Pain

[kcinsu]

and i mean that, as in, I dont think theres a psychological effect for me, weather its hardware or software

 

i could be wrong. or maybe that there is a psychological effect... that software suits me better

 

*shrug*

[Paulie Walnuts]

I think what really gets me with synths like Absynth is the knowledge that I'll never really scratch the surface... I mean even the simplest of synths, like the Juno 106, you think you've done everything you can do with it, then you listen to Tri Repetae and realise you've just been incredibly lazy and unimaginitive! (my experience at least)

 

 

^^^ this is the kind of synth that really interests me now... It's only early 90's PCM technology, but a control surface like that would let you really explore its options and sort have it become an extension of you...

 

I think it's what's great about the 303...

 

I think if you do work 100% conceptually, then it wouldn't make much difference what you were working with, but I find if I've got a concept for a piece of music or some graphic design work, I'll usually have it firmly in mind but as an abstract thing... Not as anything solid - visual or aural... More like a shape or form...

 

...then it's usually down to my interaction with the instrument or software to help me pluck ideas out of thin air until something tells me I'm on the right tracks - then you develop it and work with it and it sort of evolves with you and the idea...

 

 

It interests me the way people like Mozart composed completely from imagination - like the sounds and ideas are all solid before he's even put pen to paper or hand to piano... I've always thought it was a kind of autistic thing...

[kcinsu]

we have a JP-800 at work, it sounds niiiice

[xy_politics]

It interests me the way people like Mozart composed completely from imagination - like the sounds and ideas are all solid before he's even put pen to paper or hand to piano... I've always thought it was a kind of autistic thing...

 

I guess you could say that it makes the whole process a lot more streamlined when you know exactly what instruments you are writing for - if you spend your whole life writing a certain style of music for orchestral instruments and suchlike, you'll reach a point where melody and phrasing occur naturally in your imagination. You can't alter the sound of those instruments beyond their natural range, so of course you'll be focusing all your mental energy on the melody, phrasing and arrangement.

 

Writing for electronic instruments is almost exactly the opposite. Because there is no performer to interpret the written work, most of the effort goes into engineering the sounds to have "character", and the melody is often of less importance, or discarded completely.

 

Listening to the music floating around at the moment, it is apparent that there are many talented sound engineers who have very little sense of melody, and many very gifted composers who wouldn't know how to switch on a computer, let alone create something with one. I often wonder why those two groups of people don't work together more often.

[kcinsu]

Listening to the music floating around at the moment, it is apparent that there are many talented sound engineers who have very little sense of melody, and many very gifted composers who wouldn't know how to switch on a computer, let alone create something with one. I often wonder why those two groups of people don't work together more often.

 

I agree completely. Its something I'm really trying to accomplish (combine both successfully). Its extremely important imo.

[Guest ezeh]

Listening to the music floating around at the moment, it is apparent that there are many talented sound engineers who have very little sense of melody, and many very gifted composers who wouldn't know how to switch on a computer, let alone create something with one. I often wonder why those two groups of people don't work together more often.

 

most modern composers in the last decades work with electronic mediums, afaik.

[acid1]

Last night i realized i have a process problem.

 

Typically my process goes like this:

1) make a synth/bass tone of some sorts

2) set my sequencer to my typical bpm

3) try to make a melody out of it

4) make drums

5) once i have a steady chunk of the song I go back and make an intro

6) after the intro into the drop i expand and eventually have some sort of variation theme

7) see where it goes from there

 

 

the problem is around steps 2 or 3.

 

 

I'd perfer a method like this but not sure how to do it

1) make synth/bass tone of some sorts

2) record a section of me playing a melody of sorts

3) have my computer automatically figure out the bpm it should be from how i play it

4) rearrange and fix the melody i made by just blasting out notes

5) construct rest of track

 

 

it could be my interface or something, but i'm finding that making beats and setting bpms prior to establishing melodies is really killing the creative process for me

[kcinsu]

heres an idea... dare I say it.... don't expect the computer to do it automatically!

 

Do this, play the melody. Dont record it. (Im assuming if you've played it once, you can play it again... not just randomly hitting notes). You should be able to know roughly how it was your are playing it. Have your sequencer playing a steady beat, and get the bpm to where you estimate it to be, press play, and play the melody you just played over it. too fast? slow it down, too slow? speed it up.

 

once thats done, record it into your sequencer, and you're set.

 

OR, maybe a safer way to do it, if youre not sure you can replay the melody you were playing, like you just did one long improv, and theres a tiny part of it you want to keep... record the melody in first, disgregarding tempo (no beat, no metronome click... just play it freely). once its recorded, you can open up what you played, so you can remember exactly what you did. learn your melody so you can play it over and over by heart, and then go back and do what I said in the first paragraph.

 

also, what sequencer are you using? some of them do have options for figuring out tempos. Logic for example, can do this.

 

But, if you have to do it manually, while its a little bit of work, its better then being stuck in a routine that you think is hindering your creativity.

 

besides, who said music is easy? :grin:

[kcinsu]

 

 

Listening to the music floating around at the moment, it is apparent that there are many talented sound engineers who have very little sense of melody, and many very gifted composers who wouldn't know how to switch on a computer, let alone create something with one. I often wonder why those two groups of people don't work together more often.

