It feels like serendipity when I stumble over here. I like what I see to check out your web page repeatedly. From my first visitation I already noted that your blog is very useful, it provides high quality information to work on. You have done a outstanding job ! web design Los Angeles

This blog will be a great source blog for those who wants to know about this topic. You have provided us with many essential articles and I like visiting your blog, I love the information you provide here and cant wait to take a look when I get home forex account manager

This post you have made here couldn't be written any better! Fairly certain this article will have a good read. I enjoy what you are usually up too. This sort of clever work of writing and coverage is a wonderful work indeed capture his heart and make him love you forever

I am commenting to let you know what a terrific experience reading through your web page. This web page has a wide variety of pieces and greatly benefit from each other. It's very valuable to read further on this issue jok mobil

Ive been visiting several websites for about the last two hours and I have to voice my passion for your sharpness in writing and giving acknowledges to people. The post should have magnificent guidance plazabajumuslim.com

Appreciation for being really thoughtful and also I enjoyed reading it, you happen to be brilliant writer. Wishing you the best of luck for all your efforts compromis de vente

Some facts on this page are undeniably the most effective I have had. Definitely an issue that I've searching for. It's very encouraging to find this site, can't wait to check out new stuff chambres d'hotes cassis

I must say you have done a very well, not just with the articles but also with the exploration about the issue. The post contains really beneficial information that will satisfy readers and can clarify things upon motorlu kurye

I am curious on the way you write down certain excitement reading posts in this blog. It's so naturally written. I would love to learn more about good article writing via this blog us passport application

I was actually going through the nice helpful tips from the blog and I put respect to the writer of this post. This is just what I'm looking for, a blog that I find almost all of the posts to be very beneficial. Love to visit here again tennis blog news

Its great to come across a blog every once in a while that isn't the same out of date rehashed material. Fantastic read!From my first visitation I already noted that your blog is very useful Jason Doig

Your great knowledge in playing with all the pieces such qualified articles as this is a rare thing to find these days. Thanks for such post and please keep it up elektronik sigara

Must confess that you present powerful steps on this article and therefore has strongly encouraged contribution on this subject. I am always searching online for articles that can help me female mind mastery

This sort of clever work of writing a facts and coverage is a wonderful things indeed. My first impression here I already noted that your blog is very useful hulkshare

It is definitely worthed for me to appreciate your high quality writing. I am always searching online for articles that can help me and this is the answers solar panels

From my first visitation here last weeks I already noted that your blog is very useful, it provides high quality information to work on Iphone

Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one. Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice chunky guitars. If our kick drum doesn't have enough impact, we recognize it because we've heard satisfying kick drums in songs we like the sound of. Given that we're always learning, I'd recommend doing it consciously. If we hear a beautiful lush pad in a song, we shouldn't rely on serendipity to bring it forth in a year's time, when a similar pad may fit perfectly into our current song. Focus on the pad and try to describe it as fully as possible - how wide is it? Is it only represented in the mid range, or does it have decent low and/or high end as well? Is there any modulation - panning, filters, delay effects? How does it interact with the other sounds - are there particular other sounds which help to frame the pad and make it sound the way it does? The more detail we can use to describe what we're hearing, the better we'll be able to recreate and incorporate the sound into our own sonic palette. This leads me to the main topic of this post. It's great to describe a sound in detail, but in my experience the next step is more important - actually attempting to recreate the sound. I've addressed the issue in some of my posts already regarding the "copying vs originality" aspect of this. In short, as I've already said, we're learning all the time whether we're doing so consciously or not. Recreating sounds won't lead to any less original music than starting with a blank slate. It will however give us more techniques to use when we're making music. Here's how I go about recreating songs. I like to build songs up from the foundation - the kick and bass. The first thing I do is look for sections in the song/ album where these are as exposed as possible. When I find a song which is a good candidate, I'll import it into my sequencer and adjust the project's tempo to the tempo of the song. Some sequencers (such as Ableton Live) do this automatically, but mine doesn't, so I just loop a four bar section and adjust the tempo until the section loops cleanly. Then I set the loop markers so a two bar section with a decently exposed kick drum is looping. The first bar plays the original audio, the second bar is silent (either via volume automation or simply cutting the original audio and moving the section after the first bar out of range of the loop). Then I go through my kick samples, in whichever sample library is closest to the style of sample I'm looking for. I'll hear four of the original kick, then four of the kick I'm previewing. I make note of kicks which sound close to the attack transient, kicks which sound close to the body and kicks which sound close overall. It's great when I find a kick which is close on its own (even better when I find the exact kick the original artist used!), but I have no problems splicing together a great sounding kick using the attack portion of one and the body of another. The thing to keep in mind when cutting out the parts of each kick that aren't required is to enable the "snap to zero crossing" option. Otherwise the audio will pop every time it plays the uncleanly spliced kick. Over the course of a song that's a heap of pops! Once I've gone through my kick library I may have noted down 20 kicks. I'll go through these again and keep narrowing it down until I find the closest one(s). Whenever we listen to music we learn from it. This happens whether we're consciously aware of it or not. Some pieces of music won't appeal to us and (subconsciously) we'll have an awareness of why they don't appeal. Likewise with songs which we love as well as the many songs we neither openly love nor detest. We're always learning what works and what doesn't, from our perspective. We may open up our sequencer and start with a blank slate, but our minds aren't blank slates. When it comes to crafting a pleasing mix, we'll be guided by the music we've listened to. If our guitars don't sound chunky enough, we only know that because we've heard nice