Well less about ghost hits and more about dynamics in general. TBH I am not really a big fan of the loose unquantized sound, just get a real drummer if that is what you want. Most this type of thing sound like really bad, drunk drummers to me. I like the precision of a quantized beat along with thoughtfully programmed velocities. Multi-sampled sounds can be key too. I am going to become a fossil if Wonky and Burial clones dominate this sceneJFK wrote:True. Ghost hits are the key....webstarr wrote:ghost hits help create rhythm
"there's a simplicity to beat programming"
					Forum rules
By using this "Production" sub-forum, you acknowledge that you have read, understood and agreed with our terms of use for this site. Click HERE to read them. If you do not agree to our terms of use, you must exit this site immediately. We do not accept any responsibility for the content, submissions, information or links contained herein. Users posting content here, do so completely at their own risk.
Quick Link to Feedback Forum
	By using this "Production" sub-forum, you acknowledge that you have read, understood and agreed with our terms of use for this site. Click HERE to read them. If you do not agree to our terms of use, you must exit this site immediately. We do not accept any responsibility for the content, submissions, information or links contained herein. Users posting content here, do so completely at their own risk.
Quick Link to Feedback Forum
Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
nice responses folks!
another tune I'm thinking of is TRG - Move Dis. very simple, very basic, VERY powerful.
so I guess if you've got a lead, let that lead be very powerful from the get go...so that not much else has to be forced into the tune to mask the shittiness of the lead...or some such.
I like to zoom in to 32nds on the grid and throw things a lil off. I don't purposefully bang out drums by hand and then ensure that they're off.
also, in ableton having a sick instrument rack is a help. one multilayered sound can work wonders.
I don't know if this makes sense: most times I listen to a tune and then imagine riffs/melodies that are not actually there. that happens with the less is more approach.
			
			
									
									
						another tune I'm thinking of is TRG - Move Dis. very simple, very basic, VERY powerful.
so I guess if you've got a lead, let that lead be very powerful from the get go...so that not much else has to be forced into the tune to mask the shittiness of the lead...or some such.
I like to zoom in to 32nds on the grid and throw things a lil off. I don't purposefully bang out drums by hand and then ensure that they're off.
also, in ableton having a sick instrument rack is a help. one multilayered sound can work wonders.
I don't know if this makes sense: most times I listen to a tune and then imagine riffs/melodies that are not actually there. that happens with the less is more approach.
Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
me too and it can be a big plus in a tune for me86. wrote:I don't know if this makes sense: most times I listen to a tune and then imagine riffs/melodies that are not actually there. that happens with the less is more approach.
Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
It absolutely makes sense, this is right along with the less is more ideology. The minimalism leaves something for the imagination. Personally I end up leaving tunes unfinished and release them that way. I like to end a tune while you are still vibing on it. If I keep going I find myself getting frustrated and more often not making the tune worse.86. wrote:I don't know if this makes sense: most times I listen to a tune and then imagine riffs/melodies that are not actually there. that happens with the less is more approach.
Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
I agree with thisabZ wrote:Well less about ghost hits and more about dynamics in general. TBH I am not really a big fan of the loose unquantized sound, just get a real drummer if that is what you want. Most this type of thing sound like really bad, drunk drummers to me. I like the precision of a quantized beat along with thoughtfully programmed velocities. Multi-sampled sounds can be key too. I am going to become a fossil if Wonky and Burial clones dominate this sceneJFK wrote:True. Ghost hits are the key....webstarr wrote:ghost hits help create rhythm
how the bass fits in with the drums is also pretty important for the overall rhythm, old garage tunes are a great example of this
Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
Keep drums simple imo.  You want the groove to be simple and easy for people to pickup to help them remember it!
			
			
									
									Don’t worry about people stealing an idea. If it’s original, you will have to ram it down their throats.
						Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
i tend to put more focus on developing existing sounds/themes before adding new sounds.
when i first started, whilst making a track if it ever got boring i would another sound. by the time the tune was finished it was many layered complex thing. but if you ever stripped it back to a few elements it showed it trew colours i.e not very musical.
i find with my approach now developing key sounds, either through changing up the notes or tweaking automation, im not reaching for new sounds all the time. i might have lots of version of one sound though.
so yeah guess what im saying is i don't think you should ever add a new sound just to keep a loop interesting. make sure every thing in the tune has a true perpose. that way it should matter if its got loads in or just a bit.
			
