Part 2

Late producer SOPHIE said: “You have the possibility with electronic music to generate any texture, and any sound. So why would any musician want to limit themselves?” What's your take on that?

That's an interesting take. I come from a DJ background and I basically just make stuff that I’d want to play in one of my sets.

So there are already quite a lot of limitations there - the music is usually 4/4, it’s usually 4-8 minutes long and it will contain elements and motifs that I think will work on a dancefloor. It’ll usually be between 120 and 145bpm and I will usually have an intro and outro section, so it’s nice to mix. I know it’s going to be played loud and on big sound systems so I will prioritise making the bass and kick sound fat and there will be some percussive elements over that to create the groove. I want it to sound familiar enough so as not to alienate people but fresh enough to catch their ears.

So I have a framework to work in which is developed from lots of limitations … And I actually think limitations are good because they force you to work with what you have and get the most out of it and they add some direction to the experimentation. Also not just using the latest technology or following exact tutorials or buying expensive plugins forces you to work with what you have and make your own sound.

If you look at how acid house was made or how the seminal jungle and drum and bass producers in the 90s worked, or how dubstep was initially developed, it all came from people using their tools in a different way to what they were developed for because they didn’t have access to anything else.

No shade on anyone here, but I think this aspect of production is missing a little bit at the moment since producers have access to tutorials or programmes that can help them make any sound they want straight away, as opposed to figuring it out themselves.

Instead of a rich catalogue of music with its own sonic imprint you end up with a lot of slop that just sounds like a rip off of the producer they were trying to emulate.

But as any €1 bin in a record shop will tell you, this has been going on since the start of dance music as we know it, it maybe just feels a bit more prominent now since the means of production are so much easier to access and we’re more online.

Tell me about your aesthetic preferences for picking effects like reverb, delay, compression, chorus etc … - what was the role of these effects in the production of your current release?

It changes from release to release, but I try to use these quite sparingly.

For the ‘Pure U’ EP I used a lot of saturation to mix the elements - it’s a little bit like the wall of sound construct where you’re creating little duplicates of your sounds that have been processed and they’re being glued to the original sounds. I wanted it all to sound quite chunky and rough around the edges.

I used delay in quite a tooley way to get the groove sitting nicely and to emphasise the melodic parts - I like when it evokes a bit of a call and response feeling from the timing that’s applied to it - I think it can really get people moving if there’s a rhythmic part bouncing off itself. You can hear it in the first bassline on track like.

If I was making something a bit more psychedelic or experimental, I would probably be a bit more heavy handed with the effects. It’s important to be intentional with what you’re using to get the best results.

Generally I try not to use lots of compression in a literal sense of squeezing the sound, but I do sidechain a lot of the elements against the kick and clap so the groove is really pronounced.

Producers work with sound in a very direct way for very long stretches of time. What are some of its qualities that you appreciate now more than before, and how do you try to bring these to the fore in your work?

When I started I was obsessed with everything sounding clean and polished. But at some stage I realised the stuff I was playing in my DJ sets was not that, and by over-polishing my tracks they were lacking a bit of a human touch.

Now I appreciate when things sound a little bit off or atonal, or if there’s something interesting happening texturally somewhere in the mix. I’ve realised that it’s these parts that make the catchy parts stand out and sound really good because there’s some contrast happening.

I try and incorporate something sonically “interesting” into each part of the track - there’s usually some random percussive elements, maybe a human element that’s been processed like a vocal chop or a breath or something, and I like to overdub and automate elements so they can move around the mix a bit more.

I really like using distortion and overdrive to shape the frequencies of elements too so they’re a bit rougher, treating them this way can bring out some very interesting sounds and texture.

And of course, I want a dirty rocking bassline at all times and a kick to match it, so these two are coming first a lot of the time. I try not to use any effects or EQ on the kick and the bass to preserve all of the beefy bits in the low end, apart from maybe sidechaining or adding a little delay to the bass if it needs it (I have a bass mono on my master channel at all times too so nothing gets too muddy down there).

From an arrangement perspective, I’m trying to get tracks to do more with less which I’m still learning to do - I think it’s such an artform.

Tell me about the role collaboration played in your recent productions – and how you see the potential for machines as collaborators compared to humans.

I really like working with other people on projects because there’s a sort of synergy that’s created in achieving the final result.

For instance, with my release on Chunkers, I had been following the label for a long time before, Sally was a friend. I loved her music and what she was doing and I thought she had such a strong identity with the label already that I had a very clear idea of what would work from the start.

I tried to use the Chunkers aesthetic as a brief and asked Sally for input on all of the tracks too – I feel like the finished result was very much a collaborative effort with Sally’s input on the demos I sent, not to mention the amazing team that she has working with the label.

With regards to machines as collaborators - I’m sort of a boomer! Obviously, I use a machine to make music and I use some clever technologies within that, but those are tools and are not providing creative input per se.

I like collaborating with people because they’re people. We’ve all had different experiences that uniquely shape our personalities and preferences and that’s what’s so special about it all. It’s the human element in music that makes it sound good.

I find it a bit depressing when people reach for AI instead of their own imagination or a friend in all honesty.

Production, as opposed to live performance, can be a lonely process and feedback from listeners isn't always tangible. What is it about it that gives you satisfaction?

I’m definitely lucky in that I’m quite introverted and enjoy my own company a lot, so it rarely feels lonely for me. Often after a hectic run of socialising or whatever, I’m craving a studio session because it helps me recharge.

I think because I’ve been DJing for more than 10 years now, I trust my judgement when it comes to what works or doesn’t work in a track (I like to think I do anyway lol). The most satisfying thing for me is when I sit down and come up with some elements that work together really nicely very quickly and I can imagine the finished piece straight away, it’s almost like it writes itself. These are always my best tracks if I reflect on it.

If you know you’ve made something really cool there’s also a strange satisfaction about being in on your own secret before others.

We can watch videos on production, take producer courses, and exchange deep insights on gear forums. Amidst these options to improve one's chops/skills, how do you keep things playful?

So I mentioned the framework I work within above with regards to mostly just making dance music - once I have that outlined I try not to have any attachment or preconceived notion of what something will be before I make it.

I like to let the process unfold itself, let the ideas come out through playfulness and experimentation. I think this is the most fun way for me, just throwing ideas down and seeing what sticks. By not being attached to it or over-thinking it, you can capture the essence of an idea quickly without attaching any judgement to it. Then you can come back a bit later with a more objective perspective and move forward how you see fit.

I think a good workflow and a sense of open-mindedness and curiosity is essential for this, and that’s maybe a harder thing to outline in a tutorial online. To really keep myself on my toes I also work with pomodoro timers - I give 25 minutes to myself to get an idea down, 25 minutes to tune the sounds and 25 minutes to push out an arrangement. It can take longer than this of course, but these are good limitations for me. After that I step away and it goes from creation to editing which is a different process.

I think this is why I would end up sending demos to a label rather than making something specific for a label if that makes sense.