Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 02/26/2024 in all areas

  1. neat original! i didn't vote on the first decision. comments about the soundscape and verb application above apply to me too. percussion across the board doesn't sound like it's in the same world as the synths but the toms are particularly dry. the rest of the verb is like 10x longer than i'd expect too, the tail's super long - i actually think this is more the problem than the percs, since in a vacuum later the percs do have some room tone. the chords that come in at 1:08 are neat, but i wish they'd come in earlier. the lead at 1:22 has such a long tail that it takes a while to fade, and it's moving stepwise in Gm. that wouldn't be too big a deal except the third chord in the short background chorded instrument is a flatted II chord, and so at 1:24 it puts an Ab major chord under an A in the lead line. it's definitely a bit crunchy but wasn't a super big deal to me since the chorded element is so short. the percussion here and the bass writing is actually pretty fun, and i like the call and response through this section. it feels like there isn't quite enough there though - another instrument is needed somewhere where it won't compete with what's happening. this repeats over a few times and then we get a breakdown at 2:17. this was needed by here so it's well-timed. the same issue that was described above happens at 2:30 except this time it's the bass and the lead, and this is more noticeable since the soundscape is emptier. the same riff in the lead and the same lead riff are used here repeatedly, and it's not until almost 3:15 that we get anything new. this is a perfect section to really change up the vibe or instrumentation, coming out of the break, and staying the same is tiring from an auditory perspective. the track felt like it was approaching the end after 3:45 and then it goes for another minute doing the same thing, no solo or anything to mix it up. this is too much repetition - we're talking five minutes of bread and only three minutes of butter. trimming this back a lot would help a ton. so this is a very long rubber stamp. consider changing up the notes that conflict, take some more time to trim back the arrangement to just be the best parts and not also a ton of fat along the edges, flesh out the bass and percs writing for later in the track, and consider how you can continue to iterate what the song's saying throughout so it's not so repetitive. also consider toning back the synth reverb's tail and normalize the soundscape a bit so that it's not so diverse. NO
    1 point
  2. I agree with MW totally. This is a massive improvement! Intro and outro are much better. The soundscape sounds really lush, although the drum elements are still way too dry. Wow those are some dry claps! In the section from 1:22-1:29 and again from 2:30-2:44, I feel like the lead notes clash with the bass and other element writing. Perhaps @prophetik music can elaborate on what I am hearing. I think that motif is directly from the source tune, but in the source tune the bass and countermelodic elements go better with that writing. Overall, my complaint is that this arrangement doesn't feel fully fleshed out. It's a nice soundscape but it is leaving me flat as a full piece due to lack of motivic development, and it ends up sounding quite repetitive. I like the drum groove change at 3:39! But the same bassline, lead and pads are playing the exact same thing over and over. I think adding some kind of lead melody, either from this or another source song (preferably from the same game) or something original over this soundscape, would add a ton of interest. As it stands it's just too static and undeveloped. Please be encouraged though, you're on the right track! NO (resubmit)
    1 point
  3. I'm immediately struck by how much of a better soundscape this is than the previous version, as far as I remember it. Reverb on the pads and chimes is a little over the top, but the percussion is still pretty dry. The snares are a little dry, but the toms are very, very dry and sound out of place. The saw lead that starts at 1:09 is also much drier than the rest of the soundscape. The bass is a hair dry, but it didn't bother me until repetition started becoming a problem. Speaking of which, it's still pretty repetitive. Everything up to 1:10 takes strictly an additive approach, each couple of loops adding an instrument or a few notes. The percussion loop is "complete" at 0:40 and repeats until 2:15. The main hook, which first plays at 0:34, plays an awfully large number of times total, and I personally got very tired of it. at 3:39 it returns to the same concept as the beginning, which is fine conceptually as a bookend, except it doesn't really expand on the theme and goes on for another full minute. There's no climax or anything, it just winds down the same way it built up. Overall, kudos on the substantial improvement, but the same core issues remain: Reverb on the instruments is inconsistent, making them sound like they're not in the same space, with the chimes and pads at opposite extremes; and the overall arrangement is too repetitive, with insufficient variation to retain the listener's interest. I encourage you to keep working at it, though, as this was a massive leap forward. NO
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...