How much time do you spend on your tracks?

[chim]

I've always been really impatient with my tracks and "finish" them way too soon, usually resulting in them being half assed, repetitive or generally unpolished. the only track i've ever been satisfied with was indeed a track i spent over a month on, so maybe i'm thinking there's some connection with time and polish. i had the same thing when i was drawing, i rarely went beyond a rough sketch state.

 

I mean, it's almost like i consider myself much better than I sound, i'm just too lazy to prove it. it's like, once the melodical ideas are done the rest is just "detail" work that i can't be arsed with.

 

Maybe it's like picasso or someone said, art is never finished, only abandoned.. so I was thinking as an experiment to spend much longer time on my tracks and make sure they're properly polished before i even think of uploading them and spamming them in 200 forums

 

how much time and effort do you spend on your individual tracks, and are you satisfied with the amount of time you spend?

[Guest version2006]

good question.

 

I used to work on a track for a 8-11 hour marathon, only taking breaks to smoke cigarettes and pee. I would then listen to it in my headphones until I fell asleep. I would wake up and put my iPod on and listen to it all day at work, over and over. This usually resulted in a loss of focus and capability to make good objective decisions. I think I was afraid I would lose my original idea or I would drop it, come back to it and completely change it.

 

Now I work on it for 8-11 hours, taking breaks for peeing and smoking. Then I drop it for a few weeks, then come back and mix it down properly. This allows some kind of "palette cleansing" and I usually end up with a better product.

 

I rarely work on something for just a couple hours at a time.

 

Also, if I can't seem to get an idea where I want it within the first couple of hours, I will completely wipe the sequence and samples and synths and start with a new approach. Pushing something that just isn't working is not very productive for me and I don't get that "feeling".

 

I could talk about this for hours. I like to analyze my poop.

[pcock]

classical composers would spend years on single peices of music, and they write the best music that has ever been written.

 

liszt's annees de pilgramge 2 is 30 minutes of music that took 18 years to complete, and it is fantastic in every way you can imagine a piano work to be.

[Guest version2006]

That's amazing. I really would like to revolutionize the way I work. I feel, though, that SO much more time is spent tweaking sounds as opposed to composing melodies and harmonies.

 

I would really like to move my head into a space where I focus more on content rather than sonic clarity but I feel that sonic clarity in and of itself is a partial measure the emotional quotient of a tune.

 

need to get back to hardware sequencing and less looking at the damn glowing square in front of me. Less eyes, more ears.

 

Liszt, huh? hmm...

[pcock]

liszt was argueably the greatest pianist that ever existed, a romantic period composer,andmy favourite musician in the whole world

 

 

i have just spent the last 3 years practicing my favourite piece by him for 3-4 hours every single day(except when im hungover) and i only finished it a week or two ago

 

satisfaction extreme after all that work.

 

 

edit: (if you were asking who he was, that is, i dunno what you meant really)

[kcinsu]

I used to work on tracks all in one sitting, the most I think I ever worked, was maybe 3 days in a row. this was due in part to lazyness. and weed smoking, which might have been related.

 

the majority of the stuff on my website, the older stuff, I did in a day or two.

 

it wasnt until I started doing projects for my composition class, that I would really sit down and think about stuff, and spend days/weeks on something.

 

Pyractomena Borealis, the electronic piece Im most proud of, took me 3 months to do. My piano sonata and my orchestral piece also took 3 months each, and Im very proud of them as well.

 

I made a promise to myself to never finish a track so quickly again. Spending months on a piece is really the best way to go. It gives you time to think, plan, and perfect what it is you want to do.

 

imo

[chim]

very wise words by all of you, i can't help but agree. One thing that helps for me is to think of your tracks as your children, little pieces of yourself, sort of. you feel less inclined to just "churn" them out in an unfinished state then.

 

Yeah, lizst is simply amazing. and on the topic of classical composers, i find the fugues by bach to be in a class of their own. you can listen and read analyzes of some of them here http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~tas3/wtc.html

 

need to get back to hardware sequencing and less looking at the damn glowing square in front of me. Less eyes, more ears.

 

hardware sequencing feels like a dream to me. the computer shit feels so lifeless at times. it only really works when i'm thinking more on the music visually in my head and sort of try to ignore the program interface

 

anyway, i think above all it's important to give your music time to let your ideas within GROW and mature. you may come up with a great melody or phrase, but how are you going to connect it, modulate it and interchange it with other aspects to make it a complete piece of music, but that at the same time fits with your ideas? that's the stuff that takes alot of trying and experimenting, and I always seem to come out of the experience richer

[Braintree]

I used to finish tracks in 5-6 hour periods, but now I'll spend that much just on finding sounds and building drum kits. I tend to finish songs in two or three days now with continuous work every day. I'll take lots of breaks now and think about what is going to happen and where it's going to go. I won't even start a song these days unless I have a big idea of how the song is going to progress.

 

But the songs I've been working on lately don't seem to have real strong melodies, just a bunch of them that shift and morph over time. I'm constantly changing, though. The tracks on my myspace and the tracks in the net label links below will sound very different in formula.

[Guest Mr. Magoo]

i usally start with either a bassline and a drum pattern, then the melody, and then i just sit there, cause i have no idea what to do next PLEASE HELP!!! seriously

[pcock]

realistically i reckon its gonna take me a month a pop at making a bangin tune, the only one ive ''finished'' is that one in creations and i did thatin 4 days, rushed it to get an opinion quick as possible, and ended up with this faggy peice of shit im no longer happy with atall.

