What do you think I should cover in my guide to production?

[Applebass]

I'm a sort of amateur when it comes to music production. In fact, what I know comes almost entirely from fiddling with settings on various programs on my iPod and basic (REALLY BASIC) tutorials. So as a student who spends most of his time learning stuff and then taking notes about it, I'm going to try to find out more about the basics of production, various techniques, skills etc. and compile a comprehensive guide for people new to this sort of thing. In this way I'm hoping to help anyone who wants to learn more about production, as well as helping myself to better understand the ins and outs.

I know that there are perfectly good and rather exhaustive guides already existing on this site and others, but I'm hoping this one will be more easily accessible in terms of language (more basic language) and functionality (on a Google Doc or something, so that readers won't have to click through dozens of links to pass through each section).

But anyway, what I wanted to ask was this: what do you think are some things that I should cover? VSTs, DAWs, mastering? Anything that you think would be important for people just starting out or hoping to get a bit more in-depth with production. Any tips and tricks would also be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

[vladnuke]

So all you've done is screw around with iPod programs and watch tutorials? No DAW work?

[the4thImpulse]

I like the idea of speaking the language of a newbie but I would much rather read a tutorial from an experienced tutor. Researching the words and phrases they use would only help one learn more about music production in ways that simple language could not.

So all you've done is screw around with iPod programs and watch tutorials? No DAW work?

[Applebass]

So all you've done is screw around with iPod programs and watch tutorials? No DAW work?

I have FL Studio Mobile and NanoStudio, which are both OK but limited in their features, so I have some idea of what various things do. But other than that, no, my parents are the type that place parental controls, time restrictions etc on the home computers so that there aren't any 'distractions' from my study. So no actual DAW work from a computer, at least until I can find one that can be run without admin privileges. But the guide is meant to encompass generalities that are common to all DAWs, such as compression, EQ, filters etc. etc., which I think I would be able to accomplish. (I do have experience with these things, just not to the same level of complexity as I would like to have had.)

I like the idea of speaking the language of a newbie but I would much rather read a tutorial from an experienced tutor. Researching the words and phrases they use would only help one learn more about music production in ways that simple language could not.

So all you've done is screw around with iPod programs and watch tutorials? No DAW work?

Yes, I agree! And what I'm thinking is that the language should be easy to access initially, and gradually curve into more complex terminology as the reader develops in skill. I've been pretty frustrated in the past when, for instance, I go to read up on EQing and all the articles/forum posts are waaaay over my head. This guide is meant to address that problem.

[the4thImpulse]

Yes, I agree! And what I'm thinking is that the language should be easy to access initially, and gradually curve into more complex terminology as the reader develops in skill. I've been pretty frustrated in the past when, for instance, I go to read up on EQing and all the articles/forum posts are waaaay over my head. This guide is meant to address that problem.

Ok I'm begining to understand now but it still sounds like you will be taking more from other people's experiences rather your own experience that could only be gained from thousands of hours of (electronic?) music production.

[Edened]

I've been pretty frustrated in the past when, for instance, I go to read up on EQing and all the articles/forum posts are waaaay over my head. This guide is meant to address that problem.

Honestly I think a guide on technical terms in general would be awesome. Definitely something I would use.

[itroitnyah]

You have a fairly good idea going on here. I would definitely love a tutorial that is written for beginners that acts like it's for beginners. Few things that you should know first, although I know that you probably know this, ipod apps like the FL Studio Mobile and NanoStudio, function a bit differently than the regular computer DAWs. Their programming is written for ipods, which means that their programming for effects isn't going to be as good as the DAWs. So for EQing, you won't have the nice, easy to use Fruity Parametric EQ 2 that has visuals and all of that. Or at least I'm assuming. Anyways, a good way to make this tutorial is to:

>Start with the effects. EQ, amp, controller, gain, etc...

>Go on to mixing and mastering.

