Hey guys, thought this particular section would be the place to ask.

Anyways, I often hear people advise others to keep things consistent, as in stick to just a few styles and genres so that they can start developing their own unique sound and voice. I do agree with this to an extent, after all, there are a ton of producers who have redefined genres because of this. But there are also people who have experimented in tons of different genres, though they still keep their style.

My observation, though, is that a lot of producers start diversifying when they become more popular, when they have some identifiable style. In the beginning, they seem to stick to just a few genres.

This question has been bothering me for a while because I feel that I've been making tracks with genres all across the board. In the past, I've made electro house, deep house, drum and bass, drumstep, dubstep, trance, trap, and neurohop, which is quite a diverse list to me. But then I look at all of my WIPs and find I have psytrance, glitch hop, nu disco, happy hardcore, moombahcore, neurofunk, breaks, and more. And I plan to release them under one alias, assuming I finish them first.

As much as I love creating a wide variety of music (which is why I produce in the first place), I feel I might be a little too inconsistent, especially as someone who still has a ton to learn, which brings me to my next point. I am by no means popular (in fact I'm a nobody), and I doubt I'll find my "sound" anytime soon, if ever. In that case, I'm not worried about finding my sound, but I am concerned about how I can build an identity as an artist in relation to the music I make.

TL;DR: I may or may not be too diverse at a relatively early stage.

So here's my big question for you guys: How important is it to be consistent? When is it okay to experiment?

I'd say that as least as far as DJing is concerned, people like to know what they're getting, and the biggest DJs seem to be the ones with the narrowest selections. To the extent that you're interested in building a brand or a name for yourself it's something to think about.

Personally I would never encourage anybody to prioritise popularity over artistic freedom. But I'm idealistic like that, and there's nothing fundamentally wrong with being dead set on making a living from your craft. Making a living from music probably beats the hell out of sitting in an office five days a week. But bear in mind the importance of brand and identity if that's what you're going for. Depending on how big you want to get and how important it is to you to get big, people will more or less need to be able to pigeonhole you, which will be all the more difficult if you've spread yourself across a dozen genres instead of maybe one or two.

One way you might work around this is to use aliases - I know of a few artists who release things under different names depending on what they're making. This would allow you to build a number of identities. Anybody who's that enthusiastic about your output will figure out that it's all one person, and for anybody who's just into a couple of styles, no harm done.

The other thing that occurred to me is that all genres have techniques etc. that define them and which take time to learn. Unless you're a musical genius, you're more likely to end up making good music by learning a few things in depth rather than by trying to learn bits of everything.

But fuck all that though tbh, I say do whatever makes you feel fulfilled as an artist and producer 

Actually one thing I would add just to make my advice even more ambiguous - there are not enough people who make tunes that bridge the gaps between genres for my liking. If like me you DJ but don't want to play or listen to just one genre for an hour, it *really* helps if there are people making tunes that let you transition between styles.

I don't worry about that really. I don't think its helpful, especially when you are new. Make whatever you feel like making. If it sucks, make another. I heard an interview with Skrillex where he said he makes all kinds of music that never sees the light of day.

I think in terms of what you release(down the road), you should be a little consistent. But even then, you still want to surprise people.

I dunno, I'm pretty sure that once you become talented, labels want to control what sound you make too, arty, audien, tritonal were all from anjunabeats before and now make more housy electro stuff, stuff that anjunabeats wont ever release, armin van burren's armada has a range of everything from big room, trouse, progressive, psy trance 138, etc.

Is that really an ideal state to be in tho? Being controlled by a label and told what to make?

Let's think about David Bowie for a second. Did David Bowie have a consistent style? Perhaps he created a singular mood from song-to-song on each album, but with every album he intentionally subverted what people came to expect from David Bowie. Thus, Bowie became one of the most influential musicians on the planet. Low sounds nothing like Hunky Dory, which sounds nothing like Let's Dance, which sounds nothing like Blackstar. The unifying threads in his discography were attention to detail, "writerly" lyrics, and that voice.

The important thing to understand about music is that there are many different ways to achieve success. Skrillex's path was different than Carnage's path. Carnage's path was different than Seth Troxler's path. You can worry about whether or not your sound is "consistent" or you can keep making music until you wake up one morning and realize you have a sound, or realize you have completed several songs that all have a similar vibe and that they would sound good collected into an EP or album. The important thing is not necessarily to create marketable production "signatures" but rather to be happy with what you are making, to make songs that you are going to still want to listen to one year after you make them. The music comes first, the branding comes later. Genre is just a marketing tool, after all.