			
									
									
						when i first started, whilst making a track if it ever got boring i would another sound. by the time the tune was finished it was many layered complex thing. but if you ever stripped it back to a few elements it showed it trew colours i.e not very musical.
i find with my approach now developing key sounds, either through changing up the notes or tweaking automation, im not reaching for new sounds all the time. i might have lots of version of one sound though.
so yeah guess what im saying is i don't think you should ever add a new sound just to keep a loop interesting. make sure every thing in the tune has a true perpose. that way it should matter if its got loads in or just a bit.
Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
coyote wrote:i tend to put more focus on developing existing sounds/themes before adding new sounds.
when i first started, whilst making a track if it ever got boring i would another sound. by the time the tune was finished it was many layered complex thing. but if you ever stripped it back to a few elements it showed it trew colours i.e not very musical.
i find with my approach now developing key sounds, either through changing up the notes or tweaking automation, im not reaching for new sounds all the time. i might have lots of version of one sound though.
so yeah guess what im saying is i don't think you should ever add a new sound just to keep a loop interesting. make sure every thing in the tune has a true perpose. that way it should matter if its got loads in or just a bit.
nice nice
Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
It can go either way I think. Theres amazing music that has both very simple and very complicated beats.
but I do believe in the idea of doing 'more with less' for example, improving the existing elements before adding more.
			
			
									
									
						but I do believe in the idea of doing 'more with less' for example, improving the existing elements before adding more.
Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
I like old jungle. The beats are pretty complex but check how simple the bassline is. Usually just a very basic wave from playing 1 to 3 notes and fairly repetitive. A few samples and not much else. Not everyone of those tunes was like that but you get my point. The simplicity of everything else creates a balance. There are tunes out there with complex basslines, synthwork, drums and everything else and it works for some people but it sounds like a mess to me in most cases.thesis wrote:It can go either way I think. Theres amazing music that has both very simple and very complicated beats.
but I do believe in the idea of doing 'more with less' for example, improving the existing elements before adding more.
Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
Here is the way I see it.
Its about creating enough space (or simplicity) within the beat so it sounds like if the drums were any other way it wouldn't be right - this is why all these tunes people are saying work..I am not a big fan of overly complicated music I like simple music with well thought out ideas!
On the contrast, I think its key to keep music interesting to have very subtle differences throughout, even if its taking a hat or two out for half a beat a couple of times in the tune or adding another snare hit a few times - taking out the kick from the start of a bar and then bring it back in after the first snare, etc...
Its all about well thought out changes - as well as not making it to complex!
This is why I do my drums pretty much last, I feel I get a better idea of how drums should sound and how it should follow the progression of the bassline, pads and leads and use each part of my drum section as its own instrument and not think of drums as one thing.
			
			
									
									Its about creating enough space (or simplicity) within the beat so it sounds like if the drums were any other way it wouldn't be right - this is why all these tunes people are saying work..I am not a big fan of overly complicated music I like simple music with well thought out ideas!
On the contrast, I think its key to keep music interesting to have very subtle differences throughout, even if its taking a hat or two out for half a beat a couple of times in the tune or adding another snare hit a few times - taking out the kick from the start of a bar and then bring it back in after the first snare, etc...
Its all about well thought out changes - as well as not making it to complex!
This is why I do my drums pretty much last, I feel I get a better idea of how drums should sound and how it should follow the progression of the bassline, pads and leads and use each part of my drum section as its own instrument and not think of drums as one thing.
SoundcloudSoulstep wrote: My point is i just wanna hear more vibes
Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
Long long ago, I'd do drums last.  I couldn't even imagine doing that now.  I don't know what changed.  Prolly don't play instruments like I used to.
I pretty much get the drums done, and maybe a couple of other sounds in there, and really, I'm done. Not that that has value to anyone other than me
Here is the test with me - the head nod. If you play a beat and it doesn't get your head nodding, it's not working. A beat, at its base, has to simply go up and down regularly. Trick is keeping the body happy with that simple pulse and then occupying the mind with little clever hooks and tricks, that vapid whorish mind.
			
