Mix Sounds Like Crap - Give It A Listen & Help Me Find Out Why!

[dvyce]

I appreciate the time that you take out of your day to write these posts dvyce.

no prob

In regards to what makes a verse a "verse" and a chorus a "chorus" what do you think it is then if not the increase energy in the chorus instead of being in the verse? I've always been somewhat indecisive about whether its the "lyrics" that make the chorus or the "music" that makes the chorus.


You say that it's the writing that makes the verse or the chorus but for people with overly analytical minds that doesn't tell me anything... writing can refer to the composition (notes) instrumentation, sound design, arrangement... Etc... Could you at least be a bit more specific?

If the opposite can just as easily be true then it would be helpful if you could show me some songs in which the chorus had less highs than the verse. I would be 100% willing to convert my stance on the subject to your own because I feel like were on to something here and like you said I can see how this could be severely limiting my song making.

It's really "songwriting 101"… verses and choruses are pretty basic stuff… there are plenty of books out there on songwriting that may be helpful to you (though i am more of the belief that you can't learn songwriting from a book and you just need to "understand" songs. But a book can surely help you with understanding song structure)

Or search online for "song structure", "verse and chorus writing", etc.

There are literally millions of songs that do what I describe, but here is the first one that popped into my head as a great example of this:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PL72Tyxe1rc

Nine Inch Nails "March Of The Pigs"

A perfect example… the verse is all crazy drums, guitar, synth, bass, distortion and extreme energy… and in the chorus, everything mellows out as it goes to just light piano.

I'll try to listen to more string arrangements and do midi mockups of those arrangements in order to "fine tune" the tone of the string section and really nail it and find similarities in the voicings.

I understand what you're saying in regards to there not really being a letter grade in the music business. It's either commercial quality or not yes.

In regards to the samples I'm using... Even the piano and the bell you find to be of a poor quality? Great. Now I have even more to figure out. I mean... It's a bell sound... with one note.

yeah, not a very good piano sound… not a good bell sound...

barely sounds like a bell. I could tell what you are going for with that sound, so I figured out it is supposed to be a bell. There are many different quality and types of bell sounds…. bicycle bell, school bell, church bell, boxing bell, telephone ringer bell, xmas bell, etc.

absolutely a single sound, one note, can sound like shit.

The string parts were made using 4 notes actually. Not that it will actually make a difference...

I said 4 notes: 3 for the chord, one for the bass.

 

[dannydawiz]

no prob




It's really "songwriting 101"… verses and choruses are pretty basic stuff… there are plenty of books out there on songwriting that may be helpful to you (though i am more of the belief that you can't learn songwriting from a book and you just need to "understand" songs. But a book can surely help you with understanding song structure)

Or search online for "song structure", "verse and chorus writing", etc.

There are literally millions of songs that do what I describe, but here is the first one that popped into my head as a great example of this:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PL72Tyxe1rc

Nine Inch Nails "March Of The Pigs"

A perfect example… the verse is all crazy drums, guitar, synth, bass, distortion and extreme energy… and in the chorus, everything mellows out as it goes to just light piano.




yeah, not a very good piano sound… not a good bell sound...

barely sounds like a bell. I could tell what you are going for with that sound, so I figured out it is supposed to be a bell. There are many different quality and types of bell sounds…. bicycle bell, school bell, church bell, boxing bell, telephone ringer bell, xmas bell, etc.

absolutely a single sound, one note, can sound like shit.






I said 4 notes: 3 for the chord, one for the bass.

The time signature in the nine inch nails song is quite odd. I believe 7/8 with mixtures of 4/4. Definitely not my taste arrangement-wise though... The chord progression of the piano sounds throws me off as well. Everything before that though, I find to be quite enjoyable.

I appreciate the example. I suppose I'll think about your point of view a little bit more.

I feel like everything has been said at this point. I'll try to internalize it a bit more and continue working. Thanks again.

 

[dannydawiz]

UPDATE: After messing around with the stereo imaging/EQ a bit more and applying some more sidechaining as suggested I feel like I've gotten the synth section to sound considerably better than when I first started this thread. That combined with everything that everyone has said and contributed. Here's a new updated version of the mix. Ignore the orchestral section as I'm referring mostly to the later section.

