Bounce down those tracks and keep going. I believe in you bro.
It's pretty great so far, I just feel like it's a little too sparse in between the bits that have interest (the synth in the first half and the "dubstep" (lol) in the second half) - the ambient sections don't hold my interest as much as everything else does. That would be my biggest complaint. My other problem is that the "dubstep" section seems a little too sparse. It's quite hard to explain why this is, but it feels weirdly empty (even though it's exploding with crazy noise). I think that with more things going on (little melodic flits and pads to fill out space perhaps) it would come together better.
The synth solo in the beginning sounds great to me. If you pressed me I'd say that the melody is a touch more undirected than I would prefer. Like 2:35 really sounds on the verge of something, but is slightly off in terms of rhythm I think. I think if you fiddled with the rhythm it could be better. I like the blues notes.
That synth lead is a little too quiet but other than that the mix is perfect in my eyes. Nice thumpy kicks and heavy base. :)
The sound design (or should I say effect design) is amazing. I don't even know what's going on in the drops but it sounds amazing. The way it takes the same instrument but brings to the front different frequencies of that instrument is great.
On the fence between 8 and 9 but 8 is to low for such sexy sound design so 9 it is!
P.S. Fadeout ending is best ending so no points docked. :3
(Actually that's not true... it does sound pretty incomplete - probably because it is :p I wonder if this is how my songs sound with a fadeout ending. O_O)
Spare is right, I guess. Different things we enjoy though, since I like more ambient bits. :P
The dubsteppy bit is kinda empty, though I'm guessing you mean more after 4:13. If that is where you meant, then I'd entirely agree - that's about where I ran out of ideas. If you want more things going on before that, I'm going to have to get you to try and mix that monster yourself, because it was a nightmare already.
Melodies and stuff weren't really my focus at all, I was almost entirely focused on the sound design and atmosphere.
Sound design stuff you're gonna hate me for, because it's basically 3xosc plus some effects on it like a bitcrusher and waveshaping. :D Oh also some other samples of cardboard I had lying around, I could get those to you - shoot me a message on Skype or something.
>I wonder if this is how my songs sound with a fadeout ending.
Yes. It is if there's no conclusion. It also sounds like that for all those techno songs that just end on a pattern that's meant to loop. Do you see why I dislike fadeout endings now ;_;
I really like the vibe and chords, I'm getting a total tropical feel from the marimbas and the easygoing progression - but I have serious difficulty listening to this all the way through because the buzzy bass is so abrasively loud! Could you turn it down a little?
Thanks for the tip, "john" ;D I'm experimenting with widening my bass synths, and trying to improve sound quality, so I've started to EQ the highs on the bass more, which in this case makes it buzzier.
Glad you pointed out the marimbas, that was kinda what I was going for. In contrast to the spacey feel.
I took down the bass a little, it was a little too loud which got a little annoying.
Thanks again for listening and leaving a helpful review, much appreciated!
I just want to talk about melody, so that's what I'm going to do. THE REVIEW SYSTEM WON'T HOLD ME BACK!!!
One thing that's important is that most melodic phrases are legato, which means that if you're writing a melody, and it's a coherent idea, and it's played on an instrument that can manage it (not e.g. guitar) there shouldn't be any gaps of silence in it, in general. Just listen to a singer in your favorite pop song - they slur all their words together so that the phrases are legatoed properly. I was hearing a lot of gaps in your melodies, which is really jarring and might make people think that they're disjointed.
But even still, that won't help you get much better at melodies, it just fixes some minor issues. Now I'm going to tell you how to actually write good melodies:
Go and take ye favorite instrument (I seem to remember you being a fan of the cello, though I can't figure out why I think that lol). Bring it near your computer and play some of your favorite songs on the computer, and see if you can play the melody on your instrument as the song plays. DON'T try to get it perfect, just keep going on to new songs.
In this way you'll start to build a subconscious understanding of how melodies work. This is important because writing melodies isn't a conscious skill. afaik great musicians don't sit down and think about music theory in order to write good melodies - they just sorta feel it out subconsciously to see how the melody wants to go. It is this skill that you're developing.
It will take you a very long time to master this skill (I'm still practicing every day) but you will probably notice differences in your melodic approach almost immediately (I did).
