TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- WIP thread (DJRYAN now allowed to post tracks)
Pages (287): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 [116] 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 »

quote:

Originally posted by Richard Butler Ok this is last weeks track totally re-done. What don't you like?

You change your tracks so much I don't know what the old one was! This sounds like a techno banger straight out of a Carl Cox set. I don't really have any feedback other than I notice a lot of variance in your tracks (like elements that only get used once or in one part) which is fine, I think that is part of your style. Though, it is harder to a get a hook with a lot of parts coming in and out I think. Really great track though. I could for sure see some of the techno guys playing it.

I still have some extras/automation to add into this one, but the majority of it is in here currently. I guess I would call this deep, though it has elements of prog and trance I think. One of the more unique things I've made.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancelover03591 I still have some extras/automation to add into this one, but the majority of it is in here currently. I guess I would call this deep, though it has elements of prog and trance I think. One of the more unique things I've made.

By far my fave track of yours, absolutely smooth as hell. You have the deep house sound perfected and melted with wonderful breaks.

I do not like the part just after the break, it's incongruous, just instead go to the deeper sound you have that follows that part.

Hat off to you, this is killer.

Re: Re: WIP feedback

quote:

Originally posted by Trancelover03591 I think it is a bit dated in style but that is just a taste thing. Are the vocals original or from another song? I think you have a lot of good musical elements to work with. I might use the higher second vocals in a few less places. I like it overall.

All original, Im not sure I will continue working on it right now, common advice is that it's dated so best thing to do is move on and work on some of my other songs. Maybe one day the work put into this may come in handy for another song, etc! Thanks for the advice guys and honesty guys! Onto next song!

So, ive canned the other track, common feedback was that its dated, not gonna waste any more time on it, maybe one day I can use parts of it for something else, in the meantime, onto other songs!

Heres another ive been re working. To be honest, I dont even know what genre this really fits into it, I come from a classical and Rock background originaly (please dont roll your eyes!) so im not really up to speed with all the sub genres in the electronic world, all I know is I start creating and these are the things that come out.

feedback away! thanks guys,

quote:

Originally posted by Trancelover03591 I still have some extras/automation to add into this one, but the majority of it is in here currently. I guess I would call this deep, though it has elements of prog and trance I think. One of the more unique things I've made.

Cool song, dumb question, what genre does this song fall into?
I like the song dynamics.

On first listen the only thing that my ears were unsure about is the tuning during the organ/string chilled section. To me it sounds like there are a few elements slightly out of key, Obviously the organ is the key element in determning what chords are being played and which key they are derived from. It sounds like the kick note (its producing an note not just a thump) and strings are slightly out of key i.e. maybe just one note of the strings is out. To me it was creating a dissonant uncomfortable feeling. Maybe also matching the kicks tonal note to the root/tonic of the key would help also? Or maybe you are going for a dissonant vibe and I should just STFU!
Thats my ears anyway, just being honest. But overall a cool track. I like it.

quote:

Originally posted by madmuso Cool song, dumb question, what genre does this song fall into? I like the song dynamics. On first listen the only thing that my ears were unsure about is the tuning during the organ/string chilled section. To me it sounds like there are a few elements slightly out of key, Obviously the organ is the key element in determning what chords are being played and which key they are derived from. It sounds like the kick note (its producing an note not just a thump) and strings are slightly out of key i.e. maybe just one note of the strings is out. To me it was creating a dissonant uncomfortable feeling. Maybe also matching the kicks tonal note to the root/tonic of the key would help also? Or maybe you are going for a dissonant vibe and I should just STFU! Thats my ears anyway, just being honest. But overall a cool track. I like it.

I'd call it a mix of deep, prog & trance. I didn't intentionally add dissonance and haven't noticed it myself. However, the breakdown is quite a wash of delay, reverb and a bunch of synths which I was going for.

