/musicprod/ - Music Production

>>398

I'll just assume you're a troll and not bother arguing.

>>407

I don't laugh at MIDI covers. Where did you get that idea? And how did you get the idea that anyone here lacks an understanding of MIDI? We basically called it modern notation that doesn't require the ability to read notation to use. In almost any practical use of the word, when people talk about MIDI, you're not talking about the technology itself but rather the idea next to everyone has when they hear the word, which is chiptunes made in easy to use piano rolls or similar, and that's how most people use and think of the technology. You're basically sperging out because someone says "it's hot in here" when they should have said "the temperature is high in here." You seem like an unpleasant person to hang out with.

>>408

This. That guy is basically proof of /mu/'s arrogance, and how far up their own asses their heads are. /mu/ and /musicprod/ are not competing for traffic. We have completely different mentalities and approaches to music production. Music production threads on /mu/ do not focus on educating people and improving skills, they're basically just a big, great circlejerk for producers to show off in, and if you're not skilled enough or produce the wrong genre, you can git out. I don't get what this guy's problem is. There's no problem.

The only traffic /mu/ is going to lose is a few production threads at most, and if you're gonna miss them, you can find them right here.

>>420

No, no, it's not like comparing pen and jpeg at all. Yes, MIDI is digital notation. Notation is not interpretation and neither is MIDI, except instrumentation. The only interpretation in notation is how long a break should last, how intense a crescendo should be and similar. MIDI is digital notation. Your entire premise for your entire post is incorrect.

>>420 (me)

oh god I just realized trying to re-read my own post that I had to stop typing part way into, nolonger makes sense, and I got post 420 I can't even.

I don't know how I said midi isn't an interpretation but it is., that was a typo.

I meant that Midi is not Notation, it is an interpretation OF notation, which is different.

like, Midi is the 1's and 0's, it's stored like strings of code that say shit like [note][instrument number][note velocity][note mod][note pitch bend][note release] as just a list of text (like .mod files) the thing is 100% of what midi stores, can be expressed as musical notation, sheet music. and the design of the MIDI format was specifically to include everything that musical notation includes.

Meanwhile most DAWs that are used for EDM, store MIDI data PLUS a whole bunch more, like slides rather than pitch-bends, which midi data doesn't account for, because slides are typically annotated as pitch bends.

There's a lot of technical reasons that the post I was replying to was technically wrong. again, as >411 pointed out, probably a troll

That's relevent to say, as I said before, it's like saying JPegs are better than drawing or taking a photo, One is a method of input, one is a method of storage. and neither is an output.

For instance, a .mid file can be loaded by windows media player.

Or it can be loaded by iTunes. Or winamp or whatever open source shareware that the hip coolkids are using these days (I seriously just use windows media player unless it can't support the format)

OR you could load a Midi into a DAW, swap out each instrument channel, add even more control to it, and then render to an MP3 or WAV or OGG or flac or whatever, and it would be totally different sounding than the .mid on its own. AND, the total amount of musical data for how to play the instruments, would contain more data than a midi can hold. more complexity.

That post is literally saying that musicians make better music by being arbitrarily restricted, and quite frankly thats what they did in mozart's time, and mozart was a fucking rebel in those days, and notice he's one of the few that everybody still knows. the guy breaking boundaries and breaking the rules, wound up making better and more memorable, more enjoyable music, than his contemporaries. which is why the argument is garbage.

Sure it's good ONCE IN A WHILE to limit yourself, in order to test your skills, but

>>420

Also, those two posts commented on entirely different subjects. Who wrote them is irrelevant.

I'm the guy who said EDM musicians would benefit from making chiptunes. I said ONE FIFTH of their music production time, solely for the purpose of creating catchy tunes that they can THEN integrate into their EDM production. I was not (is this how to italics?) saying they should just quit EDM and go full chiptune piano roll. On the contrary, I was saying most EDM producers would benefit from making chiptune production a part of their workflow to improve their EDM. Do you disagree? Do you actually think musicians would not benefit from trying a different approach to writing catchy motives?

>>423

>chiptunes

if this is the way you intend it, you're very VERY bad at wording things.

chiptunes are a genre, and midi is a notation.

What I think you're trying to suggest is that EDM producers should practice with minimalist classical notation, to which I counter that they already do,

Orchestral music is something that a LOT of good EDM producers dabble in, with very strong classical notation and composition, and restricting to classical instruments. Furthermore Orchestral Fused music, like Orchestral metal, Orchestral trance, hell, trying to type orchestral trance auto-filled with ORCHESTRAL TRAP for fucks sake. and orchestral dubstep.

The thing you ask is actually a thing that people DO sometimes already do, but you worded it in a pants-on-head-retarded way, which is why I was basically giving you a ton of shit.

People should branch out into other styles, but saying they should "restrict themselves to just making midis" is the most retarded and uninformed way of saying that that I have ever heard in my entire life.

>>422

As is notation. Both MIdI data and traditional notation on paper are created by people through input, then to some degree interpreted (I'd rather call it a fixed function, a pretty restricted formula for correctly expressing the data and converting it into audio) by either a musician or software. Same process. Sheet notation data is interpreted visually and MIDI by bit interpretation, but the method is irrelevant. Notation and MIDI are examples of the same thing; storing instructions to produce audio. And Mozart basically invented simple formulas for his music, making countless examples of the same arrangements, and every classical enthusiast agrees he was far inferior to the likes of Beethoven.

>>426

Mozart didn't just invent simple formulas for his music, there where already simple formulas for music that everyone else followed, and was highly regimented, and he broke FROM that set of rules and created his own.

as for classical enthusiasts I don't really care, I'll take baroque and Debussy over Beethoven any day of the week,

>>427

You're literally listing the plebest of history's composers. Just merry, soulless, mass produced crap compared to the mindblowing, devastating works of composers that aren't as well known because of these two simple reasons: they didn't spew out as big a quantity of mediocre compositions, and people don't really enjoy classical music, but pretend to, so they just stick to the mainstream name of Mozart without ever having actually analyzed his music. If you ask people who have never listened to a single classical work in its entirety who their favorite classical composer is, I bet almost everyone would say "Mozart" just because they know the name.

If you google "mozart followed formula" you'll probably find someone who has written about what I'm talking about. Mozart did not at all revolutionize music. He did not take some impressively unique approach to music, and what little new thinking he did, he reproduced over and over and over and over again, simply switching out one leitmotif with a minusculely different one and making it sound new while being the same in its structure and essence.

You know who did what you're claiming Mozart did? Tchaikovsky. Tchaikovsky, a very emotional faggot, was the first to use practically illegal time signatures, progressions, changes in structure mid-song and completely removed himself from preconceptions. Tchaikovsky is your genius, not fucking Mozart, a shallow pleb who mass-produced the top 50 music of his time to please the uncultured masses.

>>425

>restrict themselves to just making midis

God damn it. How many times do I have to say this before it sinks in? I have said no such thing.

ONE FIFTH

ONE

FIFTH

TO

IMPROVE

YOUR

EDM PRODUCTIONS

Do you just reply without actually reading the content of the posts you're replying to?

Do I have to turn to fancy text formatting to make you read my points?

>Is your attention span that tiny?

Well, I'm not interested in wasting my time with your crap. Read my posts thoroughly or don't expect me to reply. You're making an ass of yourself. I've written programs making use of MIDI technology. I've written a couple of very simplistic DAWs. I know exactly what MIDI is, I know how notation works, I know my shit about the big names in music through history, and I probably know better than you how EDM producers work.

The only thing I have to add is: I'm not fucking talking about famous EDM producers who have already made it big. I'm talking specifically about the guys posting their electronic productions in soundcloud threads and other people on their level, who have nothing memorable to offer, which is exactly why they haven't made it yet.

