Jorito Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 (edited) I created this as a bonus track for the Meat 'n Potatoes #21 compo, but since it turned out pretty good I thought I'd ask here for feedback and maybe increase the judges' queue a bit more It's a remix of the stage 1 song from the MSX shooter Aleste 2, made by Compile in 1989. It started out as an experiment with Realivox Blue, the instrument that does the vocals. I was playing around with it, it sounded quite nice and the rest of the song more or less took off all by itself. After the main part of the song was done, I added the intro and the break, giving it a bit of an ethereal, otherworldly touch. Not sure about the style, I'd like to dub it "Ethereal Italo". Original track: Remix: https://soundcloud.com/jorito/aleste-flying-high Due to limitations of the voice synth (and my lack of skill in writing) the lyrics aren't that great. If somebody wants to volunteer and sing (and rewrite) the lyrics, you are most welcome! The lyrics: Flying High Through the sky (4x) Flying... Fighting for freedom Victory for Aleste Flying High Heroes of the sky Raise your battle cry Aleste will survive Flying High Through the sky (2x) Edited September 25, 2014 by Argle mod review done Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jorito Posted September 21, 2014 Author Share Posted September 21, 2014 Bumpetybump for a mod review Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argle Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 looks like you'll be the first person I cut my teeth on. give me a day or two to give a proper listen and put my thoughts down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jorito Posted September 23, 2014 Author Share Posted September 23, 2014 Sure, no rush from my end. I'm a bit curious though... what makes it so teeth cutting? The source or the style? Guess I'm glad I'm the first to completely baffle you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argle Posted September 23, 2014 Share Posted September 23, 2014 Sure, no rush from my end. I'm a bit curious though... what makes it so teeth cutting? The source or the style? Guess I'm glad I'm the first to completely baffle you Nothing at all. You're just my first victim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argle Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 (edited) Ok, so the intro captures my interest right away with the airy pads and female vox. I like the unabashed 80s feel of this. Overall with this track you have a nice blend of instruments and offer a very different feel from the source. Source-wise you seem to have it well-covered, adequate source tune with some melodic modifications. Don't see any problems in that area. Production-wise, everything is clear and easy to hear, no muddy buildup. Nothing in the mix blew me away, but it's solid work. I don't foresee any drastic problems with the judges on this aspect. Two minor things I would note is the snare, which could be a little beefier and more present, and the bass could MAYBE be turned down a tad. Try it and see? Now, I PERSONALLY have no problem with your synth leads, but the judges may say they are sort of thin and static, particularly the one at 1:04. Just be aware it could be a possible point they bring up. They might ask you to vary your lead sounds as well. Possible things to consider. The thing I think would cause you the most trouble with the judges is the arrangement; specifically, the relatively static feel of the backing track. There's a great airy intro. Then the main body of the track begins and 0:30 and for almost 2.5 minutes keeps the same beat, groove, and instrumentation. Then there's a nice ambient break, but soon after that starts with pretty much the same arrangement as before. Now the little crushed and panned percussive ear candy at 4:02 was much appreciated, as was the outro. But overall, almost 4 minutes the song continues along at much the same pace and feel. So, options for you. Tastefully placed automation of your drums, bass, or anything else can spice up the arrangement and give surprises to the listener, which you should always try for. Distort the beat on the last measure or bar of a section, filter it along with the bass to allow a breath in the action. Like, ah, wall of sound momentarily lessening... and now we're back into it. Try to feel where a little production surprise would be welcome for the listener. Another thing is to simply vary instrumentation and density of arrangement in later sections more radically. Perhaps choose a lead sound that is completely different from your previous ones. In a successive iteration of a section, you could drop out the beat and bass entirely for a couple bars before bringing it back in. Or substitute the drums with other percussive sounds that keep the beat but offer a different feel for awhile. Swap out backing instruments for other ones that sound different. Even change the part writing! You've got loads of options at your disposal so that the listener doesn't say, "I liked this track, but a lot of it felt the same to me." Just my impressions to help you hedge your bets with the judges, should you choose to submit. I think it's an enjoyable track, I really like the airy instrumentation and overall feel, and would like to see it have some more arrangement diversity. Hope this helps! Edited September 25, 2014 by Argle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jorito Posted September 25, 2014 Author Share Posted September 25, 2014 Much appreciated, and definately worth the wait I already had some ideas for making it more badass, so there's some overlap in your feedback that I already wanted to work on (which is good) but also some new and useful feedback to really finish it off. Especially like the idea of more automation on the drums and bass. The thin leads were already a personal annoyance I also spotted, so those go on the fix-it list too. So thanks for your great feedback, and I'm glad I made a good first victim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timaeus222 Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 (edited) I agree with Argle that the leads can be more expressive, as the soundscape suggests some sort of awesome 80s lead. Jupiter-8? Oberheim? I dunno, I'm sure you can find something in Omnisphere to accompany those boy vocals. I would call the repetition substantial. Spatially you've got it, but in terms of arrangement, it does have plenty of potential for more developed dynamics and surprises. It'd be a close call on the panel, but I think this would still pass as-is. It would just be rather close, on the basis of the missed opportunities and relatively static arrangement flow. A good rule of thumb is to skip 15 seconds at a time through your track and see if you can tell where you are in it without looking at the time stamp (you could do skip forward with WinAmp by pressing the arrow key right). If you can't tell you've gotten further into the track... then decide how long is too long for same-y melodic contour and harmonies. I generally try to change it up somehow after 15~30 seconds. Edited September 25, 2014 by timaeus222 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jorito Posted September 26, 2014 Author Share Posted September 26, 2014 Some good extra help there, thanks. I was actually worried that people would have problems with the vocals, being too artificial. But apparently people are okay with it because it fits the style Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eino Keskitalo Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 Actually, there's some spots I think could be improved. I need to take some time to pick them out. Mainly timing & pronunciation though. If there's spots that sound artificial, it actually might be an interesting idea to play that up - add some stutter/vocoder/autotune type thing so it sounds like the android who is singing is malfunctioning a bit at that spot. Might make for a cool "uncanny valley" moment in the song. (I hope that makes sense) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argle Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 I honestly can't make out the lyrics. To me the vocals feel more like a texture element than a real singer, and there's nothing wrong with that. If you didn't tell anyone that there were lyrics, I'm not sure they would notice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jorito Posted September 26, 2014 Author Share Posted September 26, 2014 Actually, there's some spots I think could be improved. I need to take some time to pick them out. Mainly timing & pronunciation though. Not much I can do about pronunciation unfortunately. For all its goodness, Realivox Blue also has some limitations (it misses an 'i' sound for example). Timing issues are fixable and maybe glitching things up a bit might work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timaeus222 Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 (edited) I would actually try vocoding it all. They do sound like vocals, but even though it's hard to understand them, they just feel like a textural addition rather than a focal point in the arrangement. Either way, it's a nice opportunity to experiment with. Edited September 27, 2014 by timaeus222 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.