SkyeWint's audio Reviews on Newgrounds

[Wolftacular NGADM Round 3]

Hello.

The Good:
-Well, this is more cohesive than your second round piece. I particularly like the guitar in my left ear.
-I like the pizzicato arpeggios quite a bit. They're definitely well-done.
-No clipping in the mixing, which is a good thing.
-When the synths come in at about 4:30, that provides some much-needed variation, though the new feeling doesn't last long.

The Not-So-Good:
-That drumset is so weak, the kick and snare are almost completely buried under just the piano and guitar. Some compression would do wonders here, or just turning up the volume period.
-This definitely feels incomplete. While there are a few chordal motifs and ostinatos, there isn't really a specific motif for the entire piece tying it together as a main melody or main rhythm even.
-Alright, this is repeating quite a bit and barely changes the feel at all throughout the entire piece. It feels a lot like a pop song, actually. A lot of the individual phrases repeat note-for-note, which brings down the overall quality of a repeating phrase.

Overall: Score of 6.4/10. Some good ideas here, but not very good execution - it really does feel unfinished to me. Even if you had used an instrument other than voice to make a main melody, it would have been significantly better than it is now.

Wolftacular responds:

Pleased to hear about the good, ready to fight the not so good as always, albeit a little late.

The drumset thing, yeah, I definitely agree. It's one of those things I failed to notice because of listening to the song over and over. The guitar is also quite low in this mix.

I WOULD argue this second point, but yeah, it IS incomplete, so I guess I half agree. It's not that there isn't a motif, it's just not as sugar coated or obvious without a lead instrument.

I definitely will argue this last point. For starters, it sounds like you might be contradicting your previous point by saying that there's a lot of repetition in that these repetitions obviously mark the main rhythm. Disregarding this, though, I think all you should've criticized is that it follows a pop structure. If the song was cut down in half, keeping the ending and intro alike, and basically avoiding the repetition of the entire thing, there is barely any repetition at all. I'm even inclined to think you agree with me here, given that your conclusion states I had good "ideas", plural.

I worked with three different sections, each with their own feeling (which goes hand in hand with the missing lead). I can understand if you think the first [0:00-1:18] and second [1:18-1:58] sections sound similar. The only way I can think of explaining it is that they're sort of "neighbor" feelings. If you listen closely, though, the second section doesn't sound nearly as "happy" as the first section, and I doubt I need to compare the third section. Placing what I said earlier in repetition (lol), I think the only part I agree with about this last point is that the song follows a pop-oriented structure, and I'm not sure that's bad at all.

Overall, and like last time, I agree with your technical feedback, but not so much with the writing stuff. It could be that we simply differ in styles and taste, or the fact that I don't yet have the production expertise to bring everything that's in my head into my music, or both. Either way, I can't help but feel that 6.4 is maybe a little too low of a score for the things you pointed out, even assuming I agreed with them all, but that's just my opinion. You nearly failed me, and I handed most of my work in D: lol

Last, but not least, thank you for taking the time to listen and review my shit. Contest or not, judge or not, agree or not, I always appreciate it. Both your reviews specifically caught my attention, so thanks!

[Bajo el sol, sobre las rocas]

Hello.

The Good:
-Well, this is certainly unique. That intro is really sweet too, I love the playing of the guitar.
-Once again at 1:07 comes the sweet guitar which sounds really awesome, and the transition into it is also excellent.
-Good transition back to the main theme at 1:45.
-2:24 is pretty cool at first, good break.
-Cool transition at 3:09, it's well-done.

The Not-So-Good:
-The initial drums don't sound too interesting, constant four-on-the-floor kick with the same snares going on.
-The transition at 0:30 sounds good, but doesn't really lead to anything special. Wolftacular certainly got that down, the initial guitar sounds waaaaay better and more interesting. The second section also seems really repetitive and feels same-y the whole way through.
-Transition at 2:20 sounds extremely similar to the one at 1:07, just worse. :c
-Section at 2:24-3:08 drags on a little bit long, and after that... the same comparatively boring main theme.
-Ending is bleh. Not very good. Could be a lot better.

