SkyeWint's audio Reviews on Newgrounds

[NGAUC Finals!]

So, you've made it to the final round. You've clearly proven yourself. Time to judge by NGADM standards - scoring will be harsher as a result. In any case, here are some pointers for improvement.

The Good:
-This is quite the odd introduction. I like the gating on the noise there. Also liking the chord progressions.
-Oooh, watery wobbly SFX around 0:45 onward. I really like watery FX. You sly devil.
-Very nice reverse effect leading into 1:30.

The Not-so-good:
-The drums and melody in the intro are a bit weird there. The melody mainly seems fairly directionless.
-Around 1:08 onward the mixing gets fairly muddy there, simply because there's too much. Try a bit of EQing with a spectrometer.
-1:30 seems extremely out of place and in a completely different idea than the previous section. At around 1:50 it seems to become clear that it *is* from a different piece. In fact, it sounds very much out of tune with the chord progressions.
-Muddy mixing and more out-of-tune chimes around 3 minutes in.

Final score: 8.4/10. I had a bit of a hard time deciding on this score. However, it's very unique and interesting. I liked it a lot. If the mixing and the out-of-tune sections were fixed up this would be an extremely solid piece of music for the contest. Good work!

TimerClock14 responds:

First of all, thanks a ton! I'm glad you liked the watery FX! TaintedLogic pointed out the same thing as far as 1:30 being out of place and I'm definitely looking to improve on that.

My biggest question to you is when you say the mix is muddy where in specific is it? Usually I'm worried about how my mix sounds in the low end because I don't have equipment that lets me hear very well in that 0-100Hz range. I'm kind of confused when you say "because there's too much." Maybe it's because I've been listening to it for too long but it doesn't sound muddy to me in the mids or highs.

[Racing the Sun]

So, you've made it to the final round. You've clearly proven yourself. Time to judge by NGADM standards - scoring will be harsher as a result. In any case, here are some pointers for improvement.

The Good:
-Whoah this is a warm mix, though it really fits. The drums are super clear in this too which is great (aside from the toms but those are a bitch to fit).
-Once again, great chord progression and overall organization of your piece.
-Great drumming in this! It sounds extremely natural.

The Not-so-good:
-Well, this is really warm mixing, but there's one thing that could benefit from being more bright - the NES sounds. They're very much buried as-is. Heck, even the cymbals are somewhat buried as-is - it sounds almost like everything was filtered down and/or put into a lower bitrate. You even use some of the higher end sound later around 3:30.
-I think I mentioned this last round, but you could really benefit from having more of a clear melody. You also have all of that high-end space in your mix which you could use for it.
-Ending ends. Not very interesting ending and not much of anything indicating that there will even *be* an ending aside from the fact that it had been playing the same idea quite a few times and the timestamp on the music player.

Final score: 8.5/10. Very good piece, but not quite as good as your second round piece. You're a really good guitar player - some excellent electric or acoustic guitar runs in it would be absolutely fantastic and really lend some extra interest to your pieces, even as good as they are now.

thebitterroost responds:

Thanks for the review! I agree on the melody aspect for sure. My songwriting has always been in the context of a band before, so I'm not as good at writing an entire song myself yet, but that's why I'm here! Even in the band context I rarely played anything but drums (that may be why they sound natural, that's actually my kit, lol), so I'm glad that my guitar playing isn't too terrible. The warm, filtery sound is likely the tape saturation plugin I put on the mix bus to give it that 80s/early-90s rock record vibe. Not everyone's cup of tea, and it definitely could use some more high-end presence. Very good insights, I hope to put em into practice. Cheers!

[Skyline]

So, you've made it to the final round. You've clearly proven yourself. Time to judge by NGADM standards - scoring will be harsher as a result. In any case, here are some pointers for improvement.

The Good:
-Very nice pad at the intro. Drums are really interesting and fairly unique compared to standard trance that I've heard.
-Cool panning effect in the open high hats.
-Really cool overall sound and great atmosphere.
-Great pad comping and rhythmic stuff going on around 4:28.

