SkyeWint's audio Reviews on Newgrounds

[stone ballroom]

MoundsofMayhem is such a great name, lol. Time for your VGMC II review! If you haven't seen my other reviews, I will be leaving two main critique sections of what you need to work on most, followed by a section detailing things you did really well and should keep on experimenting and working with!

Points of critique:

- First of all, let's look at your composition. One of the main things I'm noticing here is that you seem to be having some mild difficulty with your chord progressions. I get the impression you know some of what you're doing, but may not have studied other pieces or gone through more formal music theory lessons (at least, not western music theory which this piece is audibly aiming for). You may actually find the "Fundamentals" section of this website to be helpful if you don't know it: http://openmusictheory.com/contents.html Obviously, read through more if you're interested! But, from that basis, I'd like to point out that western music theory operates on "tension" and "release" - generally your chords in this style will roughly follow this format: [I - IV - V - I], with most extra embellishment between I and IV. One particular spot where this would have helped is at 1:32 where you added an extra chord between V and I. However, if you simply went directly there, it would have helped quite a bit. Similarly, when writing your melodies, a very simple way of making sure they stay harmonically consistent is to plan your chords first, then make sure your melody plays a chord tone whenever the chord itself first plays (likely on the downbeat). For one last note on composition, definitely be careful with your rhythm. Right at the very beginning of this piece, you sound like you're playing in 3/4... but then add extra notes around 0:10, and shift to something more like 4/4 at 0:38. Remember, 3/4 and waltzes typically strongly emphasize the first beat, then emphasize beats 2 and 3 less than the first downbeat.

- Secondly, let's have a listen to your instruments! These sound an awful lot like soundfonts, especially once the percussion comes in at 0:55. However, one thing I'm noticing about this musical palette is that certain things are sticking out FAR more than others. For example, that bass at 0:14 is rather loud, while your percussion at 0:55 was something I only noticed after several listens as it is VERY quiet. Try using a limiter at the end after doing your mixing, or at least check the volumes of your instruments to make sure things like your kick drum have a good thumpy impact to them. You can also increase the overall volume of your track, though please do try to use a limiter for this rather than just raising the volume, so you can keep it in check!

Complimentary Compliments:

- This feels super retro and reminds me a TON of the days when I used to compose and render out of musescore instead of doing works in a full DAW, haha! (Over a decade since then, kinda crazy to think about) It gives me a happy vibe, and I REALLY appreciate those trills and slide notes especially, they have a lovely texture and feeling to them. Please continue using them in future works, as you use them very effectively here. I also wanted to comment on the last section with the music box - while it has the same type of metric issue mentioned in my first point of criticism, it really caps off the whole thing quite nicely, and the dissonance here works VERY well. One of the most well-executed parts of the whole piece, I think! Regardless, I wish you luck on your continued musical pursuits and I hope this review is useful to you.

[Wandering Eyes]

Hi ProdMARROW! Time for your VGMC II review! If you haven't seen my other reviews, I will be leaving two main points of critique with explanations and expansions on the point, as well as a section of compliments and aspects of your piece that I think work especially well.

Points of critique:

- Let's look at the organization of this piece, to start. Keep in mind that this is intended to be for a game - typically in games, discrete areas tend to need either constant themes (in this case a loop) or music to introduce the place and transition to ambient noises, with a moderate exception for playable cutscenes. The way you've composed your piece would make it very difficut for each of the three parts to be looped or to introduce a section. Part 1 has the least issues, as the quiet horn ambience could definitely be played slowly in the background on loop of exploring a creepy decrepit mansion. Part 2 would have much larger issues as it directly progresses with very little reasonable possibility for looping or fading into the background. Part 3 has a couple small parts that could loop but ultimately has the same issue as part 2. Now, this doesn't mean your individual parts can't have development. But for a game, you may want to have more of a looping [AB] structure for individual parts, even if you also have transitions between them. Cutscenes may also be an option for this style, but probably not the entire track including transitions as it exists right now.

- Okay, structure aside, let's talk about the production of the track. First things first, width and reverb. You have a lot of width in your track... but it seems to almost entirely be from reverb. Try panning more of your instruments and increasing their stereo separation. You can also reduce reverb (depending on the orchestral library you're using, obviously), as it seems to be muffling quite a bit of your fine detail. Additionally, something that will REALLY bring out your fine detail would be mastering this track. Much of the leveling is done already, but you could stand to use the full dB range for this track by using a limiter to pass over it. It seems like you want to maintain relative dynamics, but here's the important point there: Dynamics are far more than just dB level, and rather are a function of the specific frequencies contained within that dB scale. Having your track at roughly -1.0dB for a majority of the track will allow for MORE fidelity since there will be more space in the waveform for smaller, subtler sounds to be brought out into audible range (like I believe you have some choirs? But they're barely audible if so). Notably one particular spot that REALLY needs this is the ending, where your final orchestral hits around 3:00 just don't have as much "oomph" as they feel like they should from an arrangement standpoint.

Complimentary Compliments:

- Okay like. Criticisms aside, this sounds like a soundtrack to a short film based on the theme. That's AWESOME. You have some awesome samples, really neat dissonance (some of the shifts like at 1:12 especially, have phenomenal dissonant contrast). I love the bass swells and the overall vibe of this. I'm a big lover of atmosphere in general, so that helps a ton! Mainly, it has issues if used as a game soundtrack - but as an independent piece? Fantastic. And the score of this review should hopefully reflect that, haha! I wish you the best of luck in your future compositions!

[Mad Castle]

Hi MOOOKS! Time for your VGMC II review! I have two main points of critique that should give you a good idea of what to work on next, then a set of things that I think you did particularly well and don't need to focus on improving right now.

Points of critique:

- This track's largest flaw currently is DEFINITELY the composition, so I'd like to take some time and focus on it specifically. Starting with the first portion, sounding like a type of "dance" theme, you may want to be somewhat careful with your meter. Many dances are set in groups of 3, using 3/4 time. You seem to lean into this at first, but then switch to 4/4 rather abruptly in each phrase. This has an unfortunate effect of making the piece feel almost "stuttery", like it can't quite make up its mind. For a dance section I would recommend sticking with 3/4 time as it has a very flowing sound emphasizing the start of each beat. If you listen to western classical waltz music, you'll actually notice this pattern in the bass, using a pattern of "down-up-up" for each measure to maintain a bouncing feel. You can build an entire piece around this!

- Next, let's look at the other aspect of your composition. A lot of your sections have an issue of seeming aimlessness. This isn't always present, but many sections such as 0:16-0:40 or 2:10-2:40 exemplify it fully. I think this actually doesn't stem from your melodic writing itself, but moreso your chord progressions. There are multiples ways to sketch out chord progressions, but you may be most interested in more standard western classical styles for that sweet sweet formula of "tension and release" letting you make dramatic flourishes in your music. You will want to know roman numeral notation for this (it's pretty simple if you don't know it, any basic music theory website should have it) - but [ I -> IV -> V -> I ] is essentially the formula that you can use, even using the I chord at the end to start the same thing again. Most classical chord progressions focus on this and just add extra chords between I and IV to embellish it and space out phrases. I would recommend trying to write your chords first and make sure they sound good, using classical theory or modern pop theory or just playing entirely by ear. Once you have that, you can start writing your melodies around it. Try making sure your melody includes one of the chord tones each time you play a chord, so that it still fits into your harmony. Using something like [ I -> IV -> V -> I ] will primarily be helpful for writing melodies that have a climactic point (the IV -> V) and conclude (V -> I) before a new melodic phrase continues.

Complimentary Compliments:

- I actually really dig the aesthetic of your instruments. It's super classic retro sound, reminds me a lot of 8-bit styled games. You also have some really nice themes despite aimlessness in others. Like, for example, at 1:00. That's wonderful! I'm glad you use it a lot too, actually - it provides a very lovely hook. Your arrangement in each section is also very nice overall, following a classic "ABA" type format. I think as you iron out more of the kinks in individual sections, you'll be able to make some pretty fantastic music (especially for retro games if you keep this aesthetic!)

MOOOKS responds:

Thanks for the advice, I recently started creating music and this is only my third composition. It made me realize that I might need to read up on some more music theory because my only music theory knowledge is a few years of playing classical music. I currently use Bosca Ceoil as my software so I'm basically stuck with the 80's retro aesthetic but I'm glad you enjoy it.

[From Heaven To Hell]

Hey there, DigitalProdigy! I know it's been quite awhile since VGMC II started, but it's time for a proper review of your track! Since you picked a three-parter, I'm going to be thinking of each section individually as a loop (as if it were in a game) as well as how they work together thematically. Overall, I'll be giving you two points of constructive criticism and one section where I point out things I think you did especially well.

Points of critique:

- To put it bluntly, these sections are very repetitive and drag on. This is especially noticeable in the second section as it simply stacks layers on the same repeating patterns for about 100 full seconds. The third section has a couple piano flourishes but is mainly straight quarter note chords, even in the most dramatic final section. However, your first section feels much less repetitive despite using the same chord progression and emphasis. There are two reasons why - first, it has two subsections which change the intensity while keeping the overall character of the section present. This would be very important during your "sleep" section, perhaps by lowering the intensity instead. Having an A and B subsection for each would help with making them loopable while also giving some contrast to not fatigue a listener. However, the second reason your first section works so well is how it has a type of melody to it: Four descending notes followed by three descending notes. Having a melody or 'motif' that you can develop through different situations and musical atmospheres will help tie everything together thematically while also providing something that most people will really be able to identify and focus on. Melodies are 'hooks' that keep listeners engaged, like a singular voice they can hear talking to them. This will help the repetitiveness and overall development of each section as well as the piece as a whole.

- Second and much more minor, let's have a listen to the sound design. First section is fantastic, no complaints there. The second section has some more issues, especially as a "sleeping" section. The guitar sounds are very crisp and forward, while the choirs pause every 6th guitar note. This gives the section much more of a driving feeling, especially with the constantly building set of sounds. While it is calmer than the other sections, it doesn't quite sound very "sleepy". Your third section depicting the dark and ruined castle has wonderful atmosphere at 3:12, but you may want to reign in the percussion a bit as it cuts through the atmosphere VERY sharply. It would also be good to pan the centered percussion some more as well as it sounds mono during those bits, but this isn't quite as important as making it less sharp.

Your compliments, friend:

- Okay, all that said. This captures the atmospheres VERY well despite my nitpicking on the sound design and critique of its repetition. I absolutely love that first section and would honestly love to hear it developed into a full piece on its own as a type of faux-medieval dance. Your mixing and overall levelling is also very nice and has minimal mud even in the more densely layered sections. I might have thought the guitar was a bit too crisp, but I absolutely adore the tone of that acoustic guitar. Excellent work!

DigitalProdigy responds:

thank you so much for that awesome review. I agree with everything you said and will make sure I implement all those suggestions in my future works. My mistake I made was not thinking to much of the music during gameplay, but maybe during cut scenes, or the beginning or the end of the game. Have I was thinking more of the music during gameplay I could have used some of those pointers in my music. But this project was fun to do and I would love to have a chance to do it again.
Again thank you so much for well thought out review!!

[Dreams in Scarlet Reverb [II. Hollow]]

Hi! Uh, this is the NGUAC review you asked for something like... nearly a month ago. Whoof. I got slammed with life stuff very rapidly as the contest ended, but I HAVE had your review on my todo list and kept it there for awhile, so here is review, about two major points where you track feels oddly "empty".

Constructive Criticism:

- First of all, let's listen to the intro. This atmospheric sound effect is pretty awesome and tasteful, and really highlights a cool atmosphere. That said, this... honestly sounds like it was written with a music video in mind rather than being a standalone track. This applies to the whole thing all the way up until about 1:53. If you had cut EVERYTHING before the cut at this point, you would still have a full track with development, a dynamic arc... maybe a little bit lost because of not having the piano intro, but honestly not much. This makes it essentially "empty space" as compared to the rest of the track. Instead, it might be good to have a faster development into the piece, especially given the composition style of the remaining track.

- A LOT of your track feels "empty". One of the primary reasons for this is the lack of spatialization. In general, think of your song's frequency distribution like a kind of funnel. The bass frequencies generally need to be centered to provide a solid, stable 'foundation' to the piece, but as you get into higher frequencies this can widen to allow more complex hi-hat patterns panned left and right, wider low mids for a fatter bass sound, more expansive background mid pads, and even some panning in leads to spread things out. Having everything centered also results in fitting your entire mix essentially into one stereo channel, whereas widening your mix and using panning lets you use the same frequencies for two separate instruments on each stereo channel (with a bit of reverb and merging to keep them present on the other one). Just make sure that your mix sounds clean in mono even if it's a tad squished, and let it be really thick in stereo. Some points where this becomes EXTREMELY apparent: 2:07, 3:12, 4:28, and 4:53.

Compliments to the Composer:

- Despite wanting them to be wider, a lot of your bass wubbles are fantastic, and your sound design in general is really really neat! I do love the atmospheric effects at the start, and the heartbeat sounds are really cool. Your high hat patterns are interesting and clean, the piano is soft but thick, and vocal chops are really fun to listen to in general. Can't go wrong there! I love the overall arrangement of the piece after the intro, and I think once the mix is sorted out you'll have a REALLY good, thick, and meaty dubstep track.

Final score from me: 8/10

I hope this is helpful for you in the future!

[Splunge]

Mate. This is sick.

Make more please thank.

[Perception]

Hello, this is your requested review for NGUAC. As a pre-emptive statement, my feedback style is very blunt and direct. None is intended to be rude, but occasionally it can come off that way. Most of all, it is my hope that the feedback is both clearly conveyed and useful for your future work.

Constructive Criticism:

- The main problem with this track is actually a little hard to explain clearly. It's clearly well-produced, it has classic and effective organization with variation to try and keep it interesting. However, I find it has a lot of difficulty actually GRABBING attention. There are two components to this which really impact it, the first of which is that none of the melodies are particularly engaging. Writing melodies is really hard, admittedly - but this melody essentially just sticks to the same note without much variation. The secondary melodies are also perfectly "okay" but also far more forgettable as they aren't repeated very much and come off far more as harmonic lines than clear melodies. As a point of comparison, try listening to the track Answers, by Puppet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGdDpMYS7sA Notice how it focuses on two main themes to engage the listener - the vocal melody, and then the simple chord progression focus followed by a four-note arpeggio. It doesn't stick out too much in the mix, but it excels as being a repeating point of interest that changes with the interesting chord progression.

- Secondarily, I'd also like to mention that the sound design in your track, while varied, isn't *that interesting*. In the Dance/House genres especially, sound design really needs to be front-and-center in ALL sections of the track even more than the melodies and themes. Using Answers as an example again, notice how right at the beginning, it starts with some interesting background noise of a train along with reversed piano and several clearly interesting sounds. The pluck used to outline the initial chord progression shows where the track will develop and is very acoustically interesting as well. By comparison, listen to the intro of your track. It doesn't really GRAB the listener and envelop them in the tone of the music very effectively. Also notice how effective the panning and sidebands are used in Answers for atmosphere, whereas your track is comparatively quite narrowly focused on the center. Try using the sidebands for reverb, or other higher frequency sounds. Auto-panning a high mid pad is also extremely effective to add space and width to your sound palette. Lastly, notice the outro in Answers uses a bandpass to conclude and fade out while still maintaining the sound into the end. Your track has a reverb tail coming off of an unresolved chord progression, leaving anticipation of the song continuing but not really enticing further listening as effectively. It leaves the listener unfulfilled but not wanting more as much.

Complimentary Complements:

- Okay, I'm aware that I just essentially brutalized the track you've worked hard on, but I really wasn't joking in the first section. This track is VERY well-produced overall. The mixing is clean even if it isn't as wide and full as it could be, and there are SO MANY individual elements I absolutely love. The percussion in the beginning is very effective, the reversed sound effects at 1:35 are delicious, and the bassy wubs you have in the second drop provide some really effective variation that I would love to have kept in your future works. I'm honestly curious how you would do if you took these techniques and made some atmospheric dubstep. I think once you take your existing sound design and added a little more sparkle to it, you'll have a track that hits even harder. Looking forward to your entry in the last round!

Final score: 8.2

[Craftwork Dreadfulness]

Hello. This is your requested NGUAC review.

Points of Criticism:

- I think one of the biggest issues I have with this track is the sound design of your actual instruments. The section after your first "restart" is perfectly fine, as is the bassy pluck. However at 1:05, it honestly falls apart there. The bass is far too background and echoey, while the main synth doesn't have any sharpness to it. Normally lead synths are meant to PIERCE through the mix, but this lead synth doesn't have any of the higher frequency/resonant "edge" to do that (same happens later as well). What I think you should focus on in future works to fix this up is making sure that your sounds 'fit together' better. The last section especially exemplifies this with how intensely flooded the frequencies are without anything in particular sticking out. This is because there's a LOT of reverb/echo in sounds like the bell and pads. Many of your frequencies sound clustered in the mids, and all overlap on top of each other. This takes practice to get right, but widening your stereo mix and focusing EQ on each instrument into one general band should help quite a bit, as will reducing reverb you have.

- Okay, with mixing talked about, let's talk composition! There are a couple things I'd like to especially point out. You mainly focus on one repeating chord progression with only a couple variations (I think) that follow the same formatting. It may be well worth your time to explore classical or jazz theory of chord progressions to learn things like tension/release and how to effectively create bridge sections. However, I'd also like to take a look at your percussion since this contributes to the problem. You have several different loops that play behind the melodic parts, but they tend to be fairly disjointed in character, and use a LOT of repeating share/kick hits without really giving them much space to individually IMPACT. A lot of tracks, even in more industrial music, use percussive loops with smaller variations and a LOT of high hats and auxillary percussion to give the kick and snare space for impacts. Try giving this track a listen and see how it works in terms of percussion despite being very experimental: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zqagld13kL4

Compliments to the Composer:

- That introduction is VERY tasteful. I love the sound of it and the way it's mixed together. Honestly sounds very effectively like winding something up. Your mechanical/industrial percussion is also excellent, especially in the beginning sections where it really focuses in on that straight industrial groove. A lot of your sound effects fall into this, you seem to really have an ear for... well, I call it "ear candy". I also do quite like the narrative idea of your track despite issues in execution. I think you could do quite a bit with this, and developing your fundamental production skills will clearly lead you to make some VERY interesting tracks.

Final score: 6.2

[Escapade]

Hello, this is your requested review.

I've gone over one or two general categories of issues specific to your song, and one section of things I think also deserve complimenting. I prefer being very direct with my critique, none of it is meant to offend. Thank you for your understanding!

Constructive Criticism:

- Right away, I can say for sure that you have too much going on in the mids. Before 0:45 it isn't too bad, but after that point you have the pads, arpeggios, and multiple leads all playing in the mid and high mid frequencies. Notably, your bass isn't even that much actual "bass", but it seems to be playing mostly in the low mids. While I can't be entirely sure since there are so many instruments, it sounds as if you have some reverb on these instruments (and definitely on your cymbals/noise sweeps) which are also causing extra mud in the mix. There's a certain principle of "less is more" when it comes to mixing a lot of the time. In professional mixes, even some of the largest "sound walls" tend to be quite clean, using plain chords and a firm bass sound. For example, check out the drop at around 0:43 in this song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qg1qZq5yjps Notice how the bass comes in, grounding the chord and helping with impact. There also aren't too many mid instruments to cause complication. For a reference with more harmonic lines, give this one a listen at 2:13 or so: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBR3s7YZzzM There are harmonic lines but they're all background to the chord progression focus and melodies.

- Now, let's talk about the harmonies and melodies you have going on here... and really the overall arrangement of the track. Notice how the reference tracks are formatted in such a way that there are clear builds, climaxes, and breakdowns, with multiple themes you can recognize between them. This is because they're using two principles which I believe would benefit you greatly to study and work on: Contrast and Familiarity. Contrast is all about having distinct sections that have different tones and dynamics. Notice how in Miss You there are three different climaxes, with breakdowns between them that are each unique, often featuring variations on the main chord progression. This allows people to rest in between climaxes and have multiple times where excitement builds in anticipation of those climaxes. Each climax in Miss You also uses very similar formatting and ideas with variation in each... which brings us to Familiarity. People like familiarity. It's a common preference used in movies, advertisement, education, and... yes, music. Having multiple themes that can be woven into your builds, climaxes, and breakdowns allows you to retain consistency over time and develop these ideas. This actually helps with the 'journey' feel you were aiming for, since it's taking something familiar and bringing it to new places - as opposed to a constantly changing and unstable chord progression with themes that are, unfortunately, fairly buried in the mix.

Compliments to the Composer:

- I really appreciate the inclusion of some variation and small drum fills like at 0:30 or 0:45. These are actually really nice even though the reverb gets in the way a bit. Having some consistent variation is fantastic. I can also tell you have multiple themes and sections with the instruments you use, once you have the mix cleaned up a bit you'll be much better situated to really show off those melodies clearly.

If this were in my score group, I would give it a 6.5. Solid start, and you have a good few ways to take a big jump in quality. Take it higher!