Arranging Music - Workflow vs Inspiration?

[Mahesh]

Hey everyone!

I'm diving into some arranging work of my upcoming 3 song EP at home, and it's got me curious about everyone's process when it comes to arrangement. For those of you who arrange your music, what sparks the initial fire? If you had the song in 1+1 (vocals + accompaniment) format,  where would you go from there? Do you find yourselves building the arrangement around a vibe or specific instruments? Do you build it section by section in sequence? Or would you go from somewhere in the middle and build forward and backwards?
 

I guess what I'm asking broadly is - is there a specific workflow you follow, or is it a more free-flowing, inspiration-driven journey? 

[john]

17 hours ago, Mahesh said:

Hey everyone!

I'm diving into some arranging work of my upcoming 3 song EP at home, and it's got me curious about everyone's process when it comes to arrangement. For those of you who arrange your music, what sparks the initial fire? If you had the song in 1+1 (vocals + accompaniment) format,  where would you go from there? Do you find yourselves building the arrangement around a vibe or specific instruments? Do you build it section by section in sequence? Or would you go from somewhere in the middle and build forward and backwards?
 

I guess what I'm asking broadly is - is there a specific workflow you follow, or is it a more free-flowing, inspiration-driven journey? 

To me what I feel leads the way. My process begins with listening… either in reality (if the 1+1 is done) or in my imagination. The words, melody, instrumentation and performance all contain and convey emotion. What is laid down either agrees or doesn’t, with what I wanted the song to contain. At all stages I remain open to the possibility that performance has introduced an unexpected unknown that enhances the recording and it may take the song in a new direction.

 

Emotional integrity is everything.

 

I listen. I consider structure. It is easier to consider structural changes before the recording evolves too far. I like to move fast. I don’t want to be hung up on technical issues or penned in by preconceptions. I firmly believe in letting songs evolve.

 

If I am happy with the structure, I feel for harmonic enhancement or rhythmic enhancement. I try to be aware of what I feel the dynamic flow will be. How will I achieve a build in intensity, or a drop in intensity. How will I achieve emotional depth with the music? How can I tease listeners? How can I foreshadow a hook melody?
 

These questions and more go through my head as I listen. 
 

Eventually, usually quickly, melody or rhythms start to flow. I try ideas singing/humming/tapping along with the track. Pretty soon I have a bunch of ideas. If I haven’t yet recorded a 1+1 or an idea pops into my head when away from my studio, I record it into my phone memo by singing, humming or beatboxing… it’s not performance level beatboxing, it’s just me creating rhythm with my mouth.

 

The free flow of ideas is critical. No technical interruptions. Simple. No getting distracted from ideas.

 

Don’t get me wrong. I can be screwing around with a patch and an idea jumps out at me, I jump on it, but only so far. I want to build a collection of quality ideas, not get sucked into a drill down.

 

Importantly, I try to separate my general experiment and learning time from my song production time. General experiment and learning does include creating production snapshots and pastiches (and more). If I hear a song I really like, I break down what interests me. What is new, fresh. I then try to recreate just those bits. It’s much faster than recreating full versions of other people’s tracks. I try to work out how they achieved something. Sometimes you just need specific gear or software.
 

My point is… all this research and experimentation happens during learning and experimentation time… not during track production, if I can help it. Why? Flow of ideas. The more time I am down a technical rabbit hole… it takes me away from idea creation. The number of quality ideas trumps all. Get that right and everything else is easy.

 

It’s not a blow by blow breakdown, but it does outline what I consider important and how I give the important things the space and support they need.

 

Does it work? Creatively, for me, yes.

 

I will add, this also helps keep it feeling fresh and engaging.

 

Cheers

 

John

[David in WV]

I've been writing and recording music/songs for a long, long time, and of course, my "process" has changed over the years.  One aspect of my process that has remained constant though, is that when starting a new work, I always start with something musical - something on a guitar, some sound in my DAW or synth, or some drum/percussion pattern or loop. 