Re: Re: Re: WIP feedback

quote:

Originally posted by madmuso All original, Im not sure I will continue working on it right now, common advice is that it's dated so best thing to do is move on and work on some of my other songs. Maybe one day the work put into this may come in handy for another song, etc! Thanks for the advice guys and honesty guys! Onto next song!

Eh, I really liked it. Some people say dated, some say retro. I think a slavish dedication to the Hot New Thing stifles creativity.

quote:

Originally posted by madmuso

Nice. That bassline at the beginning is kind of ominous and driving--gives the track energy. Well done. The mid-range synth that carries the track to the breakdown is interesting enough to listen to, but repetitive enough to be hypnotic. And that lead that kicks in at 6:56, nice. I like the two-step build out of the break, too; give 'em a kick to start dancing, with a snare on top to tell 'em they're not there yet. Unusual, and well used.

However, I think the phrase after 8:21 is a bit superfluous--you could easily skip from there to 9:17, and still have an outro. I like the low version of the synth you introduced in the breakdown (and runs after 8:21), and I think you could replace the gated stabby thing that starts at 1:20 with it. The stabs don't seem to get re-used in the piece, and for me at least they drag a bit on the track. At 1:52 they start dragging a little less, but I don't think they're necessary--I think you could easily ditch them, and either shorten the track to have a nice section that's mainly just rhythm (perhaps a funky breakbeat), then a short break and right into that great synthline at 3:20, or tease your final lead synth (the one from 6:56) in that breakdown over your pads, then bring everything back at 3:20.

quote:

Originally posted by madmuso

First thing i noticed.

You set up a very defined rythm a latino would call a clave. The 2 bar bass pattern.

And then you just kinda ditch it which takes away your main motif so far and adds something that has no groove , more notes, and more notes when more things are playing.
And when you have that style of bass that plays of the kick, you need to have at least 8 bars with the backbeat. Having those raw elements cut and people react much better. The hihats just distract at that point. The less elements you can have , well they cut way better and it just makes no logical sense to deny people those raw 8 bars that if you ask any dj just make people more energetic.

Now if you wanted to step up the energy, you need to trqnsfer that pattern to a synth because it seems like you have no reason for it there. It just can't really explain itself the way you have it. Most people llike his remix of global code but the form of the other one is more clever.

you already have the synths there that could do it.

Next up. High hats . Nobody every listened to a track and said fuyck me, those hihats are sick.

Your hihats are bright so they are taking space but they serve no fucntion. They don't really add any rythmic counterpoint and they are more busy then they need to be if you want to fill in the space as one does. This is particularly weird when you have other synths just doing similar 16ths in the same range.

Asa rule. Your main phrasing should be 8 bars. There should be enough content to accentuate the stress pints of those 8 bars. You don't. The result is well, repetitive but more than it has to be.

The hihats during the point were the bass starts to develop is taking way too much attention. Again, why are they there and why so loud. They are also really really brittle and ear piercing that they are not only pointless structurally but just sound terrible.

Towards the end you just add a synth from nowhere that has no connection and you should find ways to find ways so that the sound used well, right now it sounds random. You could of used it say in parts leading up to a downbeat just to hint at it.

I would say the thing you should focus on is structural coherance. Ask yourself why something is there, what is it doing, how am i mixing it . Other wise you get a pastiche of random thoughts and this is what makes makes for good track writting. Parsimony.

so things you could do.

the initial bass, filter it and have it as a intro to set up a motif. When you want to other bass, you can still use that idea with the synths. I would really think about hihats and why you use them. I would also focus more on form.

A dance tracks is really 1 bar. You can pretty much sum a track in one bar and you need to create a structural frame work to make that bar last the track.
someone that is rather good at form is scot project. You will notice he doesn't just add things but everything seems to serve a function. I wish i had modern guys for you to check out. He was a favorite of mine.

his remix of 99 is brilliant at basically using the same motifs and expanding and making a track that has some sense of cohesion.

fuck ya, L4C finally giving some WIP advice.

