Hardware Heroes: The Mellotron

In this next installment of Hardware Heroes we look into the next development of sampling machine history! The Mellotron...

This scandalous regeneration of the Music Master was limited to the UK market in 1965 when Harry Chamberlin took legal action against Steely Electronics, who had based it heavily upon one of the two Music Masters that arrived on the boat from America with the elusive Bill Franson. This limitation to the UK market corresponds with the Mellotron’s eminent place in the British prog-rock sound of the 60s and 70s. One of the original Chamberlin 600s that had arrived with Bill Franson would eventually find its way into the studio of Todd Rundgren and feature heavily XTC’s Skylarkin album.

Various improvements made the Mellotron a sturdier, more reliable machine than its predecessor. Through numerous progressions it would become the first popular sampling device, favoured by a wide array of recording artists including The Beatles, Genesis, and King Crimson. It even features on certain tracks by the likes of later artists such as Joy Division (Decades) and even Radiohead (Exit Music (For a Film))!

The internal tapes feature three pre-recorded samples: the flute - most notable in the intro of The Beatles' "Strawberry Fields Forever" - a cello and a string section. Each time a note is played on the keyboard a rubber pinch roller sets the length of tape to a rolling capstan. As the tape plays the pinch roller motions the tape towards a playback head. It can take up to 8 seconds for the tape to reach the playback head at which point the sample stops. When the key is released a spring winds the tape back to the play position within half a second.
In 1967 the BBC purchased a mark II Mellotron and loaded it with special effects tapes. These effects would be heard on Dr. Who programmes for a number of years.

A modernised version of the Mellotron is currently in production. The M4000D is a 24 bit digital uncompressed audio playback unit and has been recently tested in live appearances by Foo Fighters and Red Hot Chilli Peppers.

Notable examples of the Mellotron in motion: The Beatles - Strawberry Fields Forever
David Bowie - Space Oddity

Extreme Mixdowns

Over the last couple of years, dance music has taken a turn for the harder, nastier sounds. From Drum & Bass to Dubstep and Electro house, 'filth' has become one of the most popular sounds on the planet. You only need to see the Youtube viewing figures for the likes of Skrillex and Pendulum to confirm this - and that's if you missed their constant arena-level tours of America and Canada. But it takes a lot of skill and practise to be able to produce and engineer such viciously hard tracks. So here are a few tips to help you on your way to noise complaints from the neighbours...

Despite what a certain class of musical snobs would insist, it's actually not as easy as it looks to put together a mixdown of fierce intensity and maximum impact. It's certainly a lot trickier than engineering a genteel dub soundscape with delicate percussions, and is as much about what you remove as about what you leave in the mix. Soldiers in the Loudness War may, however, wish to look away now.

For the purposes of this article we'll assume that you already have your filthy, screeching synth sounds, hyped up vocal samples and possibly even some electric guitar. Indeed, you can take the recent collaboration tracks between Korn and Skrillex as a good reference point; they combine metal and electronic sounds very well, and while this author wouldn't listen to the album for pleasure, it's a well engineered and very loud example of what's possible.

It's all about considering what's important in your track. Obviously, drums are crucial; to give a solid pulse. So you need plenty of weight on your kick (boost around 100 - 150Hz, leave below that for the sub) and also on your snare (boost around 200Hz, maybe even layer in a quiet kick drum too). You'll also need plenty of top end - right at the top, 8kHz and above, to make sure the drums cut through the screaming midrange of that bass synth. Then you should overdrive them a touch and compress them to within an inch of their life; better still, use a plugin like GClip to hard-clip any pesky transients off them.

But this is where it gets interesting. Having turned everything up to 11, we now need to consider what you can lose. Obviously, transients and dynamics are the first things to go - we don't want live and funky here, we want the sound of a bus falling down the stairs. The next thing you can lose is sonic character. Again, listen to Sub Focus or Chase & Status; the drums are usually bland and featureless and this is no coincidence. The character and interest of a snare is often around 1 - 2kHz; but that's where the screech of a Massive patch or the grit of an electric guitar lies. So do a subtractive EQ cut around this area of your drums; a more subtle cut around 400 - 500Hz will also help avoid muddiness without interfering with the 200Hz boom of your snare. With such a bare sound, a slightly harsh reverb high-passed at around 10kHz (so it basically sounds like a hiss) can sometimes help the snare be heard over the maelstrom.

Another thing that needs to go is subtlety of programming. If you're going to have the biggest drums in the world, you can't really have delicate little fills going on, and trying to make any ghost-notes audible above the blare of your lead or bassline will not only be an uphill struggle, it will simply detract from the impact of said bassline. A ride cymbal on straight 8ths or 16ths layered into the drum beat will help give the impression of energy. But you may want to use an envelope shaper to remove the attack from it - in the mix it will largely be overpowered anyway.

When it comes to those huge synth riffs, clearly you need to make them as big as possible; lots of stereo width, plenty of short-medium reverb, loads of high frequencies so that they're audible on a car stereo or iPod headphones, and only have one at a time. This kind of mixdown is often as much a case of arrangement as engineering; while having two or three big synth sounds all playing heavy riffs at once may seem like a good way to increase the intensity of a track, when they're all huge sounds they'll just seem muddy and confused. Going the opposite way and having just one, but also cutting out the drums and FX so that it fills the whole frequency spectrum will sound much heavier, and will also give plenty of impact when the drums crash back in half a bar later.

