How to create longer experimental music?

jwmmakerofmusic

So, this is something I'm currently struggling with. I've tried using Google to no avail (every site it pointed me to is related to EDM production in one form or another).

I am and have often been quite well at creating electroacoustic pieces clocking in at around 1-3 minutes, both on the PC and on the iPad. This doesn't mean that all of them are good, but rather it means I do well enough. I've produced many dance music tracks for a long time both on PC and 1-2 on the iPad (as my current interest isn't in producing dance music so much as it is in listening to it and creating electroacoustic music instead).

So, the dilemma? I want to create behemoth pieces of music that can clock in around 30-60 minutes (or even longer if one truly wishes to eshew CD/DVD format). Doesn't matter the sound sources used, because the joy of creating electroacoustic music is nobody can tell you what found sounds to record for usage/royalty free found sounds (samples) to use.

Rather, what are some strategies you use to create an alien soundscape vs something like Jünglinge (which I've probably listened to way too many times during the past year, lol)? What are some strategies you use to lengthen an idea without boring the listener? Any strategies on lengthening the piece of music at all? How do you create a pleasant soundscape vs an uncomfortable one?

(If you notice, I'm not necessarily looking for a tutorial on how I should do something as I know how to experiment with sound already, lol. Rather, I'm asking what strategies you employ to go about making longer pieces of music and other aesthetic ideas so that we may try each others' strategies out and that, by inspiration, I can employ some of your strategies to see what fits, and then springboard new strategies I come up with on my own.)

Thank you all in advance.

db909

I like to work in loops, 4-8 bars. It just helps me keep organized conceptually. I usually have a ton of loops recorded for a song that don't end up making the cut. So for a longer pieces, I would not cut those out and instead weave them together in a fashion that makes sense and has momentum. Don't over think it. Just keep things moving with a comfortable rate of change of elements.

TLDR: same way you work on any other material, just with more material/perhaps longer sections or phrases.

stemshade

i would say you need evolution (new ideas, new "hook" ) every 5 or so minutes, with a seamless transition. also maybe keeping a line the same but morphing into other sounds. also try using sequencers like xynthesizer that can create minimal (or huge) changes in the sequence, so they don't get repetitive. also make minimal adjustments in filter and amp settings throughout to make sure there is more movement.

animal

I used to play with some guys, which made it easier on the attention-span-level (because we would play " all/solo1/1to2/2to3/solo3/3to1/solo2 etc.). Playing solo I started having one setup on iPad Air, another on iPad Air2 (each 10-15 minutes)(maybe some kind of "interludes"" in between coming from iPhone), and thus you can vary not only with Filters/ Effects/binaural panning, but with playful setup-changes. The work is in setting up the next "player", while modulating away in the current one, it works, though, and is a lot of fun. I also play very slow movements, though (intended to focus the attention), anyways, and have realtime-manipulated (audio-reactive) videos running simultaneously, also a help... .

[Deleted User]

A lot of my iPad stuff is probably experimental and soundscapish in nature.

I don't have a plan when I start - I just load up a batch of apps in AUM and jam about. Once I have a few recordings I load some up into Auria, and then create a mix between the tracks, fading in the 'good bits' and fading out the chaff until I have some sort of listenable thing. Sometimes the AUM jam will be good enough on its own with no further overdubbing.

Trust your ears, and above all have fun.

stemshade

@MonzoPro said:
A lot of my iPad stuff is probably experimental and soundscapish in nature.

I don't have a plan when I start - I just load up a batch of apps in AUM and jam about. Once I have a few recordings I load some up into Auria, and then create a mix between the tracks, fading in the 'good bits' and fading out the chaff until I have some sort of listenable thing. Sometimes the AUM jam will be good enough on its own with no further overdubbing.

Trust your ears, and above all have fun.

so you record your jams to stereo before going to auria?

jwmmakerofmusic

Man oh man, some pretty great strategies to try out so far. Keep 'em coming mates.

Will

I usually just jam to a single track in some DAW. Then add + edit. Or it will start in Loopy since it can handle very long loops. Those get sort of arranged into something onto a timeline and then add/edit from there.

Think for long-form soundscapey stuff, or at least the stuff I like, you have to be willing to let something sit for a while. STFU and getting out of the way are key parts of it (for me).

JohnnyGoodyear

@syrupcore said:
Think for long-form soundscapey stuff, or at least the stuff I like, you have to be willing to let something sit for a while. STFU and getting out of the way are key parts of it (for me).

Agree with this whole-heartedly, however it's also the reason I like apps with note sections. Often when I come back months later and discover something decent I have no idea what I made it with and absolutely no idea how that other guy played it....

Processaurus

You need evolution, but it also helps to have a motif. There needs to be a reward for the listener to grasp the whole piece.