>>432

you're the one that's not reading

>MIDI

>FUCKING MIDI

MIDI ISN'T A STYLE

MIDI ISN'T A RESTRICTION ON COMPOSITION

THAT'S WHAT I'M FLIPPING THE FUCK OUT ABOUT.

>>428

Tchaikovsky is actually pretty good, but mass-market remembers mozart more, for some goddamn reason.

you know who was emotive? Debussy. yes, depressed and moody with light hearted bits. that's far from soulless.

meanwhile most pre-baroque classical was the auditory equivalent of paint-by-numbers.

also

>Calling someone a pleb because they like things that you don't like

Do you even music.

you realize that /mu/ is the board that un-ironically enjoys kanye and minaj, you lose the right to complain about "the uncultured masses" the moment you post on /mu/, especially a /mu/ that's actively trying to be like halfchan /mu/, enough so they start crossboard shitfights. now if you excuse me i'm just going to just look up what the most popular tchaikovsky piece is, and re-create it with nothing but hardstyle kicks and airhorn noises, and probably get a ton of youtube views for it, just to spite you.

>>434

>>434

I didn't call you a pleb. Once again you're claiming I said things I never said, just like you claimed I ever said EDM producers should just quit and switch to MIDI.

MIDI is NOT a restriction. It's a way to focus on making catchy motives, something aspiring producers tend to lack, which is why they never make it beyond 700 plays on SC. MIDI is no more a restriction than notation.

You keep not getting this. This is not rocket science. I am not suggesting people produce their music in some MIDI piano roll and leave it at that. I am suggesting they try making first drafts for melodies MIDI so that they are not deceived by revern and fancy effects into thinking it's good.

Please, tell me directly and frankly, what about this do you not understand? What exactly do you disagree with? Tell me so I can address your opinion directly.

And before you respond, stay far away from "saying [strawman] is retarded." That may be, but whatever the brackets contain, I did not say it.

The fact that you read maybe 4 sentences before feeling qualified to reply is blatantly obvious. So tell me, in as few sentences as humanly possible, without pseudo-rebuttals to something you fictionalized me saying, exactly what your point is.

Also, Tchaikovsky fucking killed himself. Debussy might have had a soul and all, but it's basically like Metallica compared to Pink Floyd, and Mozart compared to Beethoven is basically like Coldplay compared to NMH. One is far less popular, but has achieved pretty much universal critical acclaim.

Get your shit together and respond properly. Do not assume you know more technological or technical shit than me. Describe to me what you believe, and more importantly,

WHY

your believe it.

>>434

Also, Mozart is remembered more because he was more popular. He was more popular for the exact same reason that Imagine Dragons are more popular than Swans.

>>435

>didn't call you a pleb

>>428

>Literally the plebest of history's composers

>>435

you keep acting like having reverb and effects make people think something automatically sounds good. a bad melody with reverb sounds worse. That's a completely retarded way of thinking.

you are quite literally saying that people can't write music for the synths of their choice, and they should focus on a thing that they literally are incapable of ignoring, because they have to use fucking midi notation to make any sounds at all. Meanwhile saying "well don't use those sounds, just use just midi" midi isn't fucking sound, you don't know how it will sound without an instrument playing it unless you're a fucking savant or have perfect pitch.

The thing which you are describing, in the EXACT WAY in which you are describing it being done, is not possible for 99% of people who cannot hear perfectly in their head what music will sound like from written notation of any form. if you can, congratu-fucking-lations you're in the 1%.

and before you say you DIDN'T say something that you clearly have said for a THIRD FUCKING TIME I am going to quote you word for word

>I am suggesting they try making first drafts for melodies MIDI so that they are not deceived by revern and fancy effects into thinking it's good.

no amount of reverb or any effects will do what you think it does. there is no magical production dust that makes anyone think something is better than it really is just because you tweaked a knob. 100% of effects are done AFTER instrumentation and melody, with the MINOR exception of dubstep and DNB, wherein layers upon layers of effects are used to produce the actual instruments, from which you decide the TYPE of instrumentation that it is best suited for use as.