With that being said... there is STILL something that just isn't there that I'm going to continue to grind until I figure out what it is later. I just wanted to thank everyone here for being so kind and generous to help me out.

 

[dvyce]

The time signature in the nine inch nails song is quite odd. I believe 7/8 with mixtures of 4/4. Definitely not my taste arrangement-wise though... The chord progression of the piano sounds throws me off as well. Everything before that though, I find to be quite enjoyable.

I appreciate the example. I suppose I'll think about your point of view a little bit more.

I feel like everything has been said at this point. I'll try to internalize it a bit more and continue working. Thanks again.

If you find any part of the song enjoyable, that is just a bonus since you will have spent at least a few minutes listening to it… so you may as well enjoy it

But it was really just chosen to illustrate a "verse/chorus" point.


…Another thing to think about with regard to helping you understand "verse/chorus" is this:

you can play a cover of a song with a simple guitar or piano playing only sustained quarter notes with no change in energy and no added production elements and the "verse" will still be the "verse"… the "chorus" will still be the "chorus"… the "bridge" will still be the "bridge", etc, etc.

The song is written that way.

And switching up the energy or instrumentation does not magically cause the verse and chorus to switch places.



by the way, here is another example:

U2 "The Fly"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkpSFhhicag


I'm not trying to think up examples… there are literally millions of examples in every genre… but this one just happened to pop into my head just now.

 

[dannydawiz]

If you find any part of the song enjoyable, that is just a bonus since you will have spent at least a few minutes listening to it… so you may as well enjoy it

But it was really just chosen to illustrate a "verse/chorus" point.




…Another thing to think about with regard to helping you understand "verse/chorus" is this:

you can play a cover of a song with a simple guitar or piano playing only sustained quarter notes with no change in energy and no added production elements and the "verse" will still be the "verse"… the "chorus" will still be the "chorus"… the "bridge" will still be the "bridge", etc, etc.

The song is written that way.

And switching up the energy or instrumentation does not magically cause the verse and chorus to switch places.



by the way, here is another example:

U2 "The Fly"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkpSFhhicag


I'm not trying to think up examples… there are literally millions of examples in every genre… but this one just happened to pop into my head just now.

I think I'm getting a bit closer to understand what you're saying. Basically what you're saying is that the verse and the chorus or bridge aren't determined by arrangement, mixing, or instrumentation. You're saying that it's determined by YOU or ME. The writer of the song.

It's very different from the way I've originally looked at things so I have to find some way to adapt it to my arrangement/form "Framework". I've always looked at musical sections in terms of Notes/Letters (A) , Development, Variations and a progression of energy.

Some sections are louder and some sections are quieter.
Some sections have a lot more development going on while some sections have completely different notes.
Some sections have the exact same notes but with a higher level of energy.
Some sections rest on a root harmony while other sections maintain the chord progression.
Some sections contain the FULL instrumentation of the song while some sections are a small part of it.
Some sections occur once in a track while some sections repeat 2 or 3 times. (Verse, Chorus)

The thing is... some songs to me don't sound to me like they have verses or choruses at all. If you remove the lyrics to a track and just listen to an instrumental all you really have is a chunk of contrasting sections. I've always found the "verse" "chorus" structure to be severely limiting in general due to the fact that there are a lot of songs I've heard that just do NOT follow this sort of pattern at all. Not only that but it leaves a LOT of things unclear about the track.

In traditional "songwriting 101" or whatever it is you wanna call it what you usually have is this sort of thing going on. Intro > verse > chorus >verse 2 > chorus 2 > bridge> chorus 3 > outro.

This doesn't really tell me anything though because there are a TON of different types of intros, a TON of different types of verses, and a TON of different types of choruses.

Some intros fade in
Some intros start off quiet
Some intros start off loud
Some intros start with drums
Some intros start with guitars

Not only that but the length (bars) of each section is also left unclear.

This same type of approach can be applied to verses and choruses.

Now on the other hand if I said this...

(A) 8 bars (mellow section)
(A) 16 bars (development in the instrumentation)
(B) 16 bars (loudest section)
(B) 8 bars (break)
(A) 8 bars (build the track back up again)

This to me tells me A LOT more about the "structure" or "form" of a track.