The one riff can (and maybe should) be doubled up with other sounds, however. A simple warm bass sound will help give some backup to the screaming distortion, and a fizzy topline that's comprehensively high-passed will bring an even more unpleasant texture for the headbangers to clench their fists to.

Essentially, what you'll end up with is a mix where your drums occupy the lower frequencies, a huge synth, vocal or guitar the midrange, and the drums again are peeping over the top at the highest registers to help emphasise the rhythm on smaller speakers (to this end, don't be afraid to have some very high frequency 'click' on your kick drum too).

Once you've got your drums and synth banging, it's a case of trying to fit all the extra details into the mix in such away that they don't interfere with the main groove. Any extra drum breaks and ride cymbals can be high-passed and side-chained off the kick and snare. Indeed, almost everything apart from the main riff should be side-chained like this, and if possible only occupying the space it absolutely needs; as well as high-passing things to avoid clashing with the drums, you should consider low-passing them too if possible; often cutting out frequencies above 12kHz on certain non-essential sounds will help give some much-needed clarity at the top.

Finally, it's even more important to take regular breaks than normal, as such a sustained midrange assault is very fatiguing on the ears and can lead you to make some wrong decisions.

This article, it must be acknowledged, goes against a lot of best practice in mixing music. But then is the mosh-pit at a Skrillex rave really concerned with best-practices in music engineering? We can assure you that it is not. So if you want to produce the biggest, most abrasive sounds in dance music, here is your starting point. Now give your parents some earplugs and crank out those brutal sonics!

A New Look At Hardware Sequencing!

Do you get screen-blindness when producing sometimes? Ready to write that killer track but every time you reach for the mouse, somehow all the ideas seem to fall out of your ears? Maybe a change in approach is needed. Ever tried writing on hardware?

Hardware sequencers have been around for the longest time; the iconic Alesis MMT-8 was a staple for artists such as Orbital and Moby straight from its release in 1987. (It also came in one of those quirky rhomboid boxes that Alesis used to love back in the 80's). They were solid, reliable, didn't crash and could be taken out on tour with no qualms. But look at that photo - those tiny little LCD displays, complete lack of controller knobs - it's no wonder everyone jumped onto software sequencing as soon as they got a decent computer. The flexibility and efficiency of computer MIDI editing is still the quickest way to get things done.

But that doesn't mean it's always the best way. Computers can also be subtly restrictive; with their grid formats you can find that you're always writing in 8's and 16's, and it's very easy to write what looks right - or what you think you should be doing - rather than what your head's actually telling you should happen.

This is where hardware sequencing can really come in useful. With the right techniques, you can come up with all sorts of different ideas, or feel the 'flow' of a track much better. The classic example is Akai's MPC controller. Assign drums to the pads on it, and you can jam out different beats far quicker than it would be to write each one into software; it's easy to play several notes together that you might not think of with a mouse, and with the velocity sensitive pads it suddenly becomes super simple to write fills that flow with the beat.

You can do the same with riffs - chop up a melody line in audio, assign different notes or hits to the pads, and replay it in different orders to create something new, far quicker than you could with a piano-roll editor.

Where hardware sequencers really come into their own however, is in arranging. It's so easy, with software, to track out a 6 minute stomp where parts are added and removed every 8 bars in a steady progression. But this can also be dull; listen to some of the classic tracks by legends like Theo Parrish or Kerri Chandler and you'll hear 12 bar sections, things repeating in threes, riffs just coming in for two bars at a time. It sounds more exciting, less predictable, and makes for better tunes as a result. Just set up channels on your sequencer, and jam it out; mute and unmute drums, bass, melodies and FX whenever you think the beat needs it, not when you see the marker hit the 64-bar point.

It's quick and easy to create build ups and breakdowns this way too, especially when you start assigning filters and delays to the knobs on your sequencer as well. It's also much more exciting, and helps you get into the vibe of the track more effectively. Instead of selecting, copying, pasting and dragging, you find yourself transported into the club, imagining how it will work on the dancefloor, and this energy can translate through to the track itself.

Classic 'step-sequencing' is also a lot of fun and can be inspirational too - anyone who's seen a 303 or 808 will know what it is, and understand that it's simply filling up a pattern with notes, but it's a different way of approaching programming, and can be blazingly fast too – witness the techno DJs who still use 909's on stage, programming them as they go along.

You might be thinking that it's all very well for those that can afford these fancy pieces of kit, but luckily, the last two or three years has seen a revolution in the world of controllers and sequencers. Since the advent of USB controllers for programs like Ableton, there is now a wide range of kit that can function as a controller for live work, but also as a sequencer for writing and arranging. Some of the most recent by companies like Livid also offer assignable step-sequencing to give you a full range of options. And now, many of these controllers are even available for the iPad at bargain prices too - so there are plenty of options even for those on a tight budget to get involved with hardware sequencing. And if you ever decide to get into live performance, you've got the hardware all ready to go.

