Here is your personal review for your round 1 submission! Remember that the score might be a little lower than I would normally give, I'm being a tad harsher than I'd normally be for the NGADM.
The Good:
-That's some awesome sound design.
-That's some great mixing.
-Well-placed FX.
-REALLY good buildup in the intro.
The Not-So-Good:
-First, the outro isn't overly good, just a SFX ringing out.
-Second, and this is the REALLY big thing. There's very little composition in this other than a few key changes and harmonies. While this song sounds great with all the effects and stuff, if you stripped it of its SFX and had just the notes, the song would be pretty bare and boring for a 5 minute song.
Overall: As great as this sounds, the composition is a huge problem, and I'll have to bring this down to a 7.5/10. Believe me, if your composition were better, you would be pretty much the best artist on newgrounds with all your skill in sound design.
Here is your personal review for your round 1 submission! Remember that the score might be a little lower than I would normally give, I'm being a tad harsher than I'd normally be for the NGADM.
The Good:
-First of all, you get a bonus point for finishing this in 2 days. Nice work!
-I like the synths you used for the most part, though they do get a bit harsh throughout the whole song.
-It's definitely well-made... trouce.
-Like the arpeggios in the middle, though I wish they went somewhere, moreso than what they did.
The Not-So-Good:
-Alright, going through the list. I really don't like the sidechain on the kick. It seems a bit excessive.
-The break at 1:42 is a bit awkward, I was really expecting it to fade back in as it faded out.
-The whole song is very, very samey.
-At 2:14-2:28, that highpass break would have been a lot better if it had more to it. Remember, this stuff has been done before - try making it more original!
-Outro could have been done a bit better rather than just letting it ring out.
Overall: Even for just two days, this could have been better. It's very repetitive and a bit harsh on the ears. With the extra point for making this in 2 days... you get a 6/10.
What you don't know is that I didn't strive for an original song, but rather a well-produced one. Coming up with an original melody AND a song to put it in within 2 days is really hard, you know.
You don't like my side-chaining. Well, that's just my style, matter of taste I guess.
I can also understand why you think my break is awkward, but again I guess it is a matter of taste ;P
Here is your personal review for your round 1 submission! Remember that the score might be a little lower than I would normally give, I'm being a tad harsher than I'd normally be for the NGADM.
Okay, before I get into the meat of the review, I'm going to have to comment on that little bit between you and glimpee. I know shit about music. I don't know shit about crafting synths and can't fully tell custom-made synths from presets. When I first heard this, I didn't know you made EVERY synth from scratch. The mix, I could hear the effort, but still.
Now, the review.
The Good:
-Your sounds are awesome. It's really chill and laid-back.
-I LOVE the nice calm section at around 2 minutes in. Appreciate the bird sounds in the background, they sound really natural and peaceful. Around there, it sounds more like a calming forest grove soundscape rather than a prog house track. Honestly, if you had made an entire song based off of that, I would really have loved that.
-The mix is great as I kinda said before the actual review.
-Transitions are great, I could feel what was coming before it actually came, which is a very good thing.
The Not-So-Good:
-Alright, gotta agree with glimpee on this one. At about a minute in, it really does need *some* kind of release better than what you had. As it is, immediately after that buildup there was pretty much nothing. Dissappointed me quite a bit.
-Now, the main thing that really, REALLY kills it is a very very common failing of progressive house tracks. "unce unce unce unce unce unce unce unce unce unce" There's a really common failing of progressive house tracks. There's a really common failing of progressive house tracks. In case that didn't illustrate it, I'll clear it up - waaaaay too repetitive. Sadly, this does fall prey to that. I understand what you were going for, and I understand that the intro is designed more for DJs in mind, but this is for the NGADM, right? Not as much for DJs to mix between other songs. What this song could really use is a bit more variation and a quicker buildup (or more to keep people interested while it's building up).
Overall: Yeah, I liked this, it has a groove like most progressive house/trance/whatever tracks have. But with the groove comes the other problem as I had said. Until there's more variation in the music and more ideas in it, I really don't have that much to comment on. Due to the insane amount of repetition repetition repetition repetition, I'm going to have to give this a 6/10. I do appreciate the effort in the mix, and hearing that you made all your own synths, I appreciate that as well. But mixing and sound design is only half of a song, the composition needs to also be really good to have a truly amazing song.
So, you asked me to review this, let's he- holy crap those are nice strings. Now I WANT to review this. Initiate review NOW.
THE GOOD:
-You spent more than a day on this! Good good. It shows almost immediately.
-I LOVE that percussion in the beginning, and at 0:15 and 0:21. Where did you get it? Because it's really nice.
-The strings are very nice-sounding in audio quality, though they could be improved a little bit. Sounds a bit like KKSlider60's strings, actually.
-Speaking of strings, their melodies are quite nice.
-Actually, check that. ALL the melodies are nice.
-The climactic hits at 0:51, 1:28, and 2:33 are very well-done, though I do have one nitpick with them that I'll get to later.
