Well here is my CV for anyone who cares...
Ken Mosman
Current Involvements
2007 Engineered and Produced ‘The Sisterhood Project’ debut CD for local artist Emily White.
Currently involved in Production team at Edge Church South. Duties include sound mixing, production, creative input into recording and production process.
Study
2007 Diploma of Music (Sound Engineering); Adelaide University
• Developed proficiency in use of industry standard software applications (Logic, Pro-Tools, Ableton Live, Waves plug-ins)
• Trained in recording, mixing and production techniques
• Produced creative works to a high standard
1996-1999
Flinders University
Bachelor of Arts
Bachelor of Social Work (Post Graduate Study)
Majored in Philosophy. Qualified as a Social worker.
Character Strengths:
• Does not take self too seriously
• Loyal
• Funny
• Intelligent
• Hard Working
• Reliable
• Skilled at dealing with challenging people!
Music Ambition
To one day found a credible Christian Dance music label.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Ken's presentation
At the risk of appearing cynical... I did not prepare a Powerpoint presentation for my discussion because I felt that the likelyhood of all of the relevant Uni systems working properly on the day would be slim.
Sadly, this apprehension was well founded.
I used this equipment failure as a great illustration of one of the big things I've learned this year.
That is: everything is a compromise. There is no guarantee of any equipment working. There are always deadlines and system limitations that we need to learn to negotiate successfully in order to work successfully in this (or any other) industry.
So I like to think that my presentation was all about substance, rather than worrying about bells and whistles!!
I also spent some time talking about my philosophy of my portfolio - that it is my goal to try and inject as much as myself and my personality as possible into the presentation - especially the 2 to 3 minute 'megamix' that will be the headline track.
I am very tempted by the idea of including some sort of comic voiceover. However, I freely acknowledge that the line between hilarious and tragic is a fine one indeed. And I cannot guarantee that I would be on the right side of this line!!
I felt the response to the pieces I played was very positive. Most of my work is firmly grounded in the dance/electronic genre. And I felt that people were pretty appreciative of this, despite few others in the class sharing this particular taste in music.
I played some tracks that I've prepared for class assignments this year, as well as some other material (extra-curricular!).
I have spent some time talking with a friend of mine who works in the advertising industry about what he likes to see in portfolios - and this was very enlightening.
He informed me that he is most interested in High Impact! (Not surprising, I suppose being in advertising..).
He said that one of the big problems with some portfolios he's seen is a lack of focus and attention to the immediate impression.
With this in mind, it is my intention to make my portfolio disc as exciting and high impact as possible.
Short, sharp, shiny... and of course I will up the volume of everything by 12 to 16 dB in Waves L3.
Surely this is the way forward in this brave new world!!?!!
Sadly, this apprehension was well founded.
I used this equipment failure as a great illustration of one of the big things I've learned this year.
That is: everything is a compromise. There is no guarantee of any equipment working. There are always deadlines and system limitations that we need to learn to negotiate successfully in order to work successfully in this (or any other) industry.
So I like to think that my presentation was all about substance, rather than worrying about bells and whistles!!
I also spent some time talking about my philosophy of my portfolio - that it is my goal to try and inject as much as myself and my personality as possible into the presentation - especially the 2 to 3 minute 'megamix' that will be the headline track.
I am very tempted by the idea of including some sort of comic voiceover. However, I freely acknowledge that the line between hilarious and tragic is a fine one indeed. And I cannot guarantee that I would be on the right side of this line!!
I felt the response to the pieces I played was very positive. Most of my work is firmly grounded in the dance/electronic genre. And I felt that people were pretty appreciative of this, despite few others in the class sharing this particular taste in music.
I played some tracks that I've prepared for class assignments this year, as well as some other material (extra-curricular!).
I have spent some time talking with a friend of mine who works in the advertising industry about what he likes to see in portfolios - and this was very enlightening.
He informed me that he is most interested in High Impact! (Not surprising, I suppose being in advertising..).
He said that one of the big problems with some portfolios he's seen is a lack of focus and attention to the immediate impression.
With this in mind, it is my intention to make my portfolio disc as exciting and high impact as possible.
Short, sharp, shiny... and of course I will up the volume of everything by 12 to 16 dB in Waves L3.
Surely this is the way forward in this brave new world!!?!!
Class presentations semester 2
Once again I have been pretty impressed with my classmates’ work! I think that there is some real skill on display and evident in all of these presentations.
One of the advantages of being forced to come up with a portfolio is that it makes one evaluate one’s body of work very critically. As I’ve been listening to my aural historical record (ie: a hard drive full of bounced mixes) I have been pretty happy to note my development. It is increasingly clear the progress I’ve made this year.
There are some moments when we sit in class and wonder what this is all doing for me. But when we step back a little and see things from a bigger picture, we are better able to appreciate the growth and development in our work.
As I said, this has been something I’ve noticed in other people’s work also. I recall some of the presentations from first semester, and can see that we’re all getting bigger and better at what we’re doing.
Our portfolio is an opportunity to convince people that we can ‘cut it’ in the real world.
Now I’m not really someone who enjoys the act of ‘selling myself’ at all. But I have been able to do it reasonably well in job interviews when required – so I know how to flick on that switch.
The construction of a portfolio is clearly one of those ‘job interview’ moments when we need to turn on the self confidence and professionalism as part of the presentation.
One of the advantages of being forced to come up with a portfolio is that it makes one evaluate one’s body of work very critically. As I’ve been listening to my aural historical record (ie: a hard drive full of bounced mixes) I have been pretty happy to note my development. It is increasingly clear the progress I’ve made this year.
There are some moments when we sit in class and wonder what this is all doing for me. But when we step back a little and see things from a bigger picture, we are better able to appreciate the growth and development in our work.
As I said, this has been something I’ve noticed in other people’s work also. I recall some of the presentations from first semester, and can see that we’re all getting bigger and better at what we’re doing.
Our portfolio is an opportunity to convince people that we can ‘cut it’ in the real world.
Now I’m not really someone who enjoys the act of ‘selling myself’ at all. But I have been able to do it reasonably well in job interviews when required – so I know how to flick on that switch.
The construction of a portfolio is clearly one of those ‘job interview’ moments when we need to turn on the self confidence and professionalism as part of the presentation.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Tour of Oasis Post
Yet another revealing trip to an amazing environment. Pretty impressive to see all of this stuff happening in Adelaide.
I spoke to a friend of mine who works in the graphics industry and he said that Adelaide is getting a world wide reputation as somewhere that does good high end work without the price (or overheads) of the major 'meccas' of the industry.
I can't believe it... that is some actual good news about a possible audio career for a change. Could it even be possible to have a satisfying career in the creative production field without having to give up the luxuries of living in a nice quiet town like Adelaide?
Well yes, clearly it is, if Oasis post is anything to go by.
I was impressed by so many things in this place. Including: the casual professionalism exuded by Marty, the incredible high end AV gear in their suites, and the down to earth attitude.
Marty talked of his way of developing his new staff is to take them under his wing and allow them to become proficient in all of the industry standard software. This process will typically take 3 years (a reasonable apprenticeship period, I think..)
I was pretty inspired to just keep pushing further and further ahead in my learning and composition.
It's all about quality!
I spoke to a friend of mine who works in the graphics industry and he said that Adelaide is getting a world wide reputation as somewhere that does good high end work without the price (or overheads) of the major 'meccas' of the industry.
I can't believe it... that is some actual good news about a possible audio career for a change. Could it even be possible to have a satisfying career in the creative production field without having to give up the luxuries of living in a nice quiet town like Adelaide?
Well yes, clearly it is, if Oasis post is anything to go by.
I was impressed by so many things in this place. Including: the casual professionalism exuded by Marty, the incredible high end AV gear in their suites, and the down to earth attitude.
Marty talked of his way of developing his new staff is to take them under his wing and allow them to become proficient in all of the industry standard software. This process will typically take 3 years (a reasonable apprenticeship period, I think..)
I was pretty inspired to just keep pushing further and further ahead in my learning and composition.
It's all about quality!
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Week 7 Tour of Film SA
Well, sad to say, I missed this one.
(I was tempted to fake this blog entry, and pretend I'd gone - but lies are a festering mess that only make things worse..)
I will talk about my ongoing monitoring issues.
I have brought in some old 70's hi-fi speakers from my shed to hook up to my system in my efforts to find more true representation of my bottom end.
I have reached that point in my personal development as an audio engineer where I am all too aware of the fact that I know NOTHING!
I was hoping to get to the end of this year and feel like I know what I'm doing, but the opposite has occured.
Now I'm obsessively worrying about monitoring levels; running all my master bus outputs through spectral analysis plug ins; and generally driving myself crazy in trying to solve the unsolvable mysteries of audio engineering.
I take great hope in the knowledge that the admission of incompetance is the beginning of wisdom! :)
(I was tempted to fake this blog entry, and pretend I'd gone - but lies are a festering mess that only make things worse..)
I will talk about my ongoing monitoring issues.
