HoboKa Posted August 2, 2008 Share Posted August 2, 2008 http://www.tindeck.com/audio/my/caku/RobotniK_Abstractness UPDATE 1: http://www.tindeck.com/audio/my/qnzu/Robotnik_Remix-2_verA1.2 UPDATE 2: http://www.tindeck.com/audio/my/dpme/Robotnik_Remix-2_verA1.3 UPDATE 3: http://www.tindeck.com/audio/my/pdte/Robotnitize-Me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozovian Posted August 2, 2008 Share Posted August 2, 2008 lol It's very.... you. On a more serious note, it's a little heavy on the lows, it's got some clashing between ambience/sfx and melody (when it finally comes in), the organ seems to be a minor chord as-is, and I don't get the direction of the track. Still, it's got some nice mixing choices, and the pression seems like it could make sense once after some instrument/dynamics fixes. Unfortunately, it's a source I neither know or care to dig up atm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eino Keskitalo Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 The track sounds confusing and cluttered on the other hand, and on the other hand it's quite atmospheric and intresting. I like it, except for a few issues. I'd like to hear the original and compare, can you (or somebody) point me to it's direction? 00:00-00:13 Effective intro with a good hihat rhythm, low bass wobbling and some effect sounds. This works fairly well. There's a problem, though. The intro is seven bars long. It makes it sound like you throw the drumfill in too early. Just make it one bar longer, and that should fix it. Don't get me wrong, seven bar long intro, as opposed to what I guess would be the conventional eight bars could be cool. It just doesn't work here. It sounds confusing and undeliberate. I think eight bars would fix that. One problem why it doesn't work, is that I hear the rhythm of the hihat not starting at the start of the song. To me it starts two hihat hits after the song starts - about a half a second into it. When I count "one-two-three-four" starting from where I hear it starts, the drumfill appears too suddendly, and the beat comes in on three, which sounds wrong and confusing. You should somehow indicate where the "one" is in it. With a bass drum on each "one", for instance. That might fix the "suddenness" of the drum fill and the starting of the beat, and you could keep the intro seven bars long. So, either put in a bass drum on each "one" of the beat, or make the intro before the drum beat starts eight bars long. That's my advice. I hope that was understandable. Ask if it wasn't.. 00:13-00:25 Ok, the things get going! Nice understated pads play in the background and a vibraphone-like keyboard plays the melody.. very atmospheric! And the beat, very nice, every other snare is a bit early, sounds very intresting.. hey, what the hell is happening? It just all falls apart? The first four bars are good. Please, just repeat them! The two-bar drumfill transition just does not work. It just sounds and feels like the piece falls apart, and not in a good way! Don't be afraid to repeat a section that works. What happens at 00:22-00:25 just kills the track. Good thing is, it's easy to fix! I think you should keep this part simple and conventional. I think it sounds you're desperate to do something "intresting" and unconventional. Don't be afraid to keep it simple. Trust that you will get it to sound good (it will!). You have a great "weird" section coming up in my opinion, it's important to keep the track together until then. 00:25-00:57 Ok, I guess here is where the "main melody" part comes in. I like the crescendoing choir pads, they're fairly tastefully used. I don't really like the bass much. The way it oscillates between two notes draws too much attention to it, and I feel the organ should really be the focus. I'd like to hear the original to comment more on this section. 00:57-01:24 This in my opinion is the "weird" section that works. I like the half-time beat, really nice change of pace. What is "weird" is how the chord changes aren't at the "ones" of the beat all the times. It sounds great in my opinion. I think the overall feel and flow of the track will improve greatly when you look at the rhythmical and structural issues of the first two parts. It will make it easier to appreciate and evaluate how well the later parts work. Please keep working on this! --Eino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoboKa Posted August 3, 2008 Author Share Posted August 3, 2008 The track sounds confusing and cluttered on the other hand, and on the other hand it's quite atmospheric and intresting. I like it, except for a few issues. I'd like to hear the original and compare, can you (or somebody) point me to it's direction?00:00-00:13 Effective intro with a good hihat rhythm, low bass wobbling and some effect sounds. This works fairly well. There's a problem, though. The intro is seven bars long. It makes it sound like you throw the drumfill in too early. Just make it one bar longer, and that should fix it. Don't get me wrong, seven bar long intro, as opposed to what I guess would be the conventional eight bars could be cool. It just doesn't work here. It sounds confusing and undeliberate. I think eight bars would fix that. One problem why it doesn't work, is that I hear the rhythm of the hihat not starting at the start of the song. To me it starts two hihat hits after the song starts - about a half a second into it. When I count "one-two-three-four" starting from where I hear it starts, the drumfill appears too suddendly, and the beat comes in on three, which sounds wrong and confusing. You should somehow indicate where the "one" is in it. With a bass drum on each "one", for instance. That might fix the "suddenness" of the drum fill and the starting of the beat, and you could keep the intro seven bars long. So, either put in a bass drum on each "one" of the beat, or make the intro before the drum beat starts eight bars long. That's my advice. I hope that was understandable. Ask if it wasn't.. 00:13-00:25 Ok, the things get going! Nice understated pads play in the background and a vibraphone-like keyboard plays the melody.. very atmospheric! And the beat, very nice, every other snare is a bit early, sounds very intresting.. hey, what the hell is happening? It just all falls apart? The first four bars are good. Please, just repeat them! The two-bar drumfill transition just does not work. It just sounds and feels like the piece falls apart, and not in a good way! Don't be afraid to repeat a section that works. What happens at 00:22-00:25 just kills the track. Good thing is, it's easy to fix! I think you should keep this part simple and conventional. I think it sounds you're desperate to do something "intresting" and unconventional. Don't be afraid to keep it simple. Trust that you will get it to sound good (it will!). You have a great "weird" section coming up in my opinion, it's important to keep the track together until then. 00:25-00:57 Ok, I guess here is where the "main melody" part comes in. I like the crescendoing choir pads, they're fairly tastefully used. I don't really like the bass much. The way it oscillates between two notes draws too much attention to it, and I feel the organ should really be the focus. I'd like to hear the original to comment more on this section. 00:57-01:24 This in my opinion is the "weird" section that works. I like the half-time beat, really nice change of pace. What is "weird" is how the chord changes aren't at the "ones" of the beat all the times. It sounds great in my opinion. I think the overall feel and flow of the track will improve greatly when you look at the rhythmical and structural issues of the first two parts. It will make it easier to appreciate and evaluate how well the later parts work. Please keep working on this! --Eino the snares aren't early bro they're jazzy, not rock, thats why its kinda throwing you off. as for the 7th bar fill that was def. a mistake of mine, i can fix that. but snares are staying where they are Thanks for the critiques, I'll get down to those issues when I've done my collab parts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lunahorum Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 The snares do feel a bit weird. I want to hear what it sounds like when you reverse the audio, add reverb tails, then reverse again to emphasize them coming in on non standard places. Could you try this for me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eino Keskitalo Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 00:13-00:25Ok, the things get going! Nice understated pads play in the background and a vibraphone-like keyboard plays the melody.. very atmospheric! And the beat, very nice, every other snare is a bit early, sounds very intresting. the snares aren't early bro they're jazzy, not rock, thats why its kinda throwing you off. I have no problems with the main beat, on the contrary, I think those are good. Just to clarify. Thanks for the critiques, I'll get down to those issues when I've done my collab parts. Great! I'll be listening. --Eino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ-Arthur Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 Hey! Nice going on this one! It's one of my favourite tunes from Sonic 2, so I might be a bit pre-judged... First of all: I definitely like the drums. Don't change them. Period. The Intro is very good, with the atmospheric Piano and all, although the first notes of the organ tend to sound too much detuned (Intentional, perhaps?) The pads are terrific, as I expected from you . They do tend to clash with the vibrato-Piano reverb here and there making a blurry effect. You probably don't want that to happen, so be careful mixing those too loud. Overall: The idea is definitely worth exploring, and I'm looking forward to see more of this! Moving the snare to-and-fro a semi note is risky, but it looks like you can pull it off here, good job. Keep it up! Greetzz, my friend, and salutations too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoboKa Posted August 4, 2008 Author Share Posted August 4, 2008 thanks guys - I'll try not to disappoint this time around, like in so many of my other wips Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoboKa Posted August 5, 2008 Author Share Posted August 5, 2008 update posted up top Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eino Keskitalo Posted August 6, 2008 Share Posted August 6, 2008 I really liked the first version better. My structural and drum fill complaints aside, it sounded well balanced. The organ sounded very good to me, I'm disappointed that you replaced it, the replacements don't sound good to me. The intro was fine without the melody instrument. It was better when it's first appearance was in the next section. The final section does not need the additional chimes. And that sound which replaces the organ is pretty awful, actually. The intro is still seven bars long, but now the next part (where the bass comes in) begins with a drum fill (at 00:14). I don't get it. Seven bar intro didn't sound bad actually.. try to begin the next section without the drum fill, with just the beat? The drum fill at 00:24 is much better than the previous one, it didn't feel like it broke the flow, even though the section at 00:14-00:25 is six bars long, which is another case of unusual structuring. I still have a hard time making the sense of the whole. I'd suggest: putting the organ back; removing the chiming keyboard lines from the intro and the final part; taking the drum fill out at 00:14. If you want to incorporate more ideas, put more stuff in, just continue the song. --Eino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoboKa Posted August 6, 2008 Author Share Posted August 6, 2008 evk look at my flp if you must. the fill starts at bar 8, however, I think that all the new stuff that i added to the intro *may* have thrown you off. Most of the other gripes, I agree with now that I'm looking back. I'm keeping a fill there at :14 but I've changed it to make it sound more like its starting the main beat. update will come up shortly. As for the chimes at the second half - I need something to tie in the first part of the song so it sounds more logical a transition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoboKa Posted August 6, 2008 Author Share Posted August 6, 2008 K Evt I gots me a better update for you and the 300 other people who've viewed this panel but didn't comment =p. I appreciate the comments insofar btw, they've helped a lot, even if i don't agree with them all. Look on 1st post to listen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Sounds Posted August 6, 2008 Share Posted August 6, 2008 300 other people who've viewed this panel but didn't comment =p. Heh, I know the feeling... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eino Keskitalo Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Definite improvement! Good going! evk look at my flp if you must. the fill starts at bar 8, however, I think that all the new stuff that i added to the intro *may* have thrown you off. Ahhh! Thanks, now I get it, I've been listening to it "wrong". One thing that is still throwing me off is that the bass also starts at bar 8. So I kept hearing the bass notes of the part as | A | A | C | C | when it's supposed to be | A | C | C | A | right? Removing the bass from the 8th bar of the intro would erase this confusion. Of course it's generally not a bad idea to introduce the bass at the same time as the drums. Maybe it could do something like | G G# | instead of playing | A |. Sooo, it's an eight bar intro, and four bars of the first part, plus one bar with the drum fill, and then the next part. While it works, it could honestly afford to be a bit longer. It's a good sounding part and repetition wouldn't hurt, it would actually allow the listener to settle into the song. So the part after the intro, at least in my opinion, could be 4 + 4 bars long, plus the one bar fill. I think that would work. Most of the other gripes, I agree with now that I'm looking back. I'm keeping a fill there at :14 but I've changed it to make it sound more like its starting the main beat. update will come up shortly. The fills are good now. I like them a lot. You've also added the bass drum to the intro, and I do think it works well. I might of course be biased since I suggested it. As for the chimes at the second half - I need something to tie in the first part of the song so it sounds more logical a transition. In my opinion this wasn't necessary in the first version, as the organ was very prominent and played through both parts. But I see what you mean in the latest version. I did like the "sparse" feeling of the first version - it was like a breather between busier sections. In any case I do think the third version works ok. It still feels like a breather thanks to the half-time beat. I generally like the second half. It feels like an outro to me, and for the most part a good one. I like the transition into it. The part feels slow and heavy. The main riff sounds excellent in it. I like the background strings which increase in volume over time. It has a great effect in my opinion. I don't get the 01:48-01:59 section. I think can hear the idea you're going for, but it's hard to follow and it throws me off.. I'm not sure if there's a problem harmonically/melodically, but it does feel like it a bit. The drum fill sounds awkward.. it's like the whole bit is too complex. My advice would be trying to simplify it, starting from the rhythm. I feel that the idea you have for that spot has potential, structurally it seems to fit. Sorry that I'm unable to give more detailed feedback on that.. Couple of more problems with the ending. The front cymbal crash sound is way too loud and exposed in the mix. Also it feels like the last half is somewhat louder than the first half, and feels like it's clipping/distorting. I also feel a lack of a bass instrument in the "weird" section. Otherwhere there's this long bass pad-like thing, right? I like the sudden end with the noises. Also, the drumming of the last half, and thorough the piece, pleases me. Structurally I think the outro is fine as it is, no need to add more stuff into it, or another part into the end. On the whole the piece feels on the short side. I'd suggest trying out a repetition of the main part and the half-time part before the outro, with variations of course. But nothing complex! The piece would benefit from sounding a little less busy as a whole. The sections sound pretty good in themselves. I like the piece! It's intresting and good-sounding, and it's getting better! -Eino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoboKa Posted August 7, 2008 Author Share Posted August 7, 2008 Thanks Eino...I wish I could do more work on it, but life just got kinda hectic for me, I'll see if I can get some done next week. Gotta concentrate on that DKC remix lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoboKa Posted August 8, 2008 Author Share Posted August 8, 2008 Oy I hate insomnia but love it at the same time. Since I couldn't sleep, got this updated and ALSO got work done for my DKC collab , stay tuned for that too, for those of you who're interested anyways. Update here: http://www.tindeck.com/audio/my/pdte/Robotnitize-Me and at first post. Enjoy - or try to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoboKa Posted August 8, 2008 Author Share Posted August 8, 2008 The snares do feel a bit weird. I want to hear what it sounds like when you reverse the audio, add reverb tails, then reverse again to emphasize them coming in on non standard places. Could you try this for me? I don't know how to go about doing that Max, sorry for taking so long to get back to you =/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.