|
|
|
|
|
|
#498344 - 06/09/20 08:22 AM
Re: Less repetitive, evolving styles on arrangers
[Re: bpsafran]
|
Member
Registered: 04/28/06
Posts: 837
Loc: North Texas, USA
|
If you build the "evolution" (variation) into the style pattern, you're locked into always having the changes occur four measures in, eight measures in, etc. If it's a typical pop song with 8 bars, a 4-bar chorus, etc., that might work and save you a little button-pushing.
But most if not all of today's arrangers have four variations already built into the style. So you can play 4 bars, trigger variation 2, then var 3 for the chorus, back to var 2 for the second verse, var 4 for the bridge, etc.
One of the tips I read about style creation, is to build the most complex variation first, and then simplify it / thin it out for the simpler variations. If you create a pattern eight bars long for var 4, and truncate it to four bars for var 3, it will "wrap" and play through twice. If you truncate it to just two bars for var's 2 and 1, it will play through four times. This saves a lot of work!
I agree with your premise and wouldn't own an arranger without a style creator, unless I already had a way to make or convert custom styles for that brand.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#498370 - 06/09/20 01:10 PM
Re: Less repetitive, evolving styles on arrangers
[Re: bpsafran]
|
Senior Member
Registered: 05/26/99
Posts: 9673
Loc: Levittown, Pa, USA
|
"Everyone wants easy to play styles....then in the next sentence people want to strip them down with less parts, change this, change that," Donny, mainly because we want to keep the same band all night.. same piano, same bass player, same drummer, same guitar player etc.. thinning out the style also makes it easier to fit what you are playing live.. If you aren't playing any accomp parts and just sing, you will get by, but I rather not compromise what works better for me.. PS: At the end of the gig I still don't have to pay my band..
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|