Electronic Music Songwriting Philosophy

Elektronauts Our Music
#1

Hello! I recently took the dive into Elektron land with the Model:Cycles which I enjoy so much. My music background is pretty traditional (classical piano and punk/rock guitar).

I’m struggling a bit when it comes to songwriting in the electronic space. I’ve loved electronic music all my life, but creating it feels like a totally different ballgame. I listen to artists like Loraine James, Burial, Actress, Mount Kimbie, and wonder what their approach is. It feels so very different from a rock song. But FTR I don’t think one style of musicmaking is superior to another.

I’m accustomed to thinking of songs in distinct parts with a fairly limited palette of sounds, and very linearly. Electronic music tends to be pretty different from that in a few ways.

So I’m just wondering what your philosophy and/or approach is to electronic songwriting, especially as opposed to pop/rock structure?

11 Likes
#2

This is a very interesting question that a lot of people will answer differently. Indeed, people’s output will vary differently, too. Electronic music is just the method of making the music, but can fall into any existing genre and it’s own outside of those. I.e. you can totally make rock tunes that are fully electronic (See RJD2’s rock album). But you can also do straight up orchestral music (I don’t even think Hanz Zimmer hires actual musicians anymore, he just uses some romplers and workstations) etc.

So when it comes to the cycles, it’s a mix of live and canned aspects if you’re using just the box. Hooking up MIDI unlocks a different live component if you’re a keyboardist to some extent. That said, hooking it up to a computer and recording lots of sections in a live-style setting is also doable. Electronic music doesn’t have to be quantized, etc.

So…idk, it just depends on what your intent is. Are you going to go off into Aphex Twin territory or are you more of a Roni Size?

Me personally, I try to run a philosophy of ‘do it in the box, work with it’s limits and don’t make that box look bad’. For instance, I"ve used SP404 only for a lot of tunes, currently I use MC101 only, Digitone only and RS7000 only. Now and then I’ll cross them over, but usually in a way that still confines sound to one box, such as sampling sounds of other boxes and trigger them in the ‘final box’ (i.e. sample digitone into RS7000 but final song is just RS7000). Other folks do not do this and prefer to have, say, a master controller that sends notes to all different kinds of boxes and a mixer to collect it all into the final sound.

If you’re interested in using cycles to create ‘distinct parts’, you would first start by making separate patterns of your sections and then playing them in the order you want to arrange them in and maybe twist a couple of knobs or mute/unmute tracks in such a way that it builds towards the next section in a way that satisfies your wants.

That said, ‘workflow’ is highly individual to both the individual and the tools, just as writing a song on guitar is individual, but there’s JUST a guitar. In electronic music land, you’ll find literally every box has it’s quirks beyond tonal quality, it’s sequencer and arrangement facilities will often force a workflow on you and whether you jive with that workflow or not will be personal preference.

8 Likes
#3

As your into rock music you could look up some Rock bands who used Electronic equipment for a few tracks to give you some ideas

Pink Floyd
The Who
Radiohead.

Just to get you thinking where to go.

#4

Well, I usually start with sitting down and making a sound that inspires me. For me this is easy if I have an inspiring effect unit. Then I play some notes and record 2-4 bars.

Next, I play another melodic line, either harmony, bass, or counterpoint.

If you are composing with a certain genre in mind, it makes thing easier, because you can make a skeleton beat without even thinking. But sometimes, I start by just trying to find and sculpt a compelling rhythm. This is where elektron sequencers come in, because you can get nice variations with parameter locks, and using plocks on a single track also ensures good mixing, since only one sound is happening at once.

Then maybe duplicate the pattern and make a variation. And that is enough to have a track. You said you listen to actress. He has plenty of tracks that are just 1 loop for a few minutes.

6 Likes
#5

Start a new pattern, get a loop going that you like, copy it to the next pattern, change something, copy that to the next pattern, change something else. Repeat until you get bored, play about with mutes/knobs and switch between patterns as you see fit. Record it. Done.

8 Likes
#6

Some great, thought-provoking responses already! I should specify that I’m talking about writing music in specific electronic styles, not just using electronic tools (synths, drum machines) for rock or pop music. I think techno and post-dubstep are the two genres I envision myself making.

An example of a roadblock I find myself running into is that most devices don’t seem to have a song mode. This seems like a no-brainer to me for every device with any sequencing capabilities. But this is because I’m bringing my songwriting background to a different world of music making.

Another thing I’ve been chewing on mentally is how much sound design plays such a bigger role. For a classical pianist, sound design has no bearing on what they do. As long as the piano works, they don’t think about changing the sound. So sound design is a bigger aspect of the art and creation of electronic music. Guitar is a middle ground between piano and synths, as the tones are a highly personal aspect to guitar playing. But still the range of sounds is more limited than with synths (unless you start getting into the super wacky pedal stuff).

Oh don’t worry, these are some of my favorite bands of all time. I’ve listened to more Floyd than any other band according to my last.fm and there are no signs of stopping. But I’m less concerned about incorporating electronic sounds into rock than creating proper electronic music.