			
									
									
						I pretty much get the drums done, and maybe a couple of other sounds in there, and really, I'm done. Not that that has value to anyone other than me
Here is the test with me - the head nod. If you play a beat and it doesn't get your head nodding, it's not working. A beat, at its base, has to simply go up and down regularly. Trick is keeping the body happy with that simple pulse and then occupying the mind with little clever hooks and tricks, that vapid whorish mind.
- Original Face
 - Posts: 118
 - Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:18 am
 - Contact:
 
Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
"A scientific theory should be as simple as possible, but no simpler."
- Einstein
Swap 'scientific theory' for 'beat' and you have a good maxim for making dubs, I reckon.
			
			
									
									
						- Einstein
Swap 'scientific theory' for 'beat' and you have a good maxim for making dubs, I reckon.
Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
yeah I do drums first. I might try drums last but to be honest it sounds a bit frightening  
 .
i'm so wrapped into my own 'formula' that I can't imagine changing it.
I also do bass last.
			
			
									
									
						i'm so wrapped into my own 'formula' that I can't imagine changing it.
I also do bass last.
Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
That is not really that empty tho. Listen to how many sounds and different versions of the same sound there are. It all adds up to a lot even tho it sounds quite empty imo.
Very nice reverb used by Kryptic Minds, would love to know what it is!
Don’t worry about people stealing an idea. If it’s original, you will have to ram it down their throats.
						Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
serox wrote:
That is not really that empty tho. Listen to how many sounds and different versions of the same sound there are. It all adds up to a lot even tho it sounds quite empty imo.
Very nice reverb used by Kryptic Minds, would love to know what it is!
a lotta KM is on that tip.
Like at first I thought The Weeping was pretty stripped down....but if you listen closely it's very layered....it's all subtle
Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
There are things going on that you can hardly hear, loads of dynamics.86. wrote:serox wrote:
That is not really that empty tho. Listen to how many sounds and different versions of the same sound there are. It all adds up to a lot even tho it sounds quite empty imo.
Very nice reverb used by Kryptic Minds, would love to know what it is!
a lotta KM is on that tip.
Like at first I thought The Weeping was pretty stripped down....but if you listen closely it's very layered....it's all subtle
There reverb sounds massive, huge! When I try and wack that much reverb on something it makes everything sound really muddy. So, I EQ out low end stuff and it still sounds like total shit lol. That EQ sounds like the sound has actually been recorded in a massive room. Where as the Reverbs I use (Fl, Reason) all sound like shit digital copies.
Don’t worry about people stealing an idea. If it’s original, you will have to ram it down their throats.
						Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
Imo the RV7000 is a fucking beast! But yes it sounds more digital than the KM shit.serox wrote:There are things going on that you can hardly hear, loads of dynamics.86. wrote:serox wrote:
That is not really that empty tho. Listen to how many sounds and different versions of the same sound there are. It all adds up to a lot even tho it sounds quite empty imo.
Very nice reverb used by Kryptic Minds, would love to know what it is!
a lotta KM is on that tip.
Like at first I thought The Weeping was pretty stripped down....but if you listen closely it's very layered....it's all subtle
There reverb sounds massive, huge! When I try and wack that much reverb on something it makes everything sound really muddy. So, I EQ out low end stuff and it still sounds like total shit lol. That EQ sounds like the sound has actually been recorded in a massive room. Where as the Reverbs I use (Fl, Reason) all sound like shit digital copies.
Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"
Imo the RV7000 is a fucking beast! But yes it sounds more digital than the KM shit.[/quote]Project EX wrote:
There are things going on that you can hardly hear, loads of dynamics.
There reverb sounds massive, huge! When I try and wack that much reverb on something it makes everything sound really muddy. So, I EQ out low end stuff and it still sounds like total shit lol. That EQ sounds like the sound has actually been recorded in a massive room. Where as the Reverbs I use (Fl, Reason) all sound like shit digital copies.
I cannot stand the RV7000 because I think it sounds so digital. I have spent some time trying different things on it but gave up. I get better results out of the preset Reverb units in FL tbh.
That KM Reverb sounds 'real'. It is the only way I can describe it!
Don’t worry about people stealing an idea. If it’s original, you will have to ram it down their throats.
						Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

