how long did it take you to write an entire track on a consistent basis?

[4damind]

Playing an instrument is a bit like a turbo boost It's much easier to find harmonies, melodies and stuff in a shorter time. Yes, it works also without such knowledge but it's always a good idea (and never too late) to spend some time learning an instrument.. and yes, it's no rocket science

The posted video is interesting and gives some good hints. But with separating the mix from the arrangement/composing there are different opinions. Many preferring to (pre)mix the same time they using the sound. Often mixing can change the sound so they will have it done instantly and see this stuff a bit like a part of the sound. At the end of the project some fine tuning, leveling etc. but the most part is done earlier (so there is not a big mixing stage).

Anyway, it's true not to spend too much time at such early process with mixing and eventually mastering. It should sound good but must not be ready for publishing Investing hours of time to make a kick sounding good it's IMO the wrong way, while in the process of building a song. The funniest thing could be if the song is ready and than you find this kick annoying in the context of the complete song and change it with another kick which sounds perfectly without FX

[robogone]

PS-if you're measuring how long it takes to do a track, ur doin' it wrong! it's done when it's done, dumbasses!

[timaeus222]

Maybe you'd be surprised how others would rate you based on your compositions.

I agree. Self appraisal of technical ability doesn't really have much impact on how others perceive musical output.

I said already that I was being modest. If I wasn't a naturally modest person (I don't like saying I'm better than everyone else. I only say what I believe is close to accurate), I'd say I was a 12/10 or something off the charts, and I already know for a fact that I'm not quite that high on that scale. I don't welcome insults with open arms. I'm not trying to brag, I'm just giving more information on my skill so the person's expectations won't get too high, so they won't be disappointed. I'm being considerate.

If you want to be a good person, restrain yourself from snarky/snide comments, please. Last I recall, I don't even know you two. Seriously, who insults someone online they don't even know well enough? No one wants to see interpersonal complaints. This is a topic for helping a guy, not arguing over someone who seemed to be bragging in the eyes of someone who misinterpreted him.

If you doubt that I'm at least "good" at writing music, just look at the long reviews I've written for KVR-published plugins and products before saying anything. Is that too much to ask? Some respect would be nice.

[Jace-BeOS]

To respond to the original poster:

I don't care for this lax use of the word "producer."

As far as making complete songs goes: I'm not very self-disciplined. Music tends to come to me spontaneously, via a sound I'm playing with. Less often, I will set out melody or bass line and work from there intentionally shaping a song. That might lead to a somewhat complete song structure within hours, but I likely don't care much for the actual sound of it. When I'm not making myself compose via melody and structure, it could happen quickly ("hey, this is an interesting sound... Oh, look at that, I've made a song!") or it could not happen at all for days ("Hm. I'm just disinterested in every sound there ever was").

So, hours to years. The better stuff I've made came quickly to completion or near completion. The stuff that was harder might turn out good or might just waste my time for years as I try to make it work or sound good.

But I sure do need more self-discipline to actually sit and work at music. I've various issues there I won't get into here because they're probably irrelevant.

[debra1rlo]

Maybe you'd be surprised how others would rate you based on your compositions.

I agree. Self appraisal of technical ability doesn't really have much impact on how others perceive musical output.

I said already that I was being modest. If I wasn't a naturally modest person (I don't like saying I'm better than everyone else. I only say what I believe is close to accurate), I'd say I was a 12/10 or something off the charts, and I already know for a fact that I'm not quite that high on that scale. I don't welcome insults with open arms. I'm not trying to brag, I'm just giving more information on my skill so the person's expectations won't get too high, so they won't be disappointed. I'm being considerate.

If you want to be a good person, restrain yourself from snarky/snide comments, please. Last I recall, I don't even know you two. Seriously, who insults someone online they don't even know well enough? No one wants to see interpersonal complaints. This is a topic for helping a guy, not arguing over someone who seemed to be bragging in the eyes of someone who misinterpreted him.

If you doubt that I'm at least "good" at writing music, just look at the long reviews I've written for KVR-published plugins and products before saying anything. Is that too much to ask? Some respect would be nice.

what was snarky about what he wrote? it was truth and I didnt see any of it as a dig at anyone. maybe a reality check, but sometimes it helps to step back and take a brutally honest perspective if one really wants to improve in the long run...

and honestly, after doing this for 30 years, I'd be more realistic in my self-rating than I was after 1.66 years. I really thought I knew more than I did back then and I'm thinking I might not be the only one.

[robogone]

I'm not sure what you thought was snarky either, and not intended as a dig. It was just an observation on how your self-rating has little bearing on the popularity of anything you write.

Not going to doubt you at all - as you said, I don't know you. Personally I wouldn't try to rate myself as I don't think it helps anyone appreciate music.

[debra1rlo]

I'm not sure what you thought was snarky either, and not intended as a dig. It was just an observation on how your self-rating has little bearing on the popularity of anything you write.

Not going to doubt you at all - as you said, I don't know you. Personally I wouldn't try to rate myself as I don't think it helps anyone appreciate music.

exactly... plus I would think at some point, if one is REALLY learning and pushing to improve abilities/etc, you start to realize how much there is you don't know, how much there is still left to learn. sometimes, when you catch on to something fast at first, there is a false feeling that you "have this down"... i dont know, maybe it's just me but when you start feeling very satisfied with yourself, especially after such a short time, there is a tendency to fall into a rut and not challenge yourself... dont get me wrong, i probably prefer to listen to my music over anyone's else, but I also remain my toughest critic so that hopefully I will improve... and yes, i make music for me first of all, but still part of that is I need to see some constant (albeit small) progression with each project.

