Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.
What is Loopy Pro? — Loopy Pro is a powerful, flexible, and intuitive live looper, sampler, clip launcher and DAW for iPhone and iPad. At its core, it allows you to record and layer sounds in real-time to create complex musical arrangements. But it doesn’t stop there—Loopy Pro offers advanced tools to customize your workflow, build dynamic performance setups, and create a seamless connection between instruments, effects, and external gear.
Use it for live looping, sequencing, arranging, mixing, and much more. Whether you're a live performer, a producer, or just experimenting with sound, Loopy Pro helps you take control of your creative process.
Download on the App StoreLoopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.
Song writing and Electronic music ?
Not wishing to intrude on this months SOTMC thread, I thought it may be interesting to open this up for discussion.
Where does song writing 'fit' with electronic music ?
On one hand, we can apply traditional techniques to the tools (DAWs etc) we now use as the 'modern' way of creating songs or we can use these tools to allow us to create more abstract / hybrid music in terms of stucture.
Either way is valid, of course, regarding the latter (as an example), I realised that in Gadget, you can change the time signature from one scene to the next, which opens up all manner of possibly interesting avenues.
For me, a good example of the former is Depeche Mode, they are very good songwriters using electronic instrumentation and production techniques.
For a bit of fun, another great songwriter doing his thing:
Comments
Personally I think any genre can transcend conventional song structures, it's not really anything specific to electronic music.
For example, this is a song that completely does away with verse/chorus/verse/chorus, but rather simply evolves much like electronica does, but is very traditional in it's instrumentation (and also has one of the best vocal performances ever recorded):
In my opinion VCVCBC is a handy shortcut, that helps to keep the flow of music, but other less conventional structures are just as valid - just much harder to successfully pull off. The challenge is to keep the listener interested, and to create a flow, a journey, that reaches a satisfying ending.
The reason the Roy Orbison song works so well is that he was fortunate enough to have such a massive vocal range that he could sing a song that spans 3 octaves, so as his voice keeps rising the intensity increases. There are probably many other devices you could use to keep a song progressing and keep the listener interested, the challenge is simply that in order to do this you have to write more music, more melodies, more parts, and they all have to be strong - it's simply more difficult to do.
There are probably quite a few other well known songs that do this kind of thing, Bohemian Rhapsody springs to mind, Stairway to Heaven as well.
Perhaps I should have been clearer, I'm intrigued in how the tools that we use can influence the way in which music is created, in terms of song writing / track creation. Also, how this applies to instrumental work as well as more 'traditional' songwriting.
I’ve always suspected that the different models of sequencing will allow the structure to “fall into” the available holes more readily if you’re not careful. When my dominant sequencer was the Yamaha CX5M and Music Composer cartridge, I saw no real requirement for ‘sections’ or different periods in my music, and consequently there’s no distinct versey-bit, chorusey-bit etc. People used to say it sounds like computer games music (irritatingly, those were people actually within the computer games industry, yet I’m still waiting to get any commissions from them). This gave me the idea of a type of interactive media music that would be able to be dipped into or out of at any time, and run at any length, for a specific ‘mood’ or ‘scenario’ in what you’re visually or narratively experiencing. Structured music wouldn’t work there, that’d fall into a chorus when the time for a chorus comes along, regardless of what you’re doing. The changes have to be propelled by what you’re doing or experiencing.
The next main change was the Korg SQ10 + Roland CSQ-600 as the main sequencer (pair). This really did allow me to make evolving music that started, and then ended, and in-between was different, but you probably didn’t notice a specific point at which it changed. You could dip in at any point, listen for a while, then leave without thinking you’re about to miss something that might happen next.
When I was using the Yamaha QY20, the sequencer made it more likely that I’d compose a few patterns, then put them together as a section then repeat those section blocks as verses and choruses and middle eights, and so on. That’s the way that sequencer makes things easy. Trouble is, when faced with sections, I almost always pick the same formula of intro/verse/chorus/verse/chorus/middle8/chorus/chorus-fade. Is this the winning one that renders all others mere failed experiments?
