timaeus222   Members

Nice, it has a playful charm to it. I thought the piano was a little bit dry, but other than that, you did a great job here!

If I could nitpick a few things, I'd say the guitar-playing is a little bit stiff, and the soundscape could have been filled out a bit more at 0:36 - 1:06. Other than that, it sounds pretty good! Seems to loop at 1:39.

Let's gooooooo Jordan!

Yeah, I'm definitely getting that Guaraldi feel, especially because I've played "Linus and Lucy" before as a kid, and it evokes this kind of mood. Easy to like. Great playing! Keep it up!

What? http://www.obtusemusic.net/OCR_Christmas/aoccv8.htm

Hm... I feel like there's some low-mids missing in this. You do have a bass, but it's so sustained that at some point I forget it's there. Also, at 2:17, I think you have the room to add something to fill some empty space, and filter out a little of the solo lead's low-mids (which could compensate if you add a pad, for example). That would make it sound fuller than the downtempo sections and enhance the dynamics a bit more; for some reason the solo lead doesn't quite sit right in the stereo field IMO.

That's one SLAMMIN' album! (( \(]V_V[)/ ))

The mixing sounds very narrow; the intro harp has a weird fluttering in the tone and has a lot of frequency content in the low-mids. The violin is also very out of tune... why? The mix as a whole just sounds too lofi.

Gregorian chaaaaaaant

All my remixes are open season for ya!

Nice, it reminds me of Ken's theme. That guitar feels kinda PRS-like. Dat fakey brass

I have a feeling she'll DJP soon! HAPPY BIRTHDAY!

It's clear as day bro, Mike is joking

Nooooooooo I won't stand for this I'll sit, though.

Okay, so the differences I notice: - 0:21 has a new chord movement in the tubular bells - 0:27 has a little trill and then a little ascent in the melody - New notes at 0:29 - Octave shift soon after, followed by bells, and this is done again later - Other subdivisions and soaring movement in the melody 'n stuff Yeah, I like the new melodic direction. I couldn't tell what changed at first on full consecutive listens, but when I compared them side-by-side, the changes are pretty clearly differentiating. This is well on its way. You might wanna have a judge take another look at it to be sure, but I think it's got a much better shot now.

That's awesome. I mean... thats awesome. funniest thing i r haz seen all week.

What did it sound like before? It'd help to hear what you did to it. It looks like there may have been the lofi-but-fitting orchestral elements added? Lead melody variation? Anyways, I think the judges are right, and I agree, that the swing section and on are where the interpretation was greatest. I'd estimate that it's about 70% similar or so to Giant's Rage. Something like that. The arp tone and the lead's melodic contour are rather similar, but you had some good flourishes and portamento on the lead that differentiates some. Perhaps you could try changing the harmonic direction too; instead of following the original chord progression, maybe change the second half of a bar's chord progression and do a key modulation out, and back in later. Or maybe go down to a minor third below the root and ascend to the root in the bass.

I'm slightly curious, are your caps lock / shift keys broken (I'm kind of joking)?

So to summarize my interpretation of what you've been saying/thinking: - Atonal music does not return to a particular tonic which marks the tonal center of a key. Atonality is defined in the context of the whole, not in fragments, isolation, or sections of a song because it's not enough context. - Dissonant music is still tonal, though perhaps unconventional. - Music theory only describes what you want to write or have written, and ideally shouldn't be something that gives you rules on how to write music. - Ear training is a practical, common way to learn how to write music, and if you do it long enough you might do things you can't explain with theory, but it means you do 'know' theory enough to write music that can still be explained with theory by someone else that understands it better. (I'm assuming that if you know how to hum a bass line that just works, it still counts as 'knowing' theory?) Seem to jive with you?

Yeahhhhh, there we go. That kick and bass are punching through! This is really coming along! Definitely a fresh take, unique, and with plenty of flair to it. Just a note, the bass instrument seems to have its lowest frequency at 50 Hz or so (not that there's anything wrong with that). That plucky arp at 0:30 seems rather quiet; I think the pad might be covering it up. The arp that plays the intro arpeggiated source hook (from the first few seconds) there seems to be washy in reverb; I can kinda hear it, but these headphones are my driest. I would try automating the wet mix down some for the parts where it's hard to hear, and raise its volume in general. Also, I seem to be hearing a piano in the background too... sorta. Everything sounds great arrangement-wise IMO. I just think the reverb could be toned down to hear things more distinctly, and some arp levels can be raised (and consequently your lead guitar) to hear everything at a normal volume. Mostly the reverb. No worries though, I used to have lots of trouble with using too much reverb.

Yeah, I agree, the kick is a little light on the low end thump. In contrast, the lead guitar at 0:37 hits a low note that shows it has lower frequencies than about 300Hz, so it might clash with the bass occasionally but I can't check at the moment. The bass instrument is a little quiet as well (maybe about 1.2 dB), but I wouldn't say for sure whether it's hollow or not since I can't check yet.

lol 1 month no replies suspiiiiiiicious ¬_¬

How aware are people that you are doing a kickstarter in the first place? I feel like you've been just here, gone for a long time, and back here again. I don't really know you that well, for instance. Didn't you just start it yesterday?

The important part of my sentence was, "with respect to [the song's] key". Again, I'm not explicitly considering atonality defined for the stance of an entire piece of music, but in an isolated section of it, in comparison to the overall. Semantics... I have other things to do. >_>