I have been reading a lot of Bobby Owsinski's blogs. He posted this one recently:

http://bobbyowsinski.blogspot.com/2012/07/heres-whats-wrong-with-your-music.html

I was very interested in the idea of groove. I guess they way I think of it is the element (or combination of elements) that make you want to move. If you were dancing to the music, what is it that makes you dance? If you're tapping on the desk, what is the rhythm and what is driving your finger tapping. I find it's often the rhythm parts, a lead hook, drums, vocals, everything really. Listened to a few songs I really like. M83 Midnight city for example. The main riff keeps you going. In the verses a simple synth staccato part subtly holds the groove. In maybe a hip hop or rap song it's about the vocals.

I hence went back to some of my music and listened. It's very easy for me to determine what holds the groove. But listening like this I can now hear "ok, that guitar part IS the groove, but the way I'm playing it doesn't really accentuate the groove. Those key groove elements are missing in my playing." Also as a song builds, another element is sometimes introduced which temporarily takes the groove. In those cases I know the previous holder needs to back off while the new part keeps you moving. A lot of my music I found the drums were NOT the groove. But in some sections they were. Sometimes the chorus drums, sometimes only the verse drums. Every song is different. Sometimes a simple drum fill fills in the groove in a blank spot. Everything has it's place and I see the importance of know what instrument (or vocal sometimes) is making you move. What makes you bop your head.

A few of my songs I notice in sections I really get into it and move. WHY? It's easy to hear when you look. Enhance that element. Don't make two conflicting grooves. It's confusing. It ruins it. Let them each have a turn if you need/want them both in a song.

Keeping in mind too that although one element may hold the groove, it doesn't necessarily mean it should be most prominent. It may subtly hold the groove in the background. Also doesn't mean it has to be upfront either. It could be anywhere in the 3D stereo depth sound stage. Every element has its place and this can change drastically from song to song and measure to measure even.

Anywho, I just saw this as a big eye opener for me and different way of thinking about your music. It stems right back to how you compose your parts, how you arrange them, how you play them, how you record them, how you mix them. Each step is so important. I can see compression (and the behaviour of different compressors) really making a big impact in enhancing the groove of a particular instrument. That and how you play it could be some key elements here.

Matt,

This too is the big thing I seem to be focusing on at the moment. I always took it for granted that obviously my songs have groove if I have a good music ear and good rhythm, but no as you said you really need to feel it and then pull out those instrument in the mix to accentuate it. My new aim now is that when someone hears my song, that when you look at they're feet and neck, they should move involuntary if the song has that groove. If I see that I know Im winning!

Its harder than you think though!

Cian

I find this rather simple:
the groove is the combination of good sound and slightly off-beat timing. And by slightly I mean instead of hitting at 1:01:000 it hits 10 ticks or so off either way.

jamesyoyo


I find this rather simple:
the groove is the combination of good sound and slightly off-beat timing. And by slightly I mean instead of hitting at 1:01:000 it hits 10 ticks or so off either way.

Or 137 ticks in the case of my feeble attempts at groove.

It is comforting to know that my inability to keep time is actually an asset.

So, then rather than Auto Snap, we really need Auto Groove? 

Good article Matt. I totally agree with all of it and it is a bit complex in many ways. For example why does Peter Erskine sound better playing a simple rock groove against a click to perhaps you or somebody else?

It also comes down to the metronome too or whether it is on or not. If you are building a track based on the click then I tend to use the click and carefully listen to the click against other tracks and see how well things sit. Then once I get some things really sitting nicely with the click I turn it off or use it less and start comparing other things to the part that is now sitting well with the click.

I find it is useful to set the track delays or advance settings against the click or other parts to bring them back into line more. But timing is the most important thing in the music. If its out of time it is just sounds bad. But that does not mean that a part can sound a little early or late in relation to other things. That can also work well and set up a sort of tension but that is different though from sloppy playing.

For example some forum members did a version of Deep Purple's Lazy a while ago. It was all good and the playing was correct and all but it did not groove that well and it did not have the same feel as say the live version of Lazy which is relentless in its groove. It was disappointing that the average to OK groove slipped through the cracks. People should have jumped on it way early as I would have done. But that is also a lot to expect people to be able to play with the same groove as Deep Purple do in Made in Japan for example. That is the reason why great bands are so great and average bands are just average. 

You need to be very particular about groove and listen to all your parts and really hear if anything is just plain sloppy, early or late or varying which is even worse. Every part and every instrument is responsible for the groove and really no one should be let off while others are playing the groove really well. The weak parts either need to be edited to fit better or redone. Simple as that! 

In a great jazz ensemble for example the drums can stop completely and yet the groove rages on relentlessly and it does this because the others who are left are still playing with the same relentless groove as they were before with the drums. I think it is a bit wrong to have some of the band really grooving and other parts just coasting along in time. It is not enough, all the parts need to groove with a similar intensity. 

MakeShift


So, then rather than Auto Snap, we really need Auto Groove? 

There is Groove Quantize. I've never used it but it is supposed to make subtle shifts in timing to create certain "grooves".

Jeff Evans


Good article Matt. I totally agree with all of it and it is a bit complex in many ways. For example why does Peter Erskine sound better playing a simple rock groove against a click to perhaps you or somebody else?

It also comes down to the metronome too or whether it is on or not. If you are building a track based on the click then I tend to use the click and carefully listen to the click against other tracks and see how well things sit. Then once I get some things really sitting nicely with the click I turn it off or use it less and start comparing other things to the part that is now sitting well with the click.

I find it is useful to set the track delays or advance settings against the click or other parts to bring them back into line more. But timing is the most important thing in the music. If its out of time it is just sounds bad. But that does not mean that a part can sound a little early or late in relation to other things. That can also work well and set up a sort of tension but that is different though from sloppy playing.

For example some forum members did a version of Deep Purple's Lazy a while ago. It was all good and the playing was correct and all but it did not groove that well and it did not have the same feel as say the live version of Lazy which is relentless in its groove. It was disappointing that the average to OK groove slipped through the cracks. People should have jumped on it way early as I would have done. But that is also a lot to expect people to be able to play with the same groove as Deep Purple do in Made in Japan for example. That is the reason why great bands are so great and average bands are just average. 

You need to be very particular about groove and listen to all your parts and really hear if anything is just plain sloppy, early or late or varying which is even worse. Every part and every instrument is responsible for the groove and really no one should be let off while others are playing the groove really well. The weak parts either need to be edited to fit better or redone. Simple as that! 

In a great jazz ensemble for example the drums can stop completely and yet the groove rages on relentlessly and it does this because the others who are left are still playing with the same relentless groove as they were before with the drums. I think it is a bit wrong to have some of the band really grooving and other parts just coasting along in time. It is not enough, all the parts need to groove with a similar intensity. 

I think of timing like I do pitch, in that there can be tension/resolution. In a key/scale certain notes will want to move to other notes to resolve tension. Playing a little behind, or ahead of, the beat within a phrase can also create that tension/resolution. That perfect, right on the money, beat is always implied even if no one is actually pounding it out.

^ Exactly!

The way I see it -- well, hear and write is to the point where everybody is off (the musical portion). 

It's like applying FX; they may sound good (bad) on their own, but within the context ...

To which I thought about making a rhythmless version of a track I did, but again, everybody is off; yet, given how one specific part is written, it's really off, so unless you can count extremely well ...

I call this "Nudging", but the principle's the same.