# Library musicians. How quick are you writing?



## AC986 (May 1, 2014)

An album or a track. It's a difficult one I know……

And how many tracks do you average for an album?


----------



## doctornine (May 1, 2014)

Very much depends on the album, if it requires real players etc obviously it'll take longer. Likewise, if there's a lot of live guitar and bass, thats takes me longer too.

But for a 12 to 15 track midi only album, I usually aim for approx 6 to 8 weeks.
Thats includes all the writing, edits, audio rendering etc etc...
And thats minimum 8 hour days, usually 7 days a week.

Mind that said, I have turned one around inside 4 weeks to make a deadline. 

But if we're talking trailer style, then much much longer, at least a week per track, at least.


----------



## Stephen Rees (May 1, 2014)

I write mainly orchestral (non trailer) music using samples exclusively.

Probably at an average of one track per week.

Album lengths vary dependent on the brief from the library but tend to be between 12 to 20 tracks max. Some libraries do still try and keep the total running time of all tracks plus edits etc. below the maximum you can fit on a physical CD - others don't care about this limitation.

I aim to do two albums per year on average (I'm very lazy).


----------



## Daryl (May 1, 2014)

Currently I'm doing a track a day. Just typing a score, as it will all be recorded and there are no synths, so the Sibelius demo will suffice.

If I need to do a full demo, it would be a couple of days per track. However, for me I spend a lot of time preparing to write so that I don't spend hours in the studio wondering what I'm doing.

D


----------



## RiffWraith (May 1, 2014)

I dont do 'albums'. I do tracks in bunches, and send them to the libs I am with. Whether or not they get made into albums, or become part of albums, I don't know.

If I am doing hybrid/orch tracks, I do two, fully produced ready-to-go tracks per day. A 14 hr day, that is. When I started doing these a few years ago, it would take me 1.5 days to do one.

If I am doing minimalistic tension cues, I do four per day. It only takes me about 3 hrs to do one.

If I am asked to write something that I am not that familiar with, it usually takes me almost a full day to do one.

Cheers.


----------



## chillbot (May 1, 2014)

RiffWraith @ Thu May 01 said:


> I dont do 'albums'. I do tracks in bunches, and send them to the libs I am with. Whether or not they get made into albums, or become part of albums, I don't know.
> 
> If I am doing hybrid/orch tracks, I do two, fully produced ready-to-go tracks per day. A 14 hr day, that is. When I started doing these a few years ago, it would take me 1.5 days to do one.
> 
> ...



Good I'm glad I'm not crazy. I don't understand spending more than a day on a track. Well... I understand that the track you spend a week on it going to blow my track that I spent 2-3 hours on out of the water. I just don't have time/patience for that. I'm quite sure I fall into the 'quantity' over 'quality' library music category. But anyway I average 3-4 tracks per day, every day of the year.


----------



## AC986 (May 1, 2014)

chillbot @ Thu May 01 said:


> But anyway I average 3-4 tracks per day, every day of the year.



FUuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu….


----------



## AC986 (May 1, 2014)

doctornine @ Thu May 01 said:


> But for a 12 to 15 track midi only album, I usually aim for approx 6 to 8 weeks.
> Thats includes all the writing, edits, audio rendering etc etc...
> And thats minimum 8 hour days, usually 7 days a week.
> 
> Mind that said, I have turned one around inside 4 weeks to make a deadline.



Jonathan I was about to say that's quick, but then I saw 7 days a week, 8 hours a day.

Whoa!

2 albums a year is about where I would be right now but if I could do 8 hours a day…

Daryl, that's way over my head. Typing into Sib, one a day. Wha..!

Riff I get that with tracks on a compilation album too. I'm not sure if it's any good or not.


----------



## Daryl (May 1, 2014)

chillbot @ Thu May 01 said:


> I'm quite sure I fall into the 'quantity' over 'quality' library music category. But anyway I average 3-4 tracks per day, every day of the year.


I don't think it's a question of quality. There is nothing to say that your tracks aren't perfect for the purpose they are designed for, which in my book means that they are quality tracks. I just think that the stuff you are writing probably falls into the disposable category, where the end user will want new tracks all the time. I do know other people who write these sort of tracks, and they tell me that the life of a track is pretty much 3-4 years, or less. Or never gets used at all.

D


----------



## AC986 (May 1, 2014)

That's an interesting point Daryl re: life of a track.

Any thoughts on that one gents? My publisher was telling me the other day that some of these tracks I do will go on for ages. I don't get that. :oops:


----------



## Daryl (May 1, 2014)

adriancook @ Thu May 01 said:


> Daryl, that's way over my head. Typing into Sib, one a day. Wha..!


Yes, but the tracks are already written in my head, so the typing is more an exercise of craft than of composition. If you take thinking time into account, it's a lot longer than that.

D


----------



## doctornine (May 1, 2014)

adriancook @ Thu May 01 said:


> That's an interesting point Daryl re: life of a track.
> 
> Any thoughts on that one gents? My publisher was telling me the other day that some of these tracks I do will go on for ages. I don't get that. :oops:



Well it's also dependent on both the style of a track and the publisher….

But I started this 14 years ago, and even my first tracks ( despite being, shall we say, a bit naff ) are still happily plugging away. It has been suggested by others more in the know than me, that the average shelf life for a track with a hi-end exclusive publisher is 15 to 20 years.


----------



## doctornine (May 1, 2014)

RiffWraith @ Thu May 01 said:


> I dont do 'albums'. I do tracks in bunches, and send them to the libs I am with. Whether or not they get made into albums, or become part of albums, I don't know.
> 
> If I am doing hybrid/orch tracks, I do two, fully produced ready-to-go tracks per day. A 14 hr day, that is. When I started doing these a few years ago, it would take me 1.5 days to do one.
> 
> ...



Wowsers. I clearly don't work hard enough >8o


----------



## Daryl (May 1, 2014)

adriancook @ Thu May 01 said:


> That's an interesting point Daryl re: life of a track.
> 
> Any thoughts on that one gents? My publisher was telling me the other day that some of these tracks I do will go on for ages. I don't get that. :oops:


I expect 15-20 years for mine. Of course nobody knows what will happen to licensing in that time, but as each track costs anything between £600 and £1500 to produce, it does take a while before all costs are recouped, so they do need to have some staying power.

D


----------



## chillbot (May 1, 2014)

Daryl @ Thu May 01 said:


> chillbot @ Thu May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm quite sure I fall into the 'quantity' over 'quality' library music category. But anyway I average 3-4 tracks per day, every day of the year.
> ...



Good point.


----------



## Simplesly (May 1, 2014)

chillbot @ Thu May 01 said:


> RiffWraith @ Thu May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > I dont do 'albums'. I do tracks in bunches, and send them to the libs I am with. Whether or not they get made into albums, or become part of albums, I don't know.
> ...



Teach me, o learned masters, the secret of your endless wellsprings of musical inspiration! Seriously though, don't you blow your ears out just _mixing_ that many tracks in a day??


----------



## MichaelL (May 1, 2014)

Daryl @ Thu May 01 said:


> chillbot @ Thu May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm quite sure I fall into the 'quantity' over 'quality' library music category. But anyway I average 3-4 tracks per day, every day of the year.
> ...




Spot on. Then there are cues, more like what you write Daryl, that a friend of mine calls "evergreen." 

I think a lot of people just write what they enjoy, or what their skill set allows, without considering its shelf-life. You got to be in this business for a while before you realize that most cues do, in fact, age out.

_Michael


----------



## vimonster (May 1, 2014)

Interesting topic.

It varies for me a lot. Sometimes it's one a day including mixing and sometimes it's one a month. Overall during a year it's probably something like fifty total.


----------



## RiffWraith (May 1, 2014)

Simplesly @ Fri May 02 said:


> Teach me, o learned masters, the secret of your endless wellsprings of musical inspiration! Seriously though, don't you blow your ears out just _mixing_ that many tracks in a day??



Ha! :lol:

There is no mixing here. Not in the traditional sense, anyway. Most people write their tracks, and then mix. I mix as I go. I work off of a huge template (640 tracks) and have everything I need there. No fishing for instruments, browsing for this patch/that patch, figuring out what I need to load.... I just write. If I decid I want A B or C - it's already there; all I need do is scroll to the appropriate MIDI track. My verbs are already in place. There are almost no EQ adjustments; my template is already setup with proper EQ on the Cubase Instr Trks, and the op bus. Occasionally, I will render some MIDI to audio and do some work there, but not often. I make fader moves for level changes and write auto, but again - I do that as I go. So when I am done, the track is mixed. 

Cheers.


----------



## Daryl (May 1, 2014)

MichaelL @ Thu May 01 said:


> I think a lot of people just write what they enjoy, or what their skill set allows, without considering its shelf-life. You got to be in this business for a while before you realize that most cues do, in fact, age out.
> 
> _Michael


I agree, but there are two issues there; firstly, as you say, a composer has to have the compositional craft to write music that has a longer shelf-life and secondly they have to have the business skills to know the market and tailor their music accordingly. I know some excellent composers who have no idea how to mould their music to fit the marketplace and consequently harp on about not selling out, whilst doing a day job that they hate.

D


----------



## Simplesly (May 1, 2014)

So are you primarily doing orchestral stuff Riff? Not to derail this too much, but it's interesting that despite the orchestra's fluidity and huge potential for dynamic expression and tonal variance, it's still probably one of the easiest musical ensembles to pre-mix. Probably because once you dial in the right reverb and EQ settings, and are happy with instrument placements and whatnot, nothing really changes. Every one of your virtual "players" sits in the same place regardless of cue, and plays the same instruments. The tone of the instruments are more or less static - and in theory all the samples are recorded as close to perfectly as possible. This obviously takes a bunch of time/energy out of the mixing process. 

Things change when you have to do a pop/rock/jazz cue in my mind. even when you're working with virtual pop/rock/instruments, so much of the character of the piece is in the mix. I find that when doing these types of tracks I need to give myself a day to come back and mix with "fresh ears". Not to mention, it's harder to write this stuff with templates. I have a pop/rock template but, I am never happy with it. Ok, ok, I am never happy with any of my templates... :wink:


----------



## vimonster (May 1, 2014)

Daryl @ Thu May 01 said:


> MichaelL @ Thu May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > I think a lot of people just write what they enjoy, or what their skill set allows, without considering its shelf-life. You got to be in this business for a while before you realize that most cues do, in fact, age out.
> ...



I went through a phase of not wanting to sell out when I was young(er), and then I had bills to pay and found that dealing with the end client was a real pain in the butt. Library suits me well.

No more, "oh but I don't like that like, tapping sound (on some advert), maybe you could like skrillex-ify the beats a bit?" "And by the way, this is for an Audi, so like, you should be really happy we even asked you to do the music. Like maybe you can just do it for free, but first you better come to our office so we can pummel you into submission with our legal team".


----------



## gsilbers (May 1, 2014)

chillbot @ Thu May 01 said:


> RiffWraith @ Thu May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > I dont do 'albums'. I do tracks in bunches, and send them to the libs I am with. Whether or not they get made into albums, or become part of albums, I don't know.
> ...



this is about my timings also... except that i only do 3-4 hours per day, since i also have a regular full time day job =( and fukin LA commute. 
so about 1 track or so per day. but it always depends on the track and how challengin it is.


----------



## dinerdog (May 1, 2014)

RiffWraith - Thanks for the Euphoria freebie. What a sound! Talk about great out of the box. : >


----------



## AC986 (May 1, 2014)

vimonster @ Thu May 01 said:


> I went through a phase of not wanting to sell out when I was young(er), and then I had bills to pay and found that dealing with the end client was a real pain in the butt. Library suits me well.



I watched a great western this evening called Winchester 73 directed by Anthony Mann in 1950. I thought this score _has_ to be by Roy Webb, but it turned out to be all library tracks from 6 or 7 different writers. I was amazed.

The times of some the tracks written here is phenomenally quick. This is something I just am not able to achieve ATM.


----------



## MichaelL (May 1, 2014)

Daryl @ Thu May 01 said:


> MichaelL @ Thu May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > I think a lot of people just write what they enjoy, or what their skill set allows, without considering its shelf-life. You got to be in this business for a while before you realize that most cues do, in fact, age out.
> ...




Too bad we're 3,600 US miles apart Daryl. I'd enjoy sitting down and talking music over a pint with you!

_Michael


----------



## MichaelL (May 1, 2014)

adriancook @ Thu May 01 said:


> [
> The times of some the tracks written here is phenomenally quick. This is something I just am not able to achieve ATM.




Adrian, please don't take this the wrong way. But...is it possible that you are over-thinking and trying too hard to write things that are important and impressive? 

Quality and musicality are very important. There is, however, a point at which you can be "too smart" for your own good, at which you are writing beyond the audience and wasting your own time.


----------



## markwind (May 1, 2014)

Been reading all this with much intrigue. Very interesting topic!


----------



## MichaelL (May 1, 2014)

But to actually answer your question Adrian...something along the lines of what Daryl, Stephen and Jonathan said, 1.5 days to one week per cue, including mixes and edits. 
I do spend a chunk of time on mixing / mastering. 

I aim for something less than disposable, but not eternal. My longest lived cues are about 16 years...simple piano and strings, not attached to any era (except for the sonic quality).

The cues that never got used were that ones that I wrote in vain to impress other musicians. Don't do it, you're only "talking to yourself." 

These days, like Riff, I tend to write in bunches and submit to libraries that I work with. 
But...I just finished a WFH "album" of 10 cues with Full, 60, 30,15 edits and bed mixes.
WFH projects generally run anywhere from 10 to 15 cues, and are based on briefs, or a general concept provided by the library.


----------



## chillbot (May 1, 2014)

RiffWraith @ Thu May 01 said:


> There is no mixing here. Not in the traditional sense, anyway. Most people write their tracks, and then mix. I mix as I go. I work off of a huge template (640 tracks) and have everything I need there. No fishing for instruments, browsing for this patch/that patch, figuring out what I need to load.... I just write. If I decid I want A B or C - it's already there; all I need do is scroll to the appropriate MIDI track. My verbs are already in place. There are almost no EQ adjustments; my template is already setup with proper EQ on the Cubase Instr Trks, and the op bus. Occasionally, I will render some MIDI to audio and do some work there, but not often. I make fader moves for level changes and write auto, but again - I do that as I go. So when I am done, the track is mixed.
> 
> Cheers.



Wow we are eerily similar. I work the exact same way with a huge template and everything already preset and premixed. The only difference is that when I finish a track, I DO mix it, however I largely find this totally unnecessary.

I have everything going into two external mixers, 192 tracks. When I finish a track I pull down all the faders and then put them back up to where they were. It's really dumb, everything is already mixed. Occasionally I hear something and roll off some bass somewhere or add a touch more reverb but everything is already mixed, if I had to skip that step I'd be comfortable doing it, I'm just too old school to not move the faders down and then back up again. And I suppose for the ~10 minutes or so I take to "mix" a track it's worth it for those few extra tweaks. I'm sure a lot of people on here would shudder to hear how nonchalant I am about mixes. But I have spent years tweaking (and mixing) my sound and I'm sure RiffWraith has done the same.


----------



## AC986 (May 2, 2014)

MichaelL @ Thu May 01 said:


> Adrian, please don't take this the wrong way. But...is it possible that you are over-thinking and trying too hard to write things that are important and impressive?



It's possible, but I generally have to do a style that is requested, without blatantly copying. Sometimes I can get stuck because the genre is a foreign language. My tracks are certainly not important Michael.

*But they are impressive!!!!*^^£*@((!(! :lol:


----------



## MichaelL (May 2, 2014)

RiffWraith @ Thu May 01 said:


> Simplesly @ Fri May 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Teach me, o learned masters, the secret of your endless wellsprings of musical inspiration! Seriously though, don't you blow your ears out just _mixing_ that many tracks in a day??
> ...




I'm working toward that, but I'd be beyond 640 tracks (VI junkie). I've been avoiding the task of template building. How many computers are you using Riff? 

_Michael


----------



## RiffWraith (May 2, 2014)

MichaelL @ Fri May 02 said:


> RiffWraith @ Thu May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > Simplesly @ Fri May 02 said:
> ...



Two, w/VE Pro.


----------



## InLight-Tone (May 2, 2014)

Riff are you playing your parts in via midi keyboard or are you using a notation program or both? I always feel that if you're not a virtuoso keyboardist that you tend to follow similar muscular patterns that are easy whereas if you're using notation you can break free from that restraint...


----------



## RiffWraith (May 2, 2014)

InLight-Tone @ Fri May 02 said:


> Riff are you playing your parts in via midi keyboard or are you using a notation program or both? I always feel that if you're not a virtuoso keyboardist that you tend to follow similar muscular patterns that are easy whereas if you're using notation you can break free from that restraint...



Everything is played in via midi keyboard. There is no way that a notation app would work here; with all of non-orch stuff going on - the hybrid stuff, synths, drums, etc. - a notation app would not only be a lot more time consuming and prevent me from doing the type of mixing I do on the fly, it would also be extremely limiting. 

Cheers.


----------



## chillbot (May 2, 2014)

InLight-Tone @ Fri May 02 said:


> Riff are you playing your parts in via midi keyboard or are you using a notation program or both? I always feel that if you're not a virtuoso keyboardist that you tend to follow similar muscular patterns that are easy whereas if you're using notation you can break free from that restraint...



I'm curious what you mean by this, not sure I'm understanding. Wouldn't using "notation" to input notes take away all human feeling and have it perfectly quantized on playback?


----------



## Stiltzkin (May 3, 2014)

chillbot @ Fri May 02 said:


> InLight-Tone @ Fri May 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Riff are you playing your parts in via midi keyboard or are you using a notation program or both? I always feel that if you're not a virtuoso keyboardist that you tend to follow similar muscular patterns that are easy whereas if you're using notation you can break free from that restraint...
> ...



Notation programs aren't really about the playback, but the ease of writing at great speeds ready for live performance


----------



## Daryl (May 3, 2014)

chillbot @ Sat May 03 said:


> InLight-Tone @ Fri May 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Riff are you playing your parts in via midi keyboard or are you using a notation program or both? I always feel that if you're not a virtuoso keyboardist that you tend to follow similar muscular patterns that are easy whereas if you're using notation you can break free from that restraint...
> ...


It would depend on your playback settings in the notation program. TBH it would always be quicker for me to play, but I do know a number of people who work by importing notation MIDI files and then tweaking them in the sequencer. It also depends on the instrument. Ensemble instruments (particularly Strings) need less randomisation than solos, for example.

D


----------



## AC986 (May 3, 2014)

RiffWraith @ Fri May 02 said:


> InLight-Tone @ Fri May 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Riff are you playing your parts in via midi keyboard or are you using a notation program or both? I always feel that if you're not a virtuoso keyboardist that you tend to follow similar muscular patterns that are easy whereas if you're using notation you can break free from that restraint...
> ...



Thats the way I do it. I'm not sure I could get on with just using a notation program. Probably not actually good enough to do it. You can get bogged down if your keyboard playing isn't fantastic. A bit of both would be good.

What's you keyboard playing like Jeffery?


----------



## RiffWraith (May 3, 2014)

adriancook @ Sat May 03 said:


> What's you keyboard playing like Jeffery?



This is me:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgZhiYff7nM


----------



## AC986 (May 3, 2014)

Now don't be naughty Jeffery. That was a perfectly serious question. 

Now I'm going to have to show everyone the truth about your playing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0zgQAp7EYw


----------



## RiffWraith (May 3, 2014)

Awww... that's cute!!!! :D 

My playing is ok - nothing to write home about.


----------



## chillbot (May 3, 2014)

Stiltzkin @ Sat May 03 said:


> Notation programs aren't really about the playback, but the ease of writing at great speeds ready for live performance


Got it. Makes sense. I don't think I've written one note on paper or computer in the 16+ years since I left Berklee. Wonder if I still remember how? I use live players all the time (not a lot at once, just overdubs) but there's never time to actually write down any notes...


----------



## Daryl (May 3, 2014)

chillbot @ Sat May 03 said:


> I use live players all the time (not a lot at once, just overdubs) but there's never time to actually write down any notes...


How do they know what to play? Or don't they read?

D


----------



## chillbot (May 3, 2014)

Sure they read... but it's way quicker just to play it by ear. It's 1 of 2 things: either improv or else I mock it up, play them the part, they play it back.


----------



## Daryl (May 3, 2014)

chillbot @ Sat May 03 said:


> Sure they read... but it's way quicker just to play it by ear. It's 1 of 2 things: either improv or else I mock it up, play them the part, they play it back.


Ah, I see. I understand the improv bit, but for the second scenario I would type the part out and not bother mocking up. Then again, maybe your mocking up is quicker than my typing. :wink: 

D


----------



## chillbot (May 3, 2014)

Not sure about that... but if there's not even time for a mockup sometimes I just sing* what I want... (*very poorly.)


----------



## Daryl (May 3, 2014)

chillbot @ Sat May 03 said:


> Not sure about that... but if there's not even time for a mockup sometimes I just sing* what I want... (*very poorly.)


So, more of a mockery than a mock up. :lol:


----------



## chillbot (May 3, 2014)

Exactly!


----------



## MichaelL (May 3, 2014)

Daryl @ Sat May 03 said:


> chillbot @ Sat May 03 said:
> 
> 
> > Not sure about that... but if there's not even time for a mockup sometimes I just sing* what I want... (*very poorly.)
> ...



:lol: Daryl.

Chillbot are you working for a library or production company that demands these time constraints, or are they self-imposed to meet your own goals?


----------



## gsilbers (May 3, 2014)

MichaelL @ Sat May 03 said:


> Daryl @ Sat May 03 said:
> 
> 
> > chillbot @ Sat May 03 said:
> ...



not sure about him...

but for me.. (and if you care) imo if i am working for a libary music then it means its not paying much upfront and all in theback end... which imeans that i calculate hourly if its rentable. 
so if i make a track in 4 hours then it about $20 to $50 an hour. any more time than that i start loosing money. 
i also work on 3-4 tracks at one time. kinda of way to not loose track on "perspective". 
learning to be fast on this tyoe of music pays of. took years to work as fast. 
some of mike vertas video classes kinda touch on the topic about workign faster and laying down melodías/ideas fast and move on... i think its the "kickstarter" class.
anyways.. music libraries companies just say they need style X for X show can you provide? 
the more and better tracks you submit the more chances it going to be played.. or at least get reused in different episodes. from the 12 song i do suddenly i realized they used 1 a lot in different episodes of a season. the ratio on that is intersting. like in marketing , it takes like 200 ideas to have a good one. kinda like the time it took us to notice U2.. right? (maybe? hope that analogy was understandable)


----------



## chillbot (May 3, 2014)

MichaelL @ Sat May 03 said:


> Chillbot are you working for a library or production company that demands these time constraints, or are they self-imposed to meet your own goals?



I don't know if I'm so much "fast" as "impatient".

I write "library music" for a lot of shows, I don't know if you consider it in the same category as working for a library company. It eventually creates it's own library for the production company, whether or not it gets used ever again is a whole different story.


----------



## MichaelL (May 3, 2014)

chillbot @ Sat May 03 said:


> I don't know if I'm so much "fast" as "impatient".
> 
> I write "library music" for a lot of shows, I don't know if you consider it in the same category as working for a library company. It eventually creates it's own library for the production company, whether or not it gets used ever again is a whole different story.




I'm in somewhat the same position. I've been writing for a core group of shows that results in it own library, whether or not the cues get used. There is a tendency to feel like you need to be productive all the time...just to keep up.


----------



## Stephen Rees (May 4, 2014)

I really take my hat off to you folks that can write so much music all the time. I'm not capable of doing it myself (it would make me miserable, and also physically ill, from the stress of keeping up that rate of work).

I hope you also have time to enjoy other aspects of your lives - families, hobbies etc.


----------



## doctornine (May 4, 2014)

Stephen Rees @ Sun May 04 said:


> I really take my hat off to you folks that can write so much music all the time. I'm not capable of doing it myself (it would make me miserable, and also physically ill, from the stress of keeping up that rate of work).
> 
> I hope you also have time to enjoy other aspects of your lives - families, hobbies etc.



Stephen - thats the single biggest, important issue. There are some days when you just have to switch off the computers, and go enjoy some time with the important people in your life.

~o)


----------



## Daryl (May 4, 2014)

doctornine @ Sun May 04 said:


> Stephen Rees @ Sun May 04 said:
> 
> 
> > I really take my hat off to you folks that can write so much music all the time. I'm not capable of doing it myself (it would make me miserable, and also physically ill, from the stress of keeping up that rate of work).
> ...


Agreed. I usually don't work evenings or weekends, but when I got home at midnight last night I had an idea buzzing around in my head and had to switch the computer on for 15 minutes or so to type it out. Boy, did I feel dirty afterwards. :wink: 

D


----------



## doctornine (May 4, 2014)

To be honest - i do try and avoid working evenings and weekends, but that inevitably goes out of the window when deadliens are involved :(


----------



## Daryl (May 4, 2014)

doctornine @ Sun May 04 said:


> To be honest - i do try and avoid working evenings and weekends, but that inevitably goes out of the window when deadliens are involved :(


The answer is to set your own deadlines. Not always possible, I know, but most of the time if I work evenings or weekends it's because I want to take a day off afterwards.

D


----------



## AC986 (May 4, 2014)

gsilbers @ Sat May 03 said:


> but for me.. (and if you care) imo if i am working for a libary music then it means its not paying much upfront and all in theback end... which imeans that i calculate hourly if its rentable.
> so if i make a track in 4 hours then it about $20 to $50 an hour. any more time than that i start loosing money.



That's a good way of looking at it, but I am unable to do that. A track takes as long as it takes unfortunately. I wish I could be quicker of course.



gsilbers @ Sat May 03 said:


> i also work on 3-4 tracks at one time. kinda of way to not loose track on "perspective".
> learning to be fast on this tyoe of music pays of. took years to work as fast.



Wish I could do that too. One track at a time atm.



gsilbers @ Sat May 03 said:


> the more and better tracks you submit the more chances it going to be played.. or at least get reused in different episodes. from the 12 song i do suddenly i realized they used 1 a lot in different episodes of a season. the ratio on that is intersting. like in marketing , it takes like 200 ideas to have a good one. kinda like the time it took us to notice U2.. right? (maybe? hope that analogy was understandable)



Yes I find that one has stuck out and gets used more than others. That must be the same for everyone.


----------



## Desire Inspires (May 24, 2017)

A track a day is a good starting point.


----------



## gsilbers (May 24, 2017)

AC986 said:


> That's a good way of looking at it, but I am unable to do that. A track takes as long as it takes unfortunately. I wish I could be quicker of course.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Also, i guess it has something to do with the style. 
If i am being told to write EDM, ill sure be using the same drum stem in several tracks  
but tweak a thing here or there. 

if its orchestral or hyrbid i guess ill follow the structure but change the sounds here and there and use an effects or instrument i know the show picked on other episodes and vice versa. 

so its kinda having cheat sheets or writing crutches or accesories to speed things up. import session data of an older track that has alreay built a percusion + string sting. 

I dunno. thats just some. im trying to learn new ones so i can find faster ways to write. 

And the biggest time issue is just plain ol' inspiration and procrastination. just being int he mind set to writing fast is what actually what takes me the longest!. 

id def would like to read more about workflows by cihllbot and riff.


----------



## Desire Inspires (May 24, 2017)

gsilbers said:


> so its kinda having cheat sheets or writing crutches or accesories to speed things up. import session data of an older track that has alreay built a percusion + string sting.
> 
> I dunno. thats just some. im trying to learn new ones so i can find faster ways to write.