THE NOT-QUITE-AS-GOOD-IMPROVEMENT-STUFF-A ND-I-REALLY-NEED-TO-COME-UP-WITH-MORE -CREATIVE-NAMES-FOR-THE-GOOD-SECTION:
-First, since I was just talking about the climactic hits, I'll poke at them rather than compliment them this time. The first and second ones are alright, but the second and third are practically identical (or at least, without not knowing the patterns it sounds like that). This is mostly due to the melodies being extremely similar.
-Putting this in a separate bullet since it's kinda different. One important thing that classical songs do is change the melody, having at least two "themes" that sound obviously different. This can be done by using a different instrument, which makes it more obvious even if the themes themselves are similar in style, but if it's the same instrument, the second theme should be more different in style than the original one.
-The piano could be brought out a bit more at around 0:51, it's hard to hear.
-As much dynamic variance as there is in this song, it's very similar throughout, and sounds pretty much like the same thing. It IS a lot more variable than the other songs of yours that I've heard, fortunately, so that's good. As I said, the extra effort you spent on this shows.
-Damnit, there's no outro. Songs *need* outros rather than sounding like they just
end and obviously were using patterns.
Overall: I like it, it's a lot better than your previous works, though you do still have a lot to work on. :) The repetitiveness, the mixing, and your dynamics, mainly. The mixing isn't too bad, honestly - just some level work so everything can be heard.
-Swint
P.S. I made a cool classical-ish song too that sounds surprisingly irish. :D Mind poking at it yourself? http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/liste n/498854
Yeah, I'd guess that it's a bit repetitive. I write classical music like I write House, which basically repeats itself with slight variation. As for the mixing, I'm sure I need work on it. I did take out some mids on the samples, though, like you said, although the Violin at the beginning still bugs me. As for the outro, I agree. Most of my songs lack them.
Thanks again for reviewing and you have proven once again that people have right to call you a Review God.
Alright, since I FINALLY have enough spare time to review this, here you go.
THE GOOD:
-I like the jazzy harmonies.
-The 7/8 key signature is also fairly unusual for NG work, which makes it sound a lot better. Nice!
-The main melodies are really cool, they fit right in, and really give the Arabic feel.
-All of the individual sounds for the song sound very clean and nice, I really like the percussion.
-Speaking as a pianist, I like the piano part quite a bit.
-IT LOOPS. And loops really well, actually.
THE NOT-SO-GOOD:
-The piano part doesn't really change at all throughout the entire song, aside from adding chords periodically. As awesome as that piano part is, for a song that's 1:45 long, having it not change at all is a bit boring. In fact, this could also be said for some of the percussion as well.
-At around 1:03-1:04, that little phrase sounds a bit odd, ending unresolved.
-At 1:25, that phrase also ends unresolved with the same cymbal sound as at 1:04.
-Some of the instruments don't sound as realistic as they could. Generally it's the background instruments, which all seem to be playing at the same or a very similar velocity the entire way through. Could make that a bit better, increasing the velocity contrast as well as the timing of the notes slightly so that it sounds more like a real person is playing them. I only take note of this because you specifically included "authentic-sounding song" in the description, so I might as well try to help make it sound more authentic.
-There's just not enough variation. Mainly stemming from the constant piano groove, there could be a second kind of section with a slightly different feel. Considering the other song of yours I've heard, I know that you could get a different kind of groove in here at one point to give it some more variation.
Overall: This is great - better than most of the things on newgrounds by far, it's creative and sounds nice. I really didn't have too much to critique (yeah, look at me saying that with a good 1300 characters of critique), and I have to say I thoroughly enjoyed this. Good work!
Hi Swint, I'm glad you enjoyed, furthermore that you actually took up my request, I was in the impression you had turned it down!
In any case, here's my response, as usual:
THE GOOD:
"I like the jazzy harmonies."
Hah, glad to know you like the Jazz flare, it's my favorite part :3
"-The 7/8 key signature is also fairly unusual for NG work, which makes it sound a lot better. Nice!"
Wow, you managed to identify the metric? I didn't write it anywhere, didn't think people would actually notice/care!
"The main melodies are really cool, they fit right in, and really give the Arabic feel."
That's the authentic part, it's what I took the longest to make. I knew that the eastern region used a much different internal feel in their songs, which made it really hard for a westerner like me. :P
"All of the individual sounds for the song sound very clean and nice, I really like the percussion."
Wow, that's probably the biggest compliment I've received, as this is the first song I made 100% by hand, and not through notation processing!
"Speaking as a pianist, I like the piano part quite a bit."
Glad to hear the part being approved by the authority. :3
"IT LOOPS. And loops really well, actually."
I actually find it hard to think how people who list their track as a loop can't even be bothered to take 5 minutes to actually arrange their song like so or even make a smooth transition to avoid clipping, and yet I see this so often. This baffles me. Also, thanks for the compliment. :P
THE NOT-SO-GOOD:
"The piano part doesn't really change at all throughout the entire song, aside from adding chords periodically. As awesome as that piano part is, for a song that's 1:45 long, having it not change at all is a bit boring. In fact, this could also be said for some of the percussion as well."
