I have some gripes with the way a lot of techno is produced

[Shepherd_of_Anu]

I have had a few thoughts on my mind for a long time and I am going to get some of them off my chest. I have analyzed this stuff to death and I could probably write a book about it but I will keep it brief.

I have some gripes with the way a lot of techno is produced...

1. track structure
Two big mistakes... one, constant repetitive mini breakdowns every 128 or 256 beats. It can be done tastefully but more often than not tracks just have these little breakdowns and buildups but they never lead anywhere. A breakdown/buildup can be great but once you hear it a couple times in a row then it is more or less boring. Worst is when the breakdown/buildup does not lead to an evolution in the track. If it just goes back to the same bloody beats and samples that were playing before then it might as well not have happened. Keep it moving. If a breakdown/buildup happens often then it should be more like a slight accent than anything.
Two, too long of breakdown/buildups. If you are producing big room epic trance then ok, fine that is what you're required to create to keep people happy. Otherwise keep it tight... don't let the groove slip away.

2. track length
Tracks don't have to be 8 minutes long. In fact, the longer the track is the more likely it is to require a lot of repetitive loops filling the time up. If you can create an 8+ minute track where each part of the song is distinctive and meaningful then good. If I can hop around a track indiscriminately with a needle or mouse and hear the exact same loop throughout the track then its probably not going to be very good.
If the track is pushing over six minutes it is red lining in terms of time.

3. mixability
One thing I cant stand is a great track that offers no mixability. I have come across a lot of tracks that are really good, have a great groove, make you want to move, get lost in it, but the producer takes you to this great space and then the track just kind of ends... producers need to offer DJs a way out. Don't just take this track to this pumping place and then just fade the fck out. WTF? How is someone supposed to mix that sh!t? Just take out some of the elements and create some space for the next track to mix in. If a track is heavily saturated with sound towards the end it makes it more difficult to mix. The end of a track needs breathing room so that the next track can pick it up from there. A lot of producers like to think people listen to their music for its own merits but the fact is that most people will never hear a producers music if a DJ doesn't play it.

I guess to sum it up I have a grip about mixability. Producers need to give DJs the opportunity to make the track work and not beat them senseless with repetition. Often you can just look at the overall waveform of a track and decide if the track is going to be worth listening to.

[oblioblioblio]

i want it to be 2003 and to listen to Michael Mayer's "immer" on repeat for about 1 year.

(just saying that becuase I forgot how much i loved the dance music from around that time)

[thasim1]

to avoid future grumbles just ignore all the sh!t and focus on the good stuff.

[eggnchips]

Can we have a listen to your solution?

[ALT.noize]

there is a lot of crap out there these days, but there is also so much good stuff.

it also bugs me that techno is so formulated.

[dr.rodrigobernales]

i agree with the points you make, music can be pretty damned formulaic. I guess people copy what their idols do, hoping it will sound just as good.

[ICN]

That "Big Room" techno is so formulaic - with all the risers & whatnot.. Just sounds like a tougher version of the minimal crap that you hear in the beatport charts.

Personally, I think its just a stepping stone for people who love house & think they're getting dirty

That shite is easily ignored.

[eggnchips]

This is a silly debate if you ask me. Dance music is dance music and that is that and that's why we like it. There aren't many new things we can try out in this day and age.