>Also, Tchaikovsky fucking killed himself

fucking irrelevant, so did budd dwyer, and kurt kobain, who gives a fuck

> Debussy might have had a soul and all, but it's basically like Metallica compared to Pink Floyd

uh no, debussy's best work IMO is just piano pieces, and tchaikovsky's best work is intended for an entire orchestra. there simply isn't a comparison of skill, because they are totally different types of composition.

>Mozart compared to Beethoven is basically like Coldplay compared to NMH. One is far less popular, but has achieved pretty much universal critical acclaim.

Again, not relevant, neither popularity nor critical acclaim matter in this context. there is a literal mountain of music, which is neither popular NOR critically acclaimed, which you will never get unstuck from your head. Noone can stop writing cannon in D for instance. its' 8 bass notes repeated 28 times it's 4 chords repeated ad infinitum. once you know what it is you can't stop hearing it and it's the most annoying thing. Nobody WANTS to hear it, but it's fucking everywhere, and NONE of it is critically acclaimed, it just sticks in your head, and won't go away.

That's just different ways of viewing success. so what if beethoven is critically aclaimed but everyone knows mozart, you're just going out of your way to be an exclusionary, elitist prick, for the sake of it at this point.

My point is you are setting an unreasonably high, if not impossible standard (writing midi with no fucking instrumentation because midi with nothing loaded is silence) based on completely uninformed understandings of how music is produced by most artists (>Implying reverb is magical production dust that tricks people into thinking shit music is good. if that was ever the case you could put reverb on any sound and it would sell)

you say

>do not assume you know more technological or technical shit than me.

you have displayed no understanding of anything in this reply chain. you're not even paying attention to WHICH POSTS I'M REPLYING TO,

You are picking a fight over LITERALLY NOTHING.

Go . to the sticky (link is currently 404'ing, but the links are all in this thread further up before this retarded reply chain started) AND LOOK, TUTORIALS ABOUT MUSIC THEORY THAT WILL BE ON THE TOP OF THE BOARD STICKY. so that people WILL go "you know, I've never learned proper music theory, maybe I should" and it's simple fucking stuff that once you know you can't help but use it.

Don't tell people to "just use midi and just magically learn", tell people to LEARN FUCKING MUSIC THEORY BECAUSE IT GODDAMN HELPS. Don't tell people "Don't fuck with effects you'll think it's better than it is" because that's fucking retarded, no it won't, and not using effects, will do FUCK ALL to help.

I'm fucking done, I hope your music library gets converted to 96kbps mp3s in mono.i'll come back in a few days when I think /mu/s stopped being retarded and thinking they can just shit all over this board, then maybe people will stop being needlessly confrontational about every little goddamn thing.

>>406

>having a fast paced board for this is fucking retarded.

Thinking /mu/ is fast-paced is retarded.

The reason I've been trying to warn you about any of this is because /musicprod/ would only have ever be a sub-set of /mu/, which is already a VERY slow board.

>>437

Proved me right. In neither of those quotes did I call you a pleb. You can listen to Mozart all you want and it doesn't bother me. You started an argument for why Mozart was a superior composer, so I am allowed to argue for the contrary. "Pleb" is not a banned word. It's as legitimate a word as any words you've used to describe Mozart, and it's as valid as calling Beyonce's music pleb. You're really grasping at straws if you have to turn to complaining about which words I choose to use.