>Teach about chords, progressions, scales, and making melodies that are in tune.

and the rest you can't really do without an actual DAW

[xadobex]

I've been pretty frustrated in the past when, for instance, I go to read up on EQing and all the articles/forum posts are waaaay over my head. This guide is meant to address that problem.

Honestly I think a guide on technical terms in general would be awesome. Definitely something I would use.

yeah that would be really cool to have a guide to technical terms, like explaining stuff like filters (low, high, band pass, etc). that would be really epic.

[Applebass]

Yes, I agree! And what I'm thinking is that the language should be easy to access initially, and gradually curve into more complex terminology as the reader develops in skill. I've been pretty frustrated in the past when, for instance, I go to read up on EQing and all the articles/forum posts are waaaay over my head. This guide is meant to address that problem.

Ok I'm begining to understand now but it still sounds like you will be taking more from other people's experiences rather your own experience that could only be gained from thousands of hours of (electronic?) music production.

Yes, of course! The point of the guide is not to bring anything completely new to the table, but to make it more accessible for people who might not understand the jargon that other guides might contain. I don't pretend to know a great deal about the ins and outs of production, but I am hoping to learn from this experience as much as the people who might be using the guide.

You have a fairly good idea going on here. I would definitely love a tutorial that is written for beginners that acts like it's for beginners. Few things that you should know first, although I know that you probably know this, ipod apps like the FL Studio Mobile and NanoStudio, function a bit differently than the regular computer DAWs. Their programming is written for ipods, which means that their programming for effects isn't going to be as good as the DAWs. So for EQing, you won't have the nice, easy to use Fruity Parametric EQ 2 that has visuals and all of that. Or at least I'm assuming. Anyways, a good way to make this tutorial is to:

>Start with the effects. EQ, amp, controller, gain, etc...

>Go on to mixing and mastering.

>Teach about chords, progressions, scales, and making melodies that are in tune.

and the rest you can't really do without an actual DAW

Haha, yeah, I've been very aware of the limitations that these programs have; doing anything worthwhile on them takes a lot of time, effort and unnecessary to-ing and fro-ing.
And yeah, that sounds like a great idea! I'll definitely try and include those points in the guide.

[Captain Ironhelm]

@ iTroitnia IMO, You'd want to start with what goes on before effects. For instance, EQ is one of the last things you do when you make a track. How sound waves work, the physics, would be a better starting point. Then you could move on to how oscillators take advantage of the physics, then make your way to filters and effects that can be applied, and so forth.


@ Applebass
As 4thImpulse said, simply researching information to write a guide with is different than someone who knows the information first hand, which can impact the quality of the information. For example, someone who writes a photography guide simply from information they can find via googling, versus someone who actually has been a professional photographer for several years and actually understands the stuff and how it works together. Enthusiast VS. professional. IMO, the best way to explain something in simple terms is to know it quite extensively.
I don't want to discourage at all. In fact, this could be an extremely good learning experience for you. Don't just cut and paste tricks that work, but actually understand what's behind it. There's a difference between knowing something and understanding something. It'll be hard work, but it is definitely worth it.
(You may be better than me, so I'm not trying to say you don't know anything.)

Start simple> build up to complex. Then the over-the-head stuff isn't so confusing.

[Applebass]

@ Applebass
As 4thImpulse said, simply researching information to write a guide with is different than someone who knows the information first hand, which can impact the quality of the information. For example, someone who writes a photography guide simply from information they can find via googling, versus someone who actually has been a professional photographer for several years and actually understands the stuff and how it works together. Enthusiast VS. professional. IMO, the best way to explain something in simple terms is to know it quite extensively.

Yep, I see your point here. However, as you recognized, my aim is to learn as well as teach, and this is probably the best way for me as an individual to understand the intricacies of production. I have been experimenting with the synths, effects and other things I'm going to be talking about, though, so I have an idea as to what I'm explaining. Posting it as a guide is just something for the convenience of others, so that my explanations to myself might be helpful to others.

PS. Incidentally I've already written a section on sound theory as my first topic, thanks!