I have brought in some old 70's hi-fi speakers from my shed to hook up to my system in my efforts to find more true representation of my bottom end.
I have reached that point in my personal development as an audio engineer where I am all too aware of the fact that I know NOTHING!
I was hoping to get to the end of this year and feel like I know what I'm doing, but the opposite has occured.
Now I'm obsessively worrying about monitoring levels; running all my master bus outputs through spectral analysis plug ins; and generally driving myself crazy in trying to solve the unsolvable mysteries of audio engineering.
I take great hope in the knowledge that the admission of incompetance is the beginning of wisdom! :)
Week 6 - examination of portfolio options
This week we spent time discussing the process of putting together a portfolio CD. There doesn't seem to be any real right or wrong here.
I am definitely thinking in terms of maximum impact. I want to edit quite a few high impact snipets of music in Peak and then throw them all together in a minute of frenetic action as the beginning track.
I've met a few people in the industry so far - and they all look very, very busy. So I don't want to waste their time by providing a CD with only full length tracks on it.
I am thinking about using one of my wife's paintings as the cover art. She is quite the artist - and uses a lot of splurges of colour in her canvas work.
I am pretty unsure about what tracks to use in my portfolio - but I guess that's the whole fun of the last few weeks of the course!
I am definitely thinking in terms of maximum impact. I want to edit quite a few high impact snipets of music in Peak and then throw them all together in a minute of frenetic action as the beginning track.
I've met a few people in the industry so far - and they all look very, very busy. So I don't want to waste their time by providing a CD with only full length tracks on it.
I am thinking about using one of my wife's paintings as the cover art. She is quite the artist - and uses a lot of splurges of colour in her canvas work.
I am pretty unsure about what tracks to use in my portfolio - but I guess that's the whole fun of the last few weeks of the course!
Saturday, September 1, 2007
Disk Edits Mastering facility.
Yet another fascinating time in a pro studio. And this one was fascinating for very different reasons. I really enjoyed the contrast between Disk-Edits and Mixmasters. A few notable points of difference, for me:
Mixmasters
• Control rooms and recording space were designed in a relatively unscientific manner – based on what he’d seen work in other places, rather than being specially designed by an acoustic engineer (Sounded great, of course..)
• A combination of analog and digital gear – with analog being the strong focus
• A more casual approach to recording and mixing
Disk-Edits
• More obviously a mastering focus – more precision evident at various levels
• Precisely calibrated monitoring setup
• Precisely designed and built room – sounded pretty amazing too
• Combo of analog and digital gear – but with the precision of digital being more emphasised
Yes, all of those stereotypical pictures of people in white coats with clipboards doing mastering seemed to fit well with the Disk-Edits experience. And I certainly don’t mean that to be patronising or derogatory in any way. I found the different approach taken by the 3 facilities we’ve visited so far to be interesting and liberating.
All of their approaches to their work seem valid. And this serves to emphasise the depth to this process of doing audio: there’s science, there’s art, and there’s plenty of room for individuality.
On the down side, I also found the experience this week to be pretty discouraging. I had some tracks played that sounded TERRIBLE. I overcompensated and blew out my bottom end. I was pretty depressed about this little reality check – because it allowed me to grasp that I’m at least 10 years off being reasonably competent at this stuff. (My reasoning for this comes from my experience of professional development as a Social Worker – it’s taken me many years to get where I am today, and I can see some of the rookie mistakes I made in that field showing themselves in my little audio world… So I’m at the start of a long and interesting journey, I suppose.)
Yet another fascinating time in a pro studio. And this one was fascinating for very different reasons. I really enjoyed the contrast between Disk-Edits and Mixmasters. A few notable points of difference, for me:
Mixmasters
• Control rooms and recording space were designed in a relatively unscientific manner – based on what he’d seen work in other places, rather than being specially designed by an acoustic engineer (Sounded great, of course..)
• A combination of analog and digital gear – with analog being the strong focus
• A more casual approach to recording and mixing
Disk-Edits
• More obviously a mastering focus – more precision evident at various levels
• Precisely calibrated monitoring setup
• Precisely designed and built room – sounded pretty amazing too
• Combo of analog and digital gear – but with the precision of digital being more emphasised
Yes, all of those stereotypical pictures of people in white coats with clipboards doing mastering seemed to fit well with the Disk-Edits experience. And I certainly don’t mean that to be patronising or derogatory in any way. I found the different approach taken by the 3 facilities we’ve visited so far to be interesting and liberating.
All of their approaches to their work seem valid. And this serves to emphasise the depth to this process of doing audio: there’s science, there’s art, and there’s plenty of room for individuality.
On the down side, I also found the experience this week to be pretty discouraging. I had some tracks played that sounded TERRIBLE. I overcompensated and blew out my bottom end. I was pretty depressed about this little reality check – because it allowed me to grasp that I’m at least 10 years off being reasonably competent at this stuff. (My reasoning for this comes from my experience of professional development as a Social Worker – it’s taken me many years to get where I am today, and I can see some of the rookie mistakes I made in that field showing themselves in my little audio world… So I’m at the start of a long and interesting journey, I suppose.)
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
CD Manufacture
This week was a tour of internet information on the manufacturing of CD's. I was not physically present, but dutifully googled 'CD manufacturers' to attempt to get an insight into what I missed.
What I can report is that I am very excited about seeing how cheaply one can mass produce runs of CD's.
For a few grand, I can flood the market with my very average tracks, rather than just spending my time being reassured by friends and family that one day, I'll 'make it'. Is the world ready for even more mediocrity?? I hope so.
Much more significant is the issue of mastering. I am still a little dazzled by this black art. It will come as no surprise to regular readers that I feel somewhat insecure about this exercise! Fortunately, our next tour is to a mastering facility - so we will soon see what all the fuss is about.
What I can report is that I am very excited about seeing how cheaply one can mass produce runs of CD's.
For a few grand, I can flood the market with my very average tracks, rather than just spending my time being reassured by friends and family that one day, I'll 'make it'. Is the world ready for even more mediocrity?? I hope so.
Much more significant is the issue of mastering. I am still a little dazzled by this black art. It will come as no surprise to regular readers that I feel somewhat insecure about this exercise! Fortunately, our next tour is to a mastering facility - so we will soon see what all the fuss is about.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Forum Week 3, Semester 2
Paradise Studio tour.
It was pretty cool again, to get to another studio! The one remaining question must be: how do we spell Devault's name?
It was a beautiful facility - and a few of us imagined that they must have a limitless budget. It just had that 'money no object' look and feel about it. And they'd just spent 50 Grand on outboard gear.
Which brings us to this week's dose of analog versus digital propaganda war. We had another very healthy dose of analog forever sentiments. I must confess, that I'm still a little skeptical. Although it is hard to argue with the fact that most of the people with the real 'golden ears' are inclined in the same way about this.
I received some very encouraging feedback on my mixes - again. I need to get more bass in my mixes. Which is pretty cool. Because my first generation of mixes were all way too bass heavy. I'd play them in the car and be blown away (in a bad way) by the bass. So I've now come to a place of overcompensating and making my mixes too bass-light. This actually fills me with some sense of optimism - because surely the next generation of my mixes will be at that middle ground of well balanced bass.
Cheers Folks,
Ken
It was pretty cool again, to get to another studio! The one remaining question must be: how do we spell Devault's name?
It was a beautiful facility - and a few of us imagined that they must have a limitless budget. It just had that 'money no object' look and feel about it. And they'd just spent 50 Grand on outboard gear.
Which brings us to this week's dose of analog versus digital propaganda war. We had another very healthy dose of analog forever sentiments. I must confess, that I'm still a little skeptical. Although it is hard to argue with the fact that most of the people with the real 'golden ears' are inclined in the same way about this.
I received some very encouraging feedback on my mixes - again. I need to get more bass in my mixes. Which is pretty cool. Because my first generation of mixes were all way too bass heavy. I'd play them in the car and be blown away (in a bad way) by the bass. So I've now come to a place of overcompensating and making my mixes too bass-light. This actually fills me with some sense of optimism - because surely the next generation of my mixes will be at that middle ground of well balanced bass.
Cheers Folks,
Ken
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
Week 2: Tour of Mixmaster Studio
A liberating experience indeed! My highlight wasn’t even the fact that it was the first time I touched an SSL (…I’ll never forget – or wash that hand again..).
It goes without saying that it was great to get into a pro room and hear from a working producer.
What really blew me away was the lack of pretence. Here was a guy standing in a room full of classic analog outboard gear that said: ‘None of this matters!’ Of particular note was his admission that he has patched in a channel with nothing on it before and thought to himself ‘Yeah, that sounds much better…’
Thank goodness! It’s not just me.
I was very impressed that in a room full of great gear, his focus was on getting the balance of the mix right, rather than telling us how great the gear is. But I suppose that is one of the perils of being an amateur: one spends far too much time around other amateurs!
