Jump to content



Recommended Posts

What annoys me the most is how your lead has its filtered closed and doesn't cut through like it should. Some of the backing becomes the new lead. Work those things out.

Not enough clarity. Not enough highs. Boost the highs on the master. If you've got one, use a multiband compressor on the master to clean up the frequency balance rather than EQ. You might get a better result from using both, depends on what EQ your multiband compressor has built-in.

It's better than the versions I remember. Good to see you improving, man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love the reverby stuff at the start. Beat's so-so, sample-wise and sequencing. The melodies are good too IMO. The filter FX as usual are teh haw-T as usual too :D. Though the actual source takes like 5000,00000 years to kick in :P - at least to my nub ears. But when it does...OH MAN. Dayamn man. It's definitely interpreted uniquely as well, without sounding midi-rippish.

Just a question though, is the piano a VST or soundfont? Cuz if it's an SF, you need to put up the Polyphony count. Cuz I think I heard it cut out or something - that or the EQ is a bit sloppy on it; which is something that can wait until the finished product anyways.

BTW I started dancing to this song without even realizing it. Must mean it's real good if I did :P lol. Good work dood and keep at her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must say, great mix of Spark Mandrill...

Most of the 'electronica' music in it is well balanced and mixed. Personally, I feel that the bass beat just doesn't have enough 'omph' behind it; it could be tweaked a little using the bass EQ. Thats just IMO, though, as there isn't technically anything wrong with the bass, either :).

The piano, though, does need a few tweaks. It could be a lot more dynamic... the sound is too static. Even though the source material is salient enough as it is, it just doesn't feel right without incorporating enough play with the dynamics.

Otherwise, great piece, looking foward to it later, as I love Spark Mandrill yet cannot find any good mixes on here. Good luck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Gotta hand it, the piano sounds MUCH better this time around. The use of space on the piano by jumping the melody an octave, and the emphasis of counter-melodies sprinkled in it, moving in and out like waves hitting the shore of a beach... sounds much more convincing.

Well, can't say too much more now. I hope to see this in OCR someday soon. Oh, and I like the bridge better this time around. It sounds atmospheric, almost mystifying. Also, it connects to the chorus better this way :). The piano FO is effective at the end, but could be just a wee little bit longer, IMO. Really, I'd be very surprised if this didn't make it through the submission process. Great piece!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crash in the intro could be louder. Early snares seems to have a lot of low range, see what you can cut from them without screwing too much with the overall sound. Open the filter more on your lead. Automated or not, it needs to be more open.

The drums seem like they're missing something, something's off with them. Dunna how much you've heard on #ocrwip about it, someone may have pointed it out already. I know something's off with them, but don't know exactly what.

Piano should be louder in the middle of the track, at least for its first iteration there. Really cool effects after 3:00. Some of them repeat, so you might want to spread those out more. There's some timing issues at 3:43 and :53, probably a result of the slicing or pitch shifting or whatever you were doing there.

It only keeps getting better. It'll soon be time to ask the Js for feedback... and once they're having trouble finding things to crits, submitting it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you use to "master" your tracks? Just curious, becuase what I use automatically adds the (master) when you export it.

The lead seems a little loud in some places, in my opinion.

I enjoyed the piano breaks, and I think they add a lot to the mix. I love the psy-trance-like bends and stuff you have going on in the finall section, though the lead is still too loud in my mind, everything else seems to be really in the background in comparison to it.

My only gripe actually, personally. I'm not a J tho, so if you can find one of them get their feedback.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a bunch of hi-range noises, quite disturbing during the soft section around 0:30. Dunno if you're trying to pull a Skrypnyk with the noise, but either get rid of them or make them sound intentional. I doubt they are intentional, sounds more like a byproduct from one of the synths.

Kick is a little weak, at least on my subpar headphones. If you'd cut out some of the lows form the bass drum... yes, I mean that. If you'd cut some of them, you could get the kick a little punchier, let the bass handle the low frequencies and the kick handle the beat. Take a backup before screwing with the EQ, and listen and make sure you don't cut too much of the lows.

The funky things you did to the lead after 3:00 are great (I might want to collab with you next time I need a lead to do something weird), but the 3:30 lead sounds... like its filter is a little too closed. :D Yeah, I keep saying that. On a second listen, it's too closed earlier too, but it's less noticeable because the track still has enough drive there. Timing issues are now sounding intentional. You apparently work like me, if someone complains about something intentional, you make it... uh, worse, as in better. I like it. :D

Those are the things that stand out to me. It's gotten pretty good. Run it by a judge, see where that takes you. Good luck.

...You need a better name for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

oops, i posted the same version with the lead that is too loud.

here is the fixed version.


sorry bout that.

really? Wow... Uh, I dunno. haha.

Anyway, sounds nice in my mind. Other than the suggestions that Roz posted. That guy has some awesome ears for what the J's like and what needs to be done, listen to him. ;D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks. Yet I fail when I bring my wips to the Js. You may have noticed that I'm not a posted remixer.

Cyril, if you're interested in critting wips, listen, comment on anything that stands out in a wip, crit everything you can, compare to posted remixes, and refer to the feedback checklist. You can get production ears, it just takes some determination and practice. And time. Still working on that myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strangely, I think I like v4 better than the current version. Mostly because of the sound of the lead. The higher pitch and lower volume allowed the electronic sounds you have behind it to come through more clearly. Could just be personal taste, but for now I'll be listening to v4, which to me, is good enough to enter my normal rotation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This track is definitely going somewhere. These are my thoughts as I listened.

First off, I really like the piano and the reverb

That splash at :17 is a bad sample, though

1:00 sounds very good, but by

1:20, it starts to drag

The solo at 1:30 is great

The transition at 1:58 is a little abrupt imo

2:15 is my favorite part of the track. good job.

It's your call, but 3:00 is too repetive for me.

3:30 and on is excellent

The ending is good, but fade out a lot slower.

So basically, I like where this track is headed. There are a few parts where it drags, but some variation will fix that. 2:15 really shows what this mix is all about. That plus the intro and ending really make the song. That sample at :17 really needs to be replaced imo. Finally, the ending has a lot going for it, but it gets cut off by that fast fade out. Slow that way down because that piano part is amazing :)

There is great potential here that is being constrained.

Keep working on it.

Oh. and change the name :)


Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few random nitpicks:

There's some weird ambience behind the piano in the intro. You might want to make that more subtle.

Backing rhythm at around 2:00 is brought out nicely. I like it.

2:03, 3:35, the backing melody that come in there doens't mesh well, mostly because it sounds like a way to simple and lame synth. DUnno what you should do about it, but mure their first bar or change their sound... something. If you're gonna mess with the sound, take a backup.

Lead still sounds a little too cutoff for my taste, but see what a J says about it. Could be just fine. I'd open it more, but I'm liking what you've got, too.

Niice ending. Might fade a bit too soon... or not soon enough. What's with you man, couldn't decide if you wanted to write an ending or to fade it? Pick one. :P Both would work.

Yeah, not much from me. I say you could take it to a J. Good luck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But here are some things you might want to look into:

-I felt that the crash at the beginning (0'18")was kind of useless. Don't use it unless you come in strong.

-You basically break it down at 1'58" but you keep the same main synth. I know it sounds cool but try to switch that up to, maybe into a nice high saw synth with a synth bass rythm.

-You might consider adding some sort of build up for the kicks around the 3'00" mark.

-You might want to increase the volume of the snares that you use before the outro.

-The transition into the piano outro seems sudden. You might want to try a beat drop or some other sequence to make it smoother.

I hope that this advice helps you somehow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.


×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...