That is a practice I employ.

Every song that I create from scratch eventually becomes a template for future songs. I say for every new song I make, I am able to write 5 to 10 songs from it.

I know that this is considered a cheap, easy, and derivative way to be "creative". But if I am going to emulate a sound or style, why not emulate my own sound or style?

For many older songs I have, I keep the same melody and do a different genre. For instance, I did a Rock track (a terrible one by the way) and a few years later I did a remake of the song in the Dramedy genre. I like the remake better than the original.

The tracks are attached for comparison:

ROCK Version: 


DRAMEDY Version:


----------



## rJames (May 25, 2017)

I know a little about this but not a lot. Haven't read the thread so I'm probably repeating someone's post.

Quality is the key. Not quantity. Well, let me revise that a bit. This is opinion, not experience. If you are writing for a specific show, write quantity. You know what they want, give em a bunch of stuff to choose from.

If you are writing for a producer/production company who has requested something specific, write to your highest ability but write fast; you can get more cues onto the album. Know how high the bar is to get onto the album.

If you are just writing, then write quality. Its better to get one license for $12K than get your cue onto a TV show that will return $1-100 per quarter. (the one that gets the $12K license will also get $1-100 per quarter from your PRO)

There is a vast sea of production music available. And a vast sea of composers adding to their catalogs. First, know your client, your end user. Then you can write fast.

BTW you can't listen to a cable TV show and say, "if I write to that level, I will sell my music." If you're listening to major network TV shows, then you can just write to that level.


----------



## StevenMcDonald (May 25, 2017)

Most I've done in one day is 5 for a TV library specific request. However that's cable reality TV stuff. I could have done more, but I try not to ever work past 4:30pm on my music-only days.

For trailer stuff and other more picky libraries, I can usually get a good first draft in one day of work.


----------



## mwarsell (May 27, 2017)

RiffWraith said:


> I dont do 'albums'. I do tracks in bunches, and send them to the libs I am with. Whether or not they get made into albums, or become part of albums, I don't know.
> 
> If I am doing hybrid/orch tracks, I do two, fully produced ready-to-go tracks per day. A 14 hr day, that is. When I started doing these a few years ago, it would take me 1.5 days to do one.
> 
> ...


Two per day? Four per day? Wha?


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 27, 2017)

My last (solo) album was a symphony that took six years to complete. My last commission for a film was a trailer that specifically wanted a dubstep/hip hoppy sound. Took two hours.

As @Daryl mentioned, writing something you mean to have endure can take a LOT more time.

Then again, you can just get really inspired and have a pretty darn good sketch/lightly enflesh'd idea in mind and let that act as a meth-level motivator, in some cases getting the final mix done in supernaturally quick time.


----------



## mwarsell (May 27, 2017)

I guess you guys don't have day jobs in different fields or three kids? If you write four tracks a day.


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 27, 2017)

mwarsell said:


> I guess you guys don't have day jobs in different fields or three kids? If you write four tracks a day.



Just an s.o. who's crazy about my music. All I need.

Because of my most recent commission (a soundtrack to a very independent, graduate-course film) I was able to quit what had been my bad part time job. Now I have time to find a better one, though I must admit that being able to do a T.T.J.A.S.I. was massively satisfying.


----------



## jonathanparham (May 27, 2017)

Parsifal666 said:


> Just an s.o. who's crazy about my music. AT.T.J.A.S.I


totally lost me


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 27, 2017)

jonathanparham said:


> totally lost me



S.O=Significant Other and: 

__


----------



## Parsifal666 (May 27, 2017)

I do notice I mixed up an initial in "Take...", that probably made it even more cornfusing (yeah, I meant that. I'm corny!).


----------



## InLight-Tone (May 27, 2017)

Library music is a balance between writing quickly but keeping the quality fairly high. As the competition on places like Audio Jungle gets even more intense, I say that quality is even more important. Everything used to get accepted, now there are tons of rejections. Rushing music out the door just to have a higher track count is not going to work anymore.

For me, I can sketch out the main ideas of a track and get the arrangement fleshed out in a day. But then I like to do a second pass to make sure I'm satisfied the 2nd day. On the 3rd day I tweak and polish which is fairly quick. Then the 4th day I master and upload. As far as the 2nd and 3rd passes go, I will be starting new tracks on those days as well, as the 2nd and 3rd passes are much easier and quicker than the initial sketching of a brand new cue.

I find working in batches of 3 feels comfortable which could be a minimum of 3 tracks a week going out. I'm fairly new at this, and the hardest part I had was not being a perfectionist and working months on the most epic track you could come up with. Finding that balance is key, but I think today to do well, quality has to be at the forefront...


----------



## jonathanparham (May 27, 2017)

Parsifal666 said:


> S.O=Significant Other and:
> 
> __





Parsifal666 said:


> S.O=Significant Other and:
> 
> __



Ahh copy that. Those are good traits


----------



## StevenMcDonald (May 27, 2017)

mwarsell said:


> I guess you guys don't have day jobs in different fields or three kids? If you write four tracks a day.



I do have a part time day job still that I'm hoping to drop by the end of the year. It's 3 days per week. So on the off-days I can write 5 library tracks should I choose. I also wake up early and can write a track before work on those 3 days. Sometimes I even write a track in the evening! I actually wrote two today (saturday) which took up about 3 hours. I plan on writing 1 more tomorrow. I can do all this while still getting everything I need to do around the house done, and working out 3 times a week. Even have scheduled World of Warcraft time with friends 2 nights a week! Not to mention my wife and I eat all our meals together and we drop everything at 8:30pm to dedicate time to each other. My point is there's a surprising amount of time to find in a week if you really want to do it 

My wife works full time (mostly from home) and we don't have 3 kids. But our first is due in a few days. I know having kids would make it harder. But you could probably get a solid 5 tracks a week if you really streamline and optimize your workflow and time management. 

