Techno Production

[Dr. Nay]

Hi guys, from a producers perspective, can you answer these questions for me. Just to let you know this is an open ended question and there is no specific question

What are the different ways used to sequence a techno track?

How do you manipulate different oscillators used to make
specific techno sounds?

What are the correct way of using effects?

What is required to master a techno track professionally?

[Lost to the Void]

What are the different ways used to sequence a techno track?
Hardware, software, x0x, piano roll, tracker, looper.

How do you manipulate different oscillators used to make
specific techno sounds?
Depends on the desired final sound, but essentially many different ways, or , however you choose.

What are the correct way of using effects?
In a way that gets you the result you desire depending on the limits and restraints of the recording medium.

What is required to master a techno track professionally?
In short, a professional mastering engineer. In long a professional mastering engineer, a mastering studio with full range monitoring and the equipment to do the job.

[Críoch]

I think we're done here

[Senko]

youtu.be/ckMvj1piK58

[winston]

youtu.be/ckMvj1piK58

holy shit. where does one find a donk machine?

[Aurongroove]

What are the different ways used to sequence a techno track?

musically, techno has an even meter (2/4 4/4 6/8 12/8),
As such you can sequence it almost every single way in which music can be sequenced; as a series of loops,
as a network of drum machines, in a DAW or music mixing software either as midi imputs controlling instruments, or recorded/created audio.

How do you manipulate different oscillators used to make
specific techno sounds?

That question is too broad, oscillators just means "anything that oscillates".

In general Techno, which isn't to be confused with the word "'Techno' meaning all forms of Electronic Dance music", is a genre of EDM that emphasizes the percussion elements mostly of Electronic Dance music. The technical aspects of the genre cover terms like "drums" "grooves" "4/4" "mechanical-in-sound"
You could easily write a techno track using un-pitched percussion sounds only, but the same would be either difficult in the extreme, or just out-right impossible for house of trance.

In spirit, it covers a kind of sternness, (perhaps for some an aggression), but also an intellect. If house music is "funky/soulful/sexual" and trance music is "melodic/euphoric/emotional" then techno is "intense/assertive/logical".

What are the correct way of using effects?

Artistically, there is no correct way of using effects, just like there is no correct way of mixing paint when painting.

In terms of production it is expected that effects will be use to "louden and enlarge" the track 'non-transparently' (meaning, "in a way that you can hear clearly that the track has been loudened and enlarged synthetically). Typical effects use to achieve this almost always contains region-specific-compression and/or compression in general, as well as EQing, and it is normal for this to be accompanied by Limiting, saturation/distortion, and minute amounts of delay based FX such as Reverb or Slab-back delay.

What is required to master a techno track professionally?

Give it to a professional mastering engineer, and pay him/her.


If you meant this less literally, as in, "what does it take to master a techno track to a professional standard". The answer is, a number of years practicing on listening skills development to be able to pick up on the finer aspects of 'sound' you need to match, and then further years becoming familiar with how to actualyl achieve these sounds.

You'll also need an absolutely acoustically 'sterile' environment (this usually means acoustically treated rooms) and professional mastering gear.
I would say you need at least a very, very good compressor or two, once of which must surely be multiband, a completely transparent EQ with lots of faders that can be adjusted in small amounts, an industry standard limiter, and perhaps other programmes such as transparent reverb effects, saturators, and a good stereo imagers and harmonics exciter, can be good too.

[Lost to the Void]

In terms of production it is expected that effects will be use to "louden and enlarge" the track 'non-transparently..
..
..

once of which must surely be multiband......... transparent reverb effects
harmonics exciter,

Ey?
Effects are used to manipulate sound.
Louden and enlarge? Erm. Sure if they are dynamic effects, but other than that, not really.

Very few engineers use Multiband compressors, or few good ones, very often.
A Multiband compressor could be considered non essential in a standard mastering rack. Handy for very occasional problems where the mix can't be fixed... In the mix.

Reverbs in mastering..... Well Ozone has a reverb so engineers must also use em right??
Literally no mastering engineer I have spoken to has ever used a reverb in mastering. In all my years of study and learning and training, I have never seen it done, read about it or even seen a reverb in a mastering rack. We've all heard stories of why you might consider it, but no one has actually done it. Except maybe those kids with Ozone who do "mastering".

Harmonics exciter.... As above... Ozone has it.....
Again not really something used by mastering engineers, any harmonic addition is usually done through pushing gear or just enhancing what is already there with proper application of mastering EQ. Exciters invariably do ugly things to full range material, again, never seen an exciter in a mastering rack. Probably only really useful in restoring old media like cassette or stuff from single disk vinyl albums, where there is literally no top end to grab in to.
If a mix is so dead you are considering using one, it ain't gonna fix the problem anyway, that mix is not ready to be mastered.


Ah Ozone, responsible for misleading and misrepresenting mastering since it's conception.

[Aurongroove]

No.
You are wrong.
You've either developed an elitist misconception, or you're on some sort of crusade about what multiband compression is for, but passing whatever-it-is off as "well, this is what all the GOOD engineers do" is extremely irresponsible.

First off, I've never even seen the inside of Ozone. I don't know anything about the programme or what it offers, so don't pin me to it, thanks very much.

Secondly, multiband compression is primarily a mastering effect.
If you won't take my word for it, then do some research.

Saying you don't use multiband compression during the mastering stage, is like saying, "you may only treat the entire wav form with compression, or none at all, and doing anything else, is bad"
At the very least it is extremely common, to bybass frequency regions when treating others, i.e., when you want certain regions to be left alone, or when you want the compressors threshold not to be triggered outside of the region you wish to dynamically adjust. Especially when considering how differently one treats treble and bass.
I know an engineer that literally splits the track he processes in half; bass and treble, and treats both separately, sure, it's not what 'I' would do, but he's a professional mastering engineer and he earns his living doing this and people love the results.


Programmes like L3, the Fabfilter series, C6, are LITERALLY Multiband dynamics for the mastering stage.
And they're just ones that are readily available from Waves and such.

[terryfalafel]

[Alume]

[Lost to the Void]

No.
You are wrong.
You've either developed an elitist misconception, or you're on some sort of crusade about what multiband compression is for, but passing whatever-it-is off as "well, this is what all the GOOD engineers do" is extremely irresponsible.

First off, I've never even seen the inside of Ozone. I don't know anything about the programme or what it offers, so don't pin me to it, thanks very much.

Secondly, multiband compression is primarily a mastering effect.
If you won't take my word for it, then do some research.

Saying you don't use multiband compression during the mastering stage, is like saying, "you may only treat the entire wav form with compression, or none at all, and doing anything else, is bad"
At the very least it is extremely common, to bybass frequency regions when treating others, i.e., when you want certain regions to be left alone, or when you want the compressors threshold not to be triggered outside of the region you wish to dynamically adjust. Especially when considering how differently one treats treble and bass.
I know an engineer that literally splits the track he processes in half; bass and treble, and treats both separately, sure, it's not what 'I' would do, but he's a professional mastering engineer and he earns his living doing this and people love the results.


Programmes like L3, the Fabfilter series, C6, are LITERALLY Multiband dynamics for the mastering stage.
And they're just ones that are readily available from Waves and such.

Oh dear.
Your words merely demonstrate a lack of understanding and experience.
Once you know a bit more you will realise that a lot of vst marketed as "mastering" is just word goo.
There was a point when linear phase was the buzz.
Ooh linear phase mastering EQ. Must be the best cos it says mastering...
Then it was multiband compression.

Just word goo mostly.
Tertiary but not primary tools.

Admittedly Multiband limiting was handy during the height of the loudness war.
But it became a begrudging necessity that most decent engineers argued against.