[Deleted User]

@vpich said:

@MonzoPro said:
A lot of my iPad stuff is probably experimental and soundscapish in nature.

I don't have a plan when I start - I just load up a batch of apps in AUM and jam about. Once I have a few recordings I load some up into Auria, and then create a mix between the tracks, fading in the 'good bits' and fading out the chaff until I have some sort of listenable thing. Sometimes the AUM jam will be good enough on its own with no further overdubbing.

Trust your ears, and above all have fun.

so you record your jams to stereo before going to auria?

Yeah, AUM handles all that nicely.

Will

@Processaurus said:
You need evolution, but it also helps to have a motif. There needs to be a reward for the listener to grasp the whole piece.

Not to disagree because I like evolution in music as well but for the purpose of discussion I'll just note that Eno's Music For Airports proves the opposite can also be true.

Sometimes in soundscape/ambient/whatever music the music paints a picture instead of telling a story. It sets the context for a story instead of telling it. Sometimes paintings tell stories but more often they invite you to add the story. What is she smiling about?

Will

@JohnnyGoodyear said:

@syrupcore said:
Think for long-form soundscapey stuff, or at least the stuff I like, you have to be willing to let something sit for a while. STFU and getting out of the way are key parts of it (for me).

Agree with this whole-heartedly, however it's also the reason I like apps with note sections. Often when I come back months later and discover something decent I have no idea what I made it with and absolutely no idea how that other guy played it....

I definitely definitely find this to be the case with Loopy in particular. Being able to strew the loops out across a timeline so I know wtf I was thinking a year from now is the thing I'm most excited about with LP3. Hoping it's easy to toggle back and forth between the current all-the-loops view and the timeline view ala Ableton. Would be amazing if there could be a set of different timelines actually, for experimental purposes.

Processaurus

@syrupcore said:

@Processaurus said:
You need evolution, but it also helps to have a motif. There needs to be a reward for the listener to grasp the whole piece.

Not to disagree because I like evolution in music as well but for the purpose of discussion I'll just note that Eno's Music For Airports proves the opposite can also be true.

Sometimes in soundscape/ambient/whatever music the music paints a picture instead of telling a story. It sets the context for a story instead of telling it. Sometimes paintings tell stories but more often they invite you to add the story. What is she smiling about?

Yes! Good point. A lot of the music I like is like that, too. Static. But, I feel like with Eno, even if the songs don't move, the album does, albeit in scenes.

[Deleted User]

@Processaurus said:

@syrupcore said:

@Processaurus said:
You need evolution, but it also helps to have a motif. There needs to be a reward for the listener to grasp the whole piece.

Not to disagree because I like evolution in music as well but for the purpose of discussion I'll just note that Eno's Music For Airports proves the opposite can also be true.

Sometimes in soundscape/ambient/whatever music the music paints a picture instead of telling a story. It sets the context for a story instead of telling it. Sometimes paintings tell stories but more often they invite you to add the story. What is she smiling about?

Yes! Good point. A lot of the music I like is like that, too. Static. But, I feel like with Eno, even if the songs don't move, the album does, albeit in scenes.

Isn't the whole point of creating experimental music to produce something that doesn't follow traditional aesthetic, and technical restrictions?

As soon as you start putting a formula together, and worrying about the emotional response of the listener to the finished piece it no longer warrants the label 'experimental', and instead becomes avant garde jazz, math rock, soundscapes, dark ambient etc. That's my interpretation of the genre anyway. Music from the other side of the fence.

RedSkyLullaby

Do one song, sample the end of it and transform it in to something else for next section and build on it and do same again until you have your epic long track.
If you don't already have would recommend: samplr, borderlands granular, idensity, sliver, soundscaper for type of lengthening ideas you mention

rickwaugh

Some interesting points above, but forgetting about structure does beg the question of whether you're just trying to do something for yourself, or you actually want someone to listen to it, because people like form and repetition. As to whether it's still "experimental" or not, who gives a rat's posterior - the question is what you want to get out of writing a piece of music, and whatever structure that is, is just fine.

"Standard" composition asks for a fine balance between newness and repetition. If you simply keep putting new things in that are completely unrelated every few minutes, well, it can be good, but that's not typically what catches people. It's a theme they can latch on to, a progression that makes sense. Doesn't mean you just keep repeating yourself, you can take what you did before and change it enough so it's still recognizable, but new. I would also opine that simply from the point of view of being very satisfied with a piece of music, you have to have some structure to it to feel like you have composed something, rather than just stringing things together until you get the length you want. I would be willing to say that Eno would have been able to explain his structure.

Take what you've started with, repeat it with differences. Break it up with different tempos, and sounds. I always think of myself as a very textural composer - I will start with a riff or progression, then I tend to think of things like, "next section a bit lighter, or harder, or very spacy/air." And I want a beginning, middle, and end. It can be way out there, but there has to be something to pull it all together.