 

When I start with something on my acoustic, I also finish it on my acoustic.  By that I mean, I come up with the complete acoustic guitar part and the complete lead vocal arrangement (which also means I complete the lyric) before I start any recording or do further arranging for the song.  Sometimes I'll record it as a guitar+vocal 1+1 and leave it that way as a finished recording, and sometimes I enhance the guitar+vocal 1+1 by adding further instruments/sounds and/or vocals to the arrangement.  How do I decide what to add to the arrangement and when to add it?  I think that probably varies from song to song.  But I'm sure it significantly involves a lot of trial and error guided by my musical intuition, which in turn, is probably grounded in years of experience listening to good music and writing and recording my own.  In other words, I'll try this or that, and if I like what I hear, then I keep it and move on to what else might sound good to me., until I get to the point when I consider it done . . . for the time being anyway.   

 

When I start a song with a sound in my DAW, then by default I'll record what I'm doing with that sound.  So I'm starting with an initial recording of something musical, and as I continue the process for that work, there really are no distinctly separate writing, arranging, or recording phases.  It all kind of meshes together.   And again, it involves trying this and that and listening to the results.

 

I've been doing this long enough to believe that what I might imagine is most often a mirage tempting me to go down a rabbit hole trying to bring it into reality.  What truly inspires me, is how something actually sounds to me - not something I only "hear in my head."  That includes lyrics.  A big factor in deciding what words I want to sing, is how the words sound in the arrangement as I sing them in various ways.  

 

I've been doing this musical creativity thing for so long that my process is now pretty efficient, and many, if not most of my songs, take less than 48 hours from that first musical snippet as a start to a fully produced recording of a finished song, and I often I finish in the same "session" that I started, because once I do start, I get a bit focused on it - perhaps obsessively so.     Even the trial and error aspect of my process is fairly efficient.  I know almost immediately when something sounds good and when something doesn't, and when something that sounds pretty good might sound even better with a change.  I also know when I sing words whether they are conveying what I want to convey in the way I want to convey it, and I know when I'm not meeting that goal.  For example, "I want to leave" sounds okay, but if I sang "I have to go" and held "go" with that long "o" vowel sound, and added harmonies, that would sound killer and better convey my emotions.

 

*  Disclaimer.  The one instrument sound that I do rely on what I imagine it sounding like during my process until I actually record it, is my singing voice.   It's just too physically tiring (and embarrassing if another is within earshot) for me to actual do a bunch of singing out loud when I'm trying to come up with a vocal melody and lyrics.  I know my voice pretty well and what it will sound like when I sing out loud.   But I confess, sometimes I am surprised when I actually go to record my vocals - Shit! It's out of my range!  <heh-heh>

 

I doubt any of this is of any use to you, Mahesh.  So let me close by saying this.   However you arrange and mix a recording of one of your songs, always make sure your singing is center stage.  You're a fine acoustic player, Bro.  But when you play the instrument of your voice, you're a virtuoso, and the sound is glorious.

 

David  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 13 by HoboSage

[Mahesh]

On 7/10/2024 at 5:11 AM, john said:

To me what I feel leads the way. My process begins with listening… either in reality (if the 1+1 is done) or in my imagination. The words, melody, instrumentation and performance all contain and convey emotion. What is laid down either agrees or doesn’t, with what I wanted the song to contain. At all stages I remain open to the possibility that performance has introduced an unexpected unknown that enhances the recording and it may take the song in a new direction.

 

Emotional integrity is everything.

 

I listen. I consider structure. It is easier to consider structural changes before the recording evolves too far. I like to move fast. I don’t want to be hung up on technical issues or penned in by preconceptions. I firmly believe in letting songs evolve.

 

If I am happy with the structure, I feel for harmonic enhancement or rhythmic enhancement. I try to be aware of what I feel the dynamic flow will be. How will I achieve a build in intensity, or a drop in intensity. How will I achieve emotional depth with the music? How can I tease listeners? How can I foreshadow a hook melody?
 

These questions and more go through my head as I listen. 
 

