Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Los Angeles

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Artist Settings

  • Collaboration Status
    2. Maybe; Depends on Circumstances
  • Software - Digital Audio Workstation (DAW)
    Pro Tools
  • Composition & Production Skills
    Arrangement & Orchestration
    Drum Programming
    Mixing & Mastering
    Recording Facilities
    Synthesis & Sound Design
  • Instrumental & Vocal Skills (List)
    Electric Bass
    Electric Guitar: Lead
    Electric Guitar: Rhythm
    Vocals: Male


  • Real Name
    Jesse Taub
  • Occupation
    Producer, Engineer
  • Twitter Username

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Vig's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)

  1. I'm a bit confused by the mixing here. The guitars have a lot of what sounds like artifacts that might have come about from time stretching...On the other hand it might be some kind of tape emulation flutter? I'm finding it distracting either way. There's definitely a notable lack of bass. The kick is too loud, the snare is too quiet, and the hats are way too quiet. The drum writing is stiff and repetitive. Some variation would be great. The vocals need a bit less body to create room for the other elements. The vocal writing is okay, and the guitars could sound just great, but the mixing really holds them back. Aside from the vocals, the arrangement has very little in the way of dynamic lift to differentiate sections. NO
  2. I think the piano being so loud is actually a poor mixing decision. It's got a ton of body, and it eats up space, which really ought to be taken more by the drums and leads. The drum programming is pretty weak, and the loud piano serves to draw attention away from that failing. Arrangement-wise, I think the melodic interpretation is unnecessarily liberal. It doesn't serve too much of a stylistic purpose, and the piano part writing is a bit chaotic at times. There are interesting chords, but they aren't applied with much nuance. NO
  3. I do hear the source, but I'm going to lean NO. I think this track is well-composed, but what's built here isn't built around the source. The melodic motif is sprinkled in, albeit with a different rhythm. I think the rhythmic change to the melody alters the character of the source enough that it's relationship is pretty tenuous. I don't feel like any ideas in the source are developed or expanded upon. Nice track, but I think it's more of an original, in spirit if not by the hands of the clock.
  4. Great musicianship. The mix is not great. You've got the piano a lot brighter than the violin, which is pretty much the opposite of what you would want. The violin has a lot of box and body, almost no presence. I'd start by shelving down everything below 800Hz and shelving up everything over 1.5k. seriously. You could do the reverse to the piano, just not as drastically. maybe 1 or 2 db in either direction. Of course all that bullshit I just said was purely for my own benefit, because this is still a YES
  5. Right off the bat the timing and tuning are sloppy. The part writing is good. The guitar solo shows potential, but it's a bit noodly. The lead after the guitar solo is...I actually have no idea. Is that a clarinet? Overall you've got some great ideas and talent, but the execution could be a lot tighter. I look forward to hearing more from you. NO
  6. I don't think it's overcompressed, I just think the mix is unbalanced. Too much harshness between 2-6kHz. This comes at the expense of the bottom, which is a little bit thin at times. This is an extremely common problem in metal mixes we see submitted. I realize it's gotta be about the guitars, but the way a metal mix deals with this is by having the bass more or less seamlessly double the rhythm guitar, filling out the body. The arrangement is pretty good, though it perhaps jumps around too much. The snare is terrible. Where's the crack? where's the verb? I think the lead guitar could probably use more reverb too. I think the mix is the main thing holding this back. NO
  7. The intro is extremely quiet and washy. Need more presence. The middle of the song is better mixed, but the pads fill up space without being dynamic at all. Gotta make that part a bit more interesting. 2:20 is a welcome break, definitely one of the more interesting sections so far. Overall it's kinda meandering, and the fadeout ending kinda proves that point. I'd say the arrangement needs more direction. I don't see what larry's talking about when he says it's "Mostly original." this is a pretty straightforward arrangement. NO
  8. First off, I think the production is just fine. Strings not realistic enough? Really? They sound better than some actual video game scores. The only problem here is that it's not so much an arrangement so much as a soundalike. If someone was like "hey we need a track that sounds like the Arkham City theme but we can't afford the licensing fee," they would hire someone to do this. Same feel, same instrumentation, same orchestration techniques, with just enough notes changed to not get sued. I do recognize a couple spots where the original "melody" exists, like the very beginning, but I think this track is much more about the feel of the original than the melody, and it's certainly not about the harmonic progression. NO
  9. I'm more or less in agreement. I think some parts of this rock, while other parts feel a bit empty. Obviously you need some more mellow sections to precede the hard hitting sections, but some of the relaxed parts could use more little details. The intro works well, the reverb really creates space, but then some of the interludes just feel empty. I'm not a fan of how the vocals are mixed. They sound like nonsense, which is a bit weird. I think they could work if you pulled them down and made them a bit darker, more atmospheric, I don't want to be able to hear them saying...what? December? Eat member? Other parts of the mix are great. The acoustic guitars sound great. The arrangement is great. I'm gonna lean slightly on the YES side, as in, YES the mix could be better in places and the arrangement has a couple spots that drag, but on the whole this is a really solid piece.
  10. Great arrangement. Great orchestration, great dynamics, great interplay. Minor quibble: the piano solo in the beginning is sequenced pretty flat for this genre. A pianist performing a section like that is probably going to go for a much more delicate dynamic; inject some of his/her own personality to the performance. It sticks out as flat in an otherwise dynamic arrangement. Major quibble: So damn short. Oh well. YES
  11. I don't have any problems with the samples. They aren't fooling me, but they aren't ugly, and they are certainly expressive enough to get the job done. I feel obligated to complain that the arrangement is pretty conservative. Most of the interpretation is in the instrumentation, and the song feels longer than it is. But I'm really just being a pain in the ass. This is a competently executed remix. YES
  12. Right off the bat I love your sounds, but it's SO cluttered. The piano and the bass are fighting, and the lead synths fight on top of them. Your part writing in the rhythm section is just way too busy. You need to tell the bass to seriously CHILL. If you want to have a breakdown where the bass goes all out, that's great but you can't just have the bass having a freakout for four minutes. Start by deleting about half of the notes from the bass part. Do that. Then see if the keys and leads don't sound better. You might have to go through a similar process in the key parts, though instead of deleting half, maybe delete a third. Seriously. You've got some great ideas in here but I can't remember any of them because you have them ALL going at once. Establish the groove. You're not getting paid by the note here. NO
  13. Hmm. The mix is very quiet, and the drums feel awfully dry and narrow given the soundscape of the track. The song overall is spacey and ethereal, but the drums are just dry and up front. I'd say you would benefit from a lot more compression overall. The arrangement is really nice and moody, but for a track like this that is pretty chill and repetitive, the soundscape itself is crucial, and right now you need lots more reverb and compression. I'm having trouble with this one. All three sources are pretty much variations on a theme, as is this remix. The remixer has added a couple cool sounds, like the bell synth, and some of the distorted droning later on, as well as some not cool sounds, like the drums and the thin distortion when it's exposed because there's nothing else filling the bottom of the mix. I'm not hearing any creative risks that aren't already taken in the originals. If you wanna go for atmosphere that's cool, but the drums are so exposed. They are thin, they are dry, and they are narrow. VERB IT UP. The guitar is cool but it could be fatter. I think it's a vibey tune and it just needs a little more vibe. NO
  14. Woah, holy delay on the drums. The mix is very right heavy unless I've suddenly gone deaf...nope it's definitely a balance issue. Those strings and horns don't cut well enough for how you're using them. They sound muddy next to the distorted guitars, and that's no good for a lead. The arrangement is pretty good, but it's so cluttered in the low mids! I'd start by carving out some low mids from the strings and horns, and maybe add some more top and bottom overall. I'd like to hear it resubmitted but You've gotta do a bit of cleanup first. NO
  • Create New...