In the production of electronic music do you find it better to mix-as-you-go and get that killer sound you want right off the bat, or leave the mixing till the later stages after you've fleshed out an arrangement? Do you find it most efficent to apply EQ to the drums: b4 you sketch out a pattern, after you sketch out a pattern but before you add a lead section, or after you've finalized your compositional idea?

The compositional phases of electronic music seem to be a bit different than most traditional music in that the motive of a song can (and most times does) rely heavily on the shaping of the sounds over time. If the sound shaping process is such an integral part of the compositional process, should it thus be incorporated at the compositional stage rather than at the "traditional" mixing stage?

I'm curious to hear what your different perspectives are on the subject.

Now that's a really thorny issue. One which I have just recently been wrestling with. Song as composition or sound as composition
I've been doing this 25 freekin years and I don't know.

Currently I'm working with 'sounds' but having written 'songs' for years I'm doing this hybrid thing "which is totally unique!!!"

My humble advice is not to worry about what anyone else has done before. Make sure YOU like it instead of your friends or your Mum. And Prefuse73 is great.

(I'm a bit drunk)

--------------------
I've got rhythm, I ain't got pitch

Regarding electronic music, I find it more inspiring to create a sound that inspires a melody or feel first. rather silly, I feel, to use a stock sound, play a melody, and then shape the sound to something interesting. (but that happens sometimes, it's just less fun). But is this considered part of mixing?

Personally I don't think so. It's sound design. True, it has a direction towards mixing, and if it is late on in the composition, ie most other parts are fleshed out, then the sound design must take into consideration where it will go in the mix re. frequency, stereo field, space creation, and so on. But generally I mix after everything is down. (Usually the mixing part, though, is really just to make sure everything does have it's own space, and hits as hard or soft as it should.

RE. drums, I use a lot of samples, so I may have eq'd them before I start patterning them, ie. getting the sound right at source. But as a whole group, I generally apply a little eq when mixing, just to polish.

I never compose with any fx on the master bus, so the killer sound I am after has to be inherent in the sounds used at source. That way, when applying a little "home mastering ;-)" the killer sound will only get better. (fingers crossed)

Does that help you? Probably not...

Edited by jh (15/12/04 10:40 AM)

It does help.

Indeed, sound design would be a better word for what you were describing; however, when I wrote the last post I was thinking more along the lines of composers/producers who will compress a sound as they go (which I guess could still constitute sound design, it's all in how you want to intrepret the definition isn't it?)

Like you said, a sound can sound completely lame if not treated properly, and your creative vision for a project can often times change directions depending on the sounds you're working with. For example: I might have a harmony in mind for a pad section to put behind a lead, but if the lead is powerfull enough on it's own I might never add the pad. Even though that pad part changes the arrangement and was part of my initial idea, I might decide to scrap it all together if it's exraneous.

Every creative idea stems from a motive. Every motive stems from a burst of inspiration. Does technology change that motive vastly from when you first concieved it? Or does it help facilitate that idea and bring out your original intention for the piece?

I do most of my intial writing in Reason, and I tend to put a little bit of reverb on some parts, occasionally some delay, just to give things a bit of space and atmosphere. However, when I've got what I think is most of an arrangement together, all the fx come off and the whole lot goes into Pro Tools and I mix in there, also adding real instruments and more soft synth stuff, but mixing kind of starts once I'm in PT, i.e. I'll start thinking about reverbs and other fx, and EQ I might want to use.

If mixing is about fitting sounds together, I'd say it begins right back at the compositional stage.

I usually get myself geared up for 'the mix', but then find that there isn't a whole lot to do because I've chosen sounds and recorded them at certain levels to suit the sound I'm after. I guess all this depends on the sort of stuff your doing.

Edited by Ben (17/12/04 06:32 PM)

I think that composition editing and mixing are a completely different processess.
I understand nowadays we can do everything ourselves, but we have to wear a different hat.Im always looking for the best sound. In my work I feel recording then editing are about getting the cleanest sound i can record and editing is self explanitary.Then mixing is about being flash and creating an end product. I believe the recording is a technical process and the others are creative The end product is very very different than that of the edit.Line mixing is about giving those clean sounds life. If anyone disagrees please explain as ive always worked this way.
ade