[Arglebargle]

Composer for 1.66 years. I'm almost to professional level. On a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being best, I'd rate myself between 8.5 and 9.2, being as modest as possible. I usually learn faster than most people, so don't assume that 1.66 years is automatically enough to be "good". It is, however, a good minimum moment in time for you to start gauging your skill.

LOL

Looking back at this statement 5-10 years in the future, you'll cringe in embarrassment. It's ok, we all go through it.

[rockstar_not]

I would think at some point, if one is REALLY learning and pushing to improve abilities/etc, you start to realize how much there is you don't know, how much there is still left to learn. sometimes, when you catch on to something fast at first, there is a false feeling that you "have this down"... i dont know, maybe it's just me but when you start feeling very satisfied with yourself, especially after such a short time, there is a tendency to fall into a rut and not challenge yourself.

I remember WAY BACK in the day - would have been about 1985 or 1986, when I played along with the Edge's guitar part for 'I Will Follow' a euphoric rush and thinking "I can play electric guitar - I will be famous some day like the Edge". I could even do the harmonics part - I was going to RULE! (for reference purposes - those of you U2 haters, nothing to see here, just move along: )

The fame never came, but what I did take away from that moment was a love of guitar and U2 for that matter (sneer all you want - I admit this openly) and over 2 decades, and nearly 3, of the enjoyment of playing guitar.

Still learning. Still not satisfied with my output knowing it can be better, but having fun along the way.

BTW, as soon as you make money with your music - enough to pay your bills, you have achieved 'professional' status. And that, my friend, is entirely assessed by others through their most effective assessment method - giving you their hard earned money for your output.

[como baila]

Please don't annoy, molest, bother, badger, irritate, belittle, disparage or otherwise intrude upon the adolescent ego.

Time was already devised to address that.

Prado

[tintala]

I would say you first have to have an in depth knowledge of mixing. Using a spectrum analyzer and know your frequencies. Also, have a template you use with alot of fav synths, ready. This could be continously evolving. Also , watch alot of tutorials... but I digress. I have no finished projects... haha.

[Jace-BeOS]

I remember WAY BACK in the day - would have been about 1985 or 1986, when I played along with the Edge's guitar part for 'I Will Follow' a euphoric rush and thinking "I can play electric guitar - I will be famous some day like the Edge". I could even do the harmonics part - I was going to RULE!

The fame never came, but what I did take away from that moment was a love of guitar and U2 for that matter (sneer all you want - I admit this openly) and over 2 decades, and nearly 3, of the enjoyment of playing guitar.

U2 has been a great band. I classify them as musicians, rather than pop stars. If someone thinks they suck, well, that's a matter of taste. What you might not want to share openly is still having five or six Journey CDs in your collection. Did I just say that? But nah, they made some fun stuff too, even if it seems cheesy today. But U2 deserves respect. Totally a valid thing to like, and not cheesy or requiring any embarrassment. I'd own more than one of their albums myself if my other interests hadn't been higher priority.

[robogone]

What you might not want to share openly is still having five or six Journey CDs in your collection.

Damn! One would have been bad enough...

[an-electric-heart]

I've been writing a lot of songs lately, my new system is goes something like this:

*Grab my acoustic guitar.
*Write a four line chorus and vocal melody with a three or four chord, chord progression.
*Write two four line verses and vocal melody and the basic chords for the verse.

These are the most important things, everything else is padding, if I get struck with a writers block later in the song, it's a finished song, just have an instrumental of the chorus for the intro and a breakdown after the second chorus... pretty slack (the formula for most radio songs actually), slack but a finished song.

*Then I start the recording/production side of things, I track the lead vocals really early on.

*Next once the lead vocals are out of the way I add the fancy things that make the song clever like bridges between choruses and verses, pre choruses, additional verses, thought out intro's/outro's.

A couple more things, if I'm going to repeat a part like a chorus, I'll try to have more instruments/vocals each time the part comes up, like the first the chorus comes it might just be a lone vocal, the second time it'll have a harmony.

But yeah, some take longer than others.

This one I wrote one day and recorded the next:

http://anelectricheart.bandcamp.com/track/shatter-me

This one took about six months of working on it for a few hours every week... still not happy with it, I had to just throw my hands up and go "That's it... I'm done"... that's good sometimes too:

http://anelectricheart.bandcamp.com/tra ... rink-blood

This one was a couple of years in the writing, the first verse was wrote about two years before the chorus and the second verse... the bridge bit at the end was from another unfinished song... I just mashed the two together:

http://anelectricheart.bandcamp.com/tra ... ate-to-you

[balx]

I kinda like Vespers' take on the process, though I tend to cycle between writing (he says recording) and arrangement. On top of that I'm definitely not afraid to do some pre-mixing. Granted you probably shouldn't spend more than a couple minutes pre-mixing, i.e. quick and dirty sidechaining and eq are OK.

Often during arrangement I will tweak melodies and sounds to fit the style and energy that I'm looking for. I don't see any point in trying to complete a song if there are parts that just don't fit. This is where I typically put most of the work in as well.

All of that said, I typically spend a couple weeks to a month per song. If I get frustrated or the song isn't getting better as time goes on I will put it aside and start something new. Pushing too hard can lead to burnout which no one wants.