Hopefully this gives people ideas and doesn't come off as bragging in any way. It took me a while to get my process down this efficientlt!


----------



## R. Soul (May 27, 2017)

....and meanwhile, in a different world, Tiesto spends 2 weeks on getting his snare sound just right


----------



## rvb (May 27, 2017)

Wow, some of you write FAST! I definitely try to write an idea or two every day. But really finishing a track always takes me at least two days. I guess I need to step up!


----------



## gsilbers (May 27, 2017)

R. Soul said:


> ....and meanwhile, in a different world, Tiesto spends 2 weeks on getting his snare sound just right



HA! yes pop music is on a different playing field. i did work for a big producer here in LA doing a record for an established artist and took for ever for a song and in that time period i visited a friend in remote control who recorded strings for a famous tv show in one fukin take. 1st time the string ensemble musciians saw the music btw. and 60 min show with about 30 min of music in a week or two. while the next day - the whole day- i try and record for the 5th time a guitar comp of one song for that established band :-/


----------



## gsilbers (May 27, 2017)

Desire Inspires said:


> That is a practice I employ.
> 
> Every song that I create from scratch eventually becomes a template for future songs. I say for every new song I make, I am able to write 5 to 10 songs from it.
> 
> ...




that IS very cool. i didnt thikn about that when doing different styles. good idea.


----------



## gsilbers (May 27, 2017)

rJames said:


> I know a little about this but not a lot. Haven't read the thread so I'm probably repeating someone's post.
> 
> Quality is the key. Not quantity. Well, let me revise that a bit. This is opinion, not experience. If you are writing for a specific show, write quantity. You know what they want, give em a bunch of stuff to choose from.
> 
> ...



I have to say that in the past 2-3 years ive come across soundcloud guys doing their own EDM tracks and they sound as good as the big DJs. i dont remeber that being the case before. production has become much better imo. Also, there a thousand youtube channels showing how to get an awesome track and all the tips and tricks so i think that has help a lot get past that initial learnig curve which before yo had to go to school, or learn on your own or with a tutor/friend.


----------



## jonathanparham (May 27, 2017)

gsilbers said:


> Also, there a thousand youtube channels showing how to get an awesome track and all the tips and tricks so i think that has help a lot get past that initial learnig curve which before yo had to go to school, or learn on your own or with a tutor/friend.


yes. The concept is like when Pro Tools came out it was: Sight for Sound. Now with Youtube it's like 'Sight for Sound' BUT with a DIY or education slant


----------



## muk (May 28, 2017)

How quick I write depends on what I am writing, and for whom. If you are writing for royalty free market places you can't spend a week on one track. If you are writing orchestral tracks for exclusive music libraries you most probably won't finish three per day. Or if you do, the library will turn them down quicker than you wrote them. It's all about finding a balance that is sustainable, both mentally and financially.


----------



## mwarsell (May 28, 2017)

Emmett Cooke's book suggests writing a track per week. Some of you write 2-4 tracks a day meaning 14-21 tracks per week meaning 730-1460 tracks per year. That is something - kids or no kids.


----------



## mwarsell (May 28, 2017)

StevenMcDonald said:


> I do have a part time day job still that I'm hoping to drop by the end of the year. It's 3 days per week. So on the off-days I can write 5 library tracks should I choose. I also wake up early and can write a track before work on those 3 days. Sometimes I even write a track in the evening! I actually wrote two today (saturday) which took up about 3 hours. I plan on writing 1 more tomorrow. I can do all this while still getting everything I need to do around the house done, and working out 3 times a week. Even have scheduled World of Warcraft time with friends 2 nights a week! Not to mention my wife and I eat all our meals together and we drop everything at 8:30pm to dedicate time to each other. My point is there's a surprising amount of time to find in a week if you really want to do it
> 
> My wife works full time (mostly from home) and we don't have 3 kids. But our first is due in a few days. I know having kids would make it harder. But you could probably get a solid 5 tracks a week if you really streamline and optimize your workflow and time management.
> 
> Hopefully this gives people ideas and doesn't come off as bragging in any way. It took me a while to get my process down this efficientlt!


Yes, it's somewhat harder with a baby onboard. But good luck! (you might have to ease up on the WoW sessions :-\


----------



## SillyMidOn (May 28, 2017)

muk said:


> How quick I write depends on what I am writing, and for whom. If you are writing for royalty free market places you can't spend a week on one track. If you are writing orchestral tracks for exclusive music libraries you most probably won't finish three per day. Or if you do, the library will turn them down quicker than you wrote them. It's all about finding a balance that is sustainable, both mentally and financially.


This is very, very true.


----------



## gsilbers (May 28, 2017)

mwarsell said:


> Emmett Cooke's book suggests writing a track per week. Some of you write 2-4 tracks a day meaning 14-21 tracks per week meaning 730-1460 tracks per year. That is something - kids or no kids.



well we do have kids but i think it also has to with the style and show we write it for. we def not doing the next main title for a disney movie 

background tracks for a specific show most of the times they want a vibe. once you get that vibe then its just a LOT of "save as". and as i mentioned earlier its not all the time i can write two tracks a day. its mostly still one. and i try working on 3-4 at the same time. i dont have the amount experience as other here but if you know the style and vibe then laying down a keyboard riff over a drum loop from another sessions, then a bass track that goes with the key riff and some sfx here and there then that doesnt seem it would take more than a few hours. these tracks we are talking about its about 1-2min and not that many changes except mostly in dynamic and instrumentation. is it crappy music? well, its more of utilitarian music. it works. it works for the show. but i have enjoyed this type of music on some tv shows like Face off. Plus, its going to be very different quick track if i wrote than if someone with a lifetime of producing a quick track. different outcome for sure! 
so the devil might be in the details in this thread. If i am trying to write a trailer track or hyrbid music for a movie i cannot do it this fast for sure.


