2. Drones

Seesar: I do often incorporate droning of some description, but I also never incorporate only drones or droning that has no level of dynamics at all. I regularly

Will Connor (Seesar)

underscore my work with an evolving drone of some sort to juxtapose the more-active soundscape layered on top. Also, as an acoustic musician, I have to keep in mind that I will need to make lasting drones as well as perform other sounds without electronic assistance, therefore, in live situations, reproducing or emulating my recorded pieces would be extremely difficult if I over-used drones (and this is a discussion perhaps best left for the final, general advice discussion, but when creating works, especially ones that use droning, consider if you or your project will be both a live and recording project, or just one or the other. It will greatly inform how you approach drone use and creation.)

a. What are some of the techniques you use to create drones?

Treha Sektori: Bow on a guitar for example, slowed and pitch down vocals….

Stuzha: I use bass guitar these days. Just a quick picking or tremolo playing. Then, lots of delay and reverb on top of that.

Seesar: Acoustic drone creation can be tricky, but there are certainly some effective creation methods that can be translated to many situations. Bowing an object, shaking an object, or rolling or scraping something over an object can all be useful techniques to employ. I regularly bow cymbals, pieces of plastic, or homemade stringed instruments; attach a spring to a resonator and shake it; or place a ball or stones in a bowl and move the bowl in a circle, allowing the ball or stones to roll around inside the bowl, which will resonate loudly with a consistent movement. Singing bowl-style rubbing a piece of wood or metal against something is somewhat of a combination of these methods, and is also very effective on certain free-moving bodies. Mechanical means to generate constant movment or extended decays is another useful approach to creating a drone, such as rotating the tyre of a bicycle with the pedal, and then scraping the rubber of the moving tyre or generate a constant whining sound that can be either used unaltered, or be manipulated in the studio.

Skadi: I prefer multi-layered soundscapes with different automation to create ever-changing textures. Furthermore, I usually add some background “assisting” drones, like eerie choirs, or give the main drone more expression.

Mebitek: Time stretching on single sound, delay, distortion and reverb.

protoU: Sometimes I layer sounds on top of each other. Sometimes I just play a few synths at once and they create such an immersive feeling that it really needs just a bit of editing and a proper backbone, then it is done.

Taphephobia: I usually use a lot of reverb and echo, but not always. It depends on the sound.

Sonologyst: There are different ones, maybe infinite. It’s possible to make drones with stratifications of synth pads, by editing acoustic instruments like brasses, winds, string instruments and so on; playing heavily distorted bass and/or guitar; editing samples, using noise from modular synthesizers and on and on…

b. Do you have a favorite program/instrument to use for creating drones?

Skadi: Definitely Spectrasonics Omnisphere 2, since it’s a swiss army knife for sound design, and you have the opportunity to include your own samples, as well.

Mebitek: Native Instruments and Kontakt.

protoU: I think it’s mostly Kontakt, and morphing all the different field recordings I make.

Taphephobia: My guitar and Adobe Audition 3.0. I am pretty much a comfort-guy. If I like something, I try to stick with it.

Treha Sektori: Theremin is lovely for droning.

Aegri Somnia: Reaktor enables you to create random calculated drones, and one life time is not enough to explore all its possibilities.

Stuzha: I quite like using Paul’s Extreme Sound Stretch on some field recordings like wind.

Seesar: Definitely bowing or scraping cymbals is one of my favourite means to create a drone. The overtones of vibrating discs can often interact with each other, even in just a basic, one-cymbal only situation, and typically complement and parallel over sounds to create rich, full-frequency passages. I also greatly like dragging a rubber ball over a membrane, like a large drum head, which is similar to bowing or scraping a cymbal, but with an entirely different timbre, and is also aesthetically pleasing and compositionally fulfilling.

Will Connor (Seesar)

c. As a beginner did you create drones the same way you do now?

protoU: As an evolving artist, I always seem to change. It depends on how deep you get yourself into different techniques and plugins. I try always to be inspired by something you can’t actually grasp in full.

Treha Sektori: I am still improving.

Stuzha: I used various VST’s mainly, which I haven’t used for about 10 years now!

Seesar: Yes and no. I certainly used lots of cymbals and drums towards the beginning of my career because I was moving from being a math-punk drummer, goth rock drummer, and jazz drummer to a noise-making soundscape artist. Eventually, I found new methods to use and have expanded my techniques and approaches. But I still return often to cymbals and drums, because they simply host solid useful timbres and offer a multitude of possibilities for performance.

Skadi: In my early days, I created drones by filtering sounds and noise. Since filtered noise can cause some mastering issues and unforseeable effects, I changed my drones using “cleaner” sounds.

Sonologyst: As a beginner I made a lot of mistakes before finding my way.

d. Have you changed techniques/software/instruments for creating drones over the progress of your career?

Taphephobia: I used an older program, Cool Edit Pro. After the second album (I think??), I started to use Adobe Audition 3.0. And, I also began to use Ableton Live on the side for some years now, mostly for live-recordings and finishing the track in Adobe Audition.
I would say I am still not an expert at using Ableton. I haven`t really studied the program much, I just play my guitar and try different effects and record it.
In the beginning I saw myself as learning to make drones. I think it was on the Black City Skyline I felt that the music had a good flow. Also on that album the guitar became a main instrument. On, for example, House of Memories there are almost no guitars.

Mebitek: Changes are normal when you grow up as musician, until you find your way to make music.

Sonologyst: Yes I did it many times. And, I continue to change to make the sound fabric different in any production I do.

Treha Sektori: I change instruments as often as I can. I am not a good technician, but I am always seeking the tone that’ll move me. In every instrument I can find.

Skadi: Of course. As my rig changed to virtual studio tech several times, my techniques, software, and instruments changed as well.

Stuzha: Sure. I tend to use more live instruments nowadays to produce interesting and genuine sounds.

Seesar: Yes. Not only do I return often to the staples of cymbals and drums for drone creation, I regularly explore new ways to make drones (and non-droning sounds). Keeping in mind the basic Hornbostel-Sachs taxonomy of acoustic sound generation (vibrating strings, vibrating columns of air, vibrating bodies, vibrating membranes), one can investigate means of generating sound using one or more of these methods, as well as approaching the method of generation differently. To find fresh ways to create drones. I suggest exploring as much as you can, until you find the sounds you like and the ways to make them, which provide you with a variety of performance techniques, to enrich your arsenal of drones/sounds for your compositions.

e. How important are drones to dark ambient music?

Treha Sektori: Good way to move your guts. Always depends on your message. For me, drones appeal to the guts. A way to grab this physical part, to create an uncomfortable feeling. Or, on the contrary, to bring the auditor to a meditative state. But it is a nice way to create a balance in the moving parts, the climaxes.

Seesar: That depends entirely on your approach to composition and performance, and your aesthetic preferences. For me, I find drones effective for filling space underneath a more active layer of sounds, for setting a mood and supplying a track with a frequency root around which to compose, and for a timbral theme necessary for countering other sounds and dynamics. Dark ambient music is certainly possible to create without drones. Personally, I prefer dark ambient music to be more involved than just layers of drones. However, I also feel they are highly valuable and functional. So, I suggest to consider using drones alongside other compisitional elements, to maximize your creative possibilities.

Skadi: Drones provide a solid fundament for dark ambient music. However, dark ambient is not bound to drones entirely. Some tracks, including many of my own work, are based on more natural sounds, rhythms, ethnical instruments, etc., without a dominant drone in the foreground. To sum it up, drones are very important for dark ambient but there are also ways to produce dark ambient music without the usage of drones.

Next: Dark Ambient 101: Field Recordings
Read the full article.

3. Field Recordings

a. How important are field recordings to dark ambient music?

protoU: Field recordings are the essence of the realistic atmosphere we want to convey in dark ambient. Its purpose is to be immersive and get to the point where the listener is fully in the place and time, which the musician is trying to show.

Aegri Somnia: Alot in my music, i like organic/nature feel to high frequency spectrum, sound gets another dimension with field recordings.

Stuzha: To me, FR are always number one. You can make so much from just using FR alone and post-processing. By the way there are amazing FR banks around, like this one https://www.soundsnap.com/

Stuzha, gathering field recordings.

