So I’ve for a long time been trying to find ways to improve the concept of energy within a set. The concept of starting off with lower energy tracks and suddenly building them up. Ive tried to sort them be perceived “energy” although I find this very faulty. While a track will sound exciting one day it will bore me the next, I realize this whole concept is subjective, but I got thinking about the concept of BPM. Slower minimal tracks ( lets say 122 bpm ) have a nice chugging sound while trance ( 140 bpm ) is full of energy.
Would simply progressing a set via a tracks natural BPM be an effective way to create and build “energy”?
Not necessarily. Both of these have the same BPM and there energy levels are quite different. It really depends on the tracks and genres you are mixing.
Good Point. In that case is there any non subjective way of judging “energy” perhaps major or minor keys? In my case I usually mix minimal techno, tech house, tech trance, progressive trance, and some classic trance. These BPM’s can range anywhere from 122 to 140. Ive had tracks, for exmaple, that perceieved in my mind as a low energy track yet were 136 bpm while the rest of my low energy trance tracks were at 128 bpm which would make the faster track essentially useless.
It simply got me to thing, there must be some aspect of music that conveys energy
Thanks for the reply Bassline. I already mix via the Camelot system ( go around counterclockwise, PITA to label all my tracks! ). Its just a music phonemona that confuses me. Music is mathematics and physics, I find it hard to believe that one track just sounds more energetic than another, there has to be a musical theory answer
One part of it is how the drums are produced. Two tracks can be the same BPM, but one might have more emphasis on the 16s making it feel ‘faster’.
Also the timbre of the instruments can affect it. Compare a track with growling distorted bass to one with a filtered bouncy bassline. Different feel and energy.
I would say no. Once you get good at mixing harmonically and progressing thorough the scales, combined with some nice smooth transitions and drops etc you can build a great energy with some lower bpm tracks for sure.
I have some 130 bpm tracks that have massive amounts of energy compared to some of my 140bpm tracks
some 132bpm tracks that sound much faster due to how they worked the basslines.
I have a whole slew of stuff. I dont pay attention to bpm much. Only thing bpm allows me to see is the bars and time and when to start a track.
When rating songs by energy it’s important to take the whole song into consideration and what genre the song is. A high energy deep house song is not going to be the same as a high energy electro house song even though they may have the same energy rating.
Music is a feeling, it is not to be dissected into component parts based on BPM or key. It is much more fundamental that that. These two help, and are significant aspects of every song, but they do not convey energy levels.
You need to feel the music, not analyze it. When you listen to a track for the first time, close your eyes, dont hear a BPM or a key, hear the chorus of harmonys that have been composed just for you. Then, you will answer your own question.
I’d say timbre is more important that BPM. That’s pretty much how I build sets when playing straight techno since it’s all going to be roughly the same BPM. I’ll start with the the dubby stuff which doesnt have much going on in the high and mid end, really subdued hats, thick baselines, etc. and then move up to the progier stuff with a lots of big mid range chords and stabs, and finally to the bangers which have lots of cymbals, hats, percussive, atonal sounds.
…luckily to us humans, certain intervals and time divisions sound naturally good to us; so we don’t really have to sit down and work it all out. It just sounds good.
Im glad ive been able to start, what I feel, is an interesting topic on DJTT
So if BPM isnt inherently energy, and neither is Key, what is?
Lets say, for example, there are 3 categories of tracks;
Slower beginning of set songs
‘Build Up’ songs ( which gradually increase the energy )
Club Bangers ( the songs with the highest intensity )
Is there anything at all that can constitute this besides just ear? Is there any analysis of songs to categorize them withe energy that isnt completely subjective.
With BPM we can measure “speed”
With Keys we can measure tone.
With ? we can measure intensity/energy?
Traktor starts to settle a solution with his spectrum track visualisation… Most of my energetic tracks are shown with a purple/pink dominance, and the chilly one are going into the greens or the blues…
Of course, there’s a lot of exceptions, but it works often.
But it depends of the style you play, like guessing what the track might sound like by watching the waveform, I imagine it’s a question of habits and feeling…
Rhythm perhaps. In a way. Well, all the factors you mention contribute in a way. But rhythm is often the the one giving you the feeling that coveys the energy. But, like all the other factors, it can’t speak for itself. To define the energy of music is probably not x = y, But more the equation itself, probably why it’s so elusive. Gees, am I making sense?
the basslines are built in diferent ways
(k = kick, b = bass)
k-b-b-b
or
k-b-b
or
k-b
how often the “kick” kicks in one minute = bpm
but how often the bass is heard between 2 kicks will make a HUGE difference in the “felt bpm” so it can be that a “k-b-b-b” built track on 148bpm feels faster than a “k-b-b” produced track on 158bpm