Overall: Score of 8.4/10. This is pretty good, I particularly liked the acoustic guitar why the heck did you only have it in two places and not have it be the main focus of the piece darnit. ;_; The main theme of the piece is just boring and uninspired in comparison.

InYourDreams responds:

I'm so sorry sir SkyeWintrest! :(... please don't send me to the dungeon! It's dark and scarry in there... T_T
Thanks a lot for the awesome feedback! I think that's the best part of this contest :). I'm learning a lot!
I completly undestand the things you don't like about this one. I don't know why I didn't stayed flamenco... I think because I just wanted to do something weird. Sometimes weird is good... but sometimes weird can suck balls aswell... Well, now it's out of my system... at least I hope so. O_O

[Mote Prime]

Hello.

The Good:
-That intro sounds so nice and peaceful. It feels really nice, particularly those first few guitar chords.
-Stacked 5/4 + 4/4 = 9/4. Sounds REALLY awesome, and it's funny that you managed to make the 4/4 part sound out-of-place rather than the 5/4 part.
-I'm loving your instruments, particularly the little synth lead. 3:48 is sexy as hell.
-After 4:36 I'm really liking the little guitar rhythms trailing off the end.
-That arpeggio at 6:06-0:10 is extraordinarily sexy. Similar for the ones at 6:18 and the harmonic phrases starting at 6:21.
-Piano riff at 6:41. Amg. So nice.
-I sense the Fruity Reeverb "Ambiance" preset being used after 6:41 on the panning guitar along with a light phaser. It sounds really sweet.

The Not-So-Good:
-I am not very happy with the two minutes and forty seconds of the same rhythm. The only time it really changes is at about 2:12, and then there's not much change for another ten or so seconds after that.
-Even after 2:42, the stacked meter is only cool for a little bit before it gets boring again. You can only push the same chords with ambient harmonies in the background so far. It's not as bad as the first two minutes though.
-Dat kick is causing some mixing issues at about 5:42 onward. Are you still in the habit of reverbing your kick? Might want to stop that. :c
-Transitions at about 4 minutes in and around 4:40 are both somewhat sloppy. 5:43 is a bit eh, the effect seems somewhat lacking of 'oomph'.
-After 6:41, the song is over. The ending really doesn't need to be dragged out for another minute, about half that time would be better.
-Okay, general compositional feedback - this doesn't really coalesce and have any particular theme. I could potentially see the section at 2:18 and the section at 3:48 being a theme and variation, but that's kinda a stretch. Beyond that the only theme I can hear is a rhythmic one, which is heard clearly in those little guitar trailings at 4:36. One theme does not a compositionally complete song make.

Overall: Score of 9.5/10. Yeah, I'm going through all that 'not-so-good' feedback, then turning around and giving this one of my highest scores. I honestly think this is one of the best pieces you've made, definitely the best one atmosphere-wise. If it were a bit more compositionally powerful, mixing issues were cleared up, and the transitions cleaned, all I'd have left are a few nitpicks which would be keeping it from a perfect score. Color me impressed. ...still though, I KNOW you can do better. Show us just how far you can push your skill.

[Shinjitsu]

Hello.

The Good:
-The piano melody is beautiful, as many people have said. Your composition with the melody is spectacular.
-I like the effect starting at 0:23 leading to 0:30.
-I do like your usage of synths as a fake orchestra, it's certainly a unique way to do things.
-Most of your transitions are well-done.

The Not-So-Good:
-Bit of clipping, significantly at 0:31. Try to compress the frequencies slightly more without any gain. I'd recommend turning up the ratio, though tweaking the treshhold could also work.
-Man, as much as I like the synth orchestra, the lead synth at 0:58 REALLY feels overpowering, and starts causing a lack of clarity in the lower part. At 1:33 this becomes even more pronounced, it's burying a lot of the other sound.
-Cutting out the lead synth at 1:48 sounds awkward. Also clipping.
-There's only really one melody, it'd be a lot better if you had two rather than just one.

Overall: Score of 8/10. The mixing hurt it the most, keeping to only one motif and repeating it throughout the entire piece hurt the composition.

[This is Not the End]

Hello. I'm sorry. This is the end. :(

The Good:
-Your melodies are very pleasant, I like them quite a bit.
-I like the change at 1:09, it feels very nice. Similar for 1:32.
-The clear theme is very nice, I'm liking this a lot after all the pieces lacking them last round.
-AN ENDING! A CONCLUSION! I am happy about this. :D

The Not-So-Good:
-When focusong on a solo instrument, realism and atmosphere are both EXTREMELY important. This took a severe hit on the realism front.
-The piano doesn't sound like it has much dynamic contrast or change in velocity layers. Even with a basic piano you can have more emotion simply by using dynamic contrast. Also, some tempo automation would do wonders for realism.
-Strings are buried behind the piano at about 0:25. Less reverb on the piano should fix this up. You can automate the reverb to decrease at that point if necessary.
-Transition at 1:38 is a bit sloppy in that it's too sudden, only two notes leading up to the abrupt switch.

Overall: Score of 7.8/10. The absolute biggest hit was the lack of realism in the piano, seeing as that's the instrument carrying pretty much the entire piece. Everything else is background, so that piano needs to have some serious emotion behind it.

ChronoNomad responds:

I really want to respond to this in full, but every single time I read that first line it makes me thoroughly disgusted. Whether you meant it to be sincere or sarcastic, it just comes off as being both unnecessary and offensive. Maybe you will understand if someone ever has the lack of decorum to use one of your song titles in such an unfortunate play on words. That being said, after having it done to me, I wouldn't wish it on anyone.

So we got off on a really bad foot in this review with poorly chosen and thoroughly unprofessional words. Moving on, it's nice to see that there were some things that you actually liked about my Round 3 submission. This is one time when I wish the bad news had come before the good, but it is what it is.

It basically seems like I am being penalized for my SoundFont piano more than anything else when you speak of 'realism.' Maybe this doesn't apply to all the judges, and if so I apologize, but I distinctly remember Step mentioning that instrument quality was not going to damage our scores. This is the best piano that I currently possess, and I put a lot of time and effort into my velocity dynamics, which are constantly changing throughout the entire song, so this basically just leaves me feeling frustrated. I suppose if I knew how to add tempo automation I would have done it by now, so at least that gives me a vague idea of what to look into, but the velocity dynamics are plainly there for anyone with ears to hear...especially where the melodies speed up and slow down.

For the strings that gets buried behind the piano, here I'm being penalized directly for using velocity controls and softening up that cello, so trying to be more dynamic is apparently a lose-lose proposition. Finally, you refer to the two-note transition at 1:38, one that I feel works perfectly well and sounds lovely, as being a bit sloppy. I just plain don't understand how the term applies, but it certainly sounds more like a personal nitpick than anything else. Nevertheless, I respect your opinion in this regard and will simply agree to disagree.

This has been, by far, the most difficult review that I have ever responded to. I think I've managed to work out most of my frustrations just by 'talking it out,' and I apologize for any discomfort this may have caused you. Losing to etherealwinds had less sting than reading this to be quite honest, so hopefully you won't begrudge me a bit of honest indignation. Thanks for (most of) the review. :)

[Agnos]

Hello.

The Good:
-That guitar is very nice. I like the background instrument playing at the same time, it sounds very mellow and calm.
-Your vocal work is as always good.
-1:16, VERY nice note there.
-Break at 1:24-1:43 is FANTASTIC. I like the peace and little tremelos within it, it was very calming and powerful in my opinion.
-Your melodies, harmonies, and general composition is fantastic. Only one issue with it which I'll mention.
-Mixing is decent. Could be better, but could be a TON worse.

The Not-So-Good:
-I don't particularly like the panning of the pad being exactly the same for each bloom. It makes it sound very much like a one-shot sample which you just pitched around.
-At about 0:34-0:40, there are a few mixing issues which causes the guitar to be a bit buried. There's more of this at 1:04-1:16.
-0:50-0:53 seems to be slightly too long of a pause, possibly caused by the notes ending the break. Similar happens at 1:03, though that's more of a rhythmic thing making the entrance sound awkward.
-Are there meant to be background vocal harmonies at 1:55? They're very indistinct and difficult to make out.
-The vocal note at about 2:00 seems dissonant compared to the other notes. Considering the tonality of this piece, that's not a good thing.
-More of an overall compositional aspect: You have a wonderful theme at the beginning and from 1:04-1:16, but it vanishes from the rest of the piece. I'd have liked one last iteration of it at the end.

Overall: Score of 9/10. The issues aren't particularly major, but there are plenty of them. I haven't gotten into full nitpick mode with you yet, that'll be in the next round. ;)

[the traveller]

Hello. Longest review of all of them, I think.

The Good:
-I love your melodies, they're very peaceful.
-Dat panning in the harp is nice. ^_^ Thanks for that.
-At about 3:30, there's your classic strong techno-like sound which is cool. It really does sound like there's a train whistle there as well.
-I like the phaser introduction to 4:40 on the drums.
-The little filters on the drum fills are really sweet.
-The way you end the drums at 6:04 sounds REALLY cool.

The Not-So-Good:
-The original strings and reverse cymbal seem somewhat out-of-place. The strings feel very artificial with the exact same attack each time, and the reverse cymbal was VERY obviously intended for electronic music rather than this (compressed. It's definitely too loud). It's also something you seem to use in most of your music for climaxes.
-Transition at 1:02 is into something completely different, there could at least have been a transitional chord.
-At about 2 minutes in, the guitar is a bit too panned to the left.
-The 'acoustic' snare drum sounds extremely cheesy and artificial, it could have been done much better.
-Rhythmic transition at 2:54 is sudden and off-putting. Why did you switch to like, 5/4 from 3/4 and then go to 4/4 one measure later? This could have worked if it were in the middle of a full-on transition, but when it's in the middle of a section it's just awkward.
-Overall mixing until about 3:40 is kinda empty.
-There's some weird clicking sound starting at 4:04 which is weird.
-...cliffhanger ending made specifically to piss me off, eh? :v Well, some modest success there. It worked at first, but then that last guitar bit came in. Why. Why would you deliberately make your own ending worse?
-I don't want to play "Where's Waldo?" with the main theme of the piece.

Overall: Score of 8.4/10. Good enough sections, clear (if empty at first) mixing, nice story being told there. I would like at least one motif that's used through the piece, or a short break where you reiterate a previous idea. Also, transitions. >:( ...by the way, I'm curious. Why do you never use upper-case letters in your music titles?

johnfn responds:

Thank you for this fantastic review.

I was particularly interested to hear your review because you have a ton of nit picking and I definitely needed that for my attempt at orchestral (which I have essentially no experience in.) The stuff about the cymbal being an EDM cymbal is an excellent point (also yes I overuse it!), and the point about attacks is a good one too. It's something I haven't thought about, since I'm primarily a piano player.

2:54, yes I absolutely screwed this up. What's happening is essentially it's going from 3/4->4/4. I flat out ran out of time to fix it.

Good catch at 1:02. One of my ideas was that I would modulate into different sections, because that generally sounds nice, but yeah it didn't work as well it could have. Again, rushed.

It's kind of funny that you didn't like the end guitar, because quite a few other people did... eh, let's just compromise and say the whole ending is bad. =D

> Why do you never use upper-case letters in your music titles?

I'm not sure. A while ago when a song that I made without caps did really well, so that may have something to do with it. Also, capitalizing the titles of my songs seems more pretentious than doing lower case titles. On the other hand, I do have a few songs even recently that were capitalized. Who knows!