A fundamental problem of arrangement

[noouch]

For a couple years now i've been messing around with electronic music, playing with all kinds of sounds, sequences, progressions, rhythms et cetera. But there's one thing that's still kind of elusive to me. I have hundreds of short loops, normally going no longer than eight measures. The tunes that I have completed are either incredibly short (two minutes tops), boring (just adding track after track until the climax and then removing them one ar a time) or just plain incoherent.

So could somebody perhaps give me a few useful pointers for going from the eight measures to a well-arranged and listenable song?

[Z1202]

Hi

I'm having the same problem. What I figured out for myself (of course it might be wrong), is that one needs to be able to think on a larger scale to do that. That is when you compose a short 4 or 8 bar melody, you probably are able to have a complete overview of your excerpt (that is you can keep the whole fragment in your mind simultaneuosly). Having an overview of 16 or 32 bars on the other hand probably eludes you, therefore you're losing coherency. In the end one probably needs to be able to keep the overview of the whole song, to make sure it's coherent and makes musical sense.

Bottom line - sight singing, ear training, and probably other disciplines of music theory.

Of course that's just my opinion, and I still didn't reach the ability to write really coherent songs of the full duration (with a very few exceptions). So maybe it's wrong. It's also probably dependent to some extent on what kind of music you're going to write.

Anyway, if you'd like to do so, check the S&S Counterpoint study group thread in this forum. Maybe you'll wish to join. I could also recommend some ear training and music theory books if you're interested.

Regards,
{Z}

[Nystul]

You know, on Pink Floyd's most popular song "Money", the bass guitar plays the same measure like a gazillion times in a row. It's a giant one bar loop which almost never changes except for the guitar solo in the middle of the song. The other non-melody parts change some but are not particularly interesting. For 4 bars intro, they build up like this.

But then there is the melody. Suddenly you have this 4 bar melodic theme (which like many melodies is partially composed of small repeating themes) that fits over the repeating 1 bar loop. Then you have that same 4 bar melody, with perhaps a slight variation. Then there is a new 4 bar theme. The sum of that is a 12 bar verse, so it is more or less repeated with different lyrics and slight variations. Then you have a saxophone playing an improvised variation on that same verse, but they also extend it and throw in a modulation (the bass guitar gets to play his one bar in a different key for 4 bars).

I don't know if this helps. The point here is that you don't always need a complex chord progression or a song that is constantly changing keys or changing much of anything for that matter. But if you don't have those kinds of elements, then you do need some developing element that is able to glue your loops together into bigger loops. You need themes that are related, and yet different. Then you alternate, repeat, combine themes, or create variations on those themes, over the top of your existing framework.

Then you can go back into the smaller loops, and make all the little tweaks to them like you normally would. Except they are part of a bigger picture now.

"Money" has lyrics. But you don't need words to tell a story, and it can be good to have some sort of underlying idea to your tracks.

[tbic]

The solution is simple.
Make a plan. Take an Excel sheet (or something similar) as a project plan. Write down your chosen instrumentation in a row. What has the intrument to do (and how long; intro, breaks, chorus,arpeggios...)? Make this in timelines for each intrument. No own idea for a songstructure? Make a "blueprint" of the structure of a favourite song. Ideas will come. Don't start the DAW without such a plan (more or less).
Music is architecture with sound.

Have fun.

[Barf]

Take it to the bridge

[lotus2035]

.."loop-i-tis" is more common than you think...sometimes I create a loop and spend far too long listening to it and adding more and more over it instead of progressing the song...

Turn off your loop function and write your song from the beginning through to the end trying not to get too bogged down in any one part, so even if the song is not too great when its finished you will have least learned something about creating a bigger musical picture, you wont learn anything about writing great songs if you just focus on one little piece..

...practice and practice and take some cues and techniques from other pieces of music, you will usually find that less is more and that the best tunes are quite simple in arrangement and structure but they have subtleties that make the song what it is...

I also find that I am my own worse critic, so when I try something I'm not as impressed as I would be if it was in someone elses song, so go easy on yourself..

[sonarman]

Variation is the key.

[Sascha Franck]

One tip that was/is particularly helpful for me:
Limit the amount of instruments you're using. That way, you simply can't add track after track but are sort of forced to think vertically rather than horizontally. Instead of "What else can I add here?" think "What's following next on my timeline?".
For a start, you should really only pick the instruments you know you *need*. Of course, with electronic music this might get a bit more tricky because it often heavily relies on sounds and variations of said sounds - unlike a "classical" songwriting approach, which is more about some basic chords, rhythms and a melody. But I think you can adopt quite something from such an approach.
In any case, even if I know that electronic music lives a lot from the used sounds, I would try to keep any attempts at making things sound perfect away for a start. No mixing while composing. Why would you need a perfectly EQed kick sound in the first place? You don't. Any reverb will do as well, no need to find the perfect one just yet. Any saw-patch will do, you can look for that perfect supersaw later on. Etc.

[theviirus]

think about the idea you are trying to express.
think about how you want the idea to be revealed to the listeners ears.
think about what elements move you.

arrange accordingly.
given time, it is just something that hits you.
there is no definite answer.

try to arrange a basic 3 minute popsong first.
intro verse chorus verse chorus reprise outro.
then go from there.....

[musikmachine]

Like Sascha says keep it simple and limit yourself.Thats what i'm doin at the minute and it seems to be working

I think some musicicans use GM sounds when composing the song initially.Keep it simple when writing the song then go crazy with sounds when it's finished.

Break it down into several parts,eg: compose song,choose sounds/instruments,mix,add fx then build from there if you want to add more layers and make it more complex.I like to have a good foundation and this comes down to having a good sound palete so make sure you have the right instruments for your style of music.Just my 2c.

I think a lot of it comes down to how you approach it.I look at it like i'm building a wall

Hope this helps

[Laura Smith]

Peter Gabriel on his third and fourth albums almost became the master of the "half time bridge". A "Half time bridge" is a useful device to break up the monotony of you track. So cutting from (say) a 120bpm loop to a 60bpm loop may provide some variety. You could also time stretch (or slice) a 60bpm loop into a 120bpm loop. Loops without cymbals are usually easier than loops with cymbals. If it sounds boring, it's the cymbals which are a giveaway. Better to add a couple of well placed splashes or rides to a snare-kick than to suffer the fatigue of badly repetitive cymbals.

[Braindrop]

More cowbell!

[djnetwerk]

One tip that was/is particularly helpful for me:
Limit the amount of instruments you're using. That way, you simply can't add track after track but are sort of forced to think vertically rather than horizontally. Instead of "What else can I add here?" think "What's following next on my timeline?".

You know this tip just switched on a lightbulb in my head. I just realized I ALWAYS think, what other sound can I add here first. It's time for me to start thinking vertically. It's a simple idea, but it really nailed exactly what my problem is.

[Jono-60]

I have the same problem. But mostly with electronic music.

I find it easier to writer on guitar. The problem is Im not that good on guitar. So its like a vicious circle.

For me I think its the fact that looping electronic sequences quickly becomes boring because of the repetition. When exactly the same sound is looped my brain find its annoying. When you repeat a phrase on a guitar there are always slight variations and doesnt become annoying.

I also think its improtant to play the song before recording it. Entering notes in the piano roll is not fun, well its not fun until you hear the finished product which should ideally sound amazing. So rather than compose in loops, how about noodle with the keyboard and play the song from start to finish before you start recording.

However havign said that I don't write dance music, so it might not be applicable for some.

[Hewitt Huntwork]

As far as limiting your sonic palette goes, I would take it a step further: Try using only one sound/patch. It will force you to create interest compositionally rather than sonically.