The ideology that I've never believed in it from the start point. I mean the "Less is More"

Discussion in 'Education' started by foster911, Jun 9, 2017.

  1. Talmi

    Talmi Audiosexual

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2015
    Messages:
    2,042
    Likes Received:
    1,701
    I really like this song too. But the second one you quoted, now this one is an old fav for me ! I named my cat after that band, Pixie isn't an hommage to AudioTopia (but I love that Pixie is in their NFO). Just for fun :metal:
     
  2. Remmah

    Remmah Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2016
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    uk
    Foster - Master of the spoken word! :rofl:
    [​IMG]
     
  3. GodHimSelf

    GodHimSelf Platinum Record

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    Messages:
    298
    Likes Received:
    154
    I actually support that theory.

    I've made an experiment. I had to mix using only my ears. So I basically mixed a track the "regular" way and remade the mix using only the SSL 4000 channel. No analyzers, no spectral gizmo. Just sound.

    The amazing thing is that without all the waves, visuals and shiny views of frequencies and gain reduction, I actually had to focus on the music and make proper eq decisions that would alter the sound due to the lack of less eq points (love Fabfilter Pro-2): The result sounded really natural and balanced.

    So, 5 eq bands, a gate, a compressor/expander and that's it. That's why (for me) less is more. More is distracting, more is more stuff you don't know that will affect your sound, more factors that you can't control.

    Unparadoxically, more is more.

    P.S.: I ended up having to add some distortion and saturation that had the glitters...
     
  4. jayxflash

    jayxflash Guest

    We'll die trying, I'm afraid
     
  5. 23322332

    23322332 Rock Star

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    352
    You needed proper room, monitors and an idea for the target audience and listening medium. Killer mixdowns for earbuds, mobile phones or laptop speakers don't translate to dance halls and stadiums, if you know what I mean. That's why all the analyzers/meter etc are the best thing ever. In the ideal world, each song would come in 3 mixes - one small, one big, one medium.
     
  6. seriousofficial

    seriousofficial Kapellmeister

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2014
    Messages:
    162
    Likes Received:
    73
    Location:
    LA
    Less is more....ok, I more or less rest my case with this one:
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2017
  7. Backtired

    Backtired Audiosexual

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2016
    Messages:
    958
    Likes Received:
    644
    What a bummer
    I was expecting the intro video to say "Hey everybody, I'm Foster, and welcome to another tutorial of "How not to make music". Today we'll learn, you guessed it, how to not make music"

    On serious discussion: there's not a general rule, like 99% of things in this world. Less might be more, SOMETIMES. And sometimes else you might actually want more more. It all depends, context, etc.
     
  8. pizzafresser

    pizzafresser Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2017
    Messages:
    297
    Likes Received:
    127
    Less isn't more. More is More. :dont:

     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Love it! Love it! x 1
    • List
  9. jayxflash

    jayxflash Guest

    Indeed.

    Hans Zimmer in his masterclass interview was saying something along these lines: if the script is sparse in information and the action does not compensate the lack of words, people will fail to understand the movie, if the script is too rich and basically narrates the action, it will not enhance the viewer's experience.

    Music is the same: less is more when one uses a careful balance between the melody/rhythm and textures so they complement each other. Less is less when the song sounds like is actually unfinished. More is less when all the instrument play the same melody/rhythm. More is more for example when a vast array of instruments play a beautiful set of counterpoints within a complex melody with many ups and downs.

    But the key is the balance between elements which is not given in writing by the BBEC (that is Balance Between Elements Committee) but rather is the reflection of the producer's acquired taste over time. Of course, taste is totally subjective and deeply rooted into producer's personal and cultural background, this is why some have only local success, some don't have it at all and the ones that can express their music in a way that is unversally accepted are worldwide renowned.

    We can't blame the listener for not liking something that's totally unfamiliar, this is why music evolves on iterative pace - small changes (be it compositional techniques, or textures) occur over time so the people have the time to accomodate with the new. After all music (even when is sending social/political messages) is all about our brain releasing endorphins. Not too many people are high on endorphins when one scratches the blackboard with one's nails.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • List
  10. Downlo

    Downlo Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2017
    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    76
    Location:
    Holland
  11. Swiss Made

    Swiss Made Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2011
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Switzerland & France
    moore.jpg Moore is Moore and that's it.
     
  12. Von_Steyr

    Von_Steyr Guest

    ROFL, video of the month! ACE!
     
  13. foster911

    foster911 Guest

    Thanks so much for your comments.:bow:
    I made this sound and want to know how you process it more to be put inside a track beside other sounds like bass, drums and percussion etc. Would you please listen to it and guide me how to do it and open some gaps inside it for injection of other sounds when it already has occupied almost all of the spectrum space? Suppose I've lost the midi file for manipulations inside it ad this sound is the only remainder of my attempt? Is EQing and cutting parts of it the only solutions?:mates:

    https://clyp.it/g2bomrwl
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 11, 2017
  14. foster911

    foster911 Guest

  15. foster911

    foster911 Guest

    or
    .
    .
    .
     
  16. Talmi

    Talmi Audiosexual

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2015
    Messages:
    2,042
    Likes Received:
    1,701
    No problem.
    But actually no, this snipet does spill all over the spectrum, but its energy is around some precise aera of frequencies. Your piano like sound and your arpeggio thingy aren't far from each others. You got peaks of energy at about 100-250 (the bass), 600 1200 (the arpy thing) and the piano thing at 800 2000 (both resonate around 3000 and 5000 too).
    You can't take much decision until you move forward, but already here you can tighten things up a bit. A low shelve around 100 will define your bass better, just a slight boost, it will also tame the slight resonances you have around 160 if you set the q smartly (the shape of the shelve will attenuate thing slightly right after the boost). And you can make a slight cut around 700 to define things better between your arp and the piano thing, slight cut, narrow resonance (q). Maybe also a small boost with a wide resonance around 1050, it will put the piano a bit forward.
    The aim here isn't to preparate things for after since from there you can go anywhere, and yes there are many tools to make rooms for other elements other than eq. But here you still have room for other elements.
    The few suggestions I make just might renders this small loop more coherent.
    Unless you have problems with samples you've chosen, you don't eq or compress or whatever without having reasons to do so, you have to have more elements to make decisions.


    No rapport whatsoever with the rest. Just wanted to post that :

     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2017
Loading...
Loading...