Next major revelation… how did the control room sound? Frankly: not too different to my office at home. This has been another one of those areas where I have let urban audio myths creep into my psyche. I imagined that when I heard my stuff in a ‘pro room’ I would be hearing something entirely different to what I had hear at home or in my headphones.
To summarise: I think the experience helped me to start to get past some of the self imposed psychological hurdles that stand between me and good mixes. There is a lot of them to get over – but I can see that much of the psychology that is working against me is of my own making, and not reflective of a world stacked against me!
A liberating experience indeed! My highlight wasn’t even the fact that it was the first time I touched an SSL (…I’ll never forget – or wash that hand again..).
It goes without saying that it was great to get into a pro room and hear from a working producer.
What really blew me away was the lack of pretence. Here was a guy standing in a room full of classic analog outboard gear that said: ‘None of this matters!’ Of particular note was his admission that he has patched in a channel with nothing on it before and thought to himself ‘Yeah, that sounds much better…’
Thank goodness! It’s not just me.
I was very impressed that in a room full of great gear, his focus was on getting the balance of the mix right, rather than telling us how great the gear is. But I suppose that is one of the perils of being an amateur: one spends far too much time around other amateurs!
Next major revelation… how did the control room sound? Frankly: not too different to my office at home. This has been another one of those areas where I have let urban audio myths creep into my psyche. I imagined that when I heard my stuff in a ‘pro room’ I would be hearing something entirely different to what I had hear at home or in my headphones.
To summarise: I think the experience helped me to start to get past some of the self imposed psychological hurdles that stand between me and good mixes. There is a lot of them to get over – but I can see that much of the psychology that is working against me is of my own making, and not reflective of a world stacked against me!
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Week 1, Semester 2
Well it’s a brave new world (or semester, at least)….
We listened to some of the Studio projects from semester one this week. I continue to be impressed with my fellow students’ passion and attention to detail.
This semester seems to be really geared towards us putting our work on display – to each other and at some of the commercial studios we’ll be visiting. This is way cool.
One of my (many) insecurities is about the quality of my monitoring environment and the result it will be inevitably be having on my mixes. I’ve done my best to turn my spare room into an acoustically friendly environment for mixing, and I have some decent monitors. But is it enough? Have my room modes deafened me to the truth about my mixes? All shall be revealed when I take some tracks to pro studios with professional quality monitors and spaces.
There are several key areas I hope to address with the opportunities in this topic this semester.
I am probably most concerned about the bottom end of my mixes. While they have improved (I used to have the bass up to stupid levels…) I still have some suspicions that my bass might be a little too heavy handed on account of my monitoring set-up.
I am also insecure about my vocal processing. Am I over processing? Almost certainly, I would think. So I’m looking forward to bringing some of my vocal processing under the professional scrutiny it so desperately needs.
And last but not least: Analog versus digital. If we’re going to be spending some time in places with many grand worth of analog gear, I want to see what all the fuss is about. If there really is such a warmth to be had we should be able to hear it in these high end facilities. Or.. is analog warmth just a 21st Century urban myth propagated by the power hungry studio owners (jealous that their thunder has been stolen by some 14 year old kid with a copy of Garageband)? Only time will tell.
We listened to some of the Studio projects from semester one this week. I continue to be impressed with my fellow students’ passion and attention to detail.
This semester seems to be really geared towards us putting our work on display – to each other and at some of the commercial studios we’ll be visiting. This is way cool.
One of my (many) insecurities is about the quality of my monitoring environment and the result it will be inevitably be having on my mixes. I’ve done my best to turn my spare room into an acoustically friendly environment for mixing, and I have some decent monitors. But is it enough? Have my room modes deafened me to the truth about my mixes? All shall be revealed when I take some tracks to pro studios with professional quality monitors and spaces.
There are several key areas I hope to address with the opportunities in this topic this semester.
I am probably most concerned about the bottom end of my mixes. While they have improved (I used to have the bass up to stupid levels…) I still have some suspicions that my bass might be a little too heavy handed on account of my monitoring set-up.
I am also insecure about my vocal processing. Am I over processing? Almost certainly, I would think. So I’m looking forward to bringing some of my vocal processing under the professional scrutiny it so desperately needs.
And last but not least: Analog versus digital. If we’re going to be spending some time in places with many grand worth of analog gear, I want to see what all the fuss is about. If there really is such a warmth to be had we should be able to hear it in these high end facilities. Or.. is analog warmth just a 21st Century urban myth propagated by the power hungry studio owners (jealous that their thunder has been stolen by some 14 year old kid with a copy of Garageband)? Only time will tell.
Saturday, June 23, 2007
Audio Studies Creative Project
Deflector
Ken Mosman
3 minutes, 5 seconds
Deflector
A dance inspired track with much creative inspiration coming from the mid-nineties pop-dance genre. I have attempted to compose a track that has a very melodically simple and uplifting vibe.
The track is based around a bassline hook, which was created in Ableton Live using an Albino 2 virtual instrument.
I then built a series of supporting loops using various software synths (Vanguard, Virus, Massive, Battery). I added a couple of percussion loops to attempt to increase the sense of ‘groove’.
I used the session page of Live as a sketchpad for the loops – organising which ones I would use. I also applied various effects to some of the loops in order to make them more interesting to me. I then rendered all of the loops to aiff files using Live’s time stretching engine in order to have them all playing at 135 BPM.
Loops were then examined and ‘tidied up’ where necessary within Peak.
I then imported all rendered loops into ProTools and used it as my audio sequencing environment to create an arrangement.
Various effects and routing were applied within ProTools in order to mix the track.
Once the track had been mixed within ProTools, I rendered it to a 24 bit wave file and applied some mastering plug ins within Peak. (I ran it through TC Master x3, the preset Dance Final Master)
ONLY ONE LAST QUESTION REMAINS... HOW THE HECK DO I POST THE MP3'S ON MY BLOG. I AM AN INTERNET NOOB. :(
Ken Mosman
3 minutes, 5 seconds
Deflector
A dance inspired track with much creative inspiration coming from the mid-nineties pop-dance genre. I have attempted to compose a track that has a very melodically simple and uplifting vibe.
The track is based around a bassline hook, which was created in Ableton Live using an Albino 2 virtual instrument.
I then built a series of supporting loops using various software synths (Vanguard, Virus, Massive, Battery). I added a couple of percussion loops to attempt to increase the sense of ‘groove’.
I used the session page of Live as a sketchpad for the loops – organising which ones I would use. I also applied various effects to some of the loops in order to make them more interesting to me. I then rendered all of the loops to aiff files using Live’s time stretching engine in order to have them all playing at 135 BPM.
Loops were then examined and ‘tidied up’ where necessary within Peak.
I then imported all rendered loops into ProTools and used it as my audio sequencing environment to create an arrangement.
Various effects and routing were applied within ProTools in order to mix the track.
Once the track had been mixed within ProTools, I rendered it to a 24 bit wave file and applied some mastering plug ins within Peak. (I ran it through TC Master x3, the preset Dance Final Master)
ONLY ONE LAST QUESTION REMAINS... HOW THE HECK DO I POST THE MP3'S ON MY BLOG. I AM AN INTERNET NOOB. :(
Monday, June 18, 2007
My Midi Studies Project
‘Positron’
Ken Mosman
5 Minutes, 39 Seconds
As outlined in my proposal, it was my goal to create a trance track with an ‘anthemic’ feel. While the piece stays well within the ‘trance’ genre, it has finished up as more of a ‘chilled out’ uplifting track, than an upbeat anthem. I am comfortable with this as the outcome, as once I was well into the composition process, it was clear that the loops I had constructed were more suited to this ‘laid back’ presentation.
In generic trance style, the track begins with a beat and gradually adds elements as it journeys towards the predictable breakdown, climax and conclusion. I very deliberately followed this style as I wanted to compose an original piece, but did not want to labour unduly over structure, arrangement, etc. (The bulk of time spent still seems to have been around the compositional aspects though!)
All loops were entered into logic via midi controller keyboard. Certain key loops were then modified in midi editors (matrix or hyper) in order to make them more interesting. For example, the main hook loop (‘Rain Hook Main’) was the result of its parent loop (‘Rain Hook Intro’) having extra notes drawn in via pencil tool in the matrix editor.
I used Logic’s instruments’ presets almost exclusively. I attempted to add my own flavour via layering (in particular of pad sounds) and application of effects to most channels.
I initially worked on compiling a collection of suitable loops to draw from. Once I felt I had enough material, I deleted loops that I wasn’t going to use and started working on an arrangement of the chosen loops. (Previous iterations of my song can be found in a folder called ‘Initial’. These iterations will illustrate this process)
I applied some of Logic’s mastering plug-ins on the main outputs of the track for a very basic exercise in loudness maximising.
Ken Mosman
5 Minutes, 39 Seconds
As outlined in my proposal, it was my goal to create a trance track with an ‘anthemic’ feel. While the piece stays well within the ‘trance’ genre, it has finished up as more of a ‘chilled out’ uplifting track, than an upbeat anthem. I am comfortable with this as the outcome, as once I was well into the composition process, it was clear that the loops I had constructed were more suited to this ‘laid back’ presentation.