Reading L4c's advice makes me shit myself as my latest has lots of elements. TBH I always start out intending to have it as stripped back as possible with the few parts good enough by themselves not to require padding.
Takes a lot of bravery and incredible skill tho.

Nothing wrong with that.

It is wether the elements are needed or just there out of habit or lack of consideration. Sort of why authors have editors,

Here is an example.

Hollywood blockbuster scores are incredibly simple and banal but most people just start blaming the lack of talent and that they don't make John Williams type people anymore.

The composers are quite capable but the aesthetic has changed. A John Williams score would be rejected wothout a doubt had he done even say Star Wars but now.

Composers have to realize that those loud explosions take up space that to juxtapose some clever voice exchange adds nothing.

Mixing , arranging basically solves the issue of having too little space by compromising.

And keep in mind busy isn't always busy. 10 things doing the same thing is 1 thing to most listeners. Understanding how the brain groups and processes music can help. I have some old lecture slides il try to find.

quote:

Originally posted by Looney4Clooney First thing i noticed. You set up a very defined rythm a latino would call a clave. The 2 bar bass pattern. And then you just kinda ditch it which takes away your main motif so far and adds something that has no groove , more notes, and more notes when more things are playing. And when you have that style of bass that plays of the kick, you need to have at least 8 bars with the backbeat. Having those raw elements cut and people react much better. The hihats just distract at that point. The less elements you can have , well they cut way better and it just makes no logical sense to deny people those raw 8 bars that if you ask any dj just make people more energetic. Now if you wanted to step up the energy, you need to trqnsfer that pattern to a synth because it seems like you have no reason for it there. It just can't really explain itself the way you have it. Most people llike his remix of global code but the form of the other one is more clever. you already have the synths there that could do it. Next up. High hats . Nobody every listened to a track and said fuyck me, those hihats are sick. Your hihats are bright so they are taking space but they serve no fucntion. They don't really add any rythmic counterpoint and they are more busy then they need to be if you want to fill in the space as one does. This is particularly weird when you have other synths just doing similar 16ths in the same range. Asa rule. Your main phrasing should be 8 bars. There should be enough content to accentuate the stress pints of those 8 bars. You don't. The result is well, repetitive but more than it has to be. The hihats during the point were the bass starts to develop is taking way too much attention. Again, why are they there and why so loud. They are also really really brittle and ear piercing that they are not only pointless structurally but just sound terrible. Towards the end you just add a synth from nowhere that has no connection and you should find ways to find ways so that the sound used well, right now it sounds random. You could of used it say in parts leading up to a downbeat just to hint at it. I would say the thing you should focus on is structural coherance. Ask yourself why something is there, what is it doing, how am i mixing it . Other wise you get a pastiche of random thoughts and this is what makes makes for good track writting. Parsimony. so things you could do. the initial bass, filter it and have it as a intro to set up a motif. When you want to other bass, you can still use that idea with the synths. I would really think about hihats and why you use them. I would also focus more on form. A dance tracks is really 1 bar. You can pretty much sum a track in one bar and you need to create a structural frame work to make that bar last the track. someone that is rather good at form is scot project. You will notice he doesn't just add things but everything seems to serve a function. I wish i had modern guys for you to check out. He was a favorite of mine. his remix of 99 is brilliant at basically using the same motifs and expanding and making a track that has some sense of cohesion.

Hey L4C, thanks for the tips and advice, I do agree with some of what you have to say, and disagree with some of it. The beauty of music.

quote:

Originally posted by Looney4Clooney First thing i noticed. You set up a very defined rythm a latino would call a clave. The 2 bar bass pattern.