So, why not make it a new year's resolution to try a new way of writing and arranging your tunes? It's worked for Underworld, DJ Shadow and many more - could it work for you too?

Audio Resolutions!

Here we are in 2012; the world is still standing, and most of us have nearly recovered some semblance of sanity after our New Year's Eve excesses. Plenty of people make resolutions at this time; giving up smoking, getting into the gym, working harder on their music. But if you're going to be spending more time on music, how can you be sure you're making the best use of it? Here are a few suggested musical resolutions for ensuring that your hours in the studio don't go to waste.

Practise Finishing Your Tunes
It's one of the most common issues aspiring producers face - you get to a certain point with a track, and then either run out of ideas, or just get bored, and start up a new beat instead. Soon, you end up with a hard-disk full of sketches and nothing to show for your efforts. Well, remember the old adage about how art is 10% inspiration, and 90% perspiration? It's true - and finishing off tracks is just a matter of practise and hard work. Study what others have done, don't get distracted, and knuckle down to finish those beats. It's worth it in the end.

Use More Interesting Sounds

One of the things that often marks novice producers out is that they often use stock sounds; everyone has a DAW and a copy of Massive these days, so if you want to stand out, you need to look beyond the basics and find your own signature sounds. Get a microphone and record found sounds, recontextualise some samples (take some noises from that Arabic or Blues sample pack you bought, process them and put them in a house or dubstep track), go down to a junk sale and buy some old Casio keyboard or kid's toy that you can mess around with to create some crazy and unusual sounds. The weirder the better!

Focus On The Music, Not The Production

On a similar note, since we all have access to production tools that would have been for millionaires only back in 2002, it's a lot easier to come up with a clean, tidy mixdown. But sometimes that can come at the expense of character; certain scenes (tech-house comes instantly to mind) are full of immaculately produced but forgettable tracks. So concentrate on making your tunes catchy, memorable, musical. Some of the classic dance music tracks sounded technically awful, but were still amazing - 99% of listeners will take a good tune with average production over an average track with good production any day of the week.

Keep It Simple

Having said all that, there's one great way of giving yourself an easy mixdown to deal with, and that's to not cram it full with FX, melodies, basses and the kitchen sink. If you restrict yourself to just the essentials, you'll find you're not struggling to make room for everything when you get to the final stages. It's a good compositional trick also; the temptation to throw a load more ideas into a track may seem like a good idea, but it might just signify that the main ideas aren't strong enough to carry a track. By limiting the number of elements in the track, you'll force yourself to go back and rework these elements until they can sustain the tune on their own.

Do Your Own Thing

Music scenes now develop and multiply so fast across the internet, that it's impossible to keep track of every artist in every subgenre. A pattern emerges, and it goes like this: Someone comes up with a new take on a sound, it gains popularity, people start to copy it, it spreads further, the only producers that really get the hype are the original artist and a handful of the next biggest guys. How to get around this? Start your own thing. Don't worry about what the next person is doing, just go with your own instincts. It's hard at first and you'll clear some dancefloors, but if it's genuinely good music people will get it eventually. When they do, others will start copying and you'll find yourself in a new movement as an originator, not a follower.

We hope these tips will give you some ideas on what to do while you're trying to distract yourself from that nicotine craving. Music production is never easy, and it can take a surprising amount of hard work and discipline to start finding success. But that's what new year's resolutions are all about, so start working on developing those good habits today!

Hardware Heroes: The Music Master

This weeks blog explore the next chapter of Hardware Heroes...

The Chamberlin Music Master was the world’s first basic production tape replay keyboard; created by American Inventor Harry Chamberlin in the late 1940s, this prototype of an impending legacy in sound was not without its faults. Its unreliable electronics were hot-wired, usually delivering a sizeable shock when tampered with!

The Music Master was originally aimed at families, as an accompaniment unit for sitting room sing-alongs and Chamberlin had never considered the endorsement it would earn from house bands and lounge acts across the States, who favoured it for its easy replication of their missing accompaniments. Chamberlin never anticipated the legacy that his invention would bring to the world of music production and was known to detest the rock n roll music that would emerge throughout the 50s.

The Music Master operated on a basic tape mechanism beneath each key which, when pressed, would release the tape across a rolling capstan, relaying the sound through internal speakers. Each key would play for around 8 seconds before the sound stopped and tape coiled back into position. The sounds featured on the Music Master, from instruments to special effects, were all recorded in Chamberlin’s own home on Neumann U 47 microphones. The Music Master generated great concern within the American Federation of Musicians, who saw the innovative Music Master as a threat to the livelihood of working musicians.

Through various progressions the Music Master remained unreliable, until the early-60s when an updated, more dependable version emerged from the UK market and began to overshadow the Chamberlin. It wasn’t until the mid-60s that Chamberlin discovered this new version was heavily based on his own invention, two of which had been shipped to the UK by Chamberlin’s own salesman (and originally his window cleaner!) Bill Franson. Franson’s illegitimate venture spawned one of the most influential tape replay keyboards in history: The Mellotron.