I overcomplicate my tunes.

ARTFX

Artist, sound designer and tutor
VIP Junglist
Messages
1,372
Likes
58
#2
Yeah, well a track can be very complicated.
It's just the way it is. The only way to get things less complicated is by making it less complicated by yourself.

Don't know quite an answer on this because the problem here seems to be you.
 

jimjimjim

oldskool
VIP Junglist
Messages
2,030
Likes
219
#4
its its getting too busy i would turn all the channels right down to 0 then start bringing them up. see which bits ya dont need to make it less busy. if u c wot i mean...
hope that helps.
 

bite and gouge

Lee Fury & JtB
Messages
107
Likes
2
#7
It can be surprising how little you need to write a track but a general rule of thumb would be no more than 5 parts at once. When you consider dance music will more than likely be mixed, it makes even more sense to keep things simple. Good advice above reference re-evaluating what you have and stripping away unessential parts. Time is better spent trying to get the most from one sound rather than adding another. If you can manipulate a sound well, it almost plays itself when you start tapping out rhythms on the keyboard.

Sometimes the quality of the kit can be at fault here too. If you are getting a thin sound, it makes you want to continually add things to beef the sound up but never really reaching the desired results; a common problem with cheap AD converters. I know we have suffered from this before in the past and it wasn't a cheap fix.

Peace
 

CH3SH

CH3SH - Naphalm Audio
Messages
458
Likes
0
#8
It can be surprising how little you need to write a track but a general rule of thumb would be no more than 5 parts at once. When you consider dance music will more than likely be mixed, it makes even more sense to keep things simple. Good advice above reference re-evaluating what you have and stripping away unessential parts. Time is better spent trying to get the most from one sound rather than adding another. If you can manipulate a sound well, it almost plays itself when you start tapping out rhythms on the keyboard.

Sometimes the quality of the kit can be at fault here too. If you are getting a thin sound, it makes you want to continually add things to beef the sound up but never really reaching the desired results; a common problem with cheap AD converters. I know we have suffered from this before in the past and it wasn't a cheap fix.

Peace
Now this is good advice,
Keep it simple but effective =D
 

RevTech

Butthole=output transduce
VIP Junglist
Messages
3,653
Likes
33
#9
Your individual channels could be complicated, like a lot of effects on the bassline, but a lot of channels/patterns/sounds wouldn't be good, I'd go with bring channels slowly back in, like mentioned before
 

Protoplasym

Nuskool
VIP Junglist
Messages
987
Likes
34
#10
What do you do exactly? Make too many parts? Fiddle too long with FX/Automation/different Layers?


My problem is in how I work... it is a very tedious process.

I (a slave to my OCD) have to render 'everything' that I make for a song... and 'once' the Songs Folder is fully organized with all of the various wavs, 'then' I can Sequence. There is no way to "combat this"... all I can do is comply. [makes RMXing an absolute dream though]

Because of this ^, I've only sequenced maybe 5% of the ideas I've had in the last Decade.
 

Krispy

Active Member
VIP Junglist
Messages
768
Likes
27
#11
This is a particular piece of advice I read somewhere before that could apply here

"It has been found that humans can perceive 7 +/- 3 things at a time reliably. This is why many phone numbers are 7 digits + the area code. If you think about the classic 'band' there are basically this many groups of instruments involved: Vocals, Guitar, Bass, Drums +/- 3 other sections (horns, keys, samplers, etc.). You should always keep this in mind when you are deciding how many different sounds to make"
 

subprime

Dysjoint
VIP Junglist
Messages
3,085
Likes
94
#12
This is a particular piece of advice I read somewhere before that could apply here

"It has been found that humans can perceive 7 +/- 3 things at a time reliably. This is why many phone numbers are 7 digits + the area code. If you think about the classic 'band' there are basically this many groups of instruments involved: Vocals, Guitar, Bass, Drums +/- 3 other sections (horns, keys, samplers, etc.). You should always keep this in mind when you are deciding how many different sounds to make"
Interesting idea, you'd have to ask yourself if you want the listener to hear everything the song has to offer in one listen?
There's definitely room for a multitude of layers imho, if they don't detract from the whole and if they all have their own space in the mix. (speaking as a listener here: I wouldn't claim to be able to get close to that yet) Nothing wrong with an epic musical saga.

Perhaps the pertinent question is 'When is it finished?' That's a damn hard question to answer I think. I remember from Sunday School that god created the world in 7 days and then said 'It is finished.' And in a way that one end was just a beginning. Music as a medium between artist and listener is never finished it evolves as the participants change. So what is a 'timeless' track? Maybe a sentimental snapshot of a time that one wants to hold onto? Fuck me, I digress.

So is it over-complicated? If it works as a coherent whole (think of 'one' body/forever of parts) then no. It's just a matter of knowing when to push pause on the evolution and take a snapshot that you want to show your mates. :slayer:
 

Protoplasym

Nuskool
VIP Junglist
Messages
987
Likes
34
#13
Interesting idea, you'd have to ask yourself if you want the listener to hear everything the song has to offer in one listen?
There's definitely room for a multitude of layers imho, if they don't detract from the whole and if they all have their own space in the mix. (speaking as a listener here: I wouldn't claim to be able to get close to that yet) Nothing wrong with an epic musical saga.

Perhaps the pertinent question is 'When is it finished?' That's a damn hard question to answer I think. I remember from Sunday School that god created the world in 7 days and then said 'It is finished.' And in a way that one end was just a beginning. Music as a medium between artist and listener is never finished it evolves as the participants change. So what is a 'timeless' track? Maybe a sentimental snapshot of a time that one wants to hold onto? Fuck me, I digress.

So is it over-complicated? If it works as a coherent whole (think of 'one' body/forever of parts) then no. It's just a matter of knowing when to push pause on the evolution and take a snapshot that you want to show your mates. :slayer:
Words of pure Wisdom my man...


:rock:
 

jimjimjim

oldskool
VIP Junglist
Messages
2,030
Likes
219
#14
Interesting idea, you'd have to ask yourself if you want the listener to hear everything the song has to offer in one listen?
There's definitely room for a multitude of layers imho, if they don't detract from the whole and if they all have their own space in the mix. (speaking as a listener here: I wouldn't claim to be able to get close to that yet) Nothing wrong with an epic musical saga.

Perhaps the pertinent question is 'When is it finished?' That's a damn hard question to answer I think. I remember from Sunday School that god created the world in 7 days and then said 'It is finished.' And in a way that one end was just a beginning. Music as a medium between artist and listener is never finished it evolves as the participants change. So what is a 'timeless' track? Maybe a sentimental snapshot of a time that one wants to hold onto? Fuck me, I digress.

So is it over-complicated? If it works as a coherent whole (think of 'one' body/forever of parts) then no. It's just a matter of knowing when to push pause on the evolution and take a snapshot that you want to show your mates. :slayer:
wow - thats freakin awesome and very wise.
on a side note where can i get what your smokin? seriously pm me.
i digress - u rule :D
 
Top