[Deleted User]

@rickwaugh said:
As to whether it's still "experimental" or not, who gives a rat's posterior

That was the posters original question, which is why we're taking the trouble to answer this.

stemshade

@MonzoPro said:

@rickwaugh said:
As to whether it's still "experimental" or not, who gives a rat's posterior

That was the posters original question, which is why we're taking the trouble to answer this.

but really, a rat only has a back, thighs, and an asshole. i don't think it has butt cheeks

rickwaugh

@vpich said:

@MonzoPro said:

@rickwaugh said:
As to whether it's still "experimental" or not, who gives a rat's posterior

That was the posters original question, which is why we're taking the trouble to answer this.

but really, a rat only has a back, thighs, and an asshole. i don't think it has butt cheeks

Little fuzzy ones.

stemshade

@rickwaugh said:
Some interesting points above, but forgetting about structure does beg the question of whether you're just trying to do something for yourself, or you actually want someone to listen to it, because people like form and repetition. As to whether it's still "experimental" or not, who gives a rat's posterior - the question is what you want to get out of writing a piece of music, and whatever structure that is, is just fine.

"Standard" composition asks for a fine balance between newness and repetition. If you simply keep putting new things in that are completely unrelated every few minutes, well, it can be good, but that's not typically what catches people. It's a theme they can latch on to, a progression that makes sense. Doesn't mean you just keep repeating yourself, you can take what you did before and change it enough so it's still recognizable, but new. I would also opine that simply from the point of view of being very satisfied with a piece of music, you have to have some structure to it to feel like you have composed something, rather than just stringing things together until you get the length you want. I would be willing to say that Eno would have been able to explain his structure.

Take what you've started with, repeat it with differences. Break it up with different tempos, and sounds. I always think of myself as a very textural composer - I will start with a riff or progression, then I tend to think of things like, "next section a bit lighter, or harder, or very spacy/air." And I want a beginning, middle, and end. It can be way out there, but there has to be something to pull it all together.

good points, even if it's challenging to figure out i like structure.

Telefunky

I use to track 15-45 minutes sessions, electronic or acoustic and collect the 'better' ones.
For whatever reason there's some consistency in timing and tuning (but I have no idea about absolute values).
On review I cut what appeals to me and arrange it.
Sometimes a kind of raw track evolves from this process, which may be extended later by sections that didn't make it on first review.
As I can't reproduce whatever I play there are always slight variations even in similiar parts.
A sequence 3 of those repeated gives a loop that's almost indetactable, so things seem to simply flow on and can be extended to arbitrary length.

cian

Emo has loads of structure to his music. However his structures don't evolve in a narrative sense unlike traditional music. So he comes up with a generative idea that can evolve over the duration and lets it run. Also look at the minimalist composers.

As for structure. The old classical structures can work well. Start with a theme (however you define it). Then develop and vary it over the course of the piece. Could be ABA or ABAB or anything really. The trick is to vary your ideas just enough to maintain interest.

Alternatively you can structure your piece around an idea or theme. Maybe a poem, or something in nature. That helps give your piece shape.

Moderndaycompiler

Since Eno has been mentioned here, the "Oblique Strategies" could be useful.

http://stoney.sb.org/eno/oblique.html

Icepulse

If there's one thing I've come to realize, working w/ an OP-1, it's that production is key to keeping spare,repetitious extended passages interesting; the actual timbre of the mix. Don't artificially "spice it up" by adding superfluous aural seasonings. If you want to be truly experimental, try to avoid all conventional manner of structure and workflow.

oat_phipps

I think this would be a good listen for you. He made it for himself to have something to listen to on long plane flights. The repetition seems almost silly outside of the track, but when you're listening to it, it makes sense and encompasses you.

oat_phipps

To go on, I'm someone who started writing pop music and always hated too much repetition or repeat choruses without any 'curveballs' thrown in. But as I've gotten into making longer tracks (usually 10-20 mins) I've learned to embrace repetition, not because it artificially lenghtens the song, but because it is best for capturing a vibe and then riding it out.

Tl;dr don't be afraid of repetition as long as you have one good groove or hook.

[Deleted User]

What eno likes to do is playing 16 steps vs 15 steps,
so stuff doesn't repeat after 16 steps but 16x15 steps ...
You get the idea.
Music for airports is done like that.
Other people are using this to create polyrhythms.
It's the same thing.

mschenkel.it

Tl;dr. But I will read. Just not now.
Create several different themes and find a way to seamlessly join them together. Then, from time time, revive some theme you already discussed to sew everything as one big piece.

1P18

"How to create longer experimental music?"

Have you tried experimenting?

jwmmakerofmusic

So far, so good. I'm gleaning a lot of useful information from this and marking down in a strategy notebook. Keep up the excellent work, and happy holidays.