Seesar: I do use field recordings, including ambient sound, sampling, and ethnomusicology field recordings, where applicable and ethically acceptable. Examples of field recordings I have used in my works include cat meowing, raven songs, rain and wind, construction machinery, brad machines, vacuum cleaners, drills, high school pep rallies, and music recorded during ethnomusicology fieldwork research trips (used with permission). The importance of their use is a matter of taste and style. Field recordings certainly add a particular flavour to a piece that cannot be gained otherwise, but it also places a piece in a specific mentality framed by the field recording, which must also be considered by the composer. There is nothing negative about using field recordings, just to be clear. However, they can change the aesthetic of a piece. Their importance is strictly determined by the value the composer places on them.

Skadi: As explained before regarding drones, field recordings are quite important to dark ambient music but not required. There are many dark ambient tracks around without any field recording usage. E.g. I rarely use field recordings in my tracks. They can definitely provide a very distinctive mood in a track, but emotions and moods can also be transfered with other methods and approaches to dark ambient.

Mebitek: Should be the key point for originality.

Shrine: Most ambient artists use them I think, more or less. Perhaps, it depends on the specific music. For the so called “organic ambient”, for example, all the natural sounds are an integral part of the music.

Sonologyst: They are another fundamental component in dark ambient music. They are the ingredient to create visual atmospheres, vivid landscapes, even stories. They forge a solid concept when the musician has something interesting to tell through the music.

Ugasanie: Everyone decides for themselves. Personally, I use them all the time. I love ambient with field recordings. They create the right atmosphere, for me.

b. What electronics do you use to capture field recordings?

Stuzha: I always had Zoom recorders. Now it is Zoom H4. I managed to freeze it a few times, but otherwise it is a solid piece of equipment.

Atrium Carceri: Tascam DR-100 with a dual XLR connected Röde NT4.

Atrium Carceri, field recording expedition.

Shrine: I used to have a portable field recorder. I sold it off a few years ago, as I wasn’t satisfied with its sound quality. I never bought a new one though. Nowadays it’s easy to find high quality samples online and I already have a pretty big sound library with my own field recordings too.

Aegri Somnia: My phone for recent recordings. Any cheap Tascam/Zoom/Sony stand-alone recorder will do the job.

Seesar: I use either a portable M-Audio digital recorder or I set up my laptop and capture field recordings with my M-Audio soundcard and Röde NT-4 point stereo mic.

Skadi: Since I don’t field record on my own, I use specific libraries with field recordings if required for my tracks.

Mebitek: Zoom H1

protoU: I use voice recording software on my iPhone. It is more than enough for me for now, but I’m sure I’ll get a good mic someday. I also have a friend with a recording studio, where I borrow different microphones to record stuff.

Sonologyst: I’m not a professional of field recordings, so I use simply an iPhone when I’m around to catch everything that could be interesting.

Ugasanie: Tascam DR05

c. Do you use a wind-screen?

Aegri Somnia: No

Stuzha: I like these… furry things 🙂

Seesar: Yes. All of my devices have their own, purpose-made, foam windscreen. I also, occasionally, use a floating pop screen for loud or aspirated sounds.

Atrox Pestis: Always if I am outdoors – even if it is just my t-shirt wrapped around the mic. I have different wind screens for different mics, but I generally use an open cell foam screen that fits a compact omni mic, which I use most frequently.

Mebitek: Yes, a zoom h1 ball wind screen.

protoU: No, I don’t.

d. What kind of wind-screen?

Atrium Carceri: Dead Kitten

Shrine: Foam and fur. Two for the built-in mics of the portable recorder, and one more for the external stereo mic I was also using back then.

e. When is it necessary to use a wind-screen?

Stuzha: Depends on what you record, of course. But you can’t go wrong keeping it on your mic all the time.

Seesar: In my opinion, always. Perhaps, if a sound is extremely faint and there is no chance of wind contaminating the recording. But even then, I would more likely tend to use the windscreen, just to be safe. At first, I never used a windscreen of any description. I found myself continually editing out pops, clicks, clipping, and distant unwanted sounds. Using a windscreen helps reduce a lot of post-recording editing issues. I admit, I pay particular detail to using as clean of a sample as possible, so perhaps I address these issues with far too much attention. However, in my experience and using my approaches to field recording, I cannot recommend using a windscreen enough.

Mebitek: I always use one, because it gets cleaner sounds.

