Reference Tracks for Synth-based Instrumentals

[llatham]

Hi All,

I've got these tracks I've made for an album. They're synth instrumentals - but my problem is I don't really know what style they are, so it's making it difficult to find reference tracks for them.

I didn't know if it was cool or not to just link to them here, but if people are willing to take a listen to them I can link to one or two examples (they're only 1 minute or 2, maybe 3 tops).

And I know you can't really say anything until you hear them, but just to give some generalities, they were all done 100% in Alchemy in Logic, including drum loops generated within that. The drums especially are not super drum-machine-y, nor are they super acoustic-y - but they got pitch shifted and you can do things like morph between more or less flangy/phasey versions and stuff, so they're kind of - I don't know - kind of just "bad" or "effected" sounding, but intentionally so. Other sounds are generally granular-like drones, FM-like bells, plucks/strings, and arpeggios, 60s/70s-styled lead synth melodies, and other pads.

It's not EDM or music with a bunch of risers and drops and all that kind of stuff.

But I'm hoping someone out there is like the Rain Man of synth tracks and can listen to them and go, "that really reminds me of X album by Y".

Please respond if you can help out and I'll link you to the tracks either via DM or if it's cool to post them in the thread.

[BONES]

Just out of curiosity, why do you need any reference tracks?

[TheMaestro]

Just out of curiosity, why do you need any reference tracks?

Just out of curiosuty, why don't you know what reference tracks are used for?

[zachy9]

It's indeed tough to find reference tracks for this type of music. I think we'd need to hear at least a bit of it to give recommendations since what you've described covers a lot of genre ground.

[BONES]

Just out of curiosity, why do you need any reference tracks?

Just out of curiosuty, why don't you know what reference tracks are used for?

Because I don't see any use for them whatsoever. It is a complete mystery to me why anyone would see any necessity for them at all. I'm sure the belief sells lots of software, that doesn't make it anything of value to end users. It seems like a crutch for clueless idiots and (possibly) newbies.

[askoan]

Just out of curiosity, why do you need any reference tracks?

Just out of curiosuty, why don't you know what reference tracks are used for?

Because I don't see any use for them whatsoever. It is a complete mystery to me why anyone would see any necessity for them at all. I'm sure the belief sells lots of software, that doesn't make it anything of value to end users. It seems like a crutch for clueless idiots and (possibly) newbies.

Speaking as a end user : when i’m listening to a synthwave track that doesn’t conform to the « eq signature » of the most successful standards, it’s annoying because there is a disruption in my playlist. And that’s nothing about arrangement, it’s only the choice of eqing. I find this disrepectful for the user.
I may see your point where this is only for useful for very well defined styles of music.

[BertKoor]

[...] if it's cool to post them in the thread.

Yeah, that would be great. Posting a raw link to soundcloud or an .mp3 hosted somewhere should present it with a mini player around.

I do agree though to some extent with Bones: what do you hope to get out of it. Because in the end it's you that made something unique. So why listen to what others made. Unless you're new to this all (your user profile suggests not) the most valuable things you learn from reference tracks is things like balancing: EQ, effect levels, interesting composition. And then I think these are not things you notice yoirself, but others bring it to your attention.

OR. You're looking for what text to put in promo material: my album sounds a bit like that. Then your post is totally understandable.

[zachy9]

Because I don't see any use for them whatsoever. It is a complete mystery to me why anyone would see any necessity for them at all. I'm sure the belief sells lots of software, that doesn't make it anything of value to end users. It seems like a crutch for clueless idiots and (possibly) newbies.

If you're interested, Mike Senior's book "Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio" has some good discussion of reference tracks and their utility.

[vurt]

they were useful when i was mixing for other people, if they had an idea of an album or two, that they thought they sounded like, because i was t always in to the band's i worked with, so had no idea of the "scenes" trademark sounds...

for personal stuff, maybe a quick a/b to check levels against similar things you'd expect to be played alongside, to eliminate any volume drop or rise that was too far.

[imrae]

When I use reference tracks I use a few different ones to help calibrate the general envelope of what a good-sounding mix can sound like. If I have more low-end kick than Daft Punk, or more snare than a commercial rock track, or more dominant vocals than a pop track... then I know it went too far! Unless that was the goal. When you only listen to your own stuff for a long time it can be easy to lose perspective.

What I don't do is try to closely match the signature of some particular track.

[vurt]

When I use reference tracks I use a few different ones to help calibrate the general envelope of what a good-sounding mix can sound like. If I have more low-end kick than Daft Punk, or more snare than a commercial rock track, or more dominant vocals than a pop track... then I know it went too far! Unless that was the goal. When you only listen to your own stuff for a long time it can be easy to lose perspective.