In generic trance style, the track begins with a beat and gradually adds elements as it journeys towards the predictable breakdown, climax and conclusion. I very deliberately followed this style as I wanted to compose an original piece, but did not want to labour unduly over structure, arrangement, etc. (The bulk of time spent still seems to have been around the compositional aspects though!)
All loops were entered into logic via midi controller keyboard. Certain key loops were then modified in midi editors (matrix or hyper) in order to make them more interesting. For example, the main hook loop (‘Rain Hook Main’) was the result of its parent loop (‘Rain Hook Intro’) having extra notes drawn in via pencil tool in the matrix editor.
I used Logic’s instruments’ presets almost exclusively. I attempted to add my own flavour via layering (in particular of pad sounds) and application of effects to most channels.
I initially worked on compiling a collection of suitable loops to draw from. Once I felt I had enough material, I deleted loops that I wasn’t going to use and started working on an arrangement of the chosen loops. (Previous iterations of my song can be found in a folder called ‘Initial’. These iterations will illustrate this process)
I applied some of Logic’s mastering plug-ins on the main outputs of the track for a very basic exercise in loudness maximising.
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
Mix Project presentation: What You Are - Ken's Well Hardcore Mix
Remix week part 2
I was very happy to find that all of the other students had approached the mix assignment with the same ‘remix’ mentality that I did.
I was very impressed with what was presented. It struck me that each of us were unconsciously (or perhaps very consciously..) exerting an influence on the material in the direction of our personal musical preferences.
This was certainly well within the spirit of the remix (see my project notes and references for more detailed comments on this!)
So essentially, we all presented real world samples, remixed and reshaped in our own image!
My Analysis, References and Mix notes are as follows:
MTF Real World Mix Project: Analysis of Recording session
PREAMBLE
I am deliberately limiting my analysis to the loops provided in the real world remix folder. (Refer to my production notes for elaboration on this – and appropriate reference!)
BAND: Joi (Without Zero Album)
SONG: What You Are
DURATION: Unknown
GENRE/STYLE: World/Dance
GENERAL ANALYSIS
It is clear that most or all of the loops have already had some processing applied.
Vocal loops have some background noise, which is only evident when the vocals are happening – so have evidently been through some sort of noise gate to cut down on the bleed or background noise that is clearly there.
The noise level is such that it shouldn’t be audible in the context of a mix, but likely precludes most of the vocal recordings being used in isolation.
Vocals also sound like they’ve gone through some sort of reverb treatment (may also be just the natural ambience of the room…)
Percussion Loops
Percussion seems to come from a Roland TR909 (or something very similar to this).
Very standard dance type percussion loops – which I interpret as an invitation to mix this track in a dance style!!
Also present are Tabla loop and other ‘world’ instruments.
Instrumentation is a combination of traditional Western (eg Rhodes, synth pad, 909 drums) and World (Ouda, Tabla) sources.
This diversity is also evident in the vocal loops. There are very Western-pop loops alongside more traditional eastern vocals.
Conclusion
For me, many of the melodic elements stand out, and make this the most obvious choice for me to mix/remix. There are enough hooks in this that I really enjoy hearing to make me feel like I want to work on these loops.
I noticed on the Real World website that the artist sites 80’s pop legend Chaka Kahn as a major influence.
This, combined with the obvious dance-hybrid feel of the loops leads me to conclude that a fairly upbeat, commercial dance inspired sound would likely be an appropriate direction to go in for my remix of the material.
Reference list.
Hill, Dave ‘Making Music With Ableton Live’ 2003, PC Publishing, Kent, UK;
Owsinski, Bobby ‘The Mixing Engineer’s Handbook’ 1999, Mix Books, Vallejo, CA;
Prochak, Tim ‘How to Remix’ 2001, MPG Books, London, UK;
Snoman, Rick ‘The Dance Music Manual’ 2004, Focal Press, MA, USA;
White, Paul ‘Recording and Production Techniques’ 2002, MPG Books, London, UK;
MTF Production Notes
My aim was to approach this project as a remix, rather than as a ‘mix’, as it was my desire to have an almost self indulgent level of creative input throughout the process. I read some books on remixing and some more general material on production as my research component.
I chose some loops from the project I selected (‘What You Are’). I chose loops to work with that I found musically interesting, as this is seen to be a good way of ensuring the most musically fruitful results (Prochak, 2001).
I chose to avoid listening to the original song in order to approach the loops I’m working on with ‘fresh ears’. This is considered one of many possible approaches to the remixing process (Prochak; Snoman, 2004).
I used Ableton Live software as my tool for auditioning the loops, and as a sketchpad for my final arrangement (Hill, 2003).
My goal was to find several segments for a final mix: I was looking for a few parts which went well together. It was my goal to not have too many parts playing at once, as this is seen to be a prudent way to mix/arrange (Owsinski, 1999).
I also used Live as my base of operations for time stretching and special effects. I chose this way of working because Live’s time-stretching engine works simply and seamlessly (Hill), and some of the effects plug-ins I wanted to use are not available in RTAS format.
I dragged loops into Live and auditioned them – by themselves, with other loops, and with and without effects. From here I chose which loops I was going to focus on, and then made a ‘sketch’ of an arrangement in Live’s Session view. Live is rather uniquely suited to making the process of remixing very simple (Hill; Snoman).
I determined that the 110 BPM pace was a little too pedestrian for my goals for this mix, so I upped the tempo within Live to 124 BPM. This sounded about right, and didn’t leave obvious artefacts in any of the loops.
I then used Live to bounce the loops as new audio files in order to save the loops in their time-stretched and effected state.
From here I moved all the loops into ProTools and used this as my final arrangement/mixing environment.
I bounced a version of my ProTools final mix with a compressor/limiter applied to the Master Channel in order to finalise my mix (White, 2002).
And My screenshots.... Well it kept telling me that there were errors as I was uploading them. Sadly, it is too near the deadline to do anything more about it... But they did look great!!
I was very happy to find that all of the other students had approached the mix assignment with the same ‘remix’ mentality that I did.
I was very impressed with what was presented. It struck me that each of us were unconsciously (or perhaps very consciously..) exerting an influence on the material in the direction of our personal musical preferences.
This was certainly well within the spirit of the remix (see my project notes and references for more detailed comments on this!)
So essentially, we all presented real world samples, remixed and reshaped in our own image!
My Analysis, References and Mix notes are as follows:
MTF Real World Mix Project: Analysis of Recording session
PREAMBLE
I am deliberately limiting my analysis to the loops provided in the real world remix folder. (Refer to my production notes for elaboration on this – and appropriate reference!)
BAND: Joi (Without Zero Album)
SONG: What You Are
DURATION: Unknown
GENRE/STYLE: World/Dance
GENERAL ANALYSIS
It is clear that most or all of the loops have already had some processing applied.
Vocal loops have some background noise, which is only evident when the vocals are happening – so have evidently been through some sort of noise gate to cut down on the bleed or background noise that is clearly there.
The noise level is such that it shouldn’t be audible in the context of a mix, but likely precludes most of the vocal recordings being used in isolation.
Vocals also sound like they’ve gone through some sort of reverb treatment (may also be just the natural ambience of the room…)
Percussion Loops
Percussion seems to come from a Roland TR909 (or something very similar to this).
Very standard dance type percussion loops – which I interpret as an invitation to mix this track in a dance style!!
Also present are Tabla loop and other ‘world’ instruments.
Instrumentation is a combination of traditional Western (eg Rhodes, synth pad, 909 drums) and World (Ouda, Tabla) sources.
This diversity is also evident in the vocal loops. There are very Western-pop loops alongside more traditional eastern vocals.
Conclusion
For me, many of the melodic elements stand out, and make this the most obvious choice for me to mix/remix. There are enough hooks in this that I really enjoy hearing to make me feel like I want to work on these loops.
I noticed on the Real World website that the artist sites 80’s pop legend Chaka Kahn as a major influence.
This, combined with the obvious dance-hybrid feel of the loops leads me to conclude that a fairly upbeat, commercial dance inspired sound would likely be an appropriate direction to go in for my remix of the material.
Reference list.
Hill, Dave ‘Making Music With Ableton Live’ 2003, PC Publishing, Kent, UK;
Owsinski, Bobby ‘The Mixing Engineer’s Handbook’ 1999, Mix Books, Vallejo, CA;
Prochak, Tim ‘How to Remix’ 2001, MPG Books, London, UK;
Snoman, Rick ‘The Dance Music Manual’ 2004, Focal Press, MA, USA;
White, Paul ‘Recording and Production Techniques’ 2002, MPG Books, London, UK;
MTF Production Notes
My aim was to approach this project as a remix, rather than as a ‘mix’, as it was my desire to have an almost self indulgent level of creative input throughout the process. I read some books on remixing and some more general material on production as my research component.