Actualy, its not a clave, and its not a 2 bar bass pattern. The intro (referring to where the hats come in) is a polyrhythm. Two different rhythms playing together. The bass is playing its own subdivisions which land on different down beats of the drums cycle. If you count, you'll notice that the bass returns back to the 1 downbeat on bar four not five as typicaly it would. But thats not how polyrhythms work. So as far as the bass landing on the downbeats of the drums cycle its like this: bar 1 it lands on downbeats 1 and 4. bar 2 it lands on downbeat 3. bar 3 it lands on downbeat 2. Bar four it starts its cycle again landing on downbeats 1 and 4. All the other notes the bass plays are in between the downbeats. The is classic example of a polyrhthm. The very start can confuse people becuase of two reasons, 1, theres no claps on the 2 and 4, and the drums cycly and odd amount of times (which im gonna change).

As far as hi hats go, well, to me they are a way of creating movement and anticipation. I will take on board your advice and see if I can make them less obtrusive, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Looney4Clooney Asa rule. Your main phrasing should be 8 bars

I think rules are a matter of what someone prefers, there are just as many strange songs out there that have done well as those that seem to abide by the rules more strictly. Pink Floyds "money" is a classic example, one of the most popular songs on the planet , yet its in odd time 7/4. Personaly I think that the breaking of the rules is what forges new and interesting songs and genres.

quote:

Originally posted by Looney4Clooney Towards the end you just add a synth from nowhere that has no connection and you should find ways to find ways so that the sound used well, right now it sounds random. You could of used it say in parts leading up to a downbeat just to hint at it.

Again, I think this is a matter of opinion. There are many songs that have elements that only feature on one section of the song. One artist i can think of right away who does this is Armin VB.

Guitar solo's for example only usualy feature in one spot of a song, its usualy the only time the listener will hear that guitar tone, melody and phrasing.

However, I do know what you mean by bringing it in at a few points just to let the listener know what song it is, etc. I have done what you are describing on one of my other songs and was trying to avoid using the same technique. I will play around with it and see what happens.

I will also try to get it less repetative, i can only try!

Thanks again,

clave is a term for certain latin american rhythms. Semantics but it it would be say something you would play on the ride including as you have it.

Kinda just skipped thru so i assumed it would be 2 bars. But listening to the entire iteration makes that particualr pattern even more out of place. Much cooler but as it is , well, why just drop that .

Perhaps I can explicate the things you don't agree with in more detail ? What daw are you using. I have the time to just show you how you could use that cool pattern instead of just dropping it. I kinda just wrote as i listened so i coldn't go in much detail.

quote:

I think rules are a matter of what someone prefers, there are just as many strange songs out there that have done well as those that seem to abide by the rules more strictly. Pink Floyds "money" is a classic example, one of the most popular songs on the planet , yet its in odd time 7/4. Personaly I think that the breaking of the rules is what forges new and interesting songs and genres.

Yes... but what you wrote is trance, which is built on patterns in powers of 2: 1 bar, 2, 4, 8, 16. 32-bar phrases delineate the major parts of a trance track.

i never said there are rules. But good creation regardless of the medium have certain things that are tenants of good writing.

It is really a matter of stating something, stating it properly with no more or less needed to state what you need to state. Most people never really take apart tracks and notice that things are not as random as you think.

I suppose that the years studying composers where 1 hour is made from a 3 note motif, you learn to appreciate and attribute more value to things that are well thought out more clever than you think and has value than just playing once.

I think it is just a philosophy of being a better more focused writer. Sometimes having things pointed out makes you start thinking of the picture.

I used to not think like this at all. I remember stydying scores and how the relationships were just so well , rational yet it is all subtext that most people don't hear but when you start to listen to these things, you start to appreciate more than maybe you once did.

dance music is commercial. I don't suggest you approach it like brahms. But say i was your label, these are just things that to me are confusing that the listener will also find confusing.

And there are certain things that well, its art, but say you mean to make the bass ovious, then have the hihats at the same time, that is counter productive. Sometimes people jsut don't actually think about why they have it there in the first place.

If it is n't adding value, it is eating bandwidth. This process i suppose is personal but listen to enough music old and new and you start to have an idea of why ceratin albums are classic and the process becomes easier.

And you can have 1 element. But that element is different to stand out. That is purpose. So it isn't the same.

quote:

Originally posted by deegee Nice. That bassline at the beginning is kind of ominous and driving--gives the track energy. Well done. The mid-range synth that carries the track to the breakdown is interesting enough to listen to, but repetitive enough to be hypnotic. And that lead that kicks in at 6:56, nice. I like the two-step build out of the break, too; give 'em a kick to start dancing, with a snare on top to tell 'em they're not there yet. Unusual, and well used. However, I think the phrase after 8:21 is a bit superfluous--you could easily skip from there to 9:17, and still have an outro. I like the low version of the synth you introduced in the breakdown (and runs after 8:21), and I think you could replace the gated stabby thing that starts at 1:20 with it. The stabs don't seem to get re-used in the piece, and for me at least they drag a bit on the track. At 1:52 they start dragging a little less, but I don't think they're necessary--I think you could easily ditch them, and either shorten the track to have a nice section that's mainly just rhythm (perhaps a funky breakbeat), then a short break and right into that great synthline at 3:20, or tease your final lead synth (the one from 6:56) in that breakdown over your pads, then bring everything back at 3:20.

Thanks for the feedback, next chance I get I'm gonna mess with this song and try to implement some of the suggestions you guys have made. Thanks again!

sigh i'm so in love with my daw, oh god.

One of these days you will write a melody.

Yeah its that time!

quote:

Originally posted by madmuso So, ive canned the other track, common feedback was that its dated, not gonna waste any more time on it, maybe one day I can use parts of it for something else, in the meantime, onto other songs! Heres another ive been re working. To be honest, I dont even know what genre this really fits into it, I come from a classical and Rock background originaly (please dont roll your eyes!) so im not really up to speed with all the sub genres in the electronic world, all I know is I start creating and these are the things that come out. feedback away! thanks guys,

The big problem here is that every single section is just way too long, except for the melody section which just comes in and disappears.

The entire intro up to and including the first break seems completely pointless, because it builds up to nothing, after which you get a section that is essentially just a second intro. The main melody appears when the song is already seven minutes in, which is when most songs are already ending.

There's no tension or release to justify the length of the track.

quote:

Originally posted by Innocence Lost sigh i'm so in love with my daw, oh god.

Oh look. Another two minute intro that goes nowhere and does nothing.

Please stop. Not joking. Stop posting until you have an actual work in progress and not yet another two minutes of boring.

Well-produced boring is still boring.

quote:

Originally posted by Innocence Lost sigh i'm so in love with my daw, oh god.

deegee - I'd like to think that the group here on TA are pretty patient. I'd also like to think that there is a broad spectrum of artistry and skill level. Some of us are really just young "budding" producers while there are others with mad skills (in which I have no idea why they aren't signed).
In essence, be patient. I know there are times you may not like something you hear here but keep in mind what I just mentioned.

Paulino - In a lot of ways I tend to agree with deegee. Is it because you get into a writing rut where nothing pops out at you after you create the first set of ideas? In this clip you just posted I sense a great deal of production growth (as I have listened to prior wips of yours) but damn dood..lol finish something already! =OP


---------------------------------

Put this together somewhat quickly and hardly finished.
This is actually going to be a remix for a song called Beautiful Love by Sean Norvis. Thoughts greatly appreciated.

eh, scorpradio, other people have said it too: everything Juan does is exactly the same. Two minute intro of nothing. And he's utterly resistant to any criticism.

The vocals on that track of yours... I don't know how much I like them, but she has a very interesting vocal quality. You've got some nice high arpy stuff in the background that I really do like, though. The, what's the word... three-note descant that's reminiscent--in a much better way--of Children.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.