Some songs I've heard don't even seem to really have a chorus. Which is why looking up "verse, chorus" in google or reading songwriting books doesn't seem to have much practical use.

In this track for example...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqg2U4k2BcY

Without lyrics, which section is the "verse" and which is the "chorus".

 

[dvyce]

I think I'm getting a bit closer to understand what you're saying. Basically what you're saying is that the verse and the chorus or bridge aren't determined by arrangement, mixing, or instrumentation. You're saying that it's determined by YOU or ME. The writer of the song.

It's very different from the way I've originally looked at things so I have to find some way to adapt it to my arrangement/form "Framework". I've always looked at musical sections in terms of Notes/Letters (A) , Development, Variations and a progression of energy.

It is fine to look at music that way… but then you are not talking about "verses" and "choruses".

The terms "verse" and "chorus" specifically relate to lyrical constructions.

Some sections are louder and some sections are quieter.
Some sections have a lot more development going on while some sections have completely different notes.
Some sections have the exact same notes but with a higher level of energy.
Some sections rest on a root harmony while other sections maintain the chord progression.
Some sections contain the FULL instrumentation of the song while some sections are a small part of it.
Some sections occur once in a track while some sections repeat 2 or 3 times. (Verse, Chorus)

The thing is... some songs to me don't sound to me like they have verses or choruses at all.

some songs DON'T have verses and choruses… basically, every instrumental track in existence.

If you remove the lyrics to a track and just listen to an instrumental all you really have is a chunk of contrasting sections.

You can't compare "a song with the vocals removed" to "an instrumental song".

They are two completely different animals.

A vocal based song is crafted around vocals to support those vocals. Removing the vocals leaves you with an incomplete product that was not designed to be listened to on its own and doesn't relate to an "instrumental song."

I've always found the "verse" "chorus" structure to be severely limiting in general due to the fact that there are a lot of songs I've heard that just do NOT follow this sort of pattern at all. Not only that but it leaves a LOT of things unclear about the track.

In traditional "songwriting 101" or whatever it is you wanna call it what you usually have is this sort of thing going on. Intro > verse > chorus >verse 2 > chorus 2 > bridge> chorus 3 > outro.

This doesn't really tell me anything though because there are a TON of different types of intros, a TON of different types of verses, and a TON of different types of choruses.

Some intros fade in
Some intros start off quiet
Some intros start off loud
Some intros start with drums
Some intros start with guitars

Not only that but the length (bars) of each section is also left unclear.

This same type of approach can be applied to verses and choruses.

Now on the other hand if I said this...

(A) 8 bars (mellow section)
(A) 16 bars (development in the instrumentation)
(B) 16 bars (loudest section)
(B) 8 bars (break)
(A) 8 bars (build the track back up again)

This to me tells me A LOT more about the "structure" or "form" of a track.

Some songs I've heard don't even seem to really have a chorus. Which is why looking up "verse, chorus" in google or reading songwriting books doesn't seem to have much practical use.

In this track for example...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqg2U4k2BcY

Without lyrics, which section is the "verse" and which is the "chorus".

That Zedd song does not have a verse or a chorus.

There is no "verse" or "chorus" section.

It is an instrumental song.

You should not be talking about "verses" and "choruses" with regard to songs like that.

For a song like that, you just build it with a dynamic arc in whatever way is pleasing to you.


You can call things whatever you want… intro, outro, breakdown, bass drop, bridge, hook, build, rise, boom part, woosh transition, spacey section, etc, etc...

Give them whatever descriptive names you'd like

But there is no "verse" or "chorus".

And it is not structured like a "verse/chorus" song.

You are the one who mentioned "verse" and "chorus".

I would never talk about "verse" and "chorus" in the context of a song like that… that type of song structure is basically just a journey from where it starts where where it ends…

They are two completely different styles of songwriting with completely different structures.


…and, yes, there are "a ton of different types of intros, a ton of different types of verses and a ton of different types of choruses"… and that is just further illustration of the fact that you can't neatly say "OK, so a verse does this, a chorus does this and an intro does this".

What you need to do is just make it sound good… doesn't matter HOW it does it… just that it sounds GOOD.

 

[dvyce]

Intro > verse > chorus >verse 2 > chorus 2 > bridge> chorus 3 > outro.

(A) 8 bars (mellow section)
(A) 16 bars (development in the instrumentation)
(B) 16 bars (loudest section)
(B) 8 bars (break)
(A) 8 bars (build the track back up again)

Here is an analogy for you regarding these two ways of describing the structure of a track.

Both of these things "describe" a piece of music... but the "verse/chorus" method gives no relevant description of the structure of an instrumental song... and the "descriptive" version gives no relevant information on the structure of a lyrical song. But they give all the information you need for their proper purposes.

So you can think of it like cooking a "steak" vs "bread".

You can describe a steak in terms of:
-rare or well done
-grilled or broiled
-tough or pulls apart
-au poive or plain
-chopped or steak
-which cut
etc, etc

You can describe bread in terms of:
-savory or sweet
-crusty or soft
-loaf or rolls
-flaky or doughy
-filled or not
-white or multigrain
etc, etc


They both do a great job of describing what they are intended to describe, but they do a terrible job of describing each other.

Both are "cooking"... but using "bread" descriptives for "steak, and "steak" descriptives for "bread" will not be of much use at all in telling someone how you'd like your meal prepared.

 

[dannydawiz]

Here is an analogy for you regarding these two ways of describing the structure of a track.

Both of these things "describe" a piece of music... but the "verse/chorus" method gives no relevant description of the structure of an instrumental song... and the "descriptive" version gives no relevant information on the structure of a lyrical song. But they give all the information you need for their proper purposes.

So you can think of it like cooking a "steak" vs "bread".

You can describe a steak in terms of:
-rare or well done
-grilled or broiled
-tough or pulls apart
-au poive or plain
-chopped or steak
-which cut
etc, etc

You can describe bread in terms of:
-savory or sweet
-crusty or soft
-loaf or rolls
-flaky or doughy
-filled or not
-white or multigrain
etc, etc


They both do a great job of describing what they are intended to describe, but they do a terrible job of describing each other.

Both are "cooking"... but using "bread" descriptives for "steak, and "steak" descriptives for "bread" will not be of much use at all in telling someone how you'd like your meal prepared.

You've just completely changed my perspective on songwriting. I haven't really heard anyone put it together so well.

Understanding the difference between a song (verse, chorus, etc...) and an instrumental gives me a certain understanding in regards to approach that I've never really considered. I've always thought of instrumental songs as having "chorus sections" and "verse sections" so to separate the two changes things up quite a bit.

I feel like I've been restricting myself with this entire "verse" "chorus" thing because I'm always trying to write my tracks with vocals in mind. I'll reflect upon this more until more things begin to click.

Thank you.

 

[dvyce]

You've just completely changed my perspective on songwriting. I haven't really heard anyone put it together so well.

Understanding the difference between a song (verse, chorus, etc...) and an instrumental gives me a certain understanding in regards to approach that I've never really considered. I've always thought of instrumental songs as having "chorus sections" and "verse sections" so to separate the two changes things up quite a bit.

I feel like I've been restricting myself with this entire "verse" "chorus" thing because I'm always trying to write my tracks with vocals in mind. I'll reflect upon this more until more things begin to click.

Thank you.

my pleasure

It's interactions like this one that make me enjoy coming here

 

[DarkRed]

dannydawiz, I just listened to your tracks and read your posts. Here are my thoughts. The song and production is in my view pretty emotional at its core, I can definitely understand why you are working hard on this one, it has potential. The mix/master is interesting overall, evaluate the sound of it a bit more though, so that you can learn what it needs.

 

[dannydawiz]

dannydawiz, I just listened to your tracks and read your posts. Here are my thoughts. The song and production is in my view pretty emotional at its core, I can definitely understand why you are working hard on this one, it has potential. The mix/master is interesting overall, evaluate the sound of it a bit more though, so that you can learn what it needs.

Thanks for giving the track a listen DarkRed. Even if you do feel that the track is pretty emotional at it's core, believe it or not but it's actually one of the least favorite things I've written musical speaking.

I'm still finishing it up. I'm still in that amateur phase though so when something doesn't sound right it often takes me a long time to figure out what it is that's wrong. I'll keep working on it though. Thanks for the encouragement.