"there's a simplicity to beat programming"

hardware, software, tips and tricks
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
User avatar
abZ
Posts: 5261
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 6:14 pm
Location: pittsburgh
Contact:

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by abZ » Sat Nov 07, 2009 10:56 pm

JFK wrote:
webstarr wrote:ghost hits help create rhythm
True. Ghost hits are the key....
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 scene :lol:

User avatar
86.
Posts: 2605
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:04 pm
Location: Canada

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by 86. » Sat Nov 07, 2009 11:37 pm

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.

User avatar
boomstix
Posts: 722
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 7:46 am
Location: sydney australia
Contact:

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by boomstix » Sun Nov 08, 2009 12:40 am

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.
me too and it can be a big plus in a tune for me

User avatar
abZ
Posts: 5261
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 6:14 pm
Location: pittsburgh
Contact:

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by abZ » Sun Nov 08, 2009 12:53 am

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.
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.

webstarr
Posts: 684
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:50 pm

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by webstarr » Sun Nov 08, 2009 11:04 am

abZ wrote:
JFK wrote:
webstarr wrote:ghost hits help create rhythm
True. Ghost hits are the key....
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 scene :lol:
I agree with this

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

serox
Posts: 4899
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:17 am
Location: South London

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by serox » Mon Nov 09, 2009 4:50 pm

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.

coyote
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by coyote » Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:12 pm

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.

User avatar
86.
Posts: 2605
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:04 pm
Location: Canada

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by 86. » Mon Nov 09, 2009 6:00 pm

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

User avatar
thesis
Posts: 345
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 2:23 pm
Location: amsterdam
Contact:

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by thesis » Mon Nov 09, 2009 6:11 pm

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.
Image

User avatar
abZ
Posts: 5261
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 6:14 pm
Location: pittsburgh
Contact:

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by abZ » Mon Nov 09, 2009 6:52 pm

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.
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.

User avatar
legend4ry
Posts: 10589
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 3:56 am
Location: Woolwich

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by legend4ry » Mon Nov 09, 2009 9:18 pm

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.
Soulstep wrote: My point is i just wanna hear more vibes
Soundcloud

User avatar
nowaysj
Posts: 23281
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 4:11 am
Location: Mountain Fortress

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by nowaysj » Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:27 am

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.
Join Me
DiegoSapiens wrote:oh fucking hell now i see how on point was nowaysj
Soundcloud

User avatar
Original Face
Posts: 118
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 8:18 am
Contact:

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by Original Face » Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:57 pm

"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.

User avatar
86.
Posts: 2605
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:04 pm
Location: Canada

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by 86. » Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:06 pm

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.

Brisance
Posts: 1586
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:09 pm
Location: Estonia

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by Brisance » Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:17 pm


serox
Posts: 4899
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:17 am
Location: South London

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by serox » Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:26 pm

Brisance wrote:Less is more.
Proof:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoabVM4DokQ

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.

User avatar
86.
Posts: 2605
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:04 pm
Location: Canada

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by 86. » Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:40 pm

serox wrote:
Brisance wrote:Less is more.
Proof:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoabVM4DokQ

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

serox
Posts: 4899
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:17 am
Location: South London

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by serox » Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:45 pm

86. wrote:
serox wrote:
Brisance wrote:Less is more.
Proof:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoabVM4DokQ

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 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.
Don’t worry about people stealing an idea. If it’s original, you will have to ram it down their throats.

User avatar
Ongelegen
Posts: 2310
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2009 5:17 pm
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by Ongelegen » Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:48 pm

serox wrote:
86. wrote:
serox wrote:
Brisance wrote:Less is more.
Proof:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoabVM4DokQ

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 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.
Imo the RV7000 is a fucking beast! But yes it sounds more digital than the KM shit.

serox
Posts: 4899
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:17 am
Location: South London

Re: "there's a simplicity to beat programming"

Post by serox » Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:51 pm

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.
Imo the RV7000 is a fucking beast! But yes it sounds more digital than the KM shit.[/quote]

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.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests