SkyeWint's audio Reviews on Newgrounds

[Fanfare in c minor]

Hey there. Some general commentary on your song for NGAUC... is what I'd like to say. But uh, this piece is different from the others. It's entirely composition for the organ, and I tend to critique sound design moreso than something very specific like this. Church organ music is significantly different than a lot of other music, as it tends to fairly constantly involve mostly whole notes and even timing. Any overall commentary on the song would likely just be as follows:

-Your composition is cool.
-The sound design is boring as it's the same thing the whole way through.
-The production could be a bit better but there's not really much of anything there to polish in the first place.

So, there's my dilemma. You've gone for a style of music that bypasses the typical pitfalls of most people by completely ignoring them. But that has a pitfall in itself which is that there isn't really anything there in the first place, so this would need to have absolutely brilliant composition to stand against well-composed *and* well-designed music with more than one instrument.

For what it's worth, this is well-composed church organ music. However, here's the biggest thing. There's no change in the mood of the piece. It's essentially the same kind of feeling and same style of composition the whole way through. No dynamic changes. No difference in style. Plain and simple, something relying on composition alone needs more drama in a contest, as contest pieces are about really showing everything you can do - they are literally pieces to show off, and I'm not feeling anything like that from this piece.

Final score: 6.0/10

[Lost Signals]

Hey there. Some general commentary on your song for NGAUC.

-This starts out in one of the most interesting ways I've heard a song start in quite a while. Great glitches and chopped sounds. The arps are really cool.
-Dear god this sounds almost like electric metal music at around 0:55 with those kick rolls. Wow. Only thing that could be better there is a bit more mixing and some more thump in those kicks, then this would be really filled out and sound badass as fuck. Seriously. That would make that section one of my favorite sections of music.
-The tempo changes actually work really really well. They blend pretty much seamlessly into the music IMO, and they enhance the moods that I'm receiving here.
-Hell yeah more kick drum madness.
-This song is a fantastic example of one that actually didn't need a particularly clear melodic theme.
-Now THAT is an ending. Best one I've heard so far out of all of these. Major plus for me. ...I just wish it didn't end on a passing tone, that immediately makes it feel like there's more.

Final score: 8.8/10 + download. This is quite honestly fantastic. Hugely experimental, coherent, and great. Literally the only two things I'd work on are the mixing (biggest thing) and just not having a passing tone being the last one in that way. It's unresolved tension that doesn't work nearly as well as a held chord.

[Asian Workshop]

Hey there. Some general commentary on your song for NGAUC.

-Hahahahaha, oh man. This made me laugh so hard when I heard this start. I had to take a break before I could actually get down to judging it. This is *such* a weird song.
-Great mixing throughout. That's actually fairly impressive, there's nothing about this that's off at all. Much appreciated, sir.
-Great little dinging sounds in the background and fantastic tasteful percussion.
-Hilarious brassy sounds in it.
-All of the one-shots. All of them.
-Okay, the biggest thing this is missing is a theme. It has the background sounds, but no real coherent musical theme throughout aside from the instrumentation and said background. Other than that, it's a bit short. But those are really the only criticisms I have for this.

Final score: 8.2/10 + download. This is too hilarious and well-done to give anything lower than an 8, despite the shortness and lack of theme.

[Sledgehammer]

Hey there. Some general commentary on your song for NGAUC.

-This actually has a really cool intro, though it didn't quite sound like it at first. Nice use of a phaser for effects, it's done really tastefully.
-I feel like the instrument at 1 minute in is a bit too basic to be *that* bare.
-This fills itself out pretty decently at 1:30, but I feel like it could have had something a bit more if it's going for the bassy sound. It's almost like dubstep but without the wobbles and without anything on the higher end. You could definitely have fit a higher and longer-lasting instrument in the high frequencies even with the high-end reverb.
-Nice break at 2:00, there's enough going on for the little basic instrument to work.
-Drums come in a tad dramatically at 2:16. I think they could have come in a bit more subtly like the piano was.
-That poor piano. It's totally buried at 2:46. You could totally have something in the higher register playing those chords if it was introduced earlier.
-Okay, dblue_glitch. I hear you in there, in all your raw and unedited glory.
-When this ended, I did a double-take because I wasn't sure I was seeing things correctly. This could definitely use a better ending, it sounds pretty unfinished when the sound goes straight from 70% to zilch.

Final score: 6.7/10

[Boundaries]

Hey there. Some general commentary on your song for NGAUC.

-Holy chiptune. Experiments are always cool, man.
-50 seconds in, waiting for something different to happen melody-wise. Things have been pretty repetitive for the whole thing so far.
-1:30, I swear at this point you're using the same pattern and just glitching it out. Used glitches enough here to recognize it.
-Holy crap what. The pad wash at 2:03 is head-and-shoulders above the other instruments in terms of fidelity, especially for the lead that next comes in.
-Neat effects at 3 minutes in, definitely helping the repetitiveness there.
-You have really cool rises and falls in this overall, I mainly wish that the main theme weren't the same thing going on the entire piece. It could really use some more variation in the feeling of it.
-Ending is pretty good, all things considered. It felt pretty much like the rest of the song, but had just enough conclusion to push it out of the standard fadeout to an actual conclusive ending. Good on ya, man.

Final score: 7.0/10

Adhenoid responds:

Finally the review is out!! :D

Thanks for this helpful review @Skyewint !! :D
Though, since english is not my native language, I don't quite get whether this "The pad wash at 2:03 is head-and-shoulders above the other instruments in terms of fidelity, especially for the lead that next comes in" is a good thing or not haha sorry. XD

Once again, thanks for reviewing!! :D

[Costa Concordia]

Hey there. I heard you wanted a review. First one I've done in awhile, so I might be a bit rusty, but bear with me. For reference, your total score when I was tabulating was 84/100.

The Good!
-Excellent sample manipulation. Probably the most realistic I've heard out of all the samples.
-Excellent sound effects around the 2 minute mark, nice flanger, nice high-end SFX. Not sure how you pulled those out, but it's awesome.
-Excellent ambiance overall, you really manipulated the samples to paint a picture.
-I do find it very impressive that the second half of the piece is the same chord progression as the first half.

The not-so-good:
-So, smaller things first. Ending wasn't that interesting or conclusive. It just basically ends, sounding more as if ideas ran out than it was intended to end there. This ties into the next point, which is...
-Flow. I've actually written some things about the flow of music, and this is one thing that your piece somewhat suffers from. It doesn't feel like it has a particular direction to it - rather, it feels like a few atmospheres that were strung together with some compositional theory, like using the same chord progression twice. I recognize that making a proper melody out of the samples is difficult, but certainly possible, especially given you submitted this with a full 7 days more to work on it. There was far more development that could have happened in this piece, which just... didn't.
-Mixing. Yeah, this shouldn't be too surprising as being a significant factor. It hit basically everybody in this contest, so here are some specific comments on yours. Lot of overly buried sounds around 1 minute in, partially simply due to the amount of brass. There are some bass hits which are hard to hear and a lot of the detail of the higher horns is buried as well, particularly around 1:25. Closer to 2:33 the lower brass gets very muddy. This is also partially due to using the same sample, as that can cause phasing and distortion due to having the same waveforms playing.

Overall: Again, 84/100. Biggest things were the flow and mixing. Flow is highly determined by intention of the piece, but can still work very well. Mixing could simply be corrected with more clarify of individual instruments.

Phonometrologist responds:

Ah yes thank you! I appreciate your take and time to leave this review. Welcome back!
A few things:
-You mentioned some high-end sfx. There was a sample (I forget which as I would have to open up the project to look up) that I applied a bit distortion to while playing it at a very high register, i.e. sped up. Something that anyone could recreate if one wanted the recipe.
-I agree with the flow point overall. Perhaps I can use a pun to the title by saying that the direction of it went pretty much down from there.
-The mixing thing still perplexes me so in that I appreciate your perspective. I think there's perhaps two schools of thought when it comes to mixing. Check out this short clip of Picasso drawing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JU9oaD0e7uU

I wish the video didn't cut off, because by the end of the piece, the fish no longer becomes visible as the hen pretty much gets colored in. This is my approach when it comes to music. Burying layers upon layers definitely creates muddiness where not everything becomes clear just like in modern art where not everything becomes seen. I'm more than okay from straying away from trying to replicate reality, although I appreciate both sides. This approach doesn't make your points any less valid, but rather shows that you're right. And I'm content that you are right :)

[Popping Flowers]

Righty-o, review time. Keep in mind that when judging (or thinking in terms of being a judge), I tend to be harsher in terms of scoring.

The Good:
-Nice instruments, even if some of them are fairly standard fare (like the pad). Great little ear candy percussion sounds, first come in at 0:47. Also, excellent percussive instrument playing broken chords around the 1:45 mark.
-Cute little melody.
-Nice little break in the percussion at places like 1:08 and 2:39.

The Not-So-Good:
-First, yes. It is a generic chord progression. This wouldn't be so much of an issue, but it never changes - what this really needs in terms of chords is having some section where they do something different. Keeping the chord progression the same will make the piece sound monotonous, and quite honestly boring. At the very least, try changing the notes that you're using to form the chord. You can use inversions, or you could try some more open sounds by only using two notes. That would also let you experiment with changing the scale even within the chord.
-Second, melodic content. You have the main melody, and an arpeggio which *could* be called a harmonic line, but it only does the chord. Try having a countermelody, even if it's not there the first time you play the melody. At around 2:39, you could easily have a second melody playing - this would add a lot more to the composition.
-Third, mixing. This is good in that it doesn't clip, but there's certainly some mud. You have the original arpeggios and plucks in the first 45 seconds, but after that, the plucks and arpeggio are buried under the other instruments, despite playing the same pattern. Try using panning more liberally and spreading the frequencies out. This does not improve in the second half, when you have the other instrument playing broken chords on top of the already-existing problems. This does also affect one of the ear candy percussion noises :( The little "bwob" sound is buried almost entirely in the second half, where it's actually audible (barely) in the first half.
-Finally, transitions. Intro is acceptable, though it could certainly be better. Other transitions are fine, if a bit generic. The ending is basically just bad, unfortunately - it sounds lazy, like you couldn't be bothered to conclude the piece. Basic rule of thumb which I use for endings is that they shouldn't just fade out without some kind of conclusion, and they should never ever ever just let a pattern end. At the very least, have a chord that the piece resolves to. If you want, I have a news post which explains transitions (including intros and outros). http://skyewint.newgrounds.com/news/post/857638 This might help.

Overall: The composition of the piece is a serious weak point. The mixing is decent, though more clarity would have been helpful. The ending... well, endings are somewhat of a pet peeve of mine, but the ending definitely needs an overhaul. Hopefully this helps explain why the judges decided what they did.

ForeverBound responds:

It did more or less, thanks for your time and for the review

[Final Strike!!]

Hi. Want some review?

The Good:
-Dramatic, yes!
-Orchestra, yes!
-Great guitars in the opening.
-Fantastic breakdown at 0:52 and punchy sound at 1 minute. Overall stellar composition as always.
-Pretty good loop, though it seems like it's about to reach a climax rather than the beginning again. No sound glitches though.

The Not-So-Good, composition-wise:
-I think it could still have used a bit more of a breakdown in the middle, something without the constant drums. But, that's just me.

MIXING: Right, Step. I'm docking a full two points for this, because you said you did the final mix of the entire thing. I am seriously disappoint about this.
-The drumset is balls. The orchestral percussion is way more powerful than it, and it's buried under everything else, constantly.
-Similarly, the distorted guitar is entirely covered by everything except when it's playing primarily by itself, which is every time except sometimes in the intro and around 40 seconds in.
-Hell, even the strings are buried by the horns a lot of the time. Notable points about that are 0:25 and 1:05.

Overall: I don't care if you wanted it to be "the sum of its parts" or something, that mixing was just plain no. Ye dun clutterfucked the mix, and now it's muddy as hell. Otherwise, though, everything's basically cool, only little nitpicky stuff. 7/10 with the mixing, 9/10 otherwise.

UltimateCJ64 responds:

"Hi. Want some review?"

Why yes I would! :D

"The Good:
-Dramatic, yes!
-Orchestra, yes!
-Great guitars in the opening.
-Fantastic breakdown at 0:52 and punchy sound at 1 minute. Overall stellar composition as always.
-Pretty good loop, though it seems like it's about to reach a climax rather than the beginning again. No sound glitches though."

Thankfully achieving most of what we were going for. And I see what you mean on the climax buildup. Could probably make a full song version out of this that adds a real beginning and ending.

"The Not-So-Good, composition-wise:
-I think it could still have used a bit more of a breakdown in the middle, something without the constant drums. But, that's just me."

Maybe, maybe not. It is going to be a song in a full-auto-mayhem action Contra/Metal Slug type game, if it isn't the game keeping up the action, it's the music. At least that's the plan. :)

"MIXING: Right, Step. I'm docking a full two points for this, because you said you did the final mix of the entire thing. I am seriously disappoint about this.
-The drumset is balls. The orchestral percussion is way more powerful than it, and it's buried under everything else, constantly.
-Similarly, the distorted guitar is entirely covered by everything except when it's playing primarily by itself, which is every time except sometimes in the intro and around 40 seconds in.
-Hell, even the strings are buried by the horns a lot of the time. Notable points about that are 0:25 and 1:05."

I agree the drumset is definitely balls. Sadly I don't have the money yet to buy a decent virtual kit. We didn't want the rock part to overpower the orchestra but I guess we went too far on that aspect. I personally don't know what happened with the orchestra half, but lessons learned I guess. :(

"Overall: I don't care if you wanted it to be "the sum of its parts" or something, that mixing was just plain no. Ye dun clutterfucked the mix, and now it's muddy as hell. Otherwise, though, everything's basically cool, only little nitpicky stuff. 7/10 with the mixing, 9/10 otherwise."

Yeah, the mix definitely could be better, but with the final product being much better recepted (received?) than my horrible mixing on my solo works, I can't complain too much.

Thanks for the review, I appreciate it a lot, definitely one of the more helpful. :)