Sebastien Lintz Finds a New Calling
Sebastien Lintz is a Dutch DJ and producer signed to Hardwell’s label, Revealed Recordings. He has released singles and remixes on labels such as, Spinnin’ Records, CR2 Records, Sneakerz Muzik and Stealth Records, just to name a few. Sebastien is currently a Label/Artist Manager/Producer at Revealed Recordings and Sorted Management.
What recently caught my eye was his latest endeavor. Blogging. Most importantly, his post on April 30, 2016, “Producers Exposed Part 1,” where Lintz posts, reviews and publicly advices young artists on how to improve their music. Essentially becoming a springboard for young producers to showcase their music, while gaining useful knowledge from someone with experience. Today, Sebastien followed up his post with, “Producers Exposed Part 2,” packed with new music from Ronyz, Churchy, Splytr, Manuel Alvarez and Wyren, with packed with plenty of pointers from Seb. Mr. Lintz is testing the waters. So far, so good.
“Producers Exposed Part 2,” as it appears on Sebastien Lintz Blog:
Producers Exposed Part 2
Here’s part 2 of Producers Exposed. If you’re not familiar with this concept please check out Part 1 here. Thanks everyone for submitting their track! Let’s go!
#1 Ronyz — Swifter
There are some cool idea’s in this track but at some points the track is a bit too chaotic, meaning there’s too much happening at the same time. Let’s break it down a bit:
- I would remove the small guitar/piano arp synth in the intro. You don’t really need that.
- I would remove the riser in the intro, risers are cool to create a variation but risers like this one (“Hardwell — Spaceman”) don’t really add something in the intro. Those kind of risers should be used on second drops to create more tension in a track.
- After 15sec I would release the full kick like the kick on the drop. So DJ’s can mix it easily.
- The break starts cool but I would have removed the piano-synth fill (the one at 0:35). There’s only a limited amount of information people can process the same time so try not to introduce too many different sounds at the same time.
- I think the synth starting at 0:49 at is a bit too trancy for this kind of track. Because of that synth I think a lot of “Big room Dj’s” won’t play it. Maybe you can make it a bit more like “Hardwell — Eclipse”. Make it a bit more dryer in the mix and less detuned.
- The bassline notes starting at 0:49 are a bit messy. For example at 0:53 the notes sounds a bit out of rhythm. Also I think the bassnotes are too high played, maybe lower it an octave.
- To be honest I lost the track at 1:05. These classics stabs are really misplaced here and doesn’t fit the track. There are too many elements at this point. Ditch those and bring back the piano-synth fill from 0:35 at this point. So you use that as a variation to build up the climax.
- The drop is cool but I don’t really like the synth soundwise. The higher notes coming at 2:04 are cool but I feel the main synth could be less trancy.
- The bridge leading to the break is cool but a bit too long, you should introduce the break at 2:32. Also the vocal parts don’t add anything extra so I would have remove that.
- The second break is much better but too empty. There’s missing a real break, but the build up is working here much better than the first build up.
- I wouldn’t recommend to remove the first kick from the drop. It’s a cool trick but it’s a bit too complicated for a crowd.
- The 2nd drop is a bit too short, I would remove the modern talking sounds in the outro. That’s another extra sound added to this track. Maybe recycle some used elements a bit more instead of introducing new sounds.
- I feel like the kick is lacking bass, maybe try to layer it with a more subby kick or sine wave.
Overall OK track, the melody is catchy but I would go for a less is moreapproach, try to limit tracks to just a few sounds so the track is easier to process for listeners. Before adding or introducing a new sound always ask yourself the question “Does it REALLY add something extra to the track?”. If you’re in doubt than don’t do it. Sound wise I would have make the track less trancy or otherwise make it MORE trancy by increasing the BPM and make the sounds more trancy. The track is now in between genres which is hard to find the right audience for it. I always encourage people to try new styles and combine genres but it must make sense.
#2 Churchy — Clouds
When I listened to this track for the first time I’m heard 2 different tracks in one track. That’s never a good sign to be honest, but maybe it could be interesting to separate the elements in two different tracks. Here’s some detailed feedback:
- A fade in on the kick is never a good idea (only if done right), let DJ’s do the fade in.
- The intro is a bit too empty and elements are introduced a bit too random. It sounds very demo-ish.
- The break idea melody is cool but the intro doesn’t fit this break at all. It sounds like 2 different tracks.
