Getting Demos Done Fast

Hi Guys,

At the moment I'm spending a few months at a time on projects and while I'm generally happy with the results it means that I only ever seem to finish about 3 songs a year. 

I was wondering what tips you could give to save time on tracks so that my demo tracks can be at an 'acceptable' song pitch standard in a week or so:

Some things I have in mind are: 

1) Sending my track off to have drums and bass recorded by session players.
2) Toontracks EZ Pop mix - Does anyone know about this? 

Cheers.

Ed.

greekmac7


Hi Guys,

At the moment I'm spending a few months at a time on projects and while I'm generally happy with the results it means that I only ever seem to finish about 3 songs a year. 

I was wondering what tips you could give to save time on tracks so that my demo tracks can be at an 'acceptable' song pitch standard in a week or so:

Some things I have in mind are: 

1) Sending my track off to have drums and bass recorded by session players.
2) Toontracks EZ Pop mix - Does anyone know about this? 

Cheers.

Ed.

What you have to try to do here is get to the root of the problem. What makes these projects take you so long? Is it the actual recording procedure, the physical playing aspect, the mix? All of the above?
 
Spending money: You have to ask yourself how much your music is worth it to be the best it can be. I have several clients that pay me good money to record their parts for them. They have tried the "friends" deal and though some have offered some really great parts, it's not the same as having someone that really knows how to do things "for the song" helping you out.
 
I'm also a mastering engineer...but that said, I'd never master my own stuff for a world-wide release. I know I could do it and have proved it to myself many times before, but I'd feel way better sending it to someone that is not as close to the material as I am.
 
If you have the cash and your music matters, don't procrastinate....go to qualified musicians and have it done right. You can't just use any musicians though....you need to choose those that know how to play for the song instead of for their ego.
 
But getting back to my first paragraph, definitely hone in on what is taking all this time. If it's your recording/performance....you may need to sit and learn how to play instruments better by taking some lessons or finding out how to program things more efficiently.
 
If it's your mixes taking too much time, it's your monitors or they need to be tuned or your room needs correction or both. A mix should take you no longer than 8 hours tops. Anything more than a day and you're either not hearing things correctly or you may have too many good decisions to make that are clouding your vision as well. That's my biggest problem. I can cook up a good mix in 3-4 hours for the most part. But there are decisions along the way that sometimes make it go on longer. Like say...4 different guitar tones that all sounds great that I can't make up my mind on. Or various drum kits or samples that sound good....or a bass with low end meat verses one with not as much yet it has more definition and percussive attack. Stuff like that is good stuff to be faced with. But I'm never sitting here trying to fix something for hours or days. It either works or it doesn't and I know instantly.
 
At any rate, those are the things I'd be thinking about. Good luck!
 
-Danny

Coming at it from a different angle - if you're happy with the playing, the arrangement and the performances, you might want to consider getting someone else to mix the songs. I haven't heard your stuff, so that's not a criticism, but not everyone can be a mix engineer.

demos is one thing.

finished product, is another.

if you are asking questions about radio standards, then you do not need to ask about demos.

and vice versa.


commercial releases are defined by 'stairway to heaven' (8:02 length) to taylor swift's "never ever" (3:12 length) and everything in between.

in other words, there really is no 'standard'.

only pop genius, and your vision.


me, i don't really like a lot of modern pop, (too formulaic and derivative) so it does not figure into my style at all.

that said, if your goal is to only write 'pop' style formatted songs, simply study the current charts, break down the formula, and get to deriving.

i mean, that's what all the classic pop song writers did before, basically, from elvis to the beatles to beyonce and bieber.


no matter what the formula...

the PERFORMANCE will always trump the arrangment.

greekmac7


GuitarHacker and Danny - Great Comments. I have fallen prey to thinking too much about the intro, solo, and outro. I think as a rule of thumb, all my recording will now be kept to 3 minutes.

I think the root of my problem comes down to this...

