sgulley
Superstar
If you really like music and recording it then never stop trying to get better at it.
Posts: 2,994
|
Post by sgulley on Sept 17, 2007 15:23:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mcarp555 on Sept 18, 2007 20:14:39 GMT
Stan, it drives me nuts sometimes to hear these songs that are often so close to being decent, being brought down by just simple things. I know you put a lot of thought and care into your material, but often the execution is more like "Ah well, whatever, who cares". This latest number could be totally transformed by you doing three things:
1. Redo the drum track - I know drums are your bugaboo, but other than in the instrumental break, the drum part throughout is just annoying. It's all high-hat and quick snare rolls, but nothing else. Something tight and simple with good fills would completely alter the complexion of this song.
2. Bring the vocals up - I sound like a broken record saying this every time. I can't make out a word of what you're saying.
3. Fix the ending - another broken record comment. How much harder would it be to finish the verse, do eight or sixteen bars of solo, then use the exact same ending you've got? At the risk of being rude, I'll say that screeching to a halt in mid-verse like that just sounds lazy.
The body of the song is not bad; not the best thing ever, but not bad. It just needs a little care and attention to blossom properly. The sound of the bass is lovely. I could never get my bass to sound like that, sadly.
|
|
sgulley
Superstar
If you really like music and recording it then never stop trying to get better at it.
Posts: 2,994
|
Post by sgulley on Sept 18, 2007 23:01:16 GMT
Thanks Mike, This is a little heavier than my usual song. I need a good drum machine because I now taking tracks from other songs, and this particilar drum MIDI was pulled off the net. Maybe I can make some changes to it using Band In a Box; I'll at least give that a try. The vocals should be fairly easy to fix. The ending; yeah I knew that wouldn't fly with you.
Think I'll spend some extra time to get this in better shape before writing a new song. You are right about being lazy when it comes to really finishing these projects up.
Good points that I definitely need to consider. Stan
|
|
sgulley
Superstar
If you really like music and recording it then never stop trying to get better at it.
Posts: 2,994
|
Post by sgulley on Sept 22, 2007 19:44:51 GMT
Mike, I followed your suggestions and did another remix yesterday. I also posted the updates with a little higher sample rate @ www.hisholyspace.com/stangulleyThanks for your help, Stan
|
|
|
Post by mcarp555 on Sept 22, 2007 20:49:13 GMT
Much improved, I think. Vocals are nicely out front, the drums drive, but don't overwhelm the rest of the backing. The ending is better, altho it could still be improved upon (but probably not without some serious, serious editing). Overall, the mix could still stand a few little minor tweaks, but I think as it now stands it's a much stronger recording than before.
One day Stan, you'll have to burn me a CDR with all the tracks from one of your songs as separate .wav files. I'll run them into the 788 and try my hand at a remix. Might be an interesting experiment.
|
|
sgulley
Superstar
If you really like music and recording it then never stop trying to get better at it.
Posts: 2,994
|
Post by sgulley on Sept 23, 2007 2:53:09 GMT
Thanks Mike. Really appreciate your sincere support. I'm going to take you up on that offer as soon as I write a song that I like and it's not just a normal weekend exercise.
Really appreciate your mixing offer. Sounds like something that I can definitely benefit from. Getting a good solid drum track from the very start is essential on how everything turns out; all the way to inspiration for the guitars.
Stan
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Sept 23, 2007 4:40:06 GMT
Hi Stan,
Didn't have time to comment when I listened to the first mix, but I do this time. Very much better IMHO. Stange how, in addition to sounding better, a better mix makes a song seem like a better song ... to me at least.
Tom
|
|
|
Post by chrisr on Oct 2, 2007 18:34:24 GMT
Stan,
Indeed, your second mix is a lot better than the first.
Still, I think that sometimes, you over-complicate your recordings.
Before recording a new song, determine precisely which instruments will be needed (the least possible !) to create the harmony that you want ; determine precisely what those instruments will have to do (again, the least possible !) and how many tracks you will need (and again, the least possible !) to record the song. Keep it clean and simple.
Use acoustic guitar strumming, a precise bass and a simple drums or percussion part to lay the base line of your song ; use vocal harmony when and where needed, and use the electric guitar(s) ot other instruments to accentuate and complete the song, but only where needed.
Some of your songs are kind of Tom Petty like. Well, just listen to T. Petty and analyse how he constructs most of his work (i.e. Learning to Fly, A face in the Crowd, Free Fallin', You don't know how it feels, etc...). You'll see what I mean.
Spector may well have introduced the "wall of sound" idea, but most good music (and recording) is clean and simple (it sounds clean and simple, that is), only using the instruments and musical parts needed, and nothing more.
Most of your songs "have something", but some would "touch" much more if they had a simpler construction.
Working out a song a 100 % before recording it, is a lot of work and not much fun, but the end product is a lot better.
On the other hand, musical creativity is a very free and personal matter, so there is nothing wrong with doing it "one's own way" : we all appreciate your musical work, Stan.
Our opinion - that you ask for - is of course nothing more than....our opinion.