3 Likes
#7

I should have guessed that by your name :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:

3 Likes
#8

You don’t need a song mode, changing patterns is all part of the performance.

There are some really good song modes about though.

Polyend Tracker has a mental song mode and Octatrack’s arranger is powerful, but takes a bit of figuring out to get the best from it.

1 Like
#9

I have a lot of songs but I’ve never once learned how to use song mode. It’s always live muting and parameter tweaking. That’s even how I do it on ableton.

2 Likes
#10

If we take the basic formula of rock/pop to be:
Verse chorus verse chorus bridge chorus end.

Then you can see different parts, stuck together. With a fixed set of sounds (drums guitar bass vox)

Electronic music can follow this basic forumula.

Or it can do what ever the hell you want.

Some forms have almost no change in parts (no verse no chorus etc) but slow changes in sound textures, slow additions/subtractions of elements (hihats, synth sounds etc)

Some have formulas (mainstream hiphop)

Basically, with electronic music you can throw the rulebook out the window.

Some types of electronic music focus to much on sound design, or techincal elements. This often sounds stale and lifeless to me.

Some types that have no real structure , sometimes feel boring.

So I try to get the best if both worlds, the feel of good pop/rock/whatever, but with the weirdness and experimentation that makes
sound design so much fun.

As for song mode, you dont need it. Pattern chaining is song mode. Do it real time. Play your sequencer.

6 Likes
#11

Standing behind a box(es) you’ve programmed with your own sounds and sequences to create an emotion no ones (hopefully) experienced before is quite a peculiarity. Often sharing this is the difficult part, it will communicate/be understood by others in different ways dependent on their own relationship with electronic music & life experiences in general.

“This sounds like aphex twin”

“I don’t understand”

“Where’s the soul!?”

“Bit atonal this eh.”

Are all responses that may demonstrate you’re headed in the right or wrong direction. as long as you’re not being totally derivative and making music personal to you and having fun, keep doing it.

3 Likes
#12

That’s how I approach electronic music since several years now but it hasn’t been like that when I first started. I guess when you start to produce electronic music, you need some guidelines.

Edit : It all depends if you want to fit in a certain mold (specific Genres) or want to go offroad.

3 Likes
#13

I absolutely love this.

Start with a sound.

One of my all-time favorite electronic artists is Rei Harakami. Most, if not all, of his career he used a single sound module (SC-88) and made absolutely brilliant pieces with what many considered an undesirable piece of kit. I’ve tried to understand his arrangement philosophy for years, but I think it just started with a sound that he fell for and went from there, exploring each possibility that unfolded thereafter.

9 Likes
#14

This might be the crux of it all. Letting go of the fantasy of cloning myself to play 5 instruments at the same time, and letting the technology dictate some of the “hows” of performing.

I think I worry that my inexperience with looping in general will produce stale results, but so many artists have figured out ways to make it work.

4 Likes
#15

I would highly disagree about the ‘sound design aspect’. Sure it’s more focused, but anyone serious about their instrument and recording it will worry about mic placements, tuning, the brand, and as a guitarist, the amp type, settings on it and what pedals etc, those are all sound design. Pianists will even worry about having an upright or grand piano and then worry about the brand if they’re able to have that kind of control.

As far as song mode, many boxes have song mode, but cycles is a groovebox, it’s a performance tool instead of a songwriting one. For this, you’d probably be best off running the box into a digital recorder, making clips and arranging them there. Keep all the patterns on your machine in case you want to edit/change something so you can re-record the clip.

Otherwise, treat it like playing a guitar, just learn to play the piece, accept the variances that happen on each performance, try it out a couple of times and keep the best take or use a combination of multiple takes into the best tune.

4 Likes
#16

Sorry, should have been more specific. Yes, sound design always is a huge factor in recording, regardless of the instrument. But it is much more integrated into the actual playing of synthesizers and drum machines vs the playing of a piano.

But great point about the not considering the cycles as a songwriting tool. I think I’ll have even more fun with it when I stop trying to think about making music on it the same way I always have, and adopting some of the different mindsets mentioned above.

#17

Oh yeah, the sound canvas is so cool. I would say this is another good idea—just get a piece of kit and see what you can get out of it. Let the kit dictate the compositional outcome.

1 Like
#18

One thing with limited polyphony in a box like cycles is selection of how much/many voices are you going to dedicate to percussive and melodic tones. One of the nice things about elektron parameter locks is being able to switch out sounds ‘on the fly’ which makes it great for ‘voice management’ which is just a fancy way of saying ‘making it sound like it’s doing a lot more than it really is by fitting the sounds in more places than you normally could’. So like, snare kick and hat on one voice or kick and bass on one voice, etc. Those are definitely ‘tricks’ you should get really familiar with to push the quality and density of your tunes.

2 Likes
#19

Any chance you could elaborate on this, I don’t quite understand the ‘voice management’ on the fly aspect and how to achieve this, on the machinedrum for instance? :slight_smile:

#20

Same as anything. It comes with practice.

2 Likes