>>438

Yes, I am LITERALLY LITERALLY saying those things because that's what I keep seeing. It mught not be your case, and it isn't mine, but I've seen it numerous times in real life: Many songwriters lack any sort of memorable element in their music. Then they attempt to write MIDI drafts and suddenly their music is top tier catchy. You can claim all you want that this isn't true, but it's a fact I've seen many times. You might wanna watch that YouTube video called something along the lines of "Why video game music was better before" and you'll hear exactly what I'm talking about. You clearly don't have enough experience to comment on this, and just like a scientist isn't interested in discussing science with a creationist, I don't feel like wasting more time on this with you. Everything I've said is a fact (except it's a valid opinion that Mozart's music was much better than Beethoven's, that was just a futile opinion war), and if you don't want to believe facts because you haven't yet seen them first hand, fine by me. Write music how you want. I will still recommend songwriters try to write MIDI first drafts. If it doesn't improve their music, then this method is not for them. It still works great for many. Smell ya later. :^)

>>449

This board will have fewer posters but I think they'll be more enthusiastic than /mu/'s. There's next to nothing at /mu/ to offer. It's the same shit month after month. Autistic Rage Festival is basically the only new thing you have to offer and every once in a while when an album is released that's good enough to become a meme, you might discuss it at /mu/, but the nature of this board will make new content to discuss all the time. You have a reason to come every time you consider buying new hardware or software, every time you want quality feedback on your WIP music, etc.

You know we've accomplished something when we have our first flame war.

>>556

let's see you make pure 12-tone sound good then. 12 notes, 1 in each pitch, in a random order with uneven note lengths that are still on beat. add reverb. try to make that sound "good"

you can't make things sound better by just dropping effects on it. if something is as close to objectively bad as you can get, there is no amount of reverb that can save you.

Go ahead, I put this as a challenge to you. Write something that is as melodically bad as you can, even a-tonal if you need to. then try to make it sound "good" without changing the notes. I am in fact throwing the gauntlet down and challenging you to do this.

>>578

Logical fallacy. Just because you can't make a mess that's not even in harmony sound good with excessive effects doesn't mean you can't polish a turd with it.

>>341

Exams done now. A couple of things I have to do then I'll add more links.

Also testing name stuff.

>>583

but that's just it. you can't polish a turd.

>>592

You can. Make a mediocre melody and practically anyone can make it sound decent with the right effects to distract your attention from the actual arrangement.

>>594

alright smartass I'm going to make something terrible, and upload it, and you can fuckin make it sound good. brb

>>594

Here you go bro. One royalty-free pre-masterpiece, ready for you to polish into gold.

https://soundcloud.com/milest3hr4t/proving-a-point

Piano is hard left, Drums are hard right. it's not in a key. this took me a minute because I kept writing in key and I kept having to change shit.

This might actually be in key, I didn't check, I just briefly tried to make it sound like ass.

So go ahead. Fix this. No changing any pitches or tempo… but yeah go ahead and fix the panning, I just did this so you'd be able to effect them differently.

>>596

is it wrong that i actually digged it

>>596

Did I not tell you to drop the logical fallacies? Make something harmonic and come back to me. You desperately want to be right, don't you? This is getting childish.

>>600

you said that ANYTHING could be made to sound better with a ton of effects,

you used this as the excuse that people should learn to write melodically or harmonically,

This means you implicitly stated that inharmonic, failed attempts and music could be made sound good. That is my point and you're backing down from it because you know you've made a mistake. just re-read how this thread went. this was all about telling people to learn to write harmonically and musically, because you could fix anything with reverb. that's where this argument started and that's where I kept it. you are a moving goalpost fallacy.

>>598

Not necessarily, it *is* rhythmic, it's just weird abstract polyrhythm and could easily be re-written into a complete song that is intentionally strange. but not with effects, but rather by having an actual progression, even if that progression is a-tonal. I didn't consider that at the time that I made this, and didn't bother saving the .flp. that MP3 of it is all that exists, and I don't feel up to the challenge personally of making that into something good and weird. that's… that's a lot more work than even working within the realm of music theory. Musique Concrete is hard work… also, piano slide.

>>601

No, I didn't. Read my last reply again

>mediocre

MEDIOCRE

>mediocre means no harmony

>harmony means automatically good

You're embarrassing yourself. Come back with a mediocre, harmonic melody and I'll show you an example of how noobs trick themselves into thinking it's good enough.