I chose some loops from the project I selected (‘What You Are’). I chose loops to work with that I found musically interesting, as this is seen to be a good way of ensuring the most musically fruitful results (Prochak, 2001).
I chose to avoid listening to the original song in order to approach the loops I’m working on with ‘fresh ears’. This is considered one of many possible approaches to the remixing process (Prochak; Snoman, 2004).
I used Ableton Live software as my tool for auditioning the loops, and as a sketchpad for my final arrangement (Hill, 2003).
My goal was to find several segments for a final mix: I was looking for a few parts which went well together. It was my goal to not have too many parts playing at once, as this is seen to be a prudent way to mix/arrange (Owsinski, 1999).
I also used Live as my base of operations for time stretching and special effects. I chose this way of working because Live’s time-stretching engine works simply and seamlessly (Hill), and some of the effects plug-ins I wanted to use are not available in RTAS format.
I dragged loops into Live and auditioned them – by themselves, with other loops, and with and without effects. From here I chose which loops I was going to focus on, and then made a ‘sketch’ of an arrangement in Live’s Session view. Live is rather uniquely suited to making the process of remixing very simple (Hill; Snoman).
I determined that the 110 BPM pace was a little too pedestrian for my goals for this mix, so I upped the tempo within Live to 124 BPM. This sounded about right, and didn’t leave obvious artefacts in any of the loops.
I then used Live to bounce the loops as new audio files in order to save the loops in their time-stretched and effected state.
From here I moved all the loops into ProTools and used this as my final arrangement/mixing environment.
I bounced a version of my ProTools final mix with a compressor/limiter applied to the Master Channel in order to finalise my mix (White, 2002).
And My screenshots.... Well it kept telling me that there were errors as I was uploading them. Sadly, it is too near the deadline to do anything more about it... But they did look great!!
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Real World Presentations. 24/5/07
Sadly, work commitments robbed me of the chance to be present for the first day of mix presentations. Needless to say, I’ll be there next week with great enthusiasm! I have come up with a couple of Questions for Steve
Mostly regarding referencing… these have occurred to me in the process of preparing my mix project, and many of them have been prompted by various statements that Steve’s made throughout the semester. So hope you can help Steve!!
The more I think about reference tracks, the more questions I have!
Can you give us a list of some of the finest examples of reference tracks? (Including some genre specific ones)
And/or… can we assume that any song released by a major label can be presumed to be well mixed and of a high fidelity (and therefore suitable for use as a reference)?
I’m guessing that there must be certain songs that are universally regarded as great examples of fidelity… so what might they be?
When we’re engaged in referencing, should we focus our attention on material that has been released in the last 5 years?
Do the ‘loudness wars’ mean that older material is less useful for referencing, or is it still very applicable?
Does the current loudness phenomenon only effect songs at the mastering stage? It this is the case, I would presume that we can still use older material to reference the mix, but not the master.
Clipping.
Steve, you’ve shown us that recent commercial releases tend to have been maximised to the point of clipping – and have shown us the audio files in ProTools sessions to illustrate this. I am wondering:
• Is this kind of clipping achieved on the entire mix, or does it tend to be done only on certain tracks within the mix?
• Is it achieved by just upping the volume beyond 0dB digitally, or is it solely achieved via use of limiters? (I’m presuming it must be via limiters, but would like to know for sure!)
MP3’s for referencing.
Yes, yes I know that this is a first order audio faux par… but I’m still curious. Is it possible to use compressed files as references? Surely the levels of the relative frequencies will still be a reasonably accurate guide to how the track was mixed!?
Sadly, work commitments robbed me of the chance to be present for the first day of mix presentations. Needless to say, I’ll be there next week with great enthusiasm! I have come up with a couple of Questions for Steve
Mostly regarding referencing… these have occurred to me in the process of preparing my mix project, and many of them have been prompted by various statements that Steve’s made throughout the semester. So hope you can help Steve!!
The more I think about reference tracks, the more questions I have!
Can you give us a list of some of the finest examples of reference tracks? (Including some genre specific ones)
And/or… can we assume that any song released by a major label can be presumed to be well mixed and of a high fidelity (and therefore suitable for use as a reference)?
I’m guessing that there must be certain songs that are universally regarded as great examples of fidelity… so what might they be?
When we’re engaged in referencing, should we focus our attention on material that has been released in the last 5 years?
Do the ‘loudness wars’ mean that older material is less useful for referencing, or is it still very applicable?
Does the current loudness phenomenon only effect songs at the mastering stage? It this is the case, I would presume that we can still use older material to reference the mix, but not the master.
Clipping.
Steve, you’ve shown us that recent commercial releases tend to have been maximised to the point of clipping – and have shown us the audio files in ProTools sessions to illustrate this. I am wondering:
• Is this kind of clipping achieved on the entire mix, or does it tend to be done only on certain tracks within the mix?
• Is it achieved by just upping the volume beyond 0dB digitally, or is it solely achieved via use of limiters? (I’m presuming it must be via limiters, but would like to know for sure!)
MP3’s for referencing.
Yes, yes I know that this is a first order audio faux par… but I’m still curious. Is it possible to use compressed files as references? Surely the levels of the relative frequencies will still be a reasonably accurate guide to how the track was mixed!?
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
17/5/07
Grunge, Indie, Punk Production.
Today’s seminar has presented me with some discussion points that I am extremely passionate about.
I have a great admiration for music that might be considered genuinely ‘punk’ or punk-inspired. (Key word: genuinely… but more on this later!)
The most significant moments for me today were where Steve talked about the musical integrity of this genre, and how it pertains to appropriate production techniques.
I have long been an admirer of the underground, thrash sound of certain punk and post punk music. I don’t actually enjoy listening to too much of it (it’s not melodic enough for my simplistic aural tastes), but I love the passion, the ideals and the relative integrity that the serious artists in this genre seem to exude. It has always presented itself to me as the musical ‘moral high ground’.
Steve stated that in the purest examples of this kind of music, the musicianship comes second to the artistic integrity and the purity of performance. And obviously, if we were producing this music well, we would need to take this into consideration.
Steve also talked about the phenomenon of ‘copycat’ grunge/indie/punk. And for me, this is where it gets really interesting. In a movement defined by originality and integrity, being too blatant a ‘copycat’ is an extreme faux par. But…. Where do we draw the line in the sand between legitimate influence and rip-off?? (As someone famous once said, amateurs borrow, but great artists steal!)
Well, I’m going to risk it with a generalisation here. Anyone who refers to themselves as ‘punk’ is quite likely to be a ‘copycat’. Why? Because people with true punk sensibilities never label themselves as such: it is a title bestowed upon them by others..
One of the most powerful music experiences of my life was seeing Fugazi live in 1990. I didn’t know who they were, but went with some friends of mine that assured me that they were the ‘real deal’. These guys were the embodiment of artistic integrity. They didn’t have a ‘look’; they wore very plain, uninteresting clothes. And their performance was absolutely exhilarating. I was spellbound! Their performance far surpassed anything they had recorded, and really introduced me to this world of post-punk high integrity music.
So, in conclusion: KEEP IT REAL!!
Grunge, Indie, Punk Production.
Today’s seminar has presented me with some discussion points that I am extremely passionate about.
I have a great admiration for music that might be considered genuinely ‘punk’ or punk-inspired. (Key word: genuinely… but more on this later!)
The most significant moments for me today were where Steve talked about the musical integrity of this genre, and how it pertains to appropriate production techniques.
I have long been an admirer of the underground, thrash sound of certain punk and post punk music. I don’t actually enjoy listening to too much of it (it’s not melodic enough for my simplistic aural tastes), but I love the passion, the ideals and the relative integrity that the serious artists in this genre seem to exude. It has always presented itself to me as the musical ‘moral high ground’.
Steve stated that in the purest examples of this kind of music, the musicianship comes second to the artistic integrity and the purity of performance. And obviously, if we were producing this music well, we would need to take this into consideration.
Steve also talked about the phenomenon of ‘copycat’ grunge/indie/punk. And for me, this is where it gets really interesting. In a movement defined by originality and integrity, being too blatant a ‘copycat’ is an extreme faux par. But…. Where do we draw the line in the sand between legitimate influence and rip-off?? (As someone famous once said, amateurs borrow, but great artists steal!)
Well, I’m going to risk it with a generalisation here. Anyone who refers to themselves as ‘punk’ is quite likely to be a ‘copycat’. Why? Because people with true punk sensibilities never label themselves as such: it is a title bestowed upon them by others..
One of the most powerful music experiences of my life was seeing Fugazi live in 1990. I didn’t know who they were, but went with some friends of mine that assured me that they were the ‘real deal’. These guys were the embodiment of artistic integrity. They didn’t have a ‘look’; they wore very plain, uninteresting clothes. And their performance was absolutely exhilarating. I was spellbound! Their performance far surpassed anything they had recorded, and really introduced me to this world of post-punk high integrity music.
So, in conclusion: KEEP IT REAL!!
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
10/5/07
Genre Based production styles.
Today was an overview of several production ‘traditions’ for different styles of music. Steve’s proposition was that versatility as a producer is something to strive for: that the ability to function in different styles of music will help us to become a better overall producer. (It will also allow doors to open for us that might otherwise be closed.) Thus it is important to be aware of the different approaches to recording and production that are most commonly used in different genres.
I must admit to being in two minds on this one! I certainly agree with Steve’s points. Balance is often so important to being good at something. To be a good tennis player, one needs to have a game that is competent on many fronts.
But, on the other hand… My Mum used to say: if you’re a jack of all trades, you’ll be a master of none! I think it might be possible to try so hard to spread one’s self around that one becomes mediocre in a range of different production techniques. This might be especially relevant to the trainee producer.
Specialisation is also an important part of becoming really great at something. How many great guitar players can play other instruments to the same level as they can play their guitars? It seems to me that specialisation is at least as significant as balance. There comes a time when we must draw a line in the sand and decide what we want to really excel at. So in the light of this, I can see a potential drawback to trying to be supremely balanced: I may end up being supremely mediocre.
Genre Based production styles.
Today was an overview of several production ‘traditions’ for different styles of music. Steve’s proposition was that versatility as a producer is something to strive for: that the ability to function in different styles of music will help us to become a better overall producer. (It will also allow doors to open for us that might otherwise be closed.) Thus it is important to be aware of the different approaches to recording and production that are most commonly used in different genres.
I must admit to being in two minds on this one! I certainly agree with Steve’s points. Balance is often so important to being good at something. To be a good tennis player, one needs to have a game that is competent on many fronts.
But, on the other hand… My Mum used to say: if you’re a jack of all trades, you’ll be a master of none! I think it might be possible to try so hard to spread one’s self around that one becomes mediocre in a range of different production techniques. This might be especially relevant to the trainee producer.
Specialisation is also an important part of becoming really great at something. How many great guitar players can play other instruments to the same level as they can play their guitars? It seems to me that specialisation is at least as significant as balance. There comes a time when we must draw a line in the sand and decide what we want to really excel at. So in the light of this, I can see a potential drawback to trying to be supremely balanced: I may end up being supremely mediocre.
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
Last of the presentations
3/5/07
Even more presentations.
Producer’s covered: Steven Wilson; Trent Reznor; Phil Spectre; Groove Terminator…..
An interesting blend, to be sure!!
The things that struck me this week include:
Some of the equipment used by the Producers ‘at home’ was mentioned: Steven Wilson apparently has a home studio based around Logic 6.4 and a Mac G4. (He also has Digidesign TDM plug-ins and Apogee A/D D/A converters).
I was very inspired to hear that he’s still running a G4 and logic 6; but of course he has spent the big bucks on the high quality converters and the finest plug-ins. So there is a huge statement in all of this: yes it’s possible to do it all at home on your less than state of the art computer, but don’t cut corners on the audio fidelity!
This all seems to reinforce the point that the most exciting things in this audio game are often not the big bells and whistles items. As much as something inside me wants to go out and get the new 8 core Mac Pro (..because it’s there, why else??), I am learning to ignore these primal urges and strive instead for the fidelity.
Trent Reznor’s unique style was discussed.
Lisa made the point that he tends to be something of a niche producer – having such a distinct sound that people tend to come to him in order to get some of this sound in their material. This is an interesting point. His signature sound is obviously in demand, or else there would be no work out there for him. His sound tends to be aggressive, industrialised pop. And I would venture to say that he is good at achieving the balance that Steve commented on. His work does not tend to be so abrasive as to be overly painful. Rather, there is a balance of the hard with the soft and melodic: Abrasion is so much more effective when framed within something that contrasts it. (Like everything else I suppose…)
Even more presentations.
Producer’s covered: Steven Wilson; Trent Reznor; Phil Spectre; Groove Terminator…..
An interesting blend, to be sure!!
The things that struck me this week include:
Some of the equipment used by the Producers ‘at home’ was mentioned: Steven Wilson apparently has a home studio based around Logic 6.4 and a Mac G4. (He also has Digidesign TDM plug-ins and Apogee A/D D/A converters).
I was very inspired to hear that he’s still running a G4 and logic 6; but of course he has spent the big bucks on the high quality converters and the finest plug-ins. So there is a huge statement in all of this: yes it’s possible to do it all at home on your less than state of the art computer, but don’t cut corners on the audio fidelity!
This all seems to reinforce the point that the most exciting things in this audio game are often not the big bells and whistles items. As much as something inside me wants to go out and get the new 8 core Mac Pro (..because it’s there, why else??), I am learning to ignore these primal urges and strive instead for the fidelity.
Trent Reznor’s unique style was discussed.
Lisa made the point that he tends to be something of a niche producer – having such a distinct sound that people tend to come to him in order to get some of this sound in their material. This is an interesting point. His signature sound is obviously in demand, or else there would be no work out there for him. His sound tends to be aggressive, industrialised pop. And I would venture to say that he is good at achieving the balance that Steve commented on. His work does not tend to be so abrasive as to be overly painful. Rather, there is a balance of the hard with the soft and melodic: Abrasion is so much more effective when framed within something that contrasts it. (Like everything else I suppose…)
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
26/4/2007
A day of presentations.
A reoccurring them in today’s presentations was ANALOGUE AND DIGITAL.
Ross Robinson (the subject of one presentation) was quoted as saying that he felt that digital audio was just a phase or trend – and would die out soon.
Steve Fieldhouse stated that the prevailing wisdom of the 21st Century seems to be that a mixture of analogue and digital processing is ideal. To me, this sounds about right.
We were told that Kevin Shirley and Dave Freedman (the subjects of other presentations) both opt for a combination of analogue and digital processing in their productions.
Balance is truly one of the keys to life. So it is with great confidence that I add my amateur opinion to the throng of pop wisdom and say: Yes! We can live in a world where analogue and digital are friends…
I have certainly heard the dogma that the ‘analogue extremists’ put out there: that digital audio is cold and analogue is the only way for real quality. But this kind of extremism (in any area of life – not just audio) always seems to be too simple a description of reality. Life is always about striving for this balance between opposing positions, rather than taking one side to the exclusion of the other.
For the record: I am as pro-analogue as my budget allows. (Which means: I own some great analogue modelling software…)
Another noteworthy thing from today’s presentations was a point made by Stuart J: that one of the defining characteristics of Dave Freedman’s production style is his track intros. Stuart played several audio examples from Ammonium and a remix of a Jane’s Addiction track: all produced by Freedman, and all with very interesting intros. They struck me as being perfect examples of what intros should be: a tantalising invitation to stay for the song. (As opposed to ‘filler’ before the vocals..)
A day of presentations.
A reoccurring them in today’s presentations was ANALOGUE AND DIGITAL.
Ross Robinson (the subject of one presentation) was quoted as saying that he felt that digital audio was just a phase or trend – and would die out soon.
Steve Fieldhouse stated that the prevailing wisdom of the 21st Century seems to be that a mixture of analogue and digital processing is ideal. To me, this sounds about right.
We were told that Kevin Shirley and Dave Freedman (the subjects of other presentations) both opt for a combination of analogue and digital processing in their productions.
Balance is truly one of the keys to life. So it is with great confidence that I add my amateur opinion to the throng of pop wisdom and say: Yes! We can live in a world where analogue and digital are friends…
I have certainly heard the dogma that the ‘analogue extremists’ put out there: that digital audio is cold and analogue is the only way for real quality. But this kind of extremism (in any area of life – not just audio) always seems to be too simple a description of reality. Life is always about striving for this balance between opposing positions, rather than taking one side to the exclusion of the other.
For the record: I am as pro-analogue as my budget allows. (Which means: I own some great analogue modelling software…)
Another noteworthy thing from today’s presentations was a point made by Stuart J: that one of the defining characteristics of Dave Freedman’s production style is his track intros. Stuart played several audio examples from Ammonium and a remix of a Jane’s Addiction track: all produced by Freedman, and all with very interesting intros. They struck me as being perfect examples of what intros should be: a tantalising invitation to stay for the song. (As opposed to ‘filler’ before the vocals..)
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
5/4/07 MTF
4/5/07
I’m really enjoying the presentations – but I will talk more on them next time!
This week, I’d like to ask a question that came to me fairly early on in the MTF sessions. I have been meaning to ask it of Steve – and this now seems the most appropriate forum for it.
Q: Now that we can do anything we want in the studio (thanks to the progress of technology), what is it that constitutes being creative these days??
Steve touched on this in our first or second session – and he played us some really creative tracks that creatively use ‘the studio’ from the 1970s or so. It really struck me (and I think this was Steve’s point…) that these productions ‘back in the day’ were more interesting and cutting edge than a lot of what passes for creativity and experimentation today. Have we become less creative, now that our creative boundaries have been pushed so far by developing technology?
Other versions of this question might be: is technology a creative friend or enemy?
If we need to be pushing against the boundaries to be really creative, then it seems to me that it might be more difficult to be creative today. Why? Well, the boundaries are just further away, and therefore harder to reach.
Do we even know what the boundaries are? Or has technology made the boundaries of creative production techniques so distant from us that we are never likely to approach them, let alone ‘push them’.
I utterly love technology (said in sniveling little music-tech-geek voice…). I love Autotune. But when I come to mix a track these days, I am presented with such a vast array of possible choices about how to mix, what effects to run, (etc) that it now feels like a kind of paralysis can set in. We might call this pathology: creative freedom induced panic paralysis syndrome. (Otherwise known as inexperience….)
And maybe technology will be our saviour here. Perhaps we need to find some cutting edge software and get right into it: find out where its boundaries are and then: push like we’ve never pushed before!! If I am disciplined enough to restrict myself to the use of just one plug-in and really force myself to use it for things it wasn’t designed to, I might be creating an artificial barrier that I will then have to push against.
I’m really enjoying the presentations – but I will talk more on them next time!
This week, I’d like to ask a question that came to me fairly early on in the MTF sessions. I have been meaning to ask it of Steve – and this now seems the most appropriate forum for it.
Q: Now that we can do anything we want in the studio (thanks to the progress of technology), what is it that constitutes being creative these days??
Steve touched on this in our first or second session – and he played us some really creative tracks that creatively use ‘the studio’ from the 1970s or so. It really struck me (and I think this was Steve’s point…) that these productions ‘back in the day’ were more interesting and cutting edge than a lot of what passes for creativity and experimentation today. Have we become less creative, now that our creative boundaries have been pushed so far by developing technology?
Other versions of this question might be: is technology a creative friend or enemy?
If we need to be pushing against the boundaries to be really creative, then it seems to me that it might be more difficult to be creative today. Why? Well, the boundaries are just further away, and therefore harder to reach.
Do we even know what the boundaries are? Or has technology made the boundaries of creative production techniques so distant from us that we are never likely to approach them, let alone ‘push them’.
I utterly love technology (said in sniveling little music-tech-geek voice…). I love Autotune. But when I come to mix a track these days, I am presented with such a vast array of possible choices about how to mix, what effects to run, (etc) that it now feels like a kind of paralysis can set in. We might call this pathology: creative freedom induced panic paralysis syndrome. (Otherwise known as inexperience….)
And maybe technology will be our saviour here. Perhaps we need to find some cutting edge software and get right into it: find out where its boundaries are and then: push like we’ve never pushed before!! If I am disciplined enough to restrict myself to the use of just one plug-in and really force myself to use it for things it wasn’t designed to, I might be creating an artificial barrier that I will then have to push against.
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
MTF presentation - write up: Stock Aitken and Waterman
Stock Aitken and Waterman
Disclaimer: I haven’t chosen these guys because they’re people I like. I’ve chosen them because they represent something that is very interesting to me. I am fascinated by the role of the producer. And in my view, SAW took this role to an extreme. Their production style could easily be called ‘overproduction’ (in fact it’s been called much worse!!).
SAW are worth looking at, in my opinion, because they caricature the producer role. And sometimes when we look at caricatures we see things that we wouldn’t notice in real life.
The SAW sound.
It is the sound of success. Sound on Sound stated (1994) that Mike Stock had ‘worked on over 100 top 40 records, making him the most successful producer of all time.’
This is indeed a shed-load of commercial credibility, and demands to be taken notice of.
SAW were influential enough to have shaped the pop sound-scape of he 80’s. But I think that calling them 80’s synth pop would be an oversimplification. They combined genuine underground club grooves with the classic commercial pop (read: squeaky clean) themes. (Wikipedia, 2007)
I remember (as if it were only yesterday) that in 1986/1987 the underground dance radio shows on air in Adelaide (Club FM, Eurobeat, Soul Spectrum for anyone who remembers or cares..) would play quite a bit of SAW material alongside more serious club tracks. SAW, it seems played a role in bringing the club sound into the mainstream.
A summary of the SAW musical style:
• Very electronic/synthetic in terms of sounds used – and early work was easily mistaken for serious club/dance music
• Worked predominantly with female vocalists
• Wrote many of the songs that they produced
• They were prolific: produced a great volume of material, but it all had a very familiar ring to it. In fact, their style was pretty easily spotted by the shrewd 80’s music punter.
How they worked
Broadly speaking, SAW had 2 different approaches to their work. They would either work with artists that were already established and transform their sounds in the SAW direction. Or, they would work with new, emerging artists and (again) transform their sound into the SAW direction.
An example of their first approach is their work with Bananarama. The SAW transformation here is very significant. Pre-SAW, Bananarama were a somewhat average female pop group. (In fact I am still haunted by the very average vocal performance on the track ‘Don’t it make you feel good’ released in their earlier years).
Bananarama’s first release with SAW was ‘Venus’. This was a landmark track for their career. It redefined the image of Bananarama as slick pop with a real club influence.
This is a significant part of the SAW working method: they had influence on the image and presentation of the artists they worked with.
And so Bananarama went on to become a very popular, slick and well produced part of the pop music scene through to the early 90’s.
SAW also were very good at sourcing new talent and finding them a place in the charts.
They seemed to excel at taking artists who already had a profile (eg soap stars) and teaching them how to sing the SAW way.
Kylie Minogue is their most accomplished project. She was recruited right off the set of Neighbours and enjoyed phenomenal chart success immediately, thanks to the superb branding and packaging of SAW. They also worked with Jason Donovan.
By combining the elements of
• Song writing
• Slick production, based on club grooves
• Careful talent selection (i.e. worked with very marketable artists)
• Image production and manipulation
SAW were able to produce musical packages which the marketplace found irresistible.
Stock Aitken and Waterman seemed to have a great sense of how to put together an appealing package of music for the mainstream commercial market. The evidence of this is the consistent success of their work.
It could certainly be suggested that their work was less about the music, and more about the production of a marketable commodity. I believe that this is likely true, but we cannot underestimate the power of music in this equation.
SAW often worked with artists who already had a profile – so there was already a sector of their market with posters of Kylie and Jason on their bedroom wall. Having Kylie and Jason sing as well was a natural and powerful extension of this desire, on the part of young teens all over the world to ‘swoon’ over their favourite stars.
This brings me to what I feel is the greatest strength of the SAW production. They unashamedly produced material which was EXACTLY on the level that the audience (or consumers) wanted. SAW were able to truly engage with their audience. Their music was not overly complicated (infuriatingly so!), and it existed alongside an attractive artist profile. This made for tasty consumable morsels of music that the record buying public (mostly teens) gorged themselves on.
Conclusion
Most of us don’t want to make music in a vacuum. I have a strong desire to produce cool music, but in particular, I want to produce cool music that engages meaningfully with some audience. Thus, I find it interesting and challenging to look at how well SAW were able to produce music which so readily engaged with an audience.
I find that my passion for music means that I view music differently from ‘normal people’. If this drives me to produce something so esoteric that only music-techno-geeks really ‘get it’ I reckon I will have fallen short of what I set out to do.
References
Sound on Sound, August 1994; Relative Media (Article entitled: Production Lines: Mike Stock)
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_Aitken_Waterman; viewed on 4.4.07
Disclaimer: I haven’t chosen these guys because they’re people I like. I’ve chosen them because they represent something that is very interesting to me. I am fascinated by the role of the producer. And in my view, SAW took this role to an extreme. Their production style could easily be called ‘overproduction’ (in fact it’s been called much worse!!).
SAW are worth looking at, in my opinion, because they caricature the producer role. And sometimes when we look at caricatures we see things that we wouldn’t notice in real life.
The SAW sound.
It is the sound of success. Sound on Sound stated (1994) that Mike Stock had ‘worked on over 100 top 40 records, making him the most successful producer of all time.’
This is indeed a shed-load of commercial credibility, and demands to be taken notice of.
SAW were influential enough to have shaped the pop sound-scape of he 80’s. But I think that calling them 80’s synth pop would be an oversimplification. They combined genuine underground club grooves with the classic commercial pop (read: squeaky clean) themes. (Wikipedia, 2007)
I remember (as if it were only yesterday) that in 1986/1987 the underground dance radio shows on air in Adelaide (Club FM, Eurobeat, Soul Spectrum for anyone who remembers or cares..) would play quite a bit of SAW material alongside more serious club tracks. SAW, it seems played a role in bringing the club sound into the mainstream.
A summary of the SAW musical style:
• Very electronic/synthetic in terms of sounds used – and early work was easily mistaken for serious club/dance music
• Worked predominantly with female vocalists
• Wrote many of the songs that they produced
• They were prolific: produced a great volume of material, but it all had a very familiar ring to it. In fact, their style was pretty easily spotted by the shrewd 80’s music punter.
How they worked
Broadly speaking, SAW had 2 different approaches to their work. They would either work with artists that were already established and transform their sounds in the SAW direction. Or, they would work with new, emerging artists and (again) transform their sound into the SAW direction.
An example of their first approach is their work with Bananarama. The SAW transformation here is very significant. Pre-SAW, Bananarama were a somewhat average female pop group. (In fact I am still haunted by the very average vocal performance on the track ‘Don’t it make you feel good’ released in their earlier years).
Bananarama’s first release with SAW was ‘Venus’. This was a landmark track for their career. It redefined the image of Bananarama as slick pop with a real club influence.
This is a significant part of the SAW working method: they had influence on the image and presentation of the artists they worked with.
And so Bananarama went on to become a very popular, slick and well produced part of the pop music scene through to the early 90’s.
SAW also were very good at sourcing new talent and finding them a place in the charts.
They seemed to excel at taking artists who already had a profile (eg soap stars) and teaching them how to sing the SAW way.
Kylie Minogue is their most accomplished project. She was recruited right off the set of Neighbours and enjoyed phenomenal chart success immediately, thanks to the superb branding and packaging of SAW. They also worked with Jason Donovan.
By combining the elements of
• Song writing
• Slick production, based on club grooves
• Careful talent selection (i.e. worked with very marketable artists)
• Image production and manipulation
SAW were able to produce musical packages which the marketplace found irresistible.
Stock Aitken and Waterman seemed to have a great sense of how to put together an appealing package of music for the mainstream commercial market. The evidence of this is the consistent success of their work.
It could certainly be suggested that their work was less about the music, and more about the production of a marketable commodity. I believe that this is likely true, but we cannot underestimate the power of music in this equation.
SAW often worked with artists who already had a profile – so there was already a sector of their market with posters of Kylie and Jason on their bedroom wall. Having Kylie and Jason sing as well was a natural and powerful extension of this desire, on the part of young teens all over the world to ‘swoon’ over their favourite stars.
This brings me to what I feel is the greatest strength of the SAW production. They unashamedly produced material which was EXACTLY on the level that the audience (or consumers) wanted. SAW were able to truly engage with their audience. Their music was not overly complicated (infuriatingly so!), and it existed alongside an attractive artist profile. This made for tasty consumable morsels of music that the record buying public (mostly teens) gorged themselves on.
Conclusion
Most of us don’t want to make music in a vacuum. I have a strong desire to produce cool music, but in particular, I want to produce cool music that engages meaningfully with some audience. Thus, I find it interesting and challenging to look at how well SAW were able to produce music which so readily engaged with an audience.
I find that my passion for music means that I view music differently from ‘normal people’. If this drives me to produce something so esoteric that only music-techno-geeks really ‘get it’ I reckon I will have fallen short of what I set out to do.
References
Sound on Sound, August 1994; Relative Media (Article entitled: Production Lines: Mike Stock)
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_Aitken_Waterman; viewed on 4.4.07
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
22.3.07
More on Production: Fashion and hearing memory.
Dated versus timeless production.
What should we be aspiring to?? A timeless sound that won’t date or a sound that is more readily identifiable as being culturally ‘current’.
When Steve asked this of us last week, I felt that the most appropriate answer was to say: ‘I seek the timeless sound; I want my productions to still have some currency for future generations’. This approach feels like it’s taking the artistic high road – because it is an approach that says: I am not going to buy into the dominant cultural (read: pop) trends in music.
Now that I’ve had time to reflect, I have concluded that taking either road at the expense of the other seems a little self indulgent. All this ‘high road’ stuff can get pretty boring.
It seems to me that there is always going to be a bit of a trade off involved with these things: the more ‘current’ we choose to sound (ie: the more we buy into the cultural trends of this month) the less timeless our productions will sound.
But: if we go for 100% timelessness, we risk producing things that are musically irrelevant to our potential audience.
Where are my golden ears??
Steve says: the development of your hearing memory will take time. And he then described the things he sees in students, typically: that their hearing memory is underdeveloped, and they consequently spend too much time over-tweaking the sounds they record, not being certain of what things should sound like.
Well, at least I’m normal.
I recorded a female vocalist the other day – beautiful voice, and it really came out well. I ran it through a couple of plug-ins that really enriched her voice nicely. And then I spend 2 hours adding more bits and pieces (mostly playing with EQ and different reverb treatments). Did I make it sound any better? Not really. But I just couldn’t stop myself. It’s like I’ve got some sort of obsessive compulsive disorder. I’m so keen to make the vocals sound as good as they can that I’m always complicating the process more than I need to. All I can do is cling to those comforting words of Steve: my hearing memory really will develop over time.
Dated versus timeless production.
What should we be aspiring to?? A timeless sound that won’t date or a sound that is more readily identifiable as being culturally ‘current’.
When Steve asked this of us last week, I felt that the most appropriate answer was to say: ‘I seek the timeless sound; I want my productions to still have some currency for future generations’. This approach feels like it’s taking the artistic high road – because it is an approach that says: I am not going to buy into the dominant cultural (read: pop) trends in music.
Now that I’ve had time to reflect, I have concluded that taking either road at the expense of the other seems a little self indulgent. All this ‘high road’ stuff can get pretty boring.
It seems to me that there is always going to be a bit of a trade off involved with these things: the more ‘current’ we choose to sound (ie: the more we buy into the cultural trends of this month) the less timeless our productions will sound.
But: if we go for 100% timelessness, we risk producing things that are musically irrelevant to our potential audience.
Where are my golden ears??
Steve says: the development of your hearing memory will take time. And he then described the things he sees in students, typically: that their hearing memory is underdeveloped, and they consequently spend too much time over-tweaking the sounds they record, not being certain of what things should sound like.
Well, at least I’m normal.
I recorded a female vocalist the other day – beautiful voice, and it really came out well. I ran it through a couple of plug-ins that really enriched her voice nicely. And then I spend 2 hours adding more bits and pieces (mostly playing with EQ and different reverb treatments). Did I make it sound any better? Not really. But I just couldn’t stop myself. It’s like I’ve got some sort of obsessive compulsive disorder. I’m so keen to make the vocals sound as good as they can that I’m always complicating the process more than I need to. All I can do is cling to those comforting words of Steve: my hearing memory really will develop over time.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
15/3/07 Role of the Producer
MTF: 15.3.07
The role of the producer.
We looked at the sonic fingerprints of a few producers this week.
The role of the producer seems to be intriguing and profound.
The producer is both the facilitator for and partner with the artist in their creative expression.
The role seems to be one of deliberate impartation of something into the music. But it seems to be balanced by a deliberate effort at allowing the artist to draw the best out of themselves. Maybe I’m reading too much into it, but at the moment it feels like being a producer is a high calling indeed. Although I suppose it needn’t be…
During our seminar, I couldn’t help but think of the infamous 80s legends: Stock, Aitken and Waterman (a production team that were involved with artists like Rick Astley, Bananarama, early Kylie Minogue, and many more – a real rogues gallery!!). Something Steve said in a previous lecture was that he found it helpful to have extreme examples of certain things – because they help to illustrate a point. He said he likes to use songs that have too much bass, or too much brightness as part of his audio referencing (while mixing) – because this enables him to see where the boundaries need to be. In that same spirit, I just kept thinking about this production team as a great ‘extreme’ example of a production ethos that probably stamped too much of its fingerprints on the music they helped make.
These guys managed to turn the process of manufacturing pop idols into a science. They churned out ridiculous numbers of hits, and got buckets of radio and club play. All of the music that they had a hand in has very generic 80s synth-pop fingerprints all over it. It could accurately be described as overproduced and under-performed. That is, the production team seems to have had such a large creative input that the artists involved have had very little.
It’s been helpful for me to think about their ‘overproduction’ as it sheds light (albeit in an extreme sense) on the producer role.
The role of the producer.
We looked at the sonic fingerprints of a few producers this week.
The role of the producer seems to be intriguing and profound.
The producer is both the facilitator for and partner with the artist in their creative expression.
The role seems to be one of deliberate impartation of something into the music. But it seems to be balanced by a deliberate effort at allowing the artist to draw the best out of themselves. Maybe I’m reading too much into it, but at the moment it feels like being a producer is a high calling indeed. Although I suppose it needn’t be…
During our seminar, I couldn’t help but think of the infamous 80s legends: Stock, Aitken and Waterman (a production team that were involved with artists like Rick Astley, Bananarama, early Kylie Minogue, and many more – a real rogues gallery!!). Something Steve said in a previous lecture was that he found it helpful to have extreme examples of certain things – because they help to illustrate a point. He said he likes to use songs that have too much bass, or too much brightness as part of his audio referencing (while mixing) – because this enables him to see where the boundaries need to be. In that same spirit, I just kept thinking about this production team as a great ‘extreme’ example of a production ethos that probably stamped too much of its fingerprints on the music they helped make.
These guys managed to turn the process of manufacturing pop idols into a science. They churned out ridiculous numbers of hits, and got buckets of radio and club play. All of the music that they had a hand in has very generic 80s synth-pop fingerprints all over it. It could accurately be described as overproduced and under-performed. That is, the production team seems to have had such a large creative input that the artists involved have had very little.
It’s been helpful for me to think about their ‘overproduction’ as it sheds light (albeit in an extreme sense) on the producer role.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)