SkyeWint's audio Reviews on Newgrounds

[Symphony (GB)]

Here's your round 3 review! It'll be a bit harsher than your previous reviews once more. Harsher the closer to the end we get!

And like I said to Waterflame, sorry if this sounds a bit harsh. :c I was not feeling very generous toward repetition in this round.

The Good:
-Hahahaha, that intro sounds very nice. It has some really cool sounds in it. I'm glad you changed up your synths some.
-I like the usage of all those cool little FX sounds throughout. They keep it a bit more interesting than what it'd otherwise be.
-SNAPS! Niiiiiice. I love snaps. You may not use them much but they sound really nice.
-A lot of the instruments sound pretty darn cool, you really know how made EDM.

The Not-So-Good:
-Okay, I turned my volume down to 13/100, and it STILL gave me a headache from the volume of it. Not everything needs to be so compressed that it's blasting out of my speakers.
-The vocals sound louder than the actual music. This isn't a good thing. For an intro where the volume is coming up, vocals should be turned down to the volume of the rest of the song. As-is, they overpower EVERYTHING in the build-ups.
-It gets very dubstep-monotonous at about 1:00-2:00 and 3:00-4:00. It's also varily monotonous in the 2:00-3:00 part simply due to lack of variation.
-Some of your wobble basses are out-of tune which doesn't sound very good.
-Outro isn't all that good, try having a little bit extra sound dying down rather than a single synth doing an arpeggio which I noticed you did in your round 1 song. I believe I commented on it then too.

Overall: This is pretty nice, but REALLY repetitive and overcompressed to a crazy amount. Unfortunately, it's not very different from your other songs either, so... This'll get a 5.5/10 from me.

[-SuperWing Heroes-]

Here's your round 3 review! It'll be a bit harsher than your previous reviews once more. Harsher the closer to the end we get!

Sorry if this sounds a bit harsh. :c I was not feeling very generous toward repetition in this round.

The Good:
-Very bouncy - I like the little arpeggios in the beginning. This is so completely "Waterflame" style it's insane. Nobody could possibly mistake it for anybody else's work, I'm sure.
-Come to think of it, I like almost everything about the beginning.
-I really really liked the different kind of chord progression you used in the main melody. It's definitely more unique and sounds cooler. Also the main melody is very cute to my ears.
-At about 1:32-1:34, I lurv the little metallic sound there. It sounds *so awesome*.
-Mixing's great from what I can tell.

The Not-So-Good:
-I'm not particularly a fan of the snare you used. I feel as if a slightly longer sample with a bit more in the higher frequencies would have been better.
-The synth coming in at around 0:07 sounds a little bit 'ew' where it's placed with all the softer samples.
-Hi-hat at 1:40 is really a bit too much in the high frequencies, it hurts my ears. This does apply other places, though it's most prominent there.
-This doesn't really change much at all. It's nice, just... boring. Would have loved more variation and ideas in it, because it gets very 'samey', very fast. This brought your score down significantly, as I REALLY don't like songs to do the same thing/same kind of thing for most of the song.
-The end doesn't appeal to me as much as the rest of the track. Aside from the classic-fadeout-copout lazy outro, it has the same nasty synth as there is in the beginning.

Overall: Nice, but very boring since it sounds like pretty much the same thing for the entire 4 minutes aside from one break. This NEEDS more variation. That's my main complaint about it. Well, I would have liked if you tried something different but that's a relatively minor quibble. Unfortunately though, since you haven't really showed much of anything creative compared to your last two tracks and what I know you can do, I'm giving this a 6.5/10.

[Omniwitch]

Here's your round 3 review! It'll be a bit harsher than your previous reviews once more. Harsher the closer to the end we get!

The Good:
-This is a pretty cool jazz/rock fusion thing with a lot of little awesome bits all over the entire place.
-Oh my god that intro. Is so awesome. I love the piano and stuff, it sounds really cool. I would have LOVED if you developed the ideas in the intro specifically.
-You certainly did keep the crowd-pleaser arpeggios.
-Chord progression for most of it is pretty awesome.
-Mixing's a lot better this time around particularly compared to your round 1 song.
-I particularly like the little 'suspension' (can't think of a better word) at 1:01-1:03 and later in the song. Granted it was a bit odd and offsetting initially, but on later listens it was better.
-You really got more creative with the different instruments you used in this song which I REALLY liked.

The Not-So-Good:
-If you remember, I had said that this has a lot of little awesome bits all over the place. Unfortunately, if it were a sentence, it would be an extremely long run-on sentence because it has no periods throughout most of it and goes ALL over the place. There is but a single word I need to say what you need: Transitions. Won't go into specific places, because the issues with transitions are basically throughout the entire song.
-Keeping with the analogy of the run-on sentence, it then ends abruptly in the middle of a word. Needs an ending rather than just a cutoff.
-Unfortunately, after I had listened to this a few times I realized 90% of the melody is in the chords. Other than that it's mainly arpeggios. More real melodies pl0x.
-Few nitpicky things about the intro: The ride coming in at 0:11 is a bit too loud IMO. Also, the chord you used initially at 0:21 seems a bit too... typical for what you've been doing - that's not bringing down your score, but still.

Overall: Using what I said earlier in the review... This is a pretty cool jazz/rock fusion thing with a lot of little awesome bits all over the place but it's a run-on sentence with no periods and only a few commas occasionally pausing the flow only in the middle of a sentence rather than between each section so it sounds like you're trying to say a lot in one veeeeeeeeeeery long breath so I hope that cleared up the problems with. 8/10

[-*}CaSH{*- Ministries]

Here's your round 3 review! It'll be a bit harsher than your previous reviews once more. Harsher the closer to the end we get!

The Good:
-Composition is sweet as usual. I liked the little realism bits you put in like changing the velocity and timing of notes.
-This has a lovely rising and falling action throughout, you definitely know what you're doing.
-Chord progression is sweeeeeeeeeet.
-I can hear everything fine, the mixing seems good to me.

The Not-So-Good:
-I don't like the little chord change at about 1:02, but that's pretty nitpicky.
-Unfortunately, what killed you is the instrument quality. There's really not much of anything I can say about this other than, try downloading BAB's giant library of soundfonts, because they're VERY good for being soundfonts.

Overall: Man, this was a change of pace from listening to MSB's dubstep house thing. I have to say, I liked it quite a bit. This'll get a 7/10 from me mainly because of the composition.

[Istishhad]

Here's your round 3 review! It'll be a bit harsher than your previous reviews once more. Harsher the closer to the end we get!

The Good:
-That intro sounds really cool with all the indian instruments.
-Your percussion is much better this time IMO. The way it's sequenced sounds very nice overall.
-0:32 THUMP. Niiiiiiice. Also after that, the bouncing instrument (can't remember the name of it) sounds pretty awesome.
-You have quite a few interesting melodies.
-I still love your violin sound and have been looking for it in BAB's soundfonts for awhile but can't find it. Damn.
-Very unique-sounding. You certainly have your own style.

The Not-So-Good:
-Mixing could still use some work, some instruments are buried under other ones.
-The transitions could also use some work. About 2:10-2:23 seems odd, particularly at 2:23 where everything goes down and it sounds like it's the intro to another song.
-At about 3:54, that transition could use a tiny bit more, there's a lot of empty space in it.
-After 4:06, things get fairly boring. It sounds pretty awesome, but goes on for a long time without much changing. At 4:36, it seems a bit more disconnected from the other parts.

Overall: This is pretty cool and definitely not the kind of thing I would normally hear, but... it's a bit too disconnected and monotonous. The mixing and percussion is a lot better overall. You might want to focus more on melodies and composition overall rather than mainly percussion. I'll give this a 7.5/10.

RetromanOMG responds:

In regards to the mixing, I feel I had the most dificulty mixing the strings in a fashion that kept them all audible. As I mentioned in the previous response, I ran out of time and rushed the production. When I redo this song, I will address the issues that I left unanswered in it's production.

[Asperges Me]

Here's your round 3 review! It'll be a bit harsher than your previous reviews once more. Harsher the closer to the end we get!

The Good:
-I love how the piano comes in at 0:39. Actually, that piano is REALLY good overall for the entire thing. It's very real-sounding and VERY beautiful.
-I love all the little harmonics you did with the vocals, which are a lot nicer this time actually. Took out the background noise that you had before with Edison, hm? Well, whatever you did, it helps your nice voice come out quite a bit more.
-At 2:37, I like that little break. I feel like it would have been a perfect time for that whale sound you had in your previous submission.
-There's a little overtone drone sound at around 1:52-2:00 and a few other places. I really like it.
-I LOVE the section from about 3:02 to 3:49, particularly the piano at 3:14-3:26.
-Mixing is much better than last time.
-The ending is also quite beautiful, I can hear the emotion in your voice - you're quite a good singer, though it suffers from mic issues. The little echoes of other lyrics are VERY well-done in my opinion.