The Not-so-good:
-Not too much of a melody. In fact, not much here other than sound design. Don't get me wrong, I *love* sound design, but this is basically the same kind of sound design without much change in mood throughout.

Final score: 8.8/10. Basically, this is excellent for all the content that it has. It just needs more than chord progression and trance sound design. Melodic and harmonic lines as well as some more clear rises and falls in tension would make this piece absolutely fantastic.

PolarTrance responds:

Thank you :3

The pad is actually the most simple sound I made in the whole song and originally it was much more complex, but I scrapped that version :D

The drums are what they are, because of swing~ Most of the sounds have gotten swing added, but kicks and rides have not.

I don't know what to say about the melody thing though. That sort of stuff kinda just tends to go in to what I like and adding melodies and harmonies afterwards is hard to me(since I already made it in to something I like). I'm not quite sure if adding more is going to work for this song, but I definitely keep that in mind when working on new songs. And I was planning on working this song a bit more, so if that stuff works then it will be featured in the new song.

Thank you again for the judgings, may it turn me in to a goddamn sexual trancesaurus.

[Bamboozle]

So, you've made it to the final round. You've clearly proven yourself. Time to judge by NGADM standards - scoring will be harsher as a result. In any case, here are some pointers for improvement.

The Good:
-Ah, of course. Straight classical piece. This reminds me a lot of the Invention pieces.
-Very interesting and excellent chord progressions. I very much like it.
-Good mixing.

The Not-so-good:
-Honestly, this is very well-done, but the biggest problem with it is pretty simple. This is basically a series of chords with straight runs to transition between them. It's very pretty, but very difficult to discern any kind of theme aside from the chord progression - which isn't particularly recognizable enough to make a clear theme. The biggest thing this needs is a change in mood and speed of notes. As it is, it sounds essentially like the same thing the whole way through, with 3 changes - one in instrument, and one in chord progression to something different in the middle.

Final score: 8.5/10. Gripe aside, this is a pretty solid piece - it's simply less composition competition material so much as it is particularly well-composed exercise book material. And believe me. I would absolutely love to have this kind of stuff in my old piano exercise books in order to practice my runs and finger positioning.

Phonometrologist responds:

Lol you know your classical because it's straight up an Invention piece, or did you just notice the tags? This is actually not that harsh of a review from you. I agree with the criticisms. I'm going to re-upload this with more melodic/rhythmic content from different instruments. Probably not going to change the mood or the speed, but I did find the arrangement to be a little too naked which makes the middle section a bit uninteresting to me. I wanted it to have a little more layers and therefore become chaotic to give it less of a classical feel/"exercise book material." If I had more music than 2:32, I probably would heed to the advice of changing the tempo a bit but I don't desire more of this. Thanks for the review.

[An Alternate Solution]

So, you've made it to the final round. You've clearly proven yourself. Time to judge by NGADM standards - scoring will be harsher as a result. In any case, here are some pointers for improvement.

The Good:
-Interesting panning and gating in the beginning. This is definitely "miscellaneous".
-Great arps and a nice bass, though it gets very buried around 1:10.
-Overall very creative use of sounds.
-Oh, fantastic ending. I love how it shows the melody.

The not-so-good:
-Mixing is okay, but it's not anything special. Things get somewhat buried, especially around 1:47 and after.
-Not too much of a theme, though this does have a very central chord progression and ideas. Seems very much like organized chaos.

Final score: 8.2/10. Absolute biggest thing bringing this down is the mixing. Improve that and you'd have a very solid piece. Beyond that try to have things vary a little bit more, and change up the mood throughout. Definitely an alternate idea, though! Unrelated: This immediately reminded me of alternativesolution. http://alternativesolution.newgrounds.com/ maybe you two should say hello to each other.

OmegaP responds:

Thanks for the review SkyeWint! I think you really hit the nail of the head when you said the "mixing is okay, but nothing special." I felt the same way about it, it works but I didn't really knock it out of the park, so to say. I think that I tried to jam to many things into a space and I did not let all the instruments have their own little space to breath and live.