If I'm chatting with someone (joe public) and I mention that I write music, the first thing they say is "oh, what do you play?". I tell them my studio is my instrument.
Beck are cool.. This track also, uses the studio as another instrument.
Funny thing about Depeche Mode is that Martin Gore actually composes on guitar and then translates his ideas to synths and sequencers. Maybe that's why his material sounds so fresh ... it's not boxed into XOX ideas.
The thing about composing in midi ( I first started doing this in Finale) is it allowed me to compose music way beyond my ability to play. But it also meant I went down the rabbit hole and took a lot more time to complete music than when I was doing guitar and vocals only.
Pattern sequencers and loopers seem to encourage a song structure that is less about the decisive chord changes that distinguish traditional pop and rock music. Songs become more about incrementally adding (and removing) instruments, and using effects as instruments. If there are chord changes, they are often more subtle, being formed by the interplay of different instruments (e.g., changing bass note while the lead part remains constant).
I think tools like Korg Gadget and Loopy absolutely encourage this kind of evolutionary jamming over traditional, deliberate chord changes and song structures.
I think being to formulaic is exactly what is wrong with music today.
Personally, the disposition of a song is like a self-fulfilling prophecy in which resourcefulness meets emotion. All the while both being completely autonomous.
I can surmise these things about myself regarding song creation.
Where am I at?
Where have I come from?
Where do I wish to go?
Another fact that appears to be in assessing my musical and song writing skill repertoire is where I have found solace through listening.
That has been jazz, electronic, and house music. All of which have limited amount of vocals. I have always assumed that it was because I did not want to associate ANOTHER persons mood or life.
These types of music allowed me to attribute my emotional state and life to the song. Not the other way around.
I always keep this in mind.
Cheers, these are similiar observations to mine. Particularly @thus references to Gadget and @u0421793's points.
I'd say if anything, it can be more difficult (in my experience) of setting out sections as such, it's far more linear than that.
@RustiK, interesting points too. I find it strange when the creator's intention regarding tone or mood comes over in a piece, I prefer to react to it as a natural response to the music itself.
I think that is why probably some people always feel frustrated or constrained when using Gadget.
It is nearly perfect as an app.
However, that is not how my brain delivers melody or flow. Making a hook or loop, Gadget is great.
Continuity and homeostasis is difficult enough, let alone with artificial parameters.
Gadget vs Mindfulness
I think (as if anyone cares) that the best example of songwriting and electronic music are the early albums by Kraftwerk. The electronic sounds were added to the lyrics to create a musical statement that is not that same with only the words or only the electronic sounds. Totally different. They were able to fuse the electronic sound with their new and unique songwriting style to create a new direction for music to follow to decades to come. I consider that pretty good songwriting.
Funny both Beck and Depeche Mode have been mentioned as both were quite crucial in my musical upbringing. Yes, they use a lot of electronics but I see them as the guitar and vocals songwriters just like myself.
So IMO taking a traditional song and dressing it in electronics is not all that evolutionary. Many have been doing this for years and it is cool but I think the real trick is to push the structural boundaries. My cheat is to stretch the middle of the song either to the point of no return or bring it back to the original theme. This again has been done loads since .the seventies so not quite sure what does that mean exactly.
it is really tough because a lot of music that pushes boundaries is unlistenable to an average Joe (myself included) and that is already a killer to me as I like to use souns as a way of sharing rather than in the name of progress.
Not sure if I'm completely on topic here but these are my initial thoughts.
I feel like structure is something that needs to be understood or learned until it can be unlearned. In the beginning I could make nice sounds, but didn't know where to take them, so I put myself through some hardcore structure study divorced from sound. Using basics like a melody, some chords, a bass, some scale changes, and applying transformations to those to make some standard forms.
For me it's come full circle now, I'm more interested in making an overall sound, and then letting that sound take directions in structure that seem to fit the vibe. I have a vocabulary of structure to draw from now, so I'm not just randomly twiddling or stabbing in the dark and calling it done.