 

most modern composers in the last decades work with electronic mediums, afaik.

 

ehhhh.

 

in my experience its been very few. and the ones who do use it, either use it badly (because they only understand it on a basic level) or they are totally into it, but approach it from a more academic side (ie csound/maxmsp) and then they often focus more on sound design then composition.

 

but like I said, there are exceptions.

 

the people that really find a good balance (imo) are film composers. the need for fast, and cheap ways to get a final product, pushed film composers to rely heavily on computers. add that with the need for having many sounds for what ever project may come their way (and add to that the influence of electronic music in general, on the mainstream), and you've got people how compose well, AND tastefully use electronics in their music.

 

imo

 

 

edit: and its more with the independent/non hollywood composers. the main ones in hollywood often are still very much classical composers... and usally all electronic work is done by producers/sound design assitants etc. again, not always, but seems to me its often the case.

 

and, I guess, unfortunetly, much of the music for film/tv/etc doesnt stand on its own as great art, as it is merely working to aid in a bigger art (added with short time to work, and kind of treated as a product).

 

again, not always, but in general.

[acid1]

i'm using a combination of a few different sequencers all at the same time (trackers, max, reaktor, energyxt), but i'm not sure any have the fancy midi recording capabilities like Vision or Logic

 

but yeah idealistically i'd have some small environment that possibly just and only records and exports midi. I'd hit record, jam out for a while, have it just record the midi. Go back and listen to it, find a section that i enjoy, select it and isolate it possibly. Once it is isolated and looping, possibly be able to make slight adjustments to notes and whatnot.

 

I have bpm counting devices, so i don't think it would be hard to open one while this loop was going and calculate the bpm.

 

Next go into my sequencer and import the midi file loop or whatever, set the bpm, rock out.

 

QUestion is tho, are you familiar with a midi swiss army knife tool like the one i suggested?

[kcinsu]

well, i guess the best way to do it, considering what you're using, is just to do it by ear. play the melody, and count outloud the beats. you should be able to guess pretty close the tempo, and then go into the sequencer and adjust the tempo until it sounds right, and then re-record the melody over that tempo.

 

midi swiss army knife: logic

[acid1]

i mean its the same problem. I can hear a melody in my head and put it in my sequencer just fine, but i think a lot of the melodic stuff comes from improvisational playing and random things that might occur.

 

its the problem of messing around on a keyboard making a melody and translating it into my sequencer.

 

logic is too large and bloated for me, everytime i tried to install it i got sound card issue, mostly it would not work at all, or just play the metronome badly (off time) probably due to wierd latency and sound card settings.

 

still in logic and whatnot don't you have to set up bpms and whatnot before you start playing? you don't have just some sort of beatless space you can play midi into?

[kcinsu]

well, there is a beat, but you could just turn off the metronome, and play freely. once you do that, youd select the melody, cut it out from the rest of what you played (and that makes it its own region). then you select how many bars its SUPPOSED to be, and click "get tempo from region". Unless you perfectly cut the melody, you'll probably have to move the notes around a bit, or quantize it or something, but itll get you 99% there.

[acid1]

well, there is a beat, but you could just turn off the metronome, and play freely. once you do that, youd select the melody, cut it out from the rest of what you played (and that makes it its own region). then you select how many bars its SUPPOSED to be, and click "get tempo from region". Unless you perfectly cut the melody, you'll probably have to move the notes around a bit, or quantize it or something, but itll get you 99% there.

 

cool man, if i manage to ever get logic working i'll try to see if i can do this, thanks for the help

[Paulie Walnuts]

Tbh, lately I'm finding soundtracks much more interesting and lasting than most straight up electronic music...

 

Interesting to see how composers like Kenji Kawai integrate with technology http://www.kenjikawai.com/intro_e.html

 

 

Maybe it's just a psychological thing - keeping yourself detached from the sequencer - seeing it as another tool...

 

I think there's great potential to take electronic music in this direction... I must admit, I'm thoroughly bored with electronic sounds for the sake of it... There's just so much of the same stuff being released now - Northern European, minimal guitar textures, swirling ambiences, solo piano parts, etc... even that's become a cliche, and more often than not it's just sounds disguised as something much greater...

 

There's often no real substance there, but it can be so well produced that you almost don't notice at first...

[acid1]

its art, ease of expression

[acid1]

i figured out how to do that logic thing in energy xt just now wootooo

[Guest gains]

Being "out of shape" in the music muscles.

 

It's always like working out for me. If I stop it's harder to start again.

 

I ran out two good tracks in two weeks for a potential job. Got passed over. Got discouraged. Didn't touch my gear for three weeks. This week I finally got an idea too good to miss, and I spent all day yesterday and have less than a minute's music to show.

[acid1]

yeah.... getting all excited about a track you just write to have all your closest mates whos opinions only matter say its crap, thus falling flat on your face, and needing time to pick yourself up to write a new one

[Guest thisket]

To cheer me up and to restart my dayly music-making, I shoot my own daguerreotype.

 

Huh huh. Dayly.