[A New Future]

So, you've made it to the final round. You've clearly proven yourself. Time to judge by NGADM standards - scoring will be harsher as a result. In any case, here are some pointers for improvement.

The Good:
-Very very nice guitar initially. It's super chill. Same can be said for the piano. In fact, this is just an all-around excellent intro.
-0:37 Aw yeah. This is so pretty.
-1:50 has excellent delays on the guitar. They're extremely beautiful.
-Overall all your instruments are seriously really clean and lovely. Excellent atmosphere.

The Not-so-good:
-Well, the mixing starts to suffer at around 1:05 due to being overcompressed and just generally overly stressed. This is pretty clear that it'll happen a little before. Every mix that's overcompressed seems to have the common trait of seeming to "wobble" a little bit, particularly around the extreme panning sides.
-You have this main melody. And a lot of meloddic content. But the flute is basically just soloing over the entire thing. If you had one recognizable melodic idea which was reiterated towards the end and the beginning, this piece would be absolutely fantastic.

Final score: 9.0/10. Only points of improvement really are the mixing and having more of a theme than the guitar arpeggios. With good mixing and a good melodic theme, this could easily get a 10. A bit more ear candy bits wouldn't be out of the question either. Excellent job.

NyxTheShield responds:

Mixing was a bit rushed, i admit it (i finished the track like 10 minutes before deadline HAHAHAHA) but i can swear for the love of everything that's sane that i didn't use a single limiter or compressor in my mix aside from the acoustic guitar :CCCCCCCC

Thanks for the feedback <3

[Breathe]

So, you've made it to the final round. You've clearly proven yourself. Time to judge by NGADM standards - scoring will be harsher as a result. In any case, here are some pointers for improvement.

The Good:
-Well, this is certainly in your style. Very cinematic, and nice mixing.
-Fantastic choir effect and usage.
-Excellent classical atmospheres, and overall excellent instruments.

The Not-so-good:
-The strings sound much more like soundfonts in this piece, for some reason. Perhaps it's that they basically always use the same velocity and are fairly quantized. One suggestion I have for classical music, especially if you're without a midi keyboard, is to turn off the snap-to feature (automatic quantization) and instead put them in without rigid beat markers. That way, things can sound far more organic and realistic. Also try to vary the dynamics so that they're more natural. You do this in the second half, so I'm somewhat surprised at that.
-I'm really wondering where a theme is in this. In terms of displaying fantastic compositional capability, you definitely show your stuff with harmonies, but I can't help but notice the lack of any consistent idea throughout all of this. In classical music, and in most modern music, the most impressive pieces tend to have an ostinato that repeats as well as some kind of main melodic theme. This theme can repeat in multiple transpositions and with alternate harmonies (major -> minor or vice versa is insanely common). This would improve the quality of this piece dramatically.

Final score: 7.0/10. This piece has excellent mixing, excellent harmonies, and generally excellent instruments, but really needs more realism in the strings (some other instruments too, but the strings are by far the most obvious) and a solid thematic element.

DSykMusic responds:

Thanks for the review SkyeWint! I'll be paying more attention to dynamics/velocities as I move forward.

[Some of My Foolishness]

So, you've made it to the final round. You've clearly proven yourself. Time to judge by NGADM standards - scoring will be harsher as a result. In any case, here are some pointers for improvement.

The Good:
-THe fact that you made this in one afternoon is excellent.
-All acoustic lo-fi instruments are awesome.
-Excellent mixing and recording of vocals. Everything is crisp and clear.
-Very beautiful guitar solo.
-I actually really like the lyrics. Unfortunately, it's hard to pay attention to them in the face of...