The Not-So-Good:
-That initial violin sound doesn't sound good. :c It's REALLY soundfonty, probably because I recognize it as a soundfont. Also, the tune it plays initially doesn't sound too nice at about 0:14-0:15 (which is partially due to the soundfontyness, but the tune itself seems a bit rambling and "I wasn't sure what to do here").
-Even though the vocals are better, it's still obvious that they were done with the integrated PC mic. You need a better mic, definitely. One that doesn't have the sound distortion and poor recording quality of a normal mic.
-At about 3:02, there's a little blippy sound which obviously has a delay on it. I have to be honest here, it sounds very bad. You may want to edit it a bit, though I would completely take it out and replace it with that whale sound you had in Supplication.
-Also at about 3:02, the vocals are almost nonexistent in how I can hear them, they only clear up enough to recognize at around 3:30.
-Also also starting at around 3:29 (well, that's when I first noticed it), distortion can be heard in the vocals. You might want to either EQ that out and/or edit it out altogether where you can.
-0:51 there's a random wooden "chuff"-like sound in my left ear, probably in the recording. There are a few other sounds like this as well.
-1:30 little off-key sound in the vocals. If I remember right, you record all of the vocals at once... Try recording each individual part several times, then picking the best.
-Unfortunately, the mixing could still use some work. Especially at around 3:49, where the piano gets drowned out almost completely - it also sounds 'muted', as if someone has the mute pedal on dulling the sound. Remember, use the stereo shaper and panning to move your instruments from left to right and front to back! Both things help keep frequencies from interfering with each other. EQing is probably the biggest tool - learning to do that properly would help a lot. And the last thing about mixing - reverb is awesome, but you really don't need it on EVERY SINGLE INSTRUMENT.
-Hate to do this to such a lovely ending, but I think the note at 5:00 could (A) be up an octave and (B) be about half the volume it was at. It seems like it was trying to be subtle, and in most other places it would be, but everything else is so quiet that it fails and sounds more like an elephant lightly tapping a key.
-At the end of 0:41 and the main part of 0:42, I don't think it was a good idea to have the piano do the same rhythm as it had been doing. I feel as if it would have been better to simply give the entire chord at once, then pause for a second before picking it up again at 0:43/0:44. You do this at 1:50, so I know you know how to do it.

Overall: This is very very very very very nice, I think it's your best submission of all three rounds so far - after all, I was nitpicking a ton more rather than pointing out general things! I'm going to give this a 8/10, because as I said. I really liked this. Good work!

[Alpine]

Here's your round 3 review! It'll be a bit harsher than your previous reviews once more. Harsher the closer to the end we get!

The Good:
-Oh man that intro. Holy crap it sounds nice. I was not expecting you to use pads.
-Piano/keyboard sounds great, but that's no surprise coming from you.
-This sounds. So amazingly chill. I love really chill songs, and the fact thta you managed to make DnB of all genres sound chill. I would really really love if you made this into a loop.
-I like all the subtle sidechaining throughout.
-Mixing is really great, I can hear everything clearly, and the mix is filled up nicely.

The Not-So-Good: Okay this is very nitpicky.
-Biggest thing: It doesn't really go anywhere. You have a lot of cool ideas, but this has the same problem that TheBenjerman did. Not enough content. On the plus side, you kept this to 2 minutes so you obviously knew that there wasn't enough for more. ...and if you ended it just because you couldn't think of any more, well don't tell me that.
-Cymbal roll at 0:54-0:56 is a bit too loud for me, and I bet the other judges will agree for the most part.
-Snare for the first half of the song is a very tiny bit too loud.
-It would have been awesome if you used some kind of bass amp or something for the bass to increase the low frequencies, as there's not that much of a base(bass) for the rest of the song to spring up from.

Overall: There's really not much I can say about this (yeah I said that after writing an essay). It's cool, but there's not much content. For what it's worth, I REALLY liked this, and most of my complaints are nitpicky. I'm giving this a 8.5.

BlazingDragon responds:

I had a ton more in mind for this one but simply ran out of time. x_x

Great suggestions, especially regarding the bass amp. I'll keep that in mind for my future tracks...
Thank you!