>>601

it was just so different than everything everyone has posted, i heard something potent there.

yeah man. slide.

>>601

>Not necessarily

Stop bullshitting youself. Please.

>>608

clearly you've never listened to 12tone.

or freeform jazz

or musique concrette

or industrial

or speedcore

or mathrock

or EBM

or psy (the genre, not the artist)

or anything by aphex twin

Weird non-standard music both in melody and rhythm, are not uncommon for some genres of music. get off your high horse already.

>>612

Please. That wasn't freeform jazz. That was randomized in FL studio in under a minute.

Need good mastering tutorials for the sticky. Anyone know of any?

>>619

I posted one at

>>616

which is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ywHHA-q-wM

because seamlessR has quite a few good ones. although the tutorials are made in FL, they are not specific to FL, and when it comes to specific mixing plugins he lists alternatives for just about everything, and talks about the process of mixing, rather than "how to do this process in this program without any explanation of the process itself" that 80% of tutorials seem to do.

he has a playlist for these, which I shall now link

>Production Basics - includes mixing and mastery

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLGYoE903Nir7qVmd-b333OT7Wj4EAltGT

I keep mentioning SeamlessR because he's good, not because I'm trying to be a shill for his channel or something. I've basically listed my best sources for tutorials,

SeamlessR, AcePincter, and if you can deal with how slow, rambly, and off topic he gets Warbeats was okay. otherwise it's a small handful of random individual 1-off tutorials, all of which I linked in the other thread specifically about things for the sticky.

>>617

>randomized

I actually made that by hand, even randomization isn't that terrible. again, chill out. if you can't do anything with that to make it sound good, then my point is made. people who can't write harmonically with music theory, cannot fix their crap by adding reverb. that was the fuckin point. settle your areolae

>>624

You keep implying I ever said the destructive use of effects I'm talking aboyt is done by people who can't even write harmonic music. That's called a strawman and you've done it one too many times ITT, so last chance: make something harmonic for me to demonstrate what I'm talking about on or I'll consider myself the winner of this. Seems like you're a 16 year old who just discovered FL Studio. Seems like you're too pussy to play by the rules because you're scared I'm right, and god forbid you were ever wrong. Seems like you don't belong on this board.

>>624

There's a few mastering tutorials in this playlist. I'll see if they're any good and add them to the sticky.

>>645

First of all - Ad homonym

I'm 27, and have been writing and playing music off and on since I was in elementary school, and started taking it seriously some time in highschool, but still only do it as a passing hobby. I DO have better music and am always improving.

and furthermore, no, I'm not strawmanning what you're saying, You are a moving goalposts fallacy.

>>398

>With MIDI, catchy is all you have. You can't impress with reverb and time stretching. I think most electronic music producers would benefit greatly from spending maybe one fifth of their music production time making catchy MIDI tunes.

In other words learn music theory AT ALL as a consequence

>one of the reasons the most mindblowing melodies of all time were produced in the 19th century

Pretentious much?

>>414

Continuous emphasis on learning and working with notation only, Again, music theory, and learning to write melodies and learning to be harmonic

>>428

>the plebest of history's composers

Pretentious post 2.0

>>432

>learn classical music notation to improve EDM Productions

Because EDM doesn't use music theory at all, and apparently doesn't understand how to write a harmony, and therefor you should be forced to use midi so that you can learn to write a harmony.

Why? because any jackass can just add reverb to it and make it sound good,

>>556

>It is unbelievably easy to cover up bad sound design with lots of reverb

>It's almost as easy to cover up bad melodies

Note: a bad melody is going to be one which is inharmonic, and poorly written, dissonant.

So if you can fix a "bad melody" you can fix an "Inharmonic melody" because bad in reference to melody, is almost exclusively in regards to actually being in harmony, otherwise it is automatically pleasant to the ear regardless of what you do to it.

