djpretzel Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 I realized I initially sent this to the wrong address. Sorry. Thanks! --Kailem http://www.tenoranges.zor.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vig Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 it sounds awfully rough around the edges. the banjo sounds harsh and not banjo-like. i really like the piano section before 2:00. excellent dynamic build. the transition to plucked strings would work if the delay werent so overbearing. Why are the strings panned right at 3:40? wtf. nice percussion. not sure exactly what the hell is going on at 4:50. wish it were a little quieter. Okay. so. um... yeah. I think the arrangement is great. fantastic even. banjo lines, great. piano contrast, great. dynamics, superb. but..there are some...seriously bizzare mastering choices made..as well as generally poor mastering. I'd like to hear asound quality upgrade and abetter mastering job. NO, plz resubmit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 Yeah, tone down the sharpness of the banjo notes if possible. It sounds cool at first but becomes too harsh over time, like from 1:11-1:48. No, it doesn't sound authentic, but it also doesn't sound too bad. The strings plucks at 2:02 indeed have too much delay on 'em and it manages to throw off the timing for me. The horns at 2:17 sound pretty bad/unrealistic. Take a look at refining the sound on those. Cool change of sounds at 2:37. The mix really does a good job of providing variation in those respects. Production becomes more of an issue at 3:10 when the horns comes back in and sound buried and muffled. Same with the drums and piano. What happened there????? Continuing into 3:40 everything continues to sound very muffled & rough. I had to check earlier in the track just to make sure it was the same one given how the sharpness/sound quality dropped off so dramatically. Nonetheless, still very interesting instrument changes and development moving into 4:37. Arrangement is still commendable. Not my cup of tea personally and I feel a lot of people will be put off by this, but that doesn't matter. The warbly synth you focus on for this next section at 4:37, yeah definitely scale it down and bring up the piano notes/other sounds instead. The synth really works much more effectively in a supporting role like you had earlier (4:14-4:36) and like you use from 5:17 until 5:41. Cool stuff the whole way through, but the production starting off decent and then noticeably crudding up halfway through really hurt this. Refine some of the sample work for the instruments that have been pointed out, and really get this production back up to par for the second half in particular. This was too dynamic & too interesting of an arrangement for me not to make it if you can just get these fixes going. NO (resubmit soon) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
analoq Posted October 6, 2004 Share Posted October 6, 2004 ick, i can't see a reason to pass this when there are so many mixing issues. its like each part was bandpassed to fit into its own sonic space and panned awkwardly. ending is kinda a letdown. no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Protricity Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 So.. ?? Its just really bad. The banjo instrument being used like that... no no.. Then the english horn as lead on top of that.. What can I say, it doesn't work at all. Song gets pretty interesting later on. Lots of very cool ideas at 4:00 and onward, just very poorly executed. Many awkward instruments used poorly and randomly. Strange effects here and there. You just need more experience. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts