SkyeWint's audio Reviews on Newgrounds

[[IV]Maskmen]

Hi.

The Good:
-Great instruments, good intro.
-Nice main theme, nice atmosphere.
-Mixing is good.

The Not-So-Good:
-Barely any variation until about 1:06, and even then it doesn't change much.
-There's not much variation in this, the entire piece essentially flatlines.
-The ending sounds fairly uninspired and inconclusive.

Overall: Score of 5/10. This is extremely 'flat', and lacks much variation in the theme to boot. There's very little I can really comment on without getting nitpicky, and I don't think those are important enough right now.

[Tir Na Nog]

Hi.

The Good:
-I'm loving the cultural vibe, along with all the pitch-bent trills and sounds.
-Panning is well-done with the harp and other panned instruments. Try panning some a bit more subtly rather than have it always be fully panned. :)
-Harmonic lines are also very well-done, I like it.
-Vocals are good, of course.
-Great overall composition, I like the form.

The Not-So-Good:
-The section from about 0:30-1:16 is a tad long without too much variation, I think by this part the guitar should have changed from doing the chords to doing something else.
-Some transitions are a tad bit rough, though overall they're good.

Overall: Score of 8.5/10. This is a well-composed and awesome-sounding piece of music and I like it a lot. <3 Try having more variation within each section and letting instruments do different things.

ChronoNomad responds:

Greetings, Skye! Thanks for the shiny new review; it is very much appreciated.

I like that even in The Good you offer some nice suggestions to improve the panning. I lean more towards natural-sounding pans, such as where an instrument would be in an orchestra and so on, but I also love getting creative in this regard. There's a happy medium in there somewhere, and I'll keep trying to nail it down. I'm quite pleasantly surprised that the Celtic vibe has been so well received! This is also the first review I've gotten that specifically mentions the way that I used pitch bending for all those fun little trills, so thank you for that. :D

Aw, I love how you avoid the word bad and simply say The Not-So-Good. Unfortunately, that also precludes my ability to make a humorously relevant 'The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly' reference...but I digress. I can't say that I disagree with anything you've said here, and - in perfect 20/20 hindsight - I do rather wish that I had varied the cister strums with some other form of attack; possibly with slower arpeggiated chords to complement the faster harp arpeggios. Ah, well. Live and learn.

Thank you again for all the great feedback and suggestions, and I'm glad to have you aboard as a judge! Also, every single time I see your name it makes me think of Austin Wintory. Random factoid is random. Ta!

[Worth Your Time]

Hi.

The Good:
-I like the whispering sound in the background of the voice, it sounds really cool.
-Great synths and instruments, they sound really cool.
-Lyrics sound nice, I'd like to see what they are.

The Not-So-Good:
-The buildup at about 0:50 seems kinda disappointing, I was thinking it would actually lead somewhere.
-By 1:30, I'm wondering if the drums and bassline will change at all.
-Mix at about 3 minutes in sounds like some parts are being drowned out.
-Ending's meh.

Overall: Score of 8/10. The main issue was the kinda 'monochromatic' feel of it with the constant four-on-the-floor beat.

[In the end]

Hi.

The Good:
-Intro piano is quite well-played and beautiful.
-Actually, all the piano is well-played and pretty beautiful. The soloing in the final section is very good as well.

The Not-So-Good:
-Why the hell do you have a drumset in this? :v It feels so out-of-place.
-Disappointing lack of compositional technique, the piece is just one constant change without any particular theme.
-Ending is kinda boring and generic, not the worst though.

Overall: Score of 6/10. You can do better than this. Unfortunate that your other song didn't work out. :(

BlazingDragon responds:

Valid points that you've made. Thank you for sharing, and yes, I can do better than this. And I will next year.

[Coast Totems]

Hi.

The Good:
-That intro is nice, it's so laid-back and groovy. Reminds me of Fly Me To Blue somewhat, very sweet.
-I'm liking the way you use the toms a lot, using them as some actual harmony takes skill.
-Main theme is pretty sweet.
-Solo section is nice like pretty much all your pieces of music.
-Nice ending! Really fits and feels nice.

The Not-So-Good:
-I'm sorry, this is just... so boring. x.x I'm falling asleep listening to it.
-The vocals seem a bit far back for the mix being so empty overall. You could center them a bit more and make them clearer.
-Transition at 3:22 is meh. Seems sudden.
-Little mistake at 5:39?
-What in the world did you do at around 5:50?

Overall: Score of 8/10. This is good, just boring as hell compared to your other tracks. Multiple sections drag on for far too long. I know you can do better than this, man!

[Juste Une Blague]

Hi.

The Good:
-Why am I not surprised that you'd make this, you evil clown. This is cute, evil, and completely unique, just so 'you'.
-I love the switches between adorable major and evil minor, they're very well-done.
-Instrument solos are sweet. The little mallet/piano solo at around 1:10 is awesome, I like the way you echoed it.
-So much good compositional technique here. It's actually really impressive.

The Not-So-Good:
-There's a bit of mud in some of your instruments, some seem to stick out and bury others for no particular reason.
-That kick sounds like a blop of blah to me.
-The ending is kinda sad, it feels like this was meant to just keep going and going. If you had made it a loop, that would have been much better IMO - that or giving it a more proper, more 'finished' ending.

Overall: Score of 8.2/10. This is unique, but kinda short. The composition is excellent, I just want MORE.

[inside the machine]

Hi.

The Good:
-Oh man, dat main theme. The introduction with it is just awesome. The glitchi-ish background is great.
-The way those drums come in sounds just plain awesome. VERY good at depicting the machine.
-"Perhaps it was the subconscious fact that I knew that skyewintrest was going to be judging my track, but I spent a lot of time working on transitions" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA That made my judging session, I might have to increase your score just for that
-Seriously though, your transitions are excellent. And just because of that, I'm going to nitpick the hell out of them. Don't worry though, no score reduction for it. ;)
-The solos are excellent, your mixing is excellent, in fact just about everything about this is excellent.
-Drum fills are sweet, I really like them a lot.

The Not-So-Good: Mainly transition nitpicks but then one major issue.
-NITPICK TIME! Your introduction could have been slightly better. Rather than instantly diving into the song headfirst, why not have a small lead-in from the silence?
-At about 1:20, the mixing starts getting really fuzzy due to the increased loudness of everything and the kicks leading into the next section are buried.
-3:20 has pretty much the issue as 1:20. ...man, I didn't have much I could nitpick.
-Okay, now I'm going to have to slap you. This is what kept your score from being more like a 9.8. You did not end. You faded out. I want to slap you repeatedly with a newspaper made of iron. Please don't EVER make a song this awesome again and give it such a shitty non-ending. >:(

Overall: Score of 9.2/10. FADEOUT ENDING. >:(

johnfn responds:

Ahahahahaha. That's what I get right? I knew you guys had a hatred of fadeout ends... and I did it anyways!!! >:D

Though if you allow me to soliloquize for a second, I don't think that fadeout endings are all so bad. I mean, geniuses like Tom Waits, Stevie Wonder and even Radiohead make use of them, and they can work fairly well in some contexts. Though it's fair to say that it doesn't work here haha.

Fine though - I resolve to make no more fadeout endings this NGADM. I have been properly reprimanded. ;-P

Your nitpicks are appreciated too :-) The idea of starting off a little quieter is a clever one. I was actually messing around with the opening up till the last hour.

I think the fuzziness you are noticing at 3:20 and 1:20 is a white noise sweep - my fault for not making that more clear (actually, I'm not even sure it's necessary on a relisten).

Finally, like I said to Step, thank you thank you THANK YOU for all the work you did for NGADM! I realize that writing all these reviews is no simple task (especially writing 31 in a single day hahaha), and I am super duper appreciative of all the work you guys have done.

P.S. I shall forever regret adding that fadeout ending so I didn't get the fabled 9.8. xD

[When a Good Man Goes to War ~P]

Hi.

The Good:
-The guitar sound is very nice.
-Very clear main melody - after having listened to a lot of the other pieces, I can really appreciate this.
-Nice piano in most of this, it feels fairly natural.
-Great ritardando at 1:55, that felt VERY natural.

The Not-So-Good:
-Bit of a blip in your bagpipe sound, it's very artificial, and has some issues.
-At 2:09-4:50, things 'flatten out'. The sound of each individual instrument is very repetitive and approximately the same sound throughout.
-Even though I know (or think I know) the quality of the sample banks you're using, the samples sound much lower quality than they could be. This is partially due to the mixing (they're a bit squished against each other), but mainly due to how they're used.

Overall: Score of 7.5/10. This is on a completely different level from your round 1 piece. If I had been judging that, it would have recieved a 4/10 at most. This has far more compositional technique, a less 'generic' sound, and obvious effort. That said, you really need to work on using your samples to their full potential. This is the current largest issue.

Phyrnna responds:

Thanks for the review!

The piano parts were actually natural. I decided that for the piano parts that it'd be best for me to just play them and use that instead of piano rolling the notes in. Worked out a lot better.

I think the sound issue, which others have brought up, is due to the difficulty I had in mixing the song in the short time and also because I tried to mix in some synth orchestra sounds too. I think the synth orchestral sounds detracted a lot from the more natural sounding ones.

Thanks a bunch for the review! Lots to keep in mind for my next pieces! :D

::Edit:: I was trying to figure out what you meant by the blip in my bagpipes. You mean that little bit at the beginning of each attack? That's intentional, and possibly odd since these aren't bagpipes. They're Uillean Pipes.

[A Long Way Home]

Hi.

The Good:
-Your singing is top-notch, just like the last round. It does sound like there's a bit of pitch-shifting at one point, but that's not really an issue. There's a lot of musicality in how it's sung.
-Nothing wrong with the way you use your strings, they sound fine.

The Not-So-Good:
-After all those natural and musically-sung vocals, you then have a COMPLETELY QUANTIZED piano and erhu at 1:07. I'm sorry, it sounds horrible in comparison. :(
-Some little mixing issue at 1:35, sounds like there were some misplayed piano notes an octave too high.
-This entire piece is REALLY reverb-washed and only not that muddy due to the few instruments.
-Off-key piano note at 2:16, sticks out like a sore thumb.

Overall: Score of 7.6/10. This is well-done, the singing is great, but the natural sound of it clashes with the quantized instruments. Your vocals are your best part - let them shine! This doesn't mean ignore the other instruments, you can still have them shine as well. You don't need to have them solo in order for this to happen.

[The Great Ocean]

Hi.

The Good:
-I love the chord progression at 1:10. The instruments and mixing are also very tastefully done.
-The reverb on the clap at 2:14 onward is REALLY nice, I like the way you change it up.
-Overall song organization is very nice, I seriously enjoyed it.
-Mixing is great - minimal mud and only one part where it even sounded like there was a mixing issue.

The Not-So-Good:
-By about 0:22, it sounds like the piano was drowned out rather than faded out. Not sure whether this is a mixing issue or not, but it sounds like it.
-By 0:56, I am tired of having the same two three-note licks playing on repeat. There needs to be *some* variation in the pattern.
-The transition at 2:36 is the same one as 1:10. Why not use a different drum fill?
-Oh come on, if you're going to have an epic-style hit like at 3:20, there's gotta be something different afterwards than a single change in the arpeggios.
-Transition at 4:03 is sudden and has no lead-in at all. The ending doesn't either.

Overall: Score of 7.4/10. Major issues were repetition and transitions.