What I don't do is try to closely match the signature of some particular track.

exactly!
as you over listen to a piece while mixing, it helps to have the reference, just to check there's nothing jumping out.

you don't let it dictate the mix, or copy the signature, just try not to sound like something is amiss. and it helps to recalibrate the ears a little.

[TheMaestro]

Just out of curiosity, why do you need any reference tracks?

Just out of curiosuty, why don't you know what reference tracks are used for?

Because I don't see any use for them whatsoever. It is a complete mystery to me why anyone would see any necessity for them at all. I'm sure the belief sells lots of software, that doesn't make it anything of value to end users. It seems like a crutch for clueless idiots and (possibly) newbies.

But he did't ask for your personal view on anything.
And knowing your music, no one needs your advice on anything that isn't personal to you, or about the predictable and stale music you "create".

[SHall1000]

Bones baiting! Hope you know what you’re doing.

[BONES]

Speaking as a end user : when i’m listening to a synthwave track that doesn’t conform to the « eq signature » of the most successful standards, it’s annoying because there is a disruption in my playlist.

WTF does that even mean? There is no "eq signature" for any genre, you do what works for the music you're making. What you're probably referring to is plain old bad production and if you can't hear that for yourself, as a producer, I don't understand how a reference track is going to help. I mean, its not lie you've made all this music without having ever heard anything even remotely like before, is it? There has to have been something guiding decisions throughout the process, surely?

And that’s nothing about arrangement, it’s only the choice of eqing. I find this disrepectful for the user.

Or maybe it's a creative choice that doesn't happen to work for you? You don't get to decide what is or is not acceptable for anyone but yourself. And, for the record, I don't EQ anything other than drums and vocals and my mixes turn out superbly well for what I am aiming to achieve. I used to use a lot of EQ but I worked out over time that if I get the sounds right, it really isn't necessary. Hence using it on drums and vocals, where I have less control over the raw sound.

If you're interested, Mike Senior's book "Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio" has some good discussion of reference tracks and their utility.

No, I'm not interested because a) I have no idea who Mike Senior is, and b) I doubt he has anything useful to say. Reading the blurb on Amazon is definitely enough to put me off.

they were useful when i was mixing for other people, if they had an idea of an album or two, that they thought they sounded like, because i was t always in to the band's i worked with, so had no idea of the "scenes" trademark sounds...

This makes perfect sense and I'll guarantee that's where it has come from. It is not something with any relevance to anyone producing their own music because (hopefully) you already know how it's suppose to sound.

When I use reference tracks I use a few different ones to help calibrate the general envelope of what a good-sounding mix can sound like. If I have more low-end kick than Daft Punk, or more snare than a commercial rock track, or more dominant vocals than a pop track... then I know it went too far! Unless that was the goal. When you only listen to your own stuff for a long time it can be easy to lose perspective.

Surely that's a simple matter of listening to other music during the normal course of your life, rather than a deliberate process to match your work to something else?

But he did't ask for your personal view on anything.

Which is precisely why I asked a question of him, so that I could provide useful information, or simply not bother responding any further.

And knowing your chart topping music, no one needs your advice on anything that isn't personal to you, or about the well reviewed music you "create".

I fixed that up for you with a couple of actual facts that kind of work against the premise.

[BertKoor]

I have no idea who Mike Senior is

Duuuh, he's the father of Mike Junior. But I had to look it up as well.

Regular Sound On Sound readers will already be familiar with Mike Senior's contributions to the ever‑popular Mix Rescue series, as well as his occasional (and usually lengthy!) features on comparative recording techniques. His background and experience make him ideally placed to write this book — he studied Music at Cambridge and gained an MSc in Music IT at City University. He has also worked as an assistant engineer at several London studios, before becoming the in‑house engineer at Great Linford Manor Studios, working with artists such as The Charlatans, Reef, Therapy, Nigel Kennedy, and Wet Wet Wet.

However, when the charm of long, antisocial hours in dark studios finally wore off, Mike joined the SOS team as Reviews Editor, where he was instrumental in establishing the popular Studio SOS and Mix Rescue columns. Always seeking new challenges, though, he eventually left the magazine to set up his own training and consultancy business, while also freelancing as an engineer and SOS author.

Mixing Secrets For The Small Studio is Mike's first published book.
[...]
and at a bargain price.
£24.99 including VAT.

Hmmm, Amazon quotes a new hardcover version "from $146.68"

But the book is not written by him only.

Pick up tricks and tips from leading-edge engineers working on today's multi-platinum hits, including Michael Brauer, Serban Ghenea, the Lord-Alge brothers, Tony Maserati, Manny Marroquin, Dave "Hard Drive" Pensado, Jack Joseph Puig, Mark "Spike" Stent, Phil Tan, Andy Wallace, and many, many more . . .

where "today" was back in 2011. And again none of them ring any bell in my head. But what do I know. I don't look up who's behind the top selling stuff of this century. And I don't need such books.