^ Was going to add this comment. Vince Clarke (DM->Yaz->Erasure) does the same. For me, it's one of the only ways I can get 'songs' in a more traditional sense out of electronic instruments (particularly with vocals). Otherwise I get lost in sounds (which can be wonderful and even musically productive).
I find that if I avoid too much copy+paste when using sequencers I can avoid the gradual build thing. Not that there's anything wrong with that (some of my best friends are gradual builders). My history with sequencing sounds somewhat similar to @u0421793's first paragraph above. For years (decades?) I'd start something and copy and paste it out and move on to the next track. Bump that one over by 4 measures and move on to the next track. Rinse and repeat. Then, I'd go and cut bits out to make drops and never wind up happy with it though I had a total blast creating it. So, I try to avoid too much copy+paste. I still have a blast creating.
One thing that sets certain pattern sequencers apart is the ability to transpose the sequence. If you listen to 'berlin school' stuff on the utubez you can hear what I mean. With that feature included, you can use them in many additional ways.
For me the structure should be a journey, the technical side of it is far less important than what the song communicates.
I've heard "Berlin school" mentioned a number of times on the forum. I need to look it up.
Regarding transposing sequences, Yamaha Mobile Music Sequencer does exactly what you're talking about. It wants you to specify the chord of each "section," and, in doing so, it will transpose the notes of all the patterns in that section to fit the chord. Pretty cool. It starts to be reminiscent of the automatic accompaniment apps that @Musikman4Christ often mentions.
Here's one of my favourite artists - 'The Gasman'. Structurally it's all over the place, but I find it very engaging nonetheless:
@Igneous1 Thanks for introducing me to The Gasman. Great music. According to Apple Music it's one guy named Christopher Reeves. He uses reel to reel tapes of classical music to make his songs.
Couldn't have said it better.
This is what I'm getting into for the first time in the past month with Live.
Here's a great example of what you are talking about:
He's amazing, isn't he? I've been enjoying his stuff too.
@mkell424
Yes, Mr Reeves is a talented chap, indeed !
I think he's and he's a good reference for the topic too. The convoluted structures he uses make his work really interesting to me, it's almost like listening to a musical puzzle to try to determine what's going on at any one time.
A bit like trying to follow things in material with lots of time signature changes, in fact, I'd say it's like 'prog-rock for the now' .
Cool track, @mkell424.
One of the earliest examples I can think of ambient style, gradual-build, studio-as-instrument (for you, @RUncELL) songwriting, is the album "Future Days" by Can (1973). It is all about the mixing console and effects.
Here is the opening track, showing the technique in full force. Great on headphones. Stay with it: the slow build pays off:
"Future Days" by Can (1973).
One of my most played records of all time...I had it dubbed on cassette by a friend before I ever bought it. I haven't played it for a while now maybe it's time to get it out again.
Thanks @thus that's a great track.. I'm a fan of jazz/blues style guitar. And yes great use of the desk as another instrument. I've heard of Can but not heard much of theirs cheers.
Just another couple of examples, both my faves, The O Jays- for the love of money, And Frankie goes to Hollywood- welcome to the pleasure dome.
Thanks @NoiseHorse. I care. It almost goes without saying what pioneers they are. The sounds, structures/arrangements ideas are still being used today.. They built their own sound generators, fx units etc in the late 60's early 70's. How many people can do that even today. Here's a great read for anyone interested
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Kraftwerk-Machine-Music-Pascal-Bussy/dp/B00CKAKSWS/ref=sr_1_14?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1439306215&sr=1-14
@thus Great stuff! I've heard that they were legends but never owned any music by them. I perused some of their albums and they were way a head of their time. I think I might like them better than Zappa.
@RUceLL Welcome to the Pleasure Dome is a classic. Not only was it great music but it was one of the first albums recorded on digital tape.
Some of the best Electronic Music tracks I have downloaded recently are from DjSubconscious check this one :-
https://www.trackitdown.net/recordlabel/135631/lupara-records.html
What do I need to do to be this good?
99.99% perspiration, for that 0.01 % of inspiration
Here's a goodie mind:
http://wcologarb.bandcamp.com/track/lesson-i-learn
Long live Molvania!