Eventually, usually quickly, melody or rhythms start to flow. I try ideas singing/humming/tapping along with the track. Pretty soon I have a bunch of ideas. If I haven’t yet recorded a 1+1 or an idea pops into my head when away from my studio, I record it into my phone memo by singing, humming or beatboxing… it’s not performance level beatboxing, it’s just me creating rhythm with my mouth.

 

The free flow of ideas is critical. No technical interruptions. Simple. No getting distracted from ideas.

 

Don’t get me wrong. I can be screwing around with a patch and an idea jumps out at me, I jump on it, but only so far. I want to build a collection of quality ideas, not get sucked into a drill down.

 

Importantly, I try to separate my general experiment and learning time from my song production time. General experiment and learning does include creating production snapshots and pastiches (and more). If I hear a song I really like, I break down what interests me. What is new, fresh. I then try to recreate just those bits. It’s much faster than recreating full versions of other people’s tracks. I try to work out how they achieved something. Sometimes you just need specific gear or software.
 

My point is… all this research and experimentation happens during learning and experimentation time… not during track production, if I can help it. Why? Flow of ideas. The more time I am down a technical rabbit hole… it takes me away from idea creation. The number of quality ideas trumps all. Get that right and everything else is easy.

 

It’s not a blow by blow breakdown, but it does outline what I consider important and how I give the important things the space and support they need.

 

Does it work? Creatively, for me, yes.

 

I will add, this also helps keep it feeling fresh and engaging.

 

Cheers

 

John

Thank you for sharing your thoughts @john

The biggest take away for me from your response is about the separation you were defining between the technical aspects of the production from the ideation process. I am guilty of getting carried away or digressing while searching for sounds or the right kind of instrumentation that will fit the context. Because there are endless possibilities when it comes to this, you've got to have a clear line and time limit that you'd not cross. It helps to be mindful about this. 

On the other hand, I've found it useful to take a break from ideating in order to listen to some music that may inspire or induce new directions to the song I may be working on. Or it could be a snare sound or a bass tone that I really liked which is leading me to achieving a similar tone within my own track. 

Thanks again, this is very insightful!  

[Mahesh]

@HoboSage David, I hope you are doing well brother! Thank you for these thoughts!

 

1 hour ago, HoboSage said:

When I start with something on my acoustic, I also finish it on my acoustic.  By that I mean, I come up with the complete acoustic guitar part and the complete lead vocal arrangement (which also means I complete the lyric) before I start any recording or do further arranging for the song.

This is a very useful point -  finishing the instrumental arrangement of the new instrument you've introduced all the way through the song before introducing more sounds into the arrangement.  This sounds so much more organised and avoids things being too busy - something I'm guilty of while arranging my songs. Sometimes it helps to cram all the ideas that you're hearing in the moment and go the subtractive approach by sculpting things out you don't need. Though sometimes useful, I see now that it adds more time to the clock. 


48 hours? Damn son. I hope to gain enough experience with arranging my own music overtime such that I can draft arrangement ideas in such a short period of time. Thank you for sharing your process, David!  What both of you have described was exactly the kinda stuff I was hoping to hear more of. So thank you!

 

 

1 hour ago, HoboSage said:

*  Disclaimer.  The one instrument sound that I do rely on what I imagine it sounding like during my process until I actually record it, is my singing voice.   It's just too physically tiring (and embarrassing if another is within earshot) for me to actual do a bunch of singing out loud when I'm trying to come up with a vocal melody and lyrics.  I know my voice pretty well and what it will sound like when I sing out loud.   But I confess, sometimes I am surprised when I actually go to record my vocals - Shit! It's out of my range!  <heh-heh>

I totally resonate with this. I find the voice to be my main weapon when it comes to writing and producing songs. At the same time, I want to use it in a tasteful and unique manner as opposed to it being used as if in a standard band arrangement. Bon Iver is a good example of someone who uses the voice with very interesting layering - almost as if it is a plugin or Synth. 
 

