The "Undone" Production diary
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 4692 posts since 28 Jan, 2003 from In these very interwebs
It depends on what you mean by "producing". People tend to get a little confused about that term these days.stash98 wrote:How long have you been producing?
Also, do you really want to know, or are you just having a friendly stab at me?
Nah, all keys are good.stash98 wrote:Just wondered because you said you just picked a key. I spend a lot of time finding the singer's key before I go forward. That's more important then anything really. It sounds like you had to do some tuning. You should never just guess a key if you want a great vocal..you need to know exactly which key fits your singer....then proceed.
Seriously though, I understand why choosing the right key is critically important when composing a melody for a singer. Knowing how the strength and character of a singer's voice changes over her range will help choose where to place the key (and subsequently, the other degrees of the scale).
However, in this scenario I'm not composing a melody for a singer. The singer is composing her melody. True, placing the tonic and dominant at key (npi) points in her range is important for any melody, it only makes sense to plan for it if I'm actually composing a melody ahead of time. Without a melody, I can't make any decision about key. Without having a melody first, I can't choose (for example) to place her strongest range on the dominant or subdominant or leading note of the key. I can't choose to place her low growl on the submediant or supertonic. Without having a meldoy first, I have no framework for making useful choices.
So, why not compose that melody?
Time.
I don't want to spend a lot of time working with melody. This is purely personal taste. I just don't get excited about melodies. I want to get on with jamming in all the other amazing sounds I hear. When I hear music in my head, I don't hear melodies. I hear sound. Masses and masses of sound, of all different colours and textures. The notes themselves hardly matter, they are lost in the glorious avalanche of sound.
Ahem.
I suppose the short answer is: I don't care.
-Kim.
-
- KVRian
- 991 posts since 16 Feb, 2005 from USA
I don't think you understand what I meant. I was not taking a stab at you. You are a producer in this case. Everything you have outlined is producing.
My point is that before you write a melody for a singer, you must figure out their range and what key suits them. It's pretty basic and a MUST if you want to get great vocal takes.
That's very nice and romantic that you hear sounds in your head that way ( i am the same way in a sense as sounds/tones influence my writing more then anything), but if you want to make a song that will resonate and get on the radio like you have said, then you have to get the vocal dialed in perfectly.
What I would do is sit down with your singer and find her key by going up and down the keyboard and having her match notes. Where she starts to strain to hit high notes is obviously important. Once you know her keys, then what you write on the keyboard will still go be the same workflow you are used to. You can still compose however you want, but then drag all those MIDI notes into the right key before you track vocals.
Since, you made your journal as kind of a tutorial layout, I think it is fair to critique it. To say you don't care about the key of a vocal tells me you are probably inexperienced at production. I wouldn't even post that, but since you are going for a radio sound, you have to care, because every producer getting tracks on the radio DOES.
My point is that before you write a melody for a singer, you must figure out their range and what key suits them. It's pretty basic and a MUST if you want to get great vocal takes.
That's very nice and romantic that you hear sounds in your head that way ( i am the same way in a sense as sounds/tones influence my writing more then anything), but if you want to make a song that will resonate and get on the radio like you have said, then you have to get the vocal dialed in perfectly.
What I would do is sit down with your singer and find her key by going up and down the keyboard and having her match notes. Where she starts to strain to hit high notes is obviously important. Once you know her keys, then what you write on the keyboard will still go be the same workflow you are used to. You can still compose however you want, but then drag all those MIDI notes into the right key before you track vocals.
Since, you made your journal as kind of a tutorial layout, I think it is fair to critique it. To say you don't care about the key of a vocal tells me you are probably inexperienced at production. I wouldn't even post that, but since you are going for a radio sound, you have to care, because every producer getting tracks on the radio DOES.
-
- KVRian
- 587 posts since 22 Nov, 2005 from Music-journalist/freelance audioengineer from Helsinki, Finland
I heard a distinct piano sound in the background, but after I compressed it and turned it up it looks like it was the click.Kim (esoundz) wrote:I'm not sure what you mean about the piano track.
Nope, never used it, but its a delay, right? If its two copies of the same track with slightly different settings, you can use two effect channels (I think the amount is unlimited in Cubase anyways). But I guess that three tracks with all their inserts use more cpu power than one with three sends.Kim (esoundz) wrote:Are you familiar with Replicant? Using it as a send would result in a very different sound. I didn't insert it on two different tracks, I inserted it on two copies of the same track. The two Replicants had slightly different settings (one had the low pass filter motion enabled). Besides, Replicant hardly uses any CPU anyway.ahjteam wrote: * You also could've used the replicant in a fx-send if it doesn't cause any latency, could've saved a little cpu-power with one less channel used?
Well lets put it this way: If you would get feedback (usually not in studio, but in live), it is easier/faster to look from a RTA what frequency it is than to try to do it by ear. Its just a tool to find out the problem areas, you should still mix with your ears. http://www.kvraudio.com/get/2649.htmlKim (esoundz) wrote:I have a real aversion to "mixing with my eyes".ahjteam wrote: * You should really consider getting a spectrum analyzer. not because your master would sound bad, but it could sound better.
-
- KVRist
- 117 posts since 19 Aug, 2005 from Gold Coast, Australia
I like this thread. Especially the post where Kim (esoundz) has an aversion to mixing with eyes! THANKYOU! I have this argument with my muso friends constantly. I trust my ears more than my eyes (I wear glasses, imagine how shit my mixes would be if I had to look at them!) and I totally printed the screen cap and showed them that I'm not a weirdo!
And I liked all the masters all for different reasons.
And I liked all the masters all for different reasons.
Gear list: Sony micro tape dictaphone, shares in Behringer and elastic bands.
-
- KVRian
- 991 posts since 16 Feb, 2005 from USA
Yes, I have never heard a great mixer say they like to look at a screen while mixing. This is why the console is still the preferred way to mix for professional MEs.