Chris
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Oct 8, 2007 2:47:02 GMT
I agree with some of what Chris said Stan -- I have said in the past I would like to hear less "layered guitars" and fewer simpler, more defined ones. However, I am never ever am able to work out all the parts of a song beforehand because I can not easily hear in my head how things sound together. To me, the beauty of multitracking is that one can develop a song over time. The MIDI backing and first track are a one shot thing, but the remaining tracks are layed in over time, with many hours spent just playing along with what's there, trying different things until one sounds just right and can be gotten through without error in an evening of takes. As a result I usually have 2 or 3 works in progress at any given tiime, some of which mature into songs, and some of which are archived to free up space on the card for new works in progress.
Tom
|
|
|
Post by chrisr on Oct 8, 2007 14:00:07 GMT
Now, working out a song 100 % before recording it is not a must, of course. It could be, and mostly is, a must for those who record in professional studio's (because of the cost of studio time), but since we are talking about ps5 home recording, one can let creativity take all the time it needs, and more.
However, even in home recording, and even if one has 24 or more tracks at one's disposal instead of 4, it is usually best to figure out beforehand how one is going to turn the virtual (the song in one's head) into the reality of the actual recording, and to use only what is needed for that (instruments, tracks, parts, etc...).
This does not exclude the occasional "we'll do something, and we'll see where it's going" approach (musical creativity is a bit of that too), but then afterwards, it is good to reduce the final mix to the essentials of the end-result song, and to dispose of any part, instrument or track not really needed (a bit difficult or even impossible sometimes in 4-track recording, when one has multilayered too much on each track : then one has to record the whole song over again, this time only using the necessary instruments/parts/tracks).
I do agree fully, Tom, where you say that the beauty of (home-)multitracking is that one can develop a song over time. That's why a (digital) pocket multitracker such as the PS5 is a very useful thing for any songwriter or music composer.
A very creative person, as Stan surely is, will create and record many many songs (and good one's too), but sometimes not take the time to really develop the songs and/or simplify the recording to just what is needed. I'm sure that some of Stan's recordings would benefit from being simplified (less layered guitars etc..., as Tom says).
Just my opinion, guys...
Chris
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Oct 8, 2007 17:18:51 GMT
Another thing I like about home recording is that there are no deadlines. I may dig the PS5 out of the drawer with the idea that I'm gonna get such and such song done tonight, but if I find myself not coming up with something that sounds right I don't linger at it longer than an hour. In a way, what I do with a PS5 is partly recording, but mostly the same thing band members might do collaborating on an original, trying out different parts until something clicks. Fortunately for me, there is no deadline to have it all worked out before going into a studio at however ever many dollars per hour.
Regards, Tom
|
|
sgulley
Superstar
If you really like music and recording it then never stop trying to get better at it.
Posts: 2,994
|
Post by sgulley on Oct 8, 2007 21:47:14 GMT
Chrisr & Tom, I really appreciate your extra time to post these suggestions. There is no doubt, for me anyway, that the more time spent the better the outcome. In fact, once a song is pretty much in your head then the vocal delivery comes out much smoother, natural, & explicit.
I also definitely agree that keeping it simple at the harmonic-specrum will expose your mixes better & cleaner, and opens up better instrumental pronounciation. But that doesn't mean that the same guitar track needs to ring out for the length of the entire song.
Having a better song structure requires preplanning which simplifies the final result, and I can agree totally with that. I think the single statistic for creating a good vs. average song is around 40:1, and that is for the pros. So, a good part of my problems, as with most of us hobbiest, is that we can't justify the number of hrs. it takes to perfect our songs; and the room for improvement also means the hours we invest in our spare time.
Thanks guys for your help, Much appreciated, Stan
|
|
|
Post by chrisr on Oct 8, 2007 23:42:23 GMT
Much appreciate your comment, Stan, and you certainly have a point there : one cannot spend more (spare) time on musical creativity than one has.
Not too shure that creating good songs is only for pros : you and many others prove otherwise, and not too shure about the 40:1 statistic. I would think more of 400:1, but then, what exactly is a good song ?
Best regards,
Chris
|
|
sgulley
Superstar
If you really like music and recording it then never stop trying to get better at it.
Posts: 2,994
|
Post by sgulley on Oct 9, 2007 14:19:52 GMT
You are right. Music is subjective and no one knows for sure what makes up a good song. I, like everyone else, have my own genre preferences but for some reason I still love most of the old Carpenters/Christopher Cross/Jim Croce/Gorden Lightfoot songs.
Early Beatles songs come to mind, where they were trapped in their hotels most of the time, and responded by writing a lot of songs even better than their previous hits. But, that would be the rarest of situations and is doubtable that it would ever happen again. Just like there will never be another Bob because Dylan was a product of his time & was still obscure enough not to be totally figured out which presented a challenge to the listener.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Oct 9, 2007 17:34:55 GMT
but then, what exactly is a good song ? I have always thought that, just as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so music is in the ear of the listener, e.g. a good song is one that people like listening to. I think one challenge for those of us who aspire to write such songs is to recognize when something we come up with will please the ears of others, as well as ourselves. Of course that doesn't mean I'm gonna try writing any rap songs. Tom
|
|