Shrine: All the time, I guess, when recording outdoors. The chances to get the perfect conditions when the windscreen won’t be needed are tiny. But I guess this is more true for recording quiet sounds (e.g. nature) than loud sounds (e.g. machines).

f. Do you leave the field recordings raw or do you add effects treatment to them?

Treha Sektori: I do treat them. Sometimes, I can record for an hour and only find a couple of seconds that, after modeling, I get what I feel.

Kammarheit: I rarely use raw field recordings. I have been using a Zoom H4n for many years and it has been enough for the type of music I want to make. I am not very interested in adding footsteps, dripping water or other easily recognisable sounds. But I really like the process of collecting sounds, that I then manipulate. High and long metallic sounds or traffic recorded through tunnels or under bridges. I often layer lots of different field recordings on top of each other, and play the whole mix as one instrument on my keyboard, making long, meditative drones. As long as it doesn’t get too muddy.

Pär Boström (Kammarheit), view from the studio.

Aegri Somnia: Raw, I just cut unnecessary frequencies. When I use an unusual sound, then I manupulate it and use it for a specific purpose.

Stuzha: I like both. Sometimes it is important to tell the story, so I use raw.

Seesar: It depends on the sound recorded. I would say, typically, I remove noise and unwanted sounds from a field recording. Then, I edit it to use the section I want, and often add some effect (reverb, change of pitch, echo, et cetera), along with a raw version whenever feasible. This ensures the original recording is heard, but within the context of the dark ambient piece, alongside the altered version of the recording.

Atrium Carceri: Almost always EQ, and most times compression to smooth volume spikes, if too rough.

Atrox Pestis: Both. I want some sounds to be very clear as to their source. Others, I may have recorded because I wanted to capture a texture or specific tone, and then I’ll add the effects that will boost what I like about the recordings or alter them altogether.

protoU: I usually put some effects there. It depends on if I want to convey the very realistic atmosphere (that the field recording is about: forest, rain, swamp, night-time, church etc.), or I want to play with it and make it, turn it to something completely opposite adding some delay, distortion (example: when I have a sound of a frying egg and try to turn it into the sound of a burning flame.)

Shrine: Essentially every sound in music production needs treatment (as equalization, compression, etc.), not only field recordings. Yes, sometimes it is possible to have a perfect raw sound that you can use without any treatment but this is rather an exception. And if by treatment you mean adding sound effects like reverberation or distortion, then it depends on the specific composition and how you want it to sound, so it’s up to you.

Sonologyst: I usually treat field recordings with additional reverbs. But the most important thing is to find the right level for the field recording layer in the mix. Mixing is by all means a crucial part in the process.

g. Do you use field recordings in the creation of drone or do you only use them as a secondary layer of sound?

Aegri Somnia: I use them as layers only.

Stuzha: Yes, some field recordings can be perfect for the drone manufacturing process.

Seesar: Both. If a field recording is long and droning, then, obviously, it is most likely suitable for being a drone within a piece. I also may take a shorter sample and stretch it to make it a drone, or vice versa, edit a long recording to use it for secondary layer sampling. Shorter sounds, though, tend to be used more clearly on top of drones in my pieces.

Skadi: If I use field recordings, I usually use them as a secondary layer with heavy treatment.

Mebitek: I usually use them as a second layer, but sometimes I use them as a sound generator.

protoU: Sometimes field recordings are the basis of drones, because the natural atmosphere often has it’s own natural sounds, even with notes sometimes.

Shrine: No, my drones are always synthesized. Field recordings are mostly used as a background.

Sonologyst: It’s possible to use field recordings for drones, why not?

Next: Dark Ambient 101: Vocals
Read the full article.

4. Vocals

a. Do you use your own voice, hire a voice actor, or use samples from films/television/speeches?

Treha Sektori: I use my own voice.

Mebitek: Usually I record my own voice, but sometimes I need female vocals.

Stuzha: I use my own voice, but I don’t like how it sounds. I used film samples a lot for one of my cinematic drone projects.

Seesar: I most often use my own voice, and employ a range of vocal techniques to provide varying timbres, as I can. Once or twice, I have used vocal sounds from other people, and live I have used many vocalists at once for a choir-like passage. I have not used samples from film or television, but it is certainly a possibility, if you have the permission to use the material.

Skadi: When I use vocals, I usually use samples.

Shrine: Samples only.

Sonologyst: Yes, samples from old documentaries, movies, speeches are my favorite. But I also asked singers to send to me parts for specific uses.

Taphephobia: Mostly I use my own voice and sometimes I ask friends. Clips of real people (for example on Youtube) or movies, too. I don`t think I will use that much movie samples in the future. To be honest, I don`t think I need it.

Ketil Søraker (Taphephobia)
Photo by: Egil Anders Rønning

Ugasanie: Mostly my own, but sometimes also samples from films. Alternatively, sometimes people share material, if you ask. For example, the track ” Arctic Hysteria” turned out so.

b. Is it necessary to ask permission of the original copyright holder before using samples of vocals in your music?

Stuzha: Better to ask, but you can find lots of really amazing movies to sample on archive.org. But at the end of day I make no money out of it!

Seesar: Exceptionally important. You do not want to have your work removed from online hosts or incur legal action because you incorporated a sample for which you did not have permission to use. It does happen. Check the current sampling laws in your country with your performing rights organization to get the details you need to stay within legal constraints of sampling. They are much more lenient than you may expect, and you may also find that the source you wish to sample is quite willing to give you permission, typically under a creative commons license that will allow you to use their work/recording for merely giving them public credit for the sample. Furthermore, there is little reason to sample without permission. Creating your own samples is easy and keeps your music original with you holding all the rights, so it is to your benefit to stay within the law and only sample with permission. In my experience, doing so has always resulted in benefits for me and my music, which is a pleasant bonus for only using samples with permission.

Skadi: It depends. Basically, you need permission for the usage of samples, especially when you take whole passages from other music. Sample Libraries with speech samples contain a royalty free license which allows you to use them.

protoU: Just don’t use copyrighted samples 🙂

Shrine: Good question. There are three times I have used spoken-word samples so far: one taken from a film, and two from Youtube videos. I only checked the copyrights of the movie, because I used that sample almost without changing it. The other two, I changed drastically, so to me there was no point to bother with copyrights.

Sonologyst: No, for they are usually very short samples or free samples.

Next: Dark Ambient 101: DAW (Digital Audio Workstation)
Read the full article.

5. DAW [Digital Audio Workstation]
An electronic device or application software used for recording, editing and producing audio files such as musical pieces, songs, speech or sound effects.

a. What DAW do you use?

Aegri Somnia: Studio One

Stuzha: I don’t use anything, except Adobe Audition and some plugins… I’m going to look into Ardour.

Mebitek: I use Native Instruments Maschine and Ableton Live.

Seesar: I use one of two computers, a playback system, and one of two input systems in my private studio. I run Windows 7 Ultimate and Windows 10, 4-8GB of RAM, iCore processors, AMD graphics cards running three monitors with an extended display, a 24 channel digital Yamaha desk, an M-Audio optical input soundcard and a direct M-Audio USB soundcard, an Onkyo power amp, and a set of Harmon-Kardon playback monitors and a set of Advent playback monitors, plus high end Pioneer headphones with over the ear noise-canceling cans. I primarily use Röde and Blue mics. I use the latest full version of Adobe Audition for recording and editing. I have various plug-ins for mastering, but I also typically only master on a very limited scale, leaving the full mastering to the record labels.

Atrium Carceri: Cubase

Skadi: I use several DAWs to produce my music. It depends on the style I want to produce. Mainly, I use Ableton Live for production. However, I also have Propellerhead’s Reason and Cocko’s Reaper for my side projects, and FL Studio which I mainly used before I switched to Ableton.

protoU: Ableton Live

Shrine: I used to use REASON when I started with my music project back in 2003. In 2009 I switched to SONAR, which I’m still using today, and I’m pretty sure I won’t be switching to another DAW ever.

Shrine, using the Sonar DAW.

Sonologyst: I prefer to escape all questions about DAW, computer and so on, simply because there are not peculiarities for dark ambient music. The logic of hardware and software is the same for all kinds of music. Just, I can add, that I’m a graduated sound technician, so I learned techniques of recording, mixing and mastering through regular courses. But as in all studies, the experience is the most important factor. Do it, do it and do it again. And after some years everyone will find the right set up and process. And for people like me, who don’t have big amounts of money to invest in expensive hardware and software, the experience will help to do more, using less. And this is a big advantage for creativity; when you have poor instruments and have to use your brain to figure out something good. Take a few small stones, beat them together and record the sound by using some freeware delay and reverb. Probably you will be very positively surprised of the result.

b. Do you think there is a best DAW to be used, or is it personal taste?

Kammarheit: Any DAW will serve you well, once you know how it works. I have been using Reason and Ableton Live for many years. I had the ambition to learn Cubase, but I just felt frustrated and kept looking for the functions I already knew in my other programs.

Atrox Pestis: It’s all personal taste. For noise and dark ambient, I hardly use DAWs full capabilities or features. I came from an audio engineering background, so I am really just using the tools I have and already know. Some people need DAWs a lot more minimally, and are fine with something like Audacity, while others might need a lot more from the program, and use something like Abelton or even use multiple.

Atrium Carceri: Personal taste, and it depends on what you are creating. If you are working with a lot of digital beats, a loop based program might be faster (FL Studios, Ableton), while if working on a lot of precision wave editing something like Cubase will be a better fit.

Shrine: There’s no best DAW, but choosing one isn’t about taste either. It’s about workflow. There is a set of things you have to do in order to compose a track and this set is highly individual. So a producer usually sticks to a DAW that suits his/her workflow best.

Skadi: It’s definitely personal taste which DAW you prefer. Some like Cubase, Presonus One, or Cakewalk Sonar. Others like Reason, Ableton, or FL Studio. The best approach is to check out the DAWs, and stick with the one you like most regarding workflow and features.

protoU: I know a lot of people that make great ambient music within various programs. I like Ableton, because you can create with it and do live shows. Not all DAWs are created this way. Also, it looks good. Esthetics play a very important role in what I do. For example, I can’t stand how Cubase looks 🙂 You open it up and immediately strive to collapse it, because the UI is just so ugly 😀

protoU, performing live.

Seesar: Personal taste. The main thing is qualtiy of output (which also means quality of input). If you can build a DAW that maintains clean recordings, clean editing, clean playback, and clean means of saving and disceminating your works, you can use whatever you prefer, and with which you are familiar and comfortable. In a way, being comfortable with your equipment is the way to ensure that your recordings are clean and professional. Of course, you also have to start with equipment that allows for that, too. Be intelligent when choosing equipment. Do your research, try not to be hasty, talk to other studio engineers, read reviews, and work within your financial means to build your DAW. Today, it is easy to get lots of inexpensive equipment, but not necessarily easy or cheap to get professional, easy to use equipment. Get what works for you, and evolve as your music and career grow.

As for editing software, again, use what is within your means and with which you are comfortable. It is extremely important to be able to work smoothly with your editing program. You will need to know your software inside and out to accomplish creating the music you hear in your head, in a timely manner. That being said, you should expect a steep learning curve to familiarizing yourself with your first editing program. But, do not let that discourage you. If you have not worked with an editing program before, do some research and work through a few tutorials before really delving into your first pieces with it. You will want to be fluent with the program to both create your works and meet industry deadlines. Also, you will want to test your software with your equipment to make sure everything is compatible and will provide you with clear, and smooth recordings every session. No composer or performer has time to troubleshoot tech or stop and clean up raw tracks every time you work on a new piece. You will be very happy you took the time to get everything set up and that you are familiar with the software when you are tasked with creating seven new tracks in three days and have no time to do anything but create music.

c. Did you have training in the use of this program or did you learn it yourself?

Shrine: No training. I learned by myself. I didn’t even learn all of it, only the things I need.

Shrine, studio.

Kammarheit: I have never had any training. You don’t need to. I use my programs as often as possible; and I am not afraid to experiment with other types of music, just to learn new techniques. I am still using my programs even on the days when I am not making proper music. Even when I am online, I have half the screen showing my DAW, so I won’t get stuck in social media.

Aegri Somnia: I learned it by myself. Today you have tons of Youtube lessons, and you can learn every tiny bit of specific operations in your DAW, its all online available for free, for you to learn.

Seesar: Yes and no. Initially, yes, I learned to use my editing software by myself, then I spent time working with two studio engineers to get advice and learn new tricks. Later, I upgraded my software and had to relearn certain things, even though they were supposedly easier in the new version of the program. But, it was not a difficult task, and I was able to engage with the software on my own. I will say, though, that there are many useful tutorials and online courses, so if you are not fully familiar with your software, it will benefit you greatly to take the time to go through some of the available material and ensure you are creating professional level music. Creativity is something you will certainly have if you are reading this. Make sure your creativity is rewarded with professional sounding recordings. Know your equipment, work with engineers, know your strengths and weakness, and engage your music accordingly.

protoU: Mostly I’m self taught. I have a lot of friends that make music with this program, so we kind of learned from each other. Also my husband uses it. Dronny Darko. You might know him 😉

Shrine: Once you are familiar with the basics of computer music production, try the demos of as many DAWs as you can. Try to complete a track in each of them. This way you will find what suits you best.

Seesar: Ensure your equipment is compatible and will provide you with professional recordings, without hindrance. If you need a new computer, get one. If you need a good mic, get one. If you need the latest version of an editing program, get it. A smoothly running DAW is essential to being a professional. If this is your job or main creative outlet, you should treat it as such. You will be tremendously happy and far more productive with energy spent on your creativity rather than struggling with your DAW.

protoU: When choosing a DAW, I would lurk a lot of info on the internet, on how each program works and how it looks. In the long run, it will be something you will spend a lot of your time in front of, so make sure it has the potential and the look to not irritate you 🙂

Mebitek: To experiment, experiment and still experiment!

Next: Dark Ambient 101: Computers
Read the full article.

6. Computers

a. Win or Mac?

Treha Sektori: Mac

protoU: Mac

Aegri Somnia: Windows

Stuzha: Windows, but I use it just for Adobe Audition. I also have some driver issues to plug-in my TonePort to Linux. However, I’d like to do my next album in Linux!

Seesar: For me, I utterly despise Apple computers. I find them exceptionally user unfriendly and extremely difficult to use and infinitely over-priced. I, therefore, use Windows and Linux machines. That being said, the main thing is that you are comfortable with your computer. If you are familiar with Macs, use them! Both Apple and Windows machines can support professional software and hardware. It is entirely a preferential decision, but do make sure that your equipment is professional. That is the main issue.

Skadi: PC

Shrine: PC all the way. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying Macs are bad, not at all. It’s just their price/performance ratio that is really poor, compared to PCs. For the money you will spend on an average Mac you can build a monster PC that will do a better job for you. But that’s the reality with all Apple devices, you are paying extra just because of the brand. It’s a waste.

Ugasanie: I use a budget laptop Samsung, with Windows 7.

b. What is the most important component in a dark ambient computer studio? (ie. Processor, RAM, Sound Card, etc.)

Treha Sektori: A sound card that is solid, I’d say.

Kammarheit: People have managed to make good music even before the advanced components. Don’t get too caught up in the ideal setup. Start with what you have or can afford. For me, music has always been about mood and atmosphere. Exploring and expressing the inner worlds. You can do this with very little equipment. It is only out of curiosity and maybe necessity that I have picked up what little I know about the technical aspect of music making. I often talk to people who are postponing their creativity because they are waiting for the perfect hardware or software and it makes me a bit sad.

Aegri Somnia: Active near field monitors, headphones and soundcard.

Stuzha: CPU is quite important to do some heavy real-time processing and then sound rendering. Then I’d prioritize sound card and RAM. Don’t forget about audio monitors do not be afraid to spend more on them than on your laptop!

Mebitek: As for all electronic music studios, you need a good CPU and as much RAM you can buy.

Seesar: All these pieces of equipment are important. Good processors will reduce rendering time, if you are working with high bit rates or adding lots of effects to a large number of tracks within a mix. RAM is also very important for this sort of heavy processing, and it is also useful for multitasking during a session, but I have been able to work with 4-8GB of RAM, easily, on my machines. More is better, of course. Soundcards are extremely important. Getting a clean sound is essential. Do not skimp here. You want the highest quality soundcard you can get within your financial means. I also prefer a lot of screen real estate, because I find it easier to edit fine details and analyze spectrum views of recordings, as well as I often work with a mix of ten to twenty tracks in one piece. Having multiple, large monitors has proven to be very useful and increased my efficiency noticably.

Skadi: The most important component is the sound interface. I recommend to use a high quality interface with several I/Os, and the capability to provide low latency signal processing. CPU is also important to have enough power to host the virtual instruments, if applicable. RAM is less important, since the common 16GB nowadays are usually enough.

protoU: I think it’s mostly the environment. I can’t create ambient when I’m in a rush or something is not right in the room. I need to have that tranquil sense. It will all be reflected in the music.

Ugasanie: Soundcard.

Shrine: The most important things are, of course, the clock speed of the processor, and the performance of the I/O driver of your audio interface (sound card). In a professional setup the audio interface is usually not a part of the computer, but even if it is, the performance of the sound driver is still vital for the DAW. A higher number of processor cores can help too, in case your DAW properly supports multitasking. And if you will be using sample based instruments (especially the orchestral and choral ones where every tone and articulation is coming from a separate audio file), then the RAM size will be a factor too, as the DAW will load all the samples into RAM.

Shrine, PC tower setup.

c. What do you think are the minimum requirements for these components? (ie. i5 processor, 6gb or RAM, etc.)

Skadi: An i5 Quadcore is good enough, unless you have a lot of VST instances running in parallel. Since most VSTs are not able to use multicore, and run on one core of the CPU (however, a multicore enabled DAW will distribute the VST instances onto the multiple CPU cores), a decent CPU speed is also recommendable. 8gb is the minimum for serious music production, but 16gb+ is recommended.

protoU: It always depends on the DAW, and what you are aiming for. There are different techniques to make your program work better with little resources.

Shrine: This very much depends on how many virtual instruments and virtual effects you are using. If you only record and mix audio, without processing, and without synthesis, you can go even with a low spec computer. The more virtual instruments and virtual effects you use, the more computing power you will need.

Aegri Somnia: I run smooth with Intel Core i3 and 4gb RAM for most situations. Newer stuff like Diva and other analog emulators are very CPU hungry, so if you run more than two of them, it’s wise to update your processor and RAM.

Stuzha: I’d say indeed i5 intel, 8gb RAM should do. I use my 8 year old Lenovo G780 laptop, but thinking of upgrading.

Mebitek: An i7, 16gb ram, and a solid-state hard disk.

Seesar: It is less important to be concerned with minimums, and more concerned about compatibility. As long as you are able to ensure your programs run smoothly and your end result is professional. I run a quad i5 on one machine and a duo i7 on another. Currently, both machines have 8GB of RAM. I find they are effecient to conduct my work. But, I am saving up to upgrade to a newer machine in the new year.

d. What would you say is the best computer set-up for a studio?

Seesar: The main issue is simply being able to do what you need your computer to do. For sampling, you will need more RAM. For mixing and mastering, you need more processing power. You will need scratch disc and storage space, too, so be sure to have lots of space on your hard drive(s). I have three 1TB hard drives, two 750GB hard drives, and one 4TB drive. The difference between a high end duo core and a mid grade quad is not significant, in my experience. A higher processing speed, however, can be very useful. Consider getting a high speed processor, at least 4GB of RAM (preferably more), and have at least 500GB of space to store tracks and use and workspace for your audio programs.

Skadi: That’s a difficult question, since the answer is based on the budget someone is willing or able to spend. You can have a decent music production rig for roughly $1000 including a good USB interface (e.g. Focusrite Scarlett), but you can also spend a lot more and get a $10,000+ rig, including a RME Hammerfall, Neumann mics etc etc.

Shrine: Get the fastest processor you can afford. Make sure it’s not a “low power” model. An energy saving processor will probably fail you on music production, even if it’s a very fast one.

e. What would be the most bare-bones acceptable set-up?

Seesar: Maybe an i3 with 2GHz speed, and a hard drive with 250GB. It would be slow, of course. But, that could get you through making a few tracks, until you can upgrade.

Skadi: An AMD or intel based Quadcore CPU, 8gb RAM and the usage of ASIO4ALL, to get low latency on onboard soundcards. A dualcore CPU is also acceptable, if you’re willing to deal with the limitations of instruments and effects.

Next: Dark Ambient 101: Samples
Read the full article.