----------



## Illico (May 28, 2017)

We put the time we want to put...
I'm not a PRO and open my DAW during my spare time. I'm writing a 3mn composition in 15-20h. So A track per week is probably my template.


----------



## kurtvanzo (May 28, 2017)

As a few have mentioned here, I found the trick is to work on a few at the same time. Whenever you get stuck or are just not in the mood, practice switching to another track. Changing gears (fast song to slow song, orchestral to pop track) can also help to inspire and keep things moving along (not to mention staying fresh on each song). Doing 4 or 5 songs a week is very possible when you keep switching it up.

It would be good to hear/see videos people know of that helped them speed up their process. Templetes with sounds pre-chosen, assigned, and premixed (eq, compression, reverb set) def helps. Reusing/duplicating existing sessions as a starting point for a new track can also help. Be good to know if there are Mike Verta classes on speeding up the process.


----------



## InLight-Tone (May 28, 2017)

kurtvanzo said:


> As a few have mentioned here, I found the trick is to work on a few at the same time. Whenever you get stuck or are just not in the mood, practice switching to another track. Changing gears (fast song to slow song, orchestral to pop track) can also help to inspire and keep things moving along (not to mention staying fresh on each song). Doing 4 or 5 songs a week is very possible when you keep switching it up.
> 
> It would be good to hear/see videos people know of that helped them speed up their process. Templetes with sounds pre-chosen, assigned, and premixed (eq, compression, reverb set) def helps. Reusing/duplicating existing sessions as a starting point for a new track can also help. Be good to know if there are Mike Verta classes on speeding up the process.



Mike Verta classes are slowing me down with all the drinking I'm doing


----------



## mwarsell (May 28, 2017)

kurtvanzo said:


> As a few have mentioned here, I found the trick is to work on a few at the same time. Whenever you get stuck or are just not in the mood, practice switching to another track. Changing gears (fast song to slow song, orchestral to pop track) can also help to inspire and keep things moving along (not to mention staying fresh on each song). Doing 4 or 5 songs a week is very possible when you keep switching it up.
> 
> It would be good to hear/see videos people know of that helped them speed up their process. Templetes with sounds pre-chosen, assigned, and premixed (eq, compression, reverb set) def helps. Reusing/duplicating existing sessions as a starting point for a new track can also help. Be good to know if there are Mike Verta classes on speeding up the process.


Check out Udemy for "Composing music lightning fast" or something like it. A friend of mine said it was really good.


----------



## Creston (May 31, 2017)

I can write a track every 2 sometimes 3 days. Working max 8 hours a day. These are tracks that get decent up front fees from the main libraries. After two weeks I get a bit burned out and need a few days break. 

I recently did 6 hi end library tracks in about 16 hours that were requested by a network. 

I put a lot of this speed down to having a very limited sample library palette and avoiding full on orchestral music. I render a lot to audio and commit.


----------



## mc_deli (Jun 1, 2017)

Creston said:


> a very limited sample library palette and avoiding full on orchestral music. I render a lot to audio and commit.



Pray tell extrapolate... really want to cut down on preset browsing time...


----------



## will_m (Jun 19, 2017)

Really interesting thread this, pretty surprised by how fast some composers work. Writing and mixing multiple tracks a day seems very quick, does this not hinder experimentation though?

I sometimes find it tricky to work out how long I've spent on a track. At the moment I'm writing for trailers and I'd say 2-3 days for the composition and getting the production half decent (I mix as I work).

Then I send it to the library who give rounds of feedback until everything is right. This can slow things up as I wait for replies but in terms of my time this usually means a couple of days more at least making changes. Anything with real players or me recording myself takes longer.


----------



## StevenMcDonald (Jun 19, 2017)

will_m said:


> Writing and mixing multiple tracks a day seems very quick, does this not hinder experimentation though?



When I'm writing that fast, it's for reality TV Brief... they don't usually want experimentation. Just iterations of a reference track or style they already have in mind.

When I write for trailers, I definitely try to do something a little different each time though.


----------



## ghandizilla (Jun 19, 2017)

Around 90 minutes for 1 minute of orchestration. It includes the writing, inputing, mixing, and recording. So if I spend an entire day making music, I can write 5-6 minutes a day. In practice, since I have a daytime job, I do much much less. Moreover, if I have to do something I've never done before, there will be time mock-uping tracks in the sought-after style to get familiar with idiomatic progressions and combos, and it will be a much longer process. Consequently, it happens to be a fast process in traditional orchestration and really slow when I have to do for example traditional irish music or jazz or even more difficult (I suck at mixing): electronic or trailer music.


----------



## will_m (Jun 19, 2017)

StevenMcDonald said:


> When I'm writing that fast, it's for reality TV Brief... they don't usually want experimentation. Just iterations of a reference track or style they already have in mind.
> 
> When I write for trailers, I definitely try to do something a little different each time though.



Makes sense, I guess all this is hugely genre/style dependant, just from a track count perspective some styles are going to take longer.


----------



## jononotbono (Jun 19, 2017)

I've just written a 12 track Library Rock album in 6 weeks. My fingers hurt.


----------

