Posted
Hey ho! While preparing for a new video tutorial, I built this track today and want to share it with you.
(https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/track…)
It's a simple, fast-turning chord riff arranged with a sub bass, percussive phased organ, old-style synth lead and a cheap drum kit. Actually the progression never changes, except for 2 bars in the B part. The solo after 1st part B is identical to the first one, except it was augmented with the "Variation" parameter ;-) In the B Part, I doubled the lead synth with a trumpet, transposed by 3 units and altered it a bit to add tension.
Entire composition and mix done with Synfire Pro Audio Engine (no DAW used).
P.S: A few more details: Tempo is 95/190, that is, I used a double/half tempo contrast to make it be both up-beat and groovy at the same time. Tempos around 100 are perfect "around your hip" while tempos above 130 have an up-lifting effect. Mixing double-tempo and half-tempo phrases works great. Be sure there are alternating rests between phrase, so each instrument gets the listeners attention in small intervals.
Key is Eb Minor, changing to Eb Major in the B part for only 4 measures.
The solo in the 2nd A part is a bit boring. I had to stop with this song due to lack of time. You can certainly find a better variation for it or even create a new one.
I've attached the original document. If you're interested, go ahead and mash it up in any way you see fit! Post your results to this thread. The file is relatively big (> 2 MB) because it contains all plug-in preset data. If you set it up in your studio, you will need to assign your own sounds, of course.
Tue, 2012-08-14 - 21:25 Permalink
Either my headphones are broken or you have to much bass in the mix.
Sun, 2012-08-19 - 18:54 Permalink
Erm. ok ok ok. Here's a remix that sounds quite different:
(https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/track…)
There also was a "bug" in the B progression and I neede dto clean up the melody figures (removed overlaps etc). The song now has a new intro, second part, new rhythm and other sounds. The first sounded like cheap 80's synthpop. This one is more relaxed. Trying out different sounds was the most tedious and annoying part, as everyone knows.
What do you think?
Sun, 2012-08-19 - 19:46 Permalink
There is no logic behind the container structure. It just evolved while I was working. It's creative chaos and it is impossible to avoid, because you can't really know your structure until your song is done.
From time to time, it may be useful to move the phrases into a new container structure that is more "logical", so that it represents the composition at that point of development. That's easy: Create an empty structure and drag & drop all phrases to it.
Sun, 2012-08-19 - 21:38 Permalink
I like to learn from other arrangments.. how it is build up, but from your point of view there is no room for analyzing after the arrangment is finished ?
Ofcourse you don't know at forehand how your arrangment will be looking, but afterwards than ..
I must say ..it takes a reasonable amount of time to really understand the program, and now get more and more the feeling that i get more grip on SFP.
The accompaniment in SFP has no library phrase ?
Further a update of the manual of the screenshots is neccessary..sloppy to have the old windows still there..if black is the future
Mon, 2012-08-20 - 21:25 Permalink
Great!
Did you mean that this song will be part of an upcoming video? If not, I'll still try to understand what you did :)
The intro reminds me a little bit of a song played by a very strange band in a bar in an early Star Wars movie (maybe it was the first movie…)