Pray

I put these tracks out mainly because I enjoy making music. I always have. The technology has changed over the years, but the basic motivation hasn’t — it’s still about the satisfaction of building something from nothing and seeing where each track takes me. With electronic music especially, every piece feels like another chance to learn something new. I try to approach each track with at least one idea I want to test or push a bit further than last time.

With this one, I wanted to build on the vocal-led approach I used in 1400 Days. In that track, I took Daria’s vocal and built everything around it rather than starting with drums, which is where I’d usually begin. This time I took that idea a step further. Instead of working from an existing vocal, I created the vocal from chopped fragments of my own voice and used those as a rhythmic starting point. That turned out to be surprisingly useful, because it meant the space I needed around the vocal was baked in from the beginning. This made it easier to design call-and-response parts, letting synths and drums answer the vocal rather than fight it for space.

The other idea I carried forward was continuing to use foley and found sounds as the basis for the percussion. I’ve grown to enjoy working this way. Recording and shaping everyday sounds tends to produce rhythms that feel a bit less predictable than standard drum samples, and it forces me to think differently about what percussion can be. Between the vocal chops and the found-sound percussion, the track developed its identity quite early on, which made the rest of the arrangement feel more focused and intentional.

I also like to challenge and shake up how I mix the tracks. One of the more useful techniques I’ve been exploring recently is using resonance suppressors — tools like Anina (which is free) or Soothe — as sidechain processors. Most of us are familiar with the standard approach of sidechain compression, especially between kick and bass. It works, but it also lowers the entire signal each time it triggers, which can sometimes take the weight or character out of a sound. What these newer tools offer is a more targeted alternative. Instead of ducking the whole signal, they reduce only the frequencies that are actually getting in the way. In practice, that means you can create space without thinning things out, and the result often feels cleaner and more natural.

The biggest benefit is transparency. Traditional sidechain compression creates obvious movement in level, which can be great when you want that pumping effect, but less helpful when you’re just trying to tidy up clashes. Frequency-selective ducking feels more like gentle housekeeping — removing the moments where sounds collide without changing the overall feel. Even small amounts of reduction can make a noticeable difference, especially in dense mixes where multiple elements are sharing similar frequency ranges. I really wish I’d discovered this earlier because I think the bass sounds so much better in the mix.

Although kick and bass separation is the obvious place to start, the technique becomes much more interesting when you use it elsewhere. One really effective use is between vocals and harmonic elements like pads or sustained synths. Rather than compressing the entire pad every time the vocal appears, you can duck just the part of the pad that overlaps with the vocal’s key frequencies. That keeps the vocal clear while allowing the pad to retain its warmth and width. The same idea works well with percussion — for example, letting claps or snares gently tame hi-hat harshness at the moment they hit, rather than dulling the hats permanently with EQ.

It’s also useful when dealing with busy midrange material. Leads, arpeggios and pads often compete for similar space, and static EQ cuts can sometimes feel too blunt. Using dynamic suppression allows those elements to step out of each other’s way only when necessary, which helps preserve tone while improving clarity. I’ve also found it handy on overheads and bright percussion, where it can tame occasional harsh spikes without losing the sense of air and brightness that makes those sounds work in the first place.

The trick with these tools is not to overdo them. It’s tempting to dial in large amounts of reduction when first experimenting, but the best results usually come from small, careful adjustments. A good approach is to exaggerate the effect briefly so you can clearly hear what’s happening, then back it off until the harshness or masking disappears but the tone stays the same. Narrow frequency ranges tend to sound more natural than wide ones, and if you can clearly hear the processing during normal listening, it’s usually a sign that it’s doing too much.

What I like most about working this way is that it shifts the focus from volume to space. Instead of pushing sounds up and down in level, you’re helping them share the frequency spectrum more sensibly. In dense electronic mixes, that often leads to results that feel clearer and more open, without sacrificing energy or character. Once you get used to thinking about sidechaining in that way, it becomes a surprisingly versatile part of the mixing toolkit.