When producing, in the zone, everything is pure hypermode. My current track is way too fast and it needs slowing down.
Can I just finish the track and slow it down after?
All the drums are bounced to loops. Normally, I'd leave the original drum rack triggered via midi in the project but I haven't here. The loops can then be bounced out again at the slower BPM. Also, there's some vocal chops that have pitch modulation which mean they wont line up the same adjusting the BPM.
Currently at 149, thinking of 146 or 144, slowing down via DJ software in traditional vinyl mode. The musical key will drop down too, like slowing down a tape. This means the track will likely be a few decimals out of a pure BPM and also technically not exactly on key but still in tune to itself. DJ's would change the speed anyways mixing it but it's not an extended DJ friendly track version.
Slowing the track down as normal via the project tempo means the drum loops will be time stretched, I don't want this so would need to chop them up or hunt for the original hits in the kit. Then there's the pitch shifting on the vocal chop that would need retweaking as to flow as intended. Surely slowing it down after would be the easiest option. The lowest bass note is quite high up as well, room for it to go lower.
I know in the old days radios used to speed up tracks for that extra edge, competing and to fit more tunes in. I vaguely remember reading that PWL or Stock Aitken and Waterman (along those lines) used to pitch up tunes at mastering too, why not do the same but opposite?
I suppose producing this fast is also an excuse not to come up with extra notes needed to fill out the spaces. It's a trance tune, ideally should of been 138-142.
What are your thoughts on this?
Can I just finish the track and slow it down after?
All the drums are bounced to loops. Normally, I'd leave the original drum rack triggered via midi in the project but I haven't here. The loops can then be bounced out again at the slower BPM. Also, there's some vocal chops that have pitch modulation which mean they wont line up the same adjusting the BPM.
Currently at 149, thinking of 146 or 144, slowing down via DJ software in traditional vinyl mode. The musical key will drop down too, like slowing down a tape. This means the track will likely be a few decimals out of a pure BPM and also technically not exactly on key but still in tune to itself. DJ's would change the speed anyways mixing it but it's not an extended DJ friendly track version.
Slowing the track down as normal via the project tempo means the drum loops will be time stretched, I don't want this so would need to chop them up or hunt for the original hits in the kit. Then there's the pitch shifting on the vocal chop that would need retweaking as to flow as intended. Surely slowing it down after would be the easiest option. The lowest bass note is quite high up as well, room for it to go lower.
I know in the old days radios used to speed up tracks for that extra edge, competing and to fit more tunes in. I vaguely remember reading that PWL or Stock Aitken and Waterman (along those lines) used to pitch up tunes at mastering too, why not do the same but opposite?
I suppose producing this fast is also an excuse not to come up with extra notes needed to fill out the spaces. It's a trance tune, ideally should of been 138-142.
What are your thoughts on this?
Statistics: Posted by mitchiemasha — Thu May 09, 2024 12:20 am — Replies 1 — Views 52