- Try to make the intro a bit more like the outro but with less melody.
- The drop is cool, but the notes interval could be a bit better, sounds like you forgot some midi notes. For example at 1:05–1:06, 1:13–1:14 etc.
- The arrangement could be a bit better, the first drop is too long and too boring. You can fix this by introducing a bridge towards the second break, that’s like a drop variation. So after 30seconds on the drop try to change it a bit.
- The second break sounds a bit too random, use that part of the track for a different track. Also the second drop is unexpected and completely random. It sounds like you didn’t feel like finishing the track. I think if you use the intro sound and the second break sound you could just make a nice new progressive house track out of that, for example like: Mark Knight, Funkagenda — Man With The Red Face (Hardwell Remix)
- The outro is cool but maybe use less melody and get ride of the fade out effect.
Overall this track sounds like two different tracks in one, you should work on the arrangement a bit more. Don’t be lazy while producing, making build ups and good intro’s/outro’s is part of the job! I think both idea’s are still great so it’s just a matter of work. Good luck!
#3 Splytr — Into Space
There’s a lot of work that needs to be done, here are some helpers to get fast result:
- Sample kicks from other productions to get professional sounding kicks or use sample packs such as Cr2 EDM Festival Kicks & Drops (Note: I’m not affiliated with them I just know a lot of producers use them and they do sound solid)
- The synth sounds to standard, try to learn Synthesis so you can learn to how make certain sounds. The best way to learn Synthesis is by watching Youtube tutorials or remakes, reading magazines and try to recreate sounds. A quicker way to get better sound is to use the Nexus synth or some 3rd party presets for the synth you’re using. Learning Synthesis is essential so you can tweak the sounds yourself more in detail.
- Using orchestra synths is VERY tricky. To be honest, producers should only use orchestra elements if they know what they are doing. If you don’t do this right people can hear it right away. Try to imagine you’re a violin player, play with attack, release and timing to get better results. Watch some video’s how people make Orchestra/Scores on Youtube is very helpful as well (Here’s just random Youtube video I found).
- Last but not least the mixing could be better, for example I think the bass sound is too loud. Try to put your track in Mono so it’s easier to hear low frequencies. Also I think it’s always good to “Zoom out” your track by playing it on low volume. Listen to other producers and MatchEQ their tracks using some MatchEQ plugins. Izotope Ozone can do that for example.
#4 Manuel Alvarez — Groovy
Overall OK track, sounds well produced but the track could be better sound wise and melody wise.
- The intro is too long. Also I’m not convinced by the sound coming in at 0:53. I don’t think the variation at 0:55–0:56 sounds good. The first “drop” should drop after 30seconds, imagine a DJ will play this track in a set, it takes 1MIN to get the track started, most transitions starts after 00:30 nowadays. If a DJ will play this track it will take another 30seconds plus another 1MIN15 before something happens. The crowd will totally die at this point. Go for more a Hardwell — Blackout approach. Introduce the first “drop” after 30seconds and introduce the first break around 1:15 instead 2:15.
- Let’s assume the break will start at 1:15 now. I think the break is OK, the synth sound which is coming after 15seconds sound a bit too mono. Also all the melodies are not really catchy. If you keep people waiting with this kind of break make sure the melody is super strong otherwise people will be bored. I think the sound introduced at 0:55 which is also in the second drop isn’t very good. Try to listen to some Fonk Recordings/Dannic to see what kind of groove synths they use. The sound you used is too mono and boring. The outro could be 30seconds shorter as well.
The production doesn’t sound bad but the track needs some kind of catchy melody and sounds. Also the arrangement needs some work. Maybe listen to this old track from Francis Preve & Wolfgang Garter “Yang” to listen how they made the melody and synth percs etc.
#5 BONUS: Wyren — Promentheus
I’ll just leave this track here from Wyren so you guys can give feedback on this track. Please let Wyren know what you think of the track by leaving your feedback in the comments!
That’s it guys! Thanks everyone for submitting their track and reading Part 2 of Producers Exposed. Keep sending me your track on Twitter using @sebastienlintz. I’ll try to get a new blog-post up in two weeks.
Please note, all the tracks MUST be a public Soundcloud link, everyone should learn from each others “mistakes”! If you just want to submit a demo privately the best thing to do that is to submit a demo for Revealed Recordings which I proudly represent 😉