can you vote on the best arrangement?

[manducator]

Hello,

I have made a dance track with 2 different arrangements. All sounds used are more or less the same. Here they are:

First arrangement:

funky master.wav


Second arrangement:

funky third master.wav

You can use the embedded player to listen, no download needed. I can't post the first arrangement on soundcloud it gets keeping banned. I filled out a complaint ticket but they keep ignoring me...

It would be great if you vote or comment on the arrangements; I will use 1 of these to end my evening school on audio production.

Best,
Dirk

[Ambient Mechanics]

Hello,

I have made a dance track with 2 different arrangements. All sounds used are more or less the same. Here they are:

First arrangement:

funky master.wav


Second arrangement:

funky third master.wav

You can use the embedded player to listen, no download needed. I can't post the first arrangement on soundcloud it gets keeping banned. I filled out a complaint ticket but they keep ignoring me...

It would be great if you vote or comment on the arrangements; I will use 1 of these to end my evening school on audio production.

Best,
Dirk

Dirk, I think the second one sound better..well, to me anyway. Really enjoyed it compared to the first one, which sounded a little less polished to my ears. I would have downloaded it, but it doesn't seem to be working for me for some reason..nice track though..kudos! :thumbsup:

[Ciberithm]

I agree with Ambient Mechanics that the second one sounded better. I voted for the first one because you asked about which "arrangement" was better. I didn't like the 40 second drum build up in the second one, but thought the mix sounded much better.

[manducator]

Hey, thanks everybody. The score = 2-2 for now...

Ciberithm, the mixing and mastering is virtually the same, so this proves that the arrangement can change the mix itself.

[Heaven And Hell]

I don't listen to dance, and I know nothing about it, so take this for what it is.

I agree that I liked the arrangement better on the first one, but I liked the sound better on the second.

[Ambient Mechanics]

Hey, thanks everybody. The score = 2-2 for now...

Ciberithm, the mixing and mastering is virtually the same, so this proves that the arrangement can change the mix itself.

I agree with your thinking on this, Manducator. I tend to do everything on the fly as I go, which a lot of guys hate..but I find it all just tends to sound better doing it that way, as you can hear the mix better as you build and arrange it bit by bit. I honestly don't know how guys can leave it until the end to start mixing and mastering..as I see both as being part of the same over-all process of home production.

I'm not saying or implying I'm right here..just that it feels right for me and how I work. :D

[seismic1]

I'm the opposite. I record the tracks and then sit on them, maybe for 2 or 3 years. Once I've "forgotten" them, I can better hear what needs to be done with the arrangement to complete the track. Then I mix and master it immediately. I have made only one track that doesn't conform to this model (so far).

Dirk, I'll try to give these a listen over the long weekend here.

[manducator]

I honestly don't know how guys can leave it until the end to start mixing and mastering..as I see both as being part of the same over-all process of home production.

I'm afraid I'm one of those guys.

I'll try to explain how and why I work this way but the most important thing is that you work on your music in the way it fits you the most, so it's not my intention to convert anybody to working in the same manner as I do.

I always work in 3 stages on my songs:

1. Arrangement
2. Mixing
3. Mastering

Every stage is a new session in Reaper, saved separately. I see some advantages in this way of working.

The first advantage is that it keeps me focused on what I'm doing; I don't have to bother with how the reverb on my drum synth sounds, when I'm in arrangement 'modus' and when I'm mixing, I know I don't have to get back to the arrangement session to change the order of the instruments or whatever. When I decide that the arrangement is done, I consider it done and won't change it later. Makes it more easy for me to work efficient and stay focused. I know I can always go back and change things but the tempation is less, this way.

While arranging, I don't set up intricate routings (busses, send/return tracks, parallel busses,...), I keep that for mixing. Why? If I would do this while arranging I probably won't remember how I did it while mixing and it's easier for transporting all tracks into separate wav files. All tracks are dry when I start a mixing session, this invites me to experiment with types of reverb, compression,... not having to worry that a system crash will erase my arrangement session.

When the arrangement is done, I render all tracks to separate wav files.

Second advantage; setting up the routing while mixing with the wav files is less cpu intesive than using midifiles with vst instruments. I can also regroup tracks and change colors to something that complements my workflow better. Example; when I mix, I give all drum tracks (usually between 5 and 8 tracks) all the same color because they end up in the same buss. While arranging, I give all drumsounds different colors to recognize the different drumsounds quicker.

Third advantage: because I render all tracks as separate wave files, I have quick access when I won't to change mixing settings later. Imagine that I uninstall a certain vst, I still have the rendered output for mixing. If I lose or dismiss plugins I can still work on the wav files. I changed from Ableton to Reaper 4 years ago but because of the wav files I can still mix and master the songs I once did in Ableton.

Fourth advantage: I render all tracks from the mixing session into 1 wav file for mastering. While mastering I can put my mastering plugins on the channel of the song itself, not having to put anything on the master channel. When you put plugins on the master channel (eq, comp, limiter,...), any reference track will run through those plugins to, making it impossible to compare my song to the reference track.

I guess the reduction of cpu load is the biggest benefit anyway and the different sessions are like an extra security for not losing everything with failing vst's. There's not much that can crash on an audio file.

I do some quick mixing and mastering for my ambient stuff in lots of cases though, because it's drone stuff that doesn't need as much tweaking as main stream pop songs with drum transients, having limiting to win the loudness wars, ;) ...

Wow that was a ling post for bumping this topic for a few more votes, lol.

[S1gnsOfL1fe]

I'm going with the second one. It's just more my style...love that buildup actually! Filters and all. You make such good stuff Dirk. Enjoyable listen as always. Hit hard, satisfying, the whole nine.

Wonderful description of how you work too. I work in a very similar fashion. Each stage is a new session. Well, almost each stage.

So is this another manducator dance/techno album in the works? Do tell!

[manducator]

So is this another manducator dance/techno album in the works? Do tell!

This song will be used to get my certificate of my evening school audio production. Unfortunately the school will ahve copyright over this song, I won't be able to publish it.

I have some dubtechno songs on my harddrive but I want some more to complete an album and it still needs proper mixing.

I have 3 ambient songs ready, I still want to create 1 and try to release it as an EP. That will be released before any dance stuff. I put my dance stuff on my bandcamp, never had a label interested for it.

The first version of this song was my arrangement. The second version is the arrangement with some help from the teachers. I don't think minimal enough, I want to put too much in my music, too soon in the arrangement. But votes now are 3-3 so I guess my arrangement isn't that bad after all. But the second arrangement is more 'commercial', discotheque-minded.

[seismic1]

I liked the first arrangement. The length was good, The sounds "flowed" better imho. I thought the progression of the first version sounded more "club-friendly". I also thought that the mix on the first version was more "jumping". I haven't had a chance to play this a very high volume. They're both good, but I think No. 1 is more to my liking.

Good work :thumbsup: