Dubstepforum.com

10bag posted something along these lines a couple days ago and I agree with him 100%...

People make music the wrong way nowadays, imitating others and trying to learn everything there is to know, when what they should be doing is sitting in a room with a daw and making god damn music...

I've seen people explaining in great detail how a compressor works, then I check out one of their tunes and it sounds like they made it in 5 minutes...

The only way to get better at making beats, is to make beats. Over and over until you can make one that sounds good.

Im not in any way saying knowledge of production is bad, I'm just urging people to stop assuming that knowing loads of shit about making music will actually make you better at making music.

I've been producing for nearly 7 years, and the only thing I can honestly say I am glad about learning is gain structure. That's it. I don't watch tutorials, I don't worry about my drums not sounding as good as producer x, I just work on a tune until I like it. And I am so so glad that this is how I do it.

/end rant

Agreed with that imitation thing, I've spent way too many hours in that camp. Atm my main focus is making music in the most original way I can, trying things I haven't before and finding my own 'voice'

its not wrong to copy but its wrong to copy stuff you like

BudSpencertron wrote:its not wrong to copy but its wrong to copy stuff you like

Sorry but that's retarded. How about you just don't copy? It's amazing huh. Making a tune that was actually thought of by yourself. Almost unheard of.

Talent borrows, genius steals.

so drake is retarted for making even gayer rnb?

BudSpencertron wrote:so drake is retarted for making even gayer rnb?

Do you even need to pose that fucking question, lol.

Fuck producing, it's all about amassing vsts and saving a shitload of tutorials to your watch later playlist.

Getting hung up on trying not to imitate others is just as bad as getting hung up on imitating them imo. People always shout to have fun and make what you want, but only if it's not imitating someone else! Every dungeon tune has a reese in it, yet some sound better than others and yada yada. Just have fun

Everything else I totally agree with though. I used to get so hung up on trying to be super technical it sucked the fun out of actually being creative and making music. I'm a lot sloppier when it comes to 'following the rules' and what not, but I think my tunes have improved because of it, and it's definitely a lot more fun. all bout dem vibes m8 namsayin

BudSpencertron wrote:its not wrong to copy but its wrong to copy stuff you like

I loose my mind every time I see a post by this guy.

And yeah, just making new shit helps a lot.

There's no rules.

Trainrek wrote:

BudSpencertron wrote:its not wrong to copy but its wrong to copy stuff you like

Sorry but that's retarded. How about you just don't copy? It's amazing huh. Making a tune that was actually thought of by yourself. Almost unheard of.

All ideas are a synthesis of others.

I'm just starting out, and I've found that imitation has really helped up until now. In order to imitate a sound, you need to develop your analysis skills to the point you can pick out why you even like the thing you're imitating, what really makes it work etc. Once you've successfully imitated something, you can focus on using it in an original way. In the beginning, a big problem for me was having to discover sounds rather than dilberately create, leading to a projects folder full of mediocre loops. Once you've learned how to deliberately create a set of sounds you like, ideas go into the DAW much smoother. It's still important to set aside time to discover new sounds though.

How can you imitate and be original at the same time? It's not really imitating then is it?

Also the imitation part wasn't really the main point of the thread, I'm glad people know what I'm talking about.

jonahmann wrote:There's no rules.

Trainrek wrote:

BudSpencertron wrote:its not wrong to copy but its wrong to copy stuff you like

Sorry but that's retarded. How about you just don't copy? It's amazing huh. Making a tune that was actually thought of by yourself. Almost unheard of.

All ideas are a synthesis of others.

I know what you are saying man, and I agree, all I am saying is that instead of trying to recreate producer x's style, sit in a daw and find your own style

Virtually everything I do comes from the ideas that come to mind when listening to other music.

It's the original spark which gets everything going. New ideas come from this, and so on, and so on.

Some of the most creative things I've done are the result of a chain reaction, starting with something small like "oh, i like that orchestral stab in this track"

I don't think you guys are understanding me, other music giving you ideas isn't imitation. That's inspiration, and that's perfectly acceptable. Although I agree there is a fine line between inspiration and imitation.

Even imitation is fine. People should be left to their own devices and do what makes them happy. People often have far too clear ideas of how THEY like to make music, that they're really passionate about and think there's some universal truth to it that they need to. That 'BE ORIGINAL, DON'T BE AN IMITATOR' one is the one I hear the most out of those (and most people espousing that one sound like carbon copies themselves. Not sayign the OP is, I haven't heard their music, it's a general observation).

(Re)production in art is like reproduction and evolution in the animal kingdom. A constant attempt at making a copy of something that's been proven as beneficial, but with each copy there's some some tiny mutation, amounting to a small change from the original. And a couple of years later, all those small changes add up to a big one that doesn't resemble the original. Sometimes evolution takes a giant leap out of nowhere though and that's dope, but those leaps are bracketed by long periods of relative inactivity and slow change.

I think 'shut up and just produce' works for a lot of people, but the way they'll get there is up to them

Genevieve wrote:(Re)production in art is like reproduction and evolution in the animal kingdom. A constant attempt at making a copy of something that's been proven as beneficial, but with each copy there's some some tiny mutation, amounting to a small change from the original. And a couple of years later, all those small changes add up to a big one that doesn't resemble the original. Sometimes evolution takes a giant leap out of nowhere though and that's dope, but those leaps are bracketed by long periods of relative inactivity and slow change.

This is a nice way of looking at it. Of course, contrary to evolution, we also have the oppurtunity to lift things that work in one genre and drop them into another, like crossbreeding a badger and a bee to get the badass honey badger. Many genres seem to be examples of this approach - moombahton allegedly started when someone played some house records at reggaeton tempo, mixing with reggaeton. As a genre it's now developed it's own sounds, feels and techniques to the point where it is no longer "just" slowed down house with a reggaeton beat.

Don't even dare bring moombahton into this discussion.

Ha, just the first ridiculous genre that I know the evolution of off the top of my head.