I'm not a drummer, I'm not a bass player, I'm not a pianist, I'm not a sound engineer (though I'm not a newbie), I'm not a mastering engineer, my equipment is not top of the range (though its not the very bottom rung either), and my room isn't acoustically perfect.

What happens is that if a pro recording gets 10/10 for each element eg- drums, bass, piano, vocal, guitar, overall mix, master etc; and I get 7/10 across the board the end result is an overall track that is 30% weaker than a real track.

I'm hoping that by incorporating drum and bass tracking players and maybe sending the track off to be mastered, I'll be closer to the standard required with half the effort.

I'm still not 100% clear as to what the radio standard is. If its to be rerecorded anyway and has no intro or solo or outro, why does it need to be to the standard of a commercial release?

I wouldn't worry about the radio standard Ed. The reason being, it's very easy to create "radio edits". I do them all the time for my radio/commercial/jingle clients. I'm not trying to go against the great advice Herb gave you, as he is correct....but each situation is different. You definitely want to keep interest and get straight to the point...then again, there have been some cinematic type songs (Prince let's go crazy) that have intro's or some weird stuff going on. If you sit there and try to be too "in and out" you could literally miss the boat due to something in your style being unique.
 
The big question being "what is an acceptable demo?"
 
To me, something acceptable is a piece that has solid performances with no blatant errors in production that could deter someone from enjoying your song. I don't think any of us on the forum here (myself included of course) are quite doing "major label" quality. At times I think we're close, but then again that depends on what you compare your stuff to. I think we're doing better than demo quality and could be released on radio in some instances. So I would say your production would need to be at least as good as the best stuff you've heard from your favorite production posters on the forum. Anything less, and you're basicly at "demo quality" which can work for getting a record deal or even pitching a song to spotters via publishing.
 
The key thing with publishing spotters is the hook. This is why it's good to have a nice presentation without solo sections etc like Herb mentioned. Hit them with a verse, a chorus, maybe a bridge and be done. You'll get the same price for the song no matter how long or short it is, but you definitely want to win them over in 15 seconds in that scenario.
 
All this depends on the style of music you are shooting for. If it's dance, to me, and I mean no one that does that style any disrespect, but it's easier to get "Radio quality" out of those types of mixes because most times, it's not real instrumentation. Real instruments are much harder to handle. Beats, grooves, drum machine type sounds, synths....they are a totally different animal and those sounds are what they are. Don't get me wrong, there is still an art to that stuff, but it's way easier in my opinion to make that stuff sound like it was released from a major label. You don't have to worry about rooms, mic'n instruments (other than vocals) and all that other jazz. You print it, you mix it, add the right amount of bass and make sure your vocal is incredible. The vocal is the only challenge in that style.
 
But if you're doing rock, metal, top 40 or country, you gotta deliver the goods in a lot of different areas. So it's going to challenge you and force you to be good at wearing assorted hats. I'd say concentrate on what makes you take so long to finish your material and fix that first. Once you get a handle on that and can share some songs with us, we can at least tell you what you're up against and what you may need to do or not do. Good luck. :)
 
-Danny

If you are asking what is RADIO standard or quality or ready..... It simply means the song could be played on a radio station...with all other things being equal....(decent songwriting and talent on the instruments) and no one listening would peg it as a home bedroom studio demo.  That's all that it means.

If you are seeking to plug this to radio or TV or film, or for that matter to artists, the days of home demos that sound "home made" are long gone. 

Everything going in these days is expected to be top quality. The advent of the home digital studio and the tools we have available to polish our mixes to "pro studio standards" has raised the bar significantly. 

I attended a songwriter's convention back in 2009 in LA. In one of the sessions conducted by Jason Blume, this topic was discussed. The "demo" and the artist final CD version of a country song which hit #1 were both played...first the "demo" and then the artist cut. Aside from a few notes in the intro guitar and the singer's voice being different..... the quality of the "demo" was equal to the quality of the artist cut.

You're competing against the best writers for a few open slots. You gotta be on your game in every possible way to even have a shot. The bar is high. But it is attainable.

start a savings account?