[Nothing's Easy]

Interesting idea for a song. I'm surprised you made that tune work. It didn't seem to be all that melodic of a tune to go off of.

The Good:
-As I said - I'm surprised you managed to make the main tune work. I do have to give some credit for that.
-Mixing's fine. I can hear everything, don't hear any static or clipping or anything.

The NOT-So-Good:
-The intro. The piano really doesn't sound too good. You may want to look up a better piano sound, for one, and for another, the way it fades out without going anywhere doesn't appeal to me at all. I'm betting quite a few other people would agree. Essentially: The piano initially doesn't sound too good, and the transition isn't that good either.
-At around 1:20-1:30, I thought I was hearing the next section coming. However, lowering the cutoff after that was fairly displeasing - even in techno, that normally doesn't happen. The subtle bringing-out of a new melody is more common - reason being it sounds a bit better.
-After the lowpass, things stay like that for far too long, only really coming out again at 2:45-2:59.
-You missed one of the most valuable and most-used tools in the EDM catagory! White noise filter sweeps! ;) They really add a lot of tension to a song, letting you release it in a much more satisfying way. It also fills out the high end of a mix more.
-No outro? Tch. Try something a bit more than a fadeout and/or flat-out stopping the song.
-There isn't really much variation at all. You brought down the cutoff and brought it back up again after the little piano section, and that was about the extent of variation. Try adding in multiple melodies/tunes and switching between them/layering them together. That adds a lot more depth to a song and helps solve variation issues. Same with the chord progression.

Overall: I'm going to have to give this a 1.5/5. You seem to have mixing down, but there's a LOT more that could be done with this song. I'd suggest checking over some of your favorite artists and not just listening to their music, but analyzing it. What kind of things do they do, and WHEN do they do them? There is a method to the madness, after all.

-Swint

Dylnmatrix responds:

Thanks for the critique. This actually helps me a lot, seeing as I am still a noob at all of this and the only feedback I've gotten is the review before you and feedback from friends, which is usually biased. You brought up a lot of good points in this and I'm definitely going to try and implement the tips you gave in to making my future pieces even better.

[Dance Dance Dance]

Review time.

The Good:
-You have some good initial ideas, and I know you're capable of executing them well.
-No big mixing issues that I can hear.

The Not-So-Good:
-This VERY obviously uses patterns, partially due to the lack of transitions. If you added in a few transitions (which could be done by extending a pattern a little bit so that it goes into the next part and/or having a lead-in to the next pattern), it would be quite a bit better.
-The kick isn't nearly loud enough for house. Even the moodcraft song had a clearer kick, if not a louder one: http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/liste n/481611 The problem here is partially due to the sub-bass interfering, I think. Another thing which could be causing a problem is the lack of a high end to the kick, which leads to a clearer initial hit. You might want to add a low velocity/volume hi-hat sound to the kick in a layer.
-NEED. MELODY. AND. VARIATION. I don't think I need to make that any clearer.
-Try varying the hi-hat a little bit more.

Overall: Yeah, I don't think there's too much more I can say about this one. It's alright. No big mixing issues, so that's a good thing. But man, I KNOW you're a better composer than this. :( How long did you spend on this song?

-Swint-
-Review Request Club-

BrokenDeck responds:

Well EDM is my weakest genre after all ^_^. Thanks for the review!

[We Don't Talk]

Here is your personal review for round 2 of the NGADM! Keep in mind, this review will be harsher than the round 1 review! I will be poking at songs more in each consecutive round, because it will naturally be more difficult to advance.

The Good:
-You have a good grasp of how to make catchy pop.
-The overall ideas are alright.
-The vocals are well-done, and you have a really nice voice. I like how you have echoes of the vocals in the background toward the end.
-Mix is just fine, I don't hear any problem with it.

The Not-So-Good:
-I'm sorry. This is generic in the extreme, and there's not really much of anything original about it. :< That's taking a LOT out of the score.
-Main melody is really really repetitive after hearing it for two minutes straight - or as a judge, more like 10 minutes straight, so really really REALLY REALLY REALLY repetitive.

Overall: There's not much I can comment on in this song. It just seems pretty dull and uninspired - far too generic. I'm going to have to give this a 6/10 for the negative points. It's well-produced, but repetition and... generic-ness..? make it very boring to listen to and not something I'd listen to over and over.