[Guest Coalbucket PI]

to produce something im really proud of and i know I won't want to change things if i listen to it again (so i suppose i mean 'completely finished'), probably will take over a week of arranging and fine tuning. coming up with patterns and the basic parts of the track can take minutes or days. I can make a track in 3-4 hours or so, if its a daft remix or only has one or two actual fresh ideas in it, but it would be badly structured and produced, or at least it would sound that way to me.

 

I mean, it's almost like i consider myself much better than I sound

Im the same, and also with drawing. it feels like if i actualy finish something its never as quite as good as Id like to think I am, wheras if i dont finish it I can go on believing Im amazing

[pcock]

i was planning on doing some work transposing classical pieces to a synth medium to see what it sounds like, i doubt that will take very long.

[Guest Promo]

I think the core of a good track is usually done within a few hours but then actually finishing it can take months.

[Guest 1KB]

usually between 2 hours and a month

 

the longest has taken about 2 months, working on and off

[Guest meatbingo]

Like most people, it varies widely for me. Anything between 1 hour to something daft like 2 years (on and off obviously!) Some just don't get finished at all. Some have only been ideas in my head for going on 9 months now and I haven't even started them yet. I'm lazy and easily prone to distraction, so my work rate is fairly low.

[Guest taxman]

it usually takes me a month or so off and on but i'm also usually working on more than one track at once.

 

and the way i work i usually have lots of parts to songs left over that grow into their own song after i realize i like them but don't want them in the song i made them for.

 

anyway, yeah songs take me forever but i'm always finishing something

[Guest Captain Cooper]

i was planning on doing some work transposing classical pieces to a synth medium to see what it sounds like, i doubt that will take very long.

 

Yeah just take the midi file and make a suitable patch: sorted. I did this the other day with the Rockford Files theme, it may not be Classical but it is A Classic.

[Guest boo]

i spend a lot of time getting the overall sound and melodies as i want them, but then i've heard it too much and finishing it feels daunting. structure suffers.

 

all the options make me lose focus and i get worried about putting a lot of time and effort into taking it in the wrong direction. if i'm especially pleased with the track so far, that becomes even more of a problem.

 

then working on it becomes more and more sparse, to the point that i'm just listening to it. then i end up quickly making an ending and recording it. never to touch it again, and if i do nothing comes of it.

 

blah.

[Guest Replicant]

when Boc was asked the same question, I recall them saying that they work for days tweaking away just to achieve that perfect hi-hat sound.

on the other hand, the twin makes what, 5 tracks a day?

and squarepusher? i remeber him saying something along the lines of "i have no idea where and when my tracks come from"

(this info is all from my possibly vauge memory of various interviews ive read)

 

what im saying is, with the vast capabilites we have for us to create music now a days, many of which have only recently been introduced to us musicians, its hard not to feel as though we are in completly open water, new terrority. alot of room for improvising song crafting techniques.

[pcock]

i was planning on doing some work transposing classical pieces to a synth medium to see what it sounds like, i doubt that will take very long.

 

Yeah just take the midi file and make a suitable patch: sorted. I did this the other day with the Rockford Files theme, it may not be Classical but it is A Classic.

midi files all come on one track though, as far as im concerned its going to be easier to play in each line on my clavinova rather than seperate all the melodic lines and chordal sequences by point and click, cos that takes stunning amounts of time, especially with a mouse as crap as mine.

[Guest version2006]

MIDI files do not come all on one track...

 

anyway, I just realized that through out this conversation I've been putting the finishing touches on a track I began in 2001. It has weathered two key changes and a two tempo changes.

 

I didn't work on it for 4 years, though.

[pcock]

well the site with the most reliable midi tracks for the classical music i like all come on one track then.

[Chris Moss Acid]

from 40 minutes to 9 hours

 

the only song whcih has taken more then that was my acid version of k545 because i didnt know how to chain songs up on the 303

 

 

chris moss drum n bass took me like 2 weeks, because i kept on changing it.. it was originally jinglebells drum n bass on idirons xmas album.. then i made a shorter version then the "live" version. that was using FL though.

[Guest LJG]

I'd say anywhere from a couple of hours to several months.

 

I basically make music from a couple of different angles:

 

1. For exploration- just to try stuff out, no particular end in mind.

2. For a purpose- to express a particular mood or feeling, to make a particular statement.

3. Because there's nothing around to listen to that suits my mood, so I make it myself.

4. Purely for the process.

 

Regardless of the angle of approach, creation for me is regulated by feedback from the process- if the feeling is good, continue. If the feeling falters, try a couple more tweaks, and if no dice, then put it down. Sometimes you recover, and sometimes you don't.

 

I look at music as recorded perception of the world. We're always seeing new things, and there's always more to add (or remove) when you're able to revisit your old points of view, the snapshots of the experience of your artistic life. So nothing is set in stone, and when you're stuck, give it time and come back to it. Zen and the art of block rockin beats.

 

BTW, does Coalbucket PI's avatar remind anyone else of Captain Beefheart? Is it just me?

[foresense]

i usally start with either a bassline and a drum pattern, then the melody, and then i just sit there, cause i have no idea what to do next PLEASE HELP!!! seriously

Dude, use your imagination. Seriously

 

What usually works for me is I take the most terrible cliche I can possibly imagine, and then make that cliche more pleasing to my ears and work from there. But I only do that when I don't know where to go next, I wouldn't rely on that method.

 

I usually take a couple of days to finish a track. I try to keep my sessions going as long as possible.