeze the track and close reason and the instrument still plays!There are some refills that sound stunning.Have a listennebulae wrote:Thanks for listening
As for Reason, I know most won't agree, but I don't really like how it sounds. I've got a few excellent pieces of software, and that's all I really need. Reason doesn't sound fat to me, not like Sylenth1 or Zebra or Z3ta. It's great and had a ton of options and such, but to me, I'd prefer the integration of VSTi into a Live session over the whole PITA of rewire.
But don't let my opinion deter you in any way. Plenty of people make great music with Reason.
http://www.bitword.com/index.php?main_p ... ducts_id=1
Happy accidents are sometimes fun hehenebulae wrote:Thanks for listening
As for Reason, I know most won't agree, but I don't really like how it sounds. I've got a few excellent pieces of software, and that's all I really need. Reason doesn't sound fat to me, not like Sylenth1 or Zebra or Z3ta. It's great and had a ton of options and such, but to me, I'd prefer the integration of VSTi into a Live session over the whole PITA of rewire.
Well about reason, it would indeed be for rewire use. Ever played with Thor? Well it depends on what i feel the day i am ready for more instruments (wonder why gearlust is so much up when you can have fun making sounds with weird real-life stuff.. guess its a boy's thing). Depends on how this track goes. I get better every second i play with music, but i usually make goals. "If this sounds right, i'll get that and use that in the next track" etcettera. And since i got 10 people around me to tell me everytime i kick out a new sample that i'm escalating in quality, i suppose its a good way.
But i promised that i'll complete a track now. I've spent so much time only getting smaller loops done but then its so hard to make full tracks in arrangement view (where i do the samples). But as i said i get stuck, even when i have something great!
but yeah rewire is one thing that is a bit so-so. My computer can easily handle it though. But sylenth1, despite seeming like a rather simple synth it can kick out some pretty interesting sounds [and i like the layout, too. Its easy to smack up an arp and such.]
thx to you too, angstrom
Yeah you sum it up. Arranging takes TIME! Thats my problem. When i feel like creating building blocks, basslines, melodies and progressions, i stuck up in arrangement.
So guess i could use that step to void out the stucking
Yep. If it was just a VST..Thor can sound huge
I say the same. This should be sticky heheGreat thread, lots of useful tips. Thanks guys.
(To avoid people falling in the same trap as me, running around the session view and ending up in arrangement)
At least i learned my way around the arrangement view pretty good so far then
edit: though the next stuff highly likely will not be an instrument but mastering tools. Based on a few recomendations on this forum [and bob katz book] it might be Voxengo who'll receive a truckload of cash :p
also reminds me: Do you make scenes with like "intro, main part, chorus" and then launch&record, or would you sometimes go around selecting some clips in conjunction with others (or do you mix. eg first try different clips across scenes and then smack all of the clips you find great together in a seperate scene?) I think you allready answered, at least one or some of you, that you use the 3rd method but just to be sure..
Wow this has gotten quite a big post, hope you can get around it
-
noisetonepause
- Posts: 4938
- Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2002 3:38 pm
- Location: Sticks and stones
I've actually been doing some music since the semester ended mid-December (and I've still done OK on my exams in January, too..), but I've just been using Live as one piece of the puzzle, instead of 'the centrepiece' or even the only tool in the box.. This has helped me immensely, being a lifelong member of the 'never finish anything'-club...
Basically, I've got a bunch of old hardware (and software on old computers) that I'll use to make individual patterns that I then run into Live. This isn't really that different to what I used to do (I'd just make patterns in Live and Rekaktor and bounce to audio to minimize CPU use), though.
What I've done for these three songs that are "nearly there" is to decide on a completely arbitrary structure before writing any of the music, or at least after the first building block is done. I'll litereally make a new set and start naming sections on an empty MIDI track, or draw in tempo automation and time signature changes before putting the audio in. One track started with the idea that I wanted to make a track that was a one minute slow down from 135 to 60 BPM, and then a minute speed up to 135 BPM. So that's what I did.
I like it that way because structure and dynamics is very important to me, I think it's as important as melody or rhythm, maybe more so (but then I'm tone deaf and have no sense of rhythm). But structure is different to melody and rhythm, I find. Usually a good beat, noise or tune will come up if you just noodly, but structure rarely does. Structure, at least if you like it a bit rigid with sudden changes like I do, involves a degree of intellect that a good melody or synth patch doesn't (always) do. To me it actually makes to sort of set up the framework first, once you have the most general idea of what you want the piece to feel like, and then take it from there.
Of course, I'm not afraid to change a structure if there's a beat that wants to go on for a few more bars than I'd originally thought, but still, I really like this general idea.
Basically, I've got a bunch of old hardware (and software on old computers) that I'll use to make individual patterns that I then run into Live. This isn't really that different to what I used to do (I'd just make patterns in Live and Rekaktor and bounce to audio to minimize CPU use), though.
What I've done for these three songs that are "nearly there" is to decide on a completely arbitrary structure before writing any of the music, or at least after the first building block is done. I'll litereally make a new set and start naming sections on an empty MIDI track, or draw in tempo automation and time signature changes before putting the audio in. One track started with the idea that I wanted to make a track that was a one minute slow down from 135 to 60 BPM, and then a minute speed up to 135 BPM. So that's what I did.
I like it that way because structure and dynamics is very important to me, I think it's as important as melody or rhythm, maybe more so (but then I'm tone deaf and have no sense of rhythm). But structure is different to melody and rhythm, I find. Usually a good beat, noise or tune will come up if you just noodly, but structure rarely does. Structure, at least if you like it a bit rigid with sudden changes like I do, involves a degree of intellect that a good melody or synth patch doesn't (always) do. To me it actually makes to sort of set up the framework first, once you have the most general idea of what you want the piece to feel like, and then take it from there.
Of course, I'm not afraid to change a structure if there's a beat that wants to go on for a few more bars than I'd originally thought, but still, I really like this general idea.
Suit #1: I mean, have you got any insight as to why a bright boy like this would jeopardize the lives of millions?
Suit #2: No, sir, he says he does this sort of thing for fun.
Suit #2: No, sir, he says he does this sort of thing for fun.
Depends on the track - sometimes Ill lay some rough beats down as clips then recording long bits in arrange and maybe chop them up into clips etc, othertime Ill do nearly everything in arrange or clip view.
But thats the beauty of it - just work as suits the job at hand.
But thats the beauty of it - just work as suits the job at hand.
Nothing to see here - move along!
Depending on the genre / track like Khazul said i believe.
Some tracks needs a really nice melody, others needs a really great production and structure.
But your're right, ntp, good melodie's come when you slop around
But my problem is the structure don't come until i've got those melodies and beats out! [sometimes they do, my brain is quite random on that point], but most of the time i just sit there with a crazy idea.
But you are right about structure. I am reading, trying and listening to other tracks. But as you say, structure requires brain activity, and i'd like to not have anything to do with structure until my main ideas are in place.
Interesting approach, though
Some tracks needs a really nice melody, others needs a really great production and structure.
But your're right, ntp, good melodie's come when you slop around
But my problem is the structure don't come until i've got those melodies and beats out! [sometimes they do, my brain is quite random on that point], but most of the time i just sit there with a crazy idea.
But you are right about structure. I am reading, trying and listening to other tracks. But as you say, structure requires brain activity, and i'd like to not have anything to do with structure until my main ideas are in place.
Interesting approach, though