And that was your fucking mistake. because THEN

>>606

>come back with a mediocre harmonic melody and…

and there's the change. there's the moved goalpost.

it went from

>Bad melody

to

>mediocre, harmonic melody

One of which implies inharmonic and worse than just bland, would have worked. but then you made it a more strict requirement. and THAT is a moving goalpost fallacy – To claim something as a requirement, and then later when the requirement is met, change the requirement.

have some 12 tone serial - the very definition of inharmonic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iz_fBstLfS4

my point was 2-fold

1: you can't fix bad writing (annoyingly inharmonic) with reverb and shit, in order for reverb to "fix" something it must be competently written, and already follow music theory, which is what using a midi would result in. Restricting yourself to notation is only a garauntee of writing in key, NOT writing anything catchy. nothing written in that way would be "bad" it just wouldn't be stellar, and again, no amount of reverb would make something like that BECOME stellar either.

point 2: you're a pretentious ass, there's more than one way to write good music, and being in harmony is not the only way, Again, here's something a huge number of people respect as good, that will absolutely make you scream that it's so a-tonal and a mess

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czpwrg8zNls

I have linked in this thread a TON of things about music theory, but no, that doesn't matter to you, it's just "write with midi and you'l just magically get good naturally and write like someone from the 19th fucking century because that's what's good" get off your high fucking horse, it died some time in the 60's.

>>645

and again in regards to the ad homonym and saying I don't belong here,

>>335

>>336

>>337

>>338

>>339

>>340

>>341

>>342

>>345

those are all me fuckass.Lets see first of those posts -

Humanizing instruments - so that your levels aren't flat

how to cheat at music theory

getting past writer's block

more cheating music theory

Actual music theory on intervals

actual music theory on actually learning it

actual music theory - creating tension

post 2

Music theory - call and response (how to make something catchy)

Post 3 - how to make specific genres of EDM

post 4 - Various FL Specific tutorials

PRODUCTION BASICS

Post 5 - how to become sucessful, push past buzzwords, and understand if record labels are worth bothering with

post 6 - Software and VSTs

post 7

How to write funk

how to write pop

Every song is pachabel's cannon in fucking D

Pop music is mindless and any retard can write it

More of everything is pachabel's cannon in fucking D, but not even knowing it's cannon in D and only knowing it as "the 4 chords"

How to write a stereotypical love song that can chart easily

But no, I'm probably just some 16 year old who doesn't belong on this board. May all of your future shits be rock solid cubes.

>>645

oh, oh, not to mention

>>529

>>531

>>532

>>533

>>534

also me

>more bullshit

>still no realistically mediocre melody to show

I win.

>>656

>ad homonym

Just had to kek at that.

Someone should advertise this board on 4chan's /mu/. They have a daily /prod/ thread with lots of activity. I would do it myself, but ban.

>>815

I tried, but joot's spam detection saw my various methods of writing "8chan" and then the page automatically refreshed and my comment was gone.

>>816

i don't know if I'd want halfchan idiots over here, considering what happened when I asked 8chan /mu/ to do cross-board link so that production stuff get directed here, so that producers, and finished music are actually separated, and we got a spammy confrontational asshole.

Do you think we can actually support and moderate that much content? if so, then by all means,

have you refered to it as fullchan? did you try mentioning hotwheels?

Here's a solution

Post an image with a QR Code link and just mention that there's another site that has a dedicated music-production board. and of course use a proxy in case of ban.

I posted a picture with the URL. I doubt a lot of halfchanners are interested in migrating. It's worth a try, though. We'll certainly not get flooded. The worst that can happen is that a couple of halflings think they can raid us to death for le lulz. I think there must be at least a small portion of 4/mu/ lurkers that are tired of the same old elitism over there. 8/mu/ is even worse though, and it's a dying board, so that anon was probably the board owner or a mod that's pissed because he just wants an active board to brag about and feel in control over instead of focusing on practicality.

Wow guys, we're in the top 100 biggest boards on 8ch!

>>891

Not a bad start. When we're in the top 50 and the catalog is full I'll be satisfied.