Besides, using the voice as a voice, I think it can be a useful tool for creating new ideas by humming/singing parts as you'll have described. In this regard, I found a free open source plugin recently called NeuralNote which converts audio into midi. I've just started using it but being able to sing some parts and then converting it into midi to experiment with new sounds and instruments has been super fun! Just in case someone is interested: https://github.com/DamRsn/NeuralNote
 

 

1 hour ago, HoboSage said:

I doubt any of this is of any use to you, Mahesh.  So let me close by saying this.   However you arrange and mix a recording of one of your songs, always make sure your singing is center stage.  You're a fine acoustic player, Bro.  But when you play the instrument of your voice, you're a virtuoso, and the sound is glorious.

This means much to me David. Thank you for your words of motivation! That's very kind of you!
 

[john]

7 hours ago, Mahesh said:

Thank you for sharing your thoughts @john

The biggest take away for me from your response is about the separation you were defining between the technical aspects of the production from the ideation process. I am guilty of getting carried away or digressing while searching for sounds or the right kind of instrumentation that will fit the context. Because there are endless possibilities when it comes to this, you've got to have a clear line and time limit that you'd not cross. It helps to be mindful about this. 

On the other hand, I've found it useful to take a break from ideating in order to listen to some music that may inspire or induce new directions to the song I may be working on. Or it could be a snare sound or a bass tone that I really liked which is leading me to achieving a similar tone within my own track. 

Thanks again, this is very insightful!  

Thanks @Mahesh.

 

A vocal comparison is:

1. having dedicated learning/exploration time
2. dedicated practice time
3. performance time

Ideally you would keep these separate tasks. Studio/production wise, I treat learning/exploration time as something I do on my own. I practice and apply learning when working on demos and small gig live work, and I perform by applying learning and practiced components to finished studio and big gig live work. These days I take live work out of that equation.

 

Listening is a whole other set of tasks and the now sometimes hard to achieve, “no task”… ie just switch off and listen and enjoy.

 

I have a whole range of tasks that I readily use to give my head a break from ideation. Interestingly having a production & recording notebook is a useful idea. Keep a dedicated “write up” level notebook to note problems and solutions, ideas and solutions, and a second more notes level book you keep for listening time you set aside from your normal schedule. In addition to that keep this note book with you when generally listening. Grow this book listening at any point. Grow the write up book when exploring, trying and practicing the ideas you scratch out in your idea notes book.

 

That way, if I am having a break in ideation off the top of my head, with a plan to return to it soon, I go to my idea write up or scratch notes book and browse previously observed stuff. It’s more densely packed and more reliable for suggesting. I recommend listing songs that demonstrate ideas or close to the idea, which I can then go to if/when needed.

 

I used to keep it all in my head but it is too easy to overlook things.

[GregB]

For me, it's whether 1 voice + 1 instrument can sustain a song for its running length. 

 

For me, that's rare.  My voice simply isn't good enough (strength, emotion, range, dexterity, etc.) to sustain an album.  MInd you, I'd get bored hearing ANYONE (let alone myself) doing just voice+guitar.  All the great albums from the likes of Joni Mitchell, Leonard Cohen, Paul Simon, James Taylor, Cat Stevens etc.. had a variety of instrumentation.

 

Out of my own 50+ tracks, only 2 are voice + guitar.  For the others I've used one or more of percussion, bass, keys, choir, strings etc.  where something was needed to provide interest plus light-and-shade.  I can't say WHY I used what I did for specific songs or sections ... it was instinctive.   And you should trust YOUR instincts, especially if you have listened to a lot of music and know what you like or don't like..

 

Your voice, Mahesh, is great!  The choice of simplicity vs arrangements is yours.  But even ONE extra instrument can make a huge differece ... e.g. a single violin/cello at the right moment(s) can magnify the emotional heft. And even an EP can benfit from variety.

 

I'm sure, if you provided a draft session, there are several people here who would give their opinion on what extra MIGHT lift a song.   Probably best done via direct Message rather than in an open Topic.