If the engineer gets the EQ balancing right, he will rarely need more than 1 or 2 straight single band compressors. You might need to use the sidechain on the fast acting comp to pull out the lows from triggering it, but essentially you rarely need Multiband.
I won't go in to the full ins and outs of why, it's a long subject, but mb compression can easily make the track fight itself in terms of time alignment and groove. It's very much a last resort application.


Let me think now.

I've cut records with lawrie at curvpusher, mike and nilz at the exchange, Matt Colton (now back at alchemy) at Air studios.
Not one not them used a mb compressor or had one in the rack.
In all my years of training, and lectures and attended sessions I have never seen one used outside of a theoretical\training context.
So far I myself have never needed to use one. If the mix is so bad that conventional single band compression and EQ cannot sort the problem, make notes get the mix engineer to fix the mix.
If the mix can't be fixed then maybe resort to mb comp.
The mastery in mastering is mostly in the application of EQ.

Go to the back of the class.

[terly]

I feel like with a decent mix and 1-2 db of compression/limiting, someone should be able to get their final product 90% of the way there. I do this with my tracks and I'm able to play them out in sets without any major issues. If the mix is bad, mastering won't be able to fix it, and if the mix is good, it's possible to make it playable without too much effort. Good mastering will make music sound its best, but for the purposes of previewing/demoing or even playing in a set, it's not necessary to have music mastered.

[Planar]

This feels like Dr. Nay is conducting a social experiment.

[Lost to the Void]

Well I look at mastering via the Bob Katz philosophy.

You can take a C mix to a B mix
A B mix to an A .
An A . to an A (if you really know your stuff)
And an A mix you leave well alone, occasionally if you really have the chops an A can become an A plus.

Mastering is the final polishing of a nearly finished sculpture.
If you find yourself reaching for a chisel, then the sculpture is not ready to be polished.

[Aurongroove]

If my words demonstrate a lack of experience (I highly doubt they do) then yours demonstrate an insufferable arrogance.

Don't be that "well experienced" brick-layer standing there, scratching his arse, playing the "I've been around the block and I've never met anyone in the trade who did this" card.

It's quite obvious when you shot out of the gate with your "pff, well, maybe in Ozone *pretentious snigger*" that you have a bee in your bonnet about mastering procedure, which is fine, it can often help people develop their own way of achieving excellent results. But the damaging side of this is the snobbishness that belittles practices besides your own, and you go straight for the "experience teacher/student" angle when you're met with alternative ideas.

It's fine that you do your thing, but wing chun isn't the only martial art in the universe.
Don't confuse your 'beliefs' with 'the one and only way of doing something properly'.

[Lost to the Void]

There is no snobbishness in professionalism.

It's called mastering and not half_assering.

I'm open to different ideas and new techniques. you never stop learning. I recently tried and learned some new techniques for specific problems and bought new year to allow me to do this stuff. Always moving forwards.

Bad ideas and bad advice though.......... Seem to be what you label alternate ideas.
Sounds like alternative facts to me.

[intrusav]

Do some research?!



I'm afraid I wrote your post off as skip-worhy when you started by typing that techno is a type of EDM. That term has no place in the music world as far as I'm concerned...

[intrusav]

I also hope Dr. Nay is taking the piss...

[Aurongroove]

I'm afraid I wrote your post off as skip-worhy when you started by typing that techno is a type of EDM. That term has no place in the music world as far as I'm concerned...

You think Techno isn't a type of Electronic Dance Music?
Electronic Music that you Dance too?
Music you Dance too, made Electronically?
Dancing Music Electronically made?

[Aurongroove]

There is no snobbishness in professionalism.

It's called mastering and not half_assering.

The problem I'm having is your belief that "your way" is professionalism, but another way is not.

I don't understand what you think audio processing is, if you believe that compressing the bass region of a track to a different ratio than the treble region is "unprofessional"
But using standard full spectrum compression, or Using EQ, is fine and "professional".
Like what if in the mix, the bass levels are already fine, and you ONLY want to bring the treble together a touch?
Fine, set up your multiband; 2 bands, bypass the bass, treat the treble a little. Why mess with the bass if it's fine?