Ah, yes, that's always been an issue with me, and it's an issue I'm currently working on fixing with live MIDI performance. I always think of my songs as templates rather than actual performances. I always write my music with a Jazz approach in mind, sort of like the Lead Sheet/Fake Book approach, that is, to write a base groove onto which to interpret and perform. Hope that clears what I'm trying to say. :S
"At around 1:03-1:04, that little phrase sounds a bit odd, ending unresolved."
Yeah, I botched up this transition. I'm actually quite fond of unresolving melodies, but I guess this wasn't the best approach.
"At 1:25, that phrase also ends unresolved with the same cymbal sound as at 1:04."
Again, I like unresolving melodies. Though in this case, this is an Oud solo, so I feel it's free to the performer to do what he must, because he can. (in this case, me :3)
"Some of the instruments don't sound as realistic as they could. [...]"
That's not actually where I was coming from when referring to "authentic". I was actually talking about the authenticity of the groove, as in authentic ethnicity.
As for the realism, that's unfortunately due to my noobness on the new equipment I'm working on, though if you would be so kind as to point out which ones exactly you're referring to, it would be incredibly useful!
"There's just not enough variation. [...]"
There are no words truer than this. The problem is that I got lazy, and I figured that 1:45 was the perfect time to make a loop. Maybe one day I'll pull my head out of my arse and actually finish this, as well as most of my other stuff. :\
Once again, Thank you SO much for this ridiculously in-depth review, And don't you think I forgot about that review I owe you! :P
In any case, I'm almost out of characters, so I'll end it here!
Here you go. I did promise, though I'm a little late... my bad for that.
THE GOOD:
-The intro sounds pretty darn awesome. I love the sweeping sound you used, and the pads were also pretty nice.
-The main tune is also fairly good.
-Break at 1:30. Yes. Just yes.
-The effect at 1:44 is also really great.
THE NOT-SO-GOOD:
-At about 0:45 and 0:55, I didn't particularly like how the tune just vanished and then appeared again, it definitely felt like something was missing when that hit.
-When the instrument comes in at 1:15 along with the louder cymbal, the entire mix gets a bit too loud - it's hard to make out the other instruments without trying fairly hard. Not a good thing.
-Throughout the entire thing, there's only really one chord sequence, it would have been nice if that were varied.
-Along with the chords' lack of variation, the same can also be said for the melody. It would make this song a LOT better to have at least two different melodies so that there can be more of a 'B section'. Variation is a good thing.
Overall:
I love the instruments, the pads, the effects you had used, it sounds really cool. My main issue with this song is the lack of variation, making it kind of just sit there and feel meh. Really the best way I can put it. If you added in just a little more variation, though, this would be really cool.
THE GOOD:
-I like the little reversed effects you've used throughout.
-The background pad sounds really nice and deep.
-The synth at 0:42-0:55 onward is also pretty nice. So are the two at 1:08 and 1:13 (I REALLY like the one at 1:13 onward).
THE NOT-SO-GOOD:
-First big thing - the timings are somewhat off, though I do commend you for not having it in the classic 4/4 beat and 4-measure section style.
-Second big thing. The drums are very low quality - there are a number of free sample packs online, you might want to check them out. The drums you have now sound like either default drums or DSK drums.
-Third big thing, the biggest one - mixing. The overall song is far too loud, and there's quite a bit of clipping. There's also a little bit of distortion, mainly from the kick. Try equalizing it a bit more so the frequencies don't interrupt each other, and also try compressing some of the instruments.
-Fourth problem - There's not really a full 'melody', it's mainly arpeggios and the chord sequence. Try adding in some kind of melody that people can hear - it's one of the things that make songs more catchy and helps people to remember them, which is a good thing.
Overall:
Sounds nice, but there's no melody and the mixing could be improved a lot. Those are the two biggest things, the other two are lower priority. I have to admit, I liked this, but for the reasons I had said above, it's not something I'd listen to over and over again by choice.
Thanks! My drums Ive worked a lot with but canâEUTMt seem to be getting the sounds I want, I just make them in FL and bring them over to Ableton, I honestly didnâEUTMt see this track as being the best cause I made it whilst working on another project I just felt like I needed to put something out there XD but I get what your saying on a lot of it, most of these songs tend to be songs I donâEUTMt mind letting people download, songs on Soundcloud I think have a better overall feel to it, thanks for the review!
Electronic/ambient artist. I started making music more than random scribblings in the fall of 2010, around the end of November. I think I've come a long way since then!
-Rupture- 
LO - Rush Hour (NGADM'12) 
Sonik - Sy's Law (NGADM) 
Breath of Air 
-*}CaSH{*- Mild-Arabic 
Offgore - Wired 
Miss PutterFly 