The Not-so-good:
-There are a LOT of off-key notes in the singing. And I do mean a lot. Given you didn't have much time, that's somewhat forgivable - but it would be excellent if you could go back over this and touch it up.
-During the guitar solo, try panning one to each side rather than having them overlap on the right. While that was nice, it covered things up.
-Mixing starts to fall apart around 2:08 simply because there are so many instruments. THe strings are fine, by the way. They're basically just an underlying pad.
-Ending is meh. It just ends. This could really use a bit more of a nicer ending.

Final score: 6.5/10. Incredible for the amount of time you had. Not quite as good for a contest, though.

Ceevro responds:

One does what one can, I'm afraid. Yes, given more time, I probably would have gotten to all those little things...and I realize how those little things can add up. What you heard was a simple, honest track.

[Panic Attack [NGAUC]]

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

-If this was all recorded live, that's pretty good - particularly if it was a one-take recording.
-Badass theme to come in at first. I like it.
-Could use a bit more syncing between the drums and the guitars - the kick drum seems a bit out of time. Or the guitars do. Or something. It's not sync'd up properly.
-Kick and snare are definitely too quiet.
-Needs a bit more of a breakdown than what happens at 1:50.
-Nice ear candy after 2:10 with the chords.
-Tempo speeeeeeeeeeeeeeed! Impressive that this is a recording for certain here. Especially if the drums are too.
-And... it ends. Abruptly. Without conclusion. :(

Final score: 7.5/10

TSRBand responds:

Thanks a lot for the feedback! Lots of good points, on reflection I'm definitely feeling more could be done with that half-hearted breakdown as you mentioned. I'm glad you're digging the tempo which is a little more varied in this round, but I will clarify the drums are programmed so it's not as flash as it might seem :) Unfortunately, I'm not in able to record a real kit at this time (especially at this speed!)

[_Clouds]

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

-Excellent windy sounds, arpeggios, and plucks in the beginning. Very pretty and sky-sounding.
-The melody in this is aaaaaall over the place, and it's pretty sweet. I like it. That said, it's a bit too all over the place, and could use a bit more consistency.
-Dem subs, man. Those are sweet. Your drums are nice and punchy too, which I appreciate.
-Not sure what the sound effect at 2:19 is, but I wish it were louder. There's a lot of ear candy here which could be louder tbh.
-Good ending - it concludes very well.

Final score: 8.5/10

trunotfals responds:

Thank for your review and I'm honestly very surprised at how much you guys liked this piece! Not that I doubt my capabilities, but this was the FIRST time I got really serious about my mixing. Most of my time spent making this piece was watching tutorial after tutorial on sidechaining, mixing with multiband compressors, EQ tricks, etc. etc. etc.

I'm glad my hard work payed off and I think I have a pretty good idea on how to master from now on. It's taken me a long time to finally make a piece where the Subs can shine, yet it doesnt drown out everything else. I'm so glad you appreciated that too. And I like what you said about my melodies to be honest. One thing I try to do in my music is well, write kind of "soloistic melodies" I guess I could take this idea and make it more clear that that's my intention, I suck at writing super catchy melodies. And when I succeed at it, it takes up a lot of time and effort to do so. SO I kind of mixed those two ideas here and tried to write a floaty/soloistic melody. I've always kind of wrote "solos" instead of melodies, inspired from FEED ME, because thats just my style i guess. I can hear a wonderful wailing synth solo easier than a super catchy repetitive melody, and I like that my EDM ends up being different because of that.

And I agree there is a lot of ear candy, the reason im so suprised you liked my mixing, is because there WAS so much going on, and i honestly got way over my head there because when it came to mixing, there was a lot of my intent that was missed. However, the final product was more than satisfactory to me. I remember after my final master (it took me about 5 attempts) I was listening with my friend about to ask their opinion, the moment the sub hits the first time, just before the chill drop, i was like DAMN. For the first time my mix sounded so full and intense, and luscious. I absically was like IM NOT TOUCHING THE MIXER OR MAXIMUS AT ALL WHATSOEVER I NEED THE SOUND TO STAY THAT WAY.

TLDR; Thank you so much for appreciating this piece. I've never put so much work into a song. Ever. I'm so happy to have made the Knockout Round.