Aside from that, I have one other very simple tip (which I even fail to follow a lot.. lol). MAKE YOUR MELODIES MORE REPETITIVE. It sounds crazy because a lot of the time people are like "zomg musical repetition is the root of all evil!!!" However, if you listen to some pop song you like, you'll realize almost immediately that the melodies are REALLY repetitive. Not only do they repeat entire phrases over and over, but the phrases themselves are really repetitive - like they may play some notes, and then play them again slightly lower or something.
Seriously, sit down one day and listen, really listen and analyze the melodies in some of your favorite tracks. You'd be amazed how repetitive they are - and yet how successful that makes them!
Last, I have a challenge for you, which kinda ties into what I've been saying up above. I want you to do a song with theme and variation. Take some melodic theme - it can be as short as a couple of notes - and then then make a bigger melody out of reusing it, modulating it up or down, or playing it under different chords. Not only is there a ton of space to explore here (you're basically looking at the foundation of classical music here), but it'll teach you to make your melodies more coherent.
Anyway... I kinda 100% disregarded your song here but I hope this is more helpful than a piecewise dissection of your track (LSD, BO and LE kinda got that in the bag anyways).
Final thing - melody writing is HARD and you shouldn't let this get you down. You're doing pretty great for being 16. Go listen to my tracks when I was 16 (in 2007) if you want to feel much better about yourself hahahahahah
Thanks so much, Johnfn! :D I really appreciate your advice about the melodies. For some reason, the mixing got really screwed up when I tried incorporating some more legato elements into the piece, and I agree it is a little too pizzicato-esque. I've been playing the cello since I was 9, btw! ;D Thank you so much for all the advice on making good melodies. I'll try experimenting with that as soon as I have the time, which reminds me: DANG IT, JOHN!!! Don't you know it's midnight in Boston and I should really finish studying for my Biology midterms! ...oh, wait, of course you don't know. You're not psychic. I forgot. Sorry....
No, but seriously, thank you again for the extremely helpful advice. Don't be too hard on your 16-year-old self, btw. I have a feeling DAWs weren't as advanced then as they are now.
Thanks again! ^^
Now then, the structure of mitochondria... ;)
Another awesome piece. I'm going to say something more substantive here because I copped out on my last review hahahah
This song is just filled with a lot of awesome ideas. I'm going to list my favorite here: The end of the melody at :27 really caught me, because it seems like it's directionless but then it is justified really nicely at the end. Dat arp at :41 !!! (Reminds me of gerudo valley from OoT!) The beautiful higher range piano at 1:08.
Minor nitpicks. The piano seems to have been EQ'd weirdly, like it has no bass at all. I think with some more powerful bass this would be a little better. It's really quiet, just crank up the gain somewhere.
Slightly more substantive thoughts: Well, you called it jumpy because of the left hand, but I actually feel like jumpy adequately describes the entire piece, which may not be a good thing. It feels like it moves between great ideas a little too fast, like an overenthusiastic friend excited to show me things - I almost don't have enough time to appreciate the last thing by the time I get to the next one. Also, the great ideas are scattered in with some ideas that aren't quite as great.
I think this is an easy thing to fix - just make the song a little more repetitive! (How often have I given that advice?) If you were to repeat your good ideas, I think the song would flow better. I also have this problem where you're going between moods too fast, like it goes from sad -> mysterious -> open and happy and then back in any variation really rapidly. Allowing repetition to stretch out the arrangement of the song could help here, too.
The other thing I wanted to point out is that the chord progression is quite tricky to get a grasp on. Actually, now that I relisten, there is no repeating chord progression! Maybe this is why I was having a problem... haha. I guess it's again a problem of lack of repetition then...
Anywho... great work. I complained a lot but really (as evidenced by my score) I think the piece is great and your composition is really inventive. This puts you solidly on my list of people to keep an eye out for ;-)
=> Yeah, I like that place too; when I came up with it (quite long ago now) I remember being pretty happy with it.
"Dat arp at :41 !!! (Reminds me of gerudo valley from OoT!)"
=> That is probably my favorite part! I love Gerudo Valley, so it might be that some element of it has snuck into this piece :D
"The beautiful higher range piano at 1:08"
=> It's funny that you like this part, since it is actually one of the worse parts imo, but that might be because of the poor mixing :D
"Well, you called it jumpy because of the left hand, but I actually feel like jumpy adequately describes the entire piece, which may not be a good thing. It feels like it moves between great ideas a little too fast, like an overenthusiastic friend excited to show me things - I almost don't have enough time to appreciate the last thing by the time I get to the next one. Also, the great ideas are scattered in with some ideas that aren't quite as great."
=> I agree with you on every point. The fact that the transitions are so sudden and that the song lacks repetitivity are also reasons for the composition's name :) When I made this song, I spent no time on caring about actual arrangement, I just let my hands follow their own will, and took every idea they gave me without qustion (tip: one shouldn't always do this). Ofc, that is just running away from the criticism haha :D
"I think this is an easy thing to fix - just make the song a little more repetitive! "
=> You know, with all the different parts in this song, I could at least double, probably triple the length of this song, without it getting too iterative. I mean, the beginning is never brought back! The only things that repeat, are 1: that jumpy left hand. 2. that odd transition at 0:50 and at the very end. I might follow your advice and expand upon this some day!
And yes, I've noticed from the previous reviews that the mood switches very abruptly too! I actually had some difficulty realizing this myself, since I wasn't really (if I recall correctly) in any special mood when I made this song; I was simply feeling creative. So whenever I listen to this song, the only thing going through my head is: oh, it's this song. That is almost sad... This might be a good song for people with short attention spans though XD?
"Minor nitpicks. The piano seems to have been EQ'd weirdly, like it has no bass at all. I think with some more powerful bass this would be a little better. It's really quiet, just crank up the gain somewhere."
=> Actually I don't think it's the EQ, I think it's some other thing I used (Probably too much air and too little bass in UpStereo). What I should have done though, is EQ the lower register of the song, so you're still right. I didn't think about it, but now that you mention it, there is pretty much no real bass sound in this :D
"The other thing I wanted to point out is that the chord progression is quite tricky to get a grasp on. Actually, now that I relisten, there is no repeating chord progression! Maybe this is why I was having a problem... haha. I guess it's again a problem of lack of repetition then..."
=> Oh, you noticed :D Well, almost. There is actually some hidden repeted chord progression, but it's pretty subtle. Well, if one wants to be nitpicky, many of them are variations of the same chord. That is, F might be replaced with F7 or so on.
In the beginning this progression is played twice: D minor, Bb (flat, I mean), C, F and A. However, the time given to each chord varies a little. If you count the right hand you might make those chords D minor add 9, and so on, giving the illusion of no progression.
Using the same rule, the one progression that repeats the most is: D, Eb, F and Gm.
The only other progression that repeats is: Gm, Eb, F, D.
All the other parts use those same chords as well, and the A is completely forgotten D: Which is dumb, because some A's would really be cool >:( Well, at one point there is an Ab, but that doesn't even fit too well!!!
Ha, now who is rambling XD Sorry for that, I went slightly off topic. Also, there are better ways of explaining that, but my knowledge about music theory is very lacking :)
I'm being even more nitpicky than you! Basically, you are right. There is not much repeting chord progression in this song :'D
"Anywho... great work. I complained a lot but really (as evidenced by my score) I think the piece is great and your composition is really inventive. This puts you solidly on my list of people to keep an eye out for ;-)"
=> Wow, thank you so much, I really appreciate it! I don't really see it as complaining, since you were right about every "complaint" as well! I'm glad to see that you enjoy the odd music that I produce! And sorry for the long reply... When I start writing, I don't easily stop :)
Man this is even better than my piece. I feel like I should write a lot here because you usually write a good deal but honestly its just great and I can't say too much more. I regret not coming by earlier.
You play piano really well btw. 5 years paid off. :D
Heyyyy!!!
Thanks for checking my stuff out, and for writing a review! It's much appreciated :D
"Better than my piece."
=> Then again, your piece was a real improvisation! This song was simply based on one, so I could think much more about how I wanted things to sound. Also, I actually like Snowy Night more than I like my composition. The melody in your song is much better imo :p
"I feel like I should write a lot ... it's just great"
=> First of all, thank you! And I'm just happy you decided to drop by! It's not easy to write reviews for all kinds of songs, and I often find that piano music is one of the most difficult 'genres' to write long reviews for :)
"I regret not coming by earlier"
=> Well there's no need to do that :') I was happily surprised to see a review from you now, so the time doesn't really matter ;)
Aside from that, thanks once more for complimenting my piano skills; I too think that the years of playing have paid off :'D
This is amazing. The composition is so so so great. For some reason I'm getting final fantasy vibes a little, it has that dark moody jrpg vibe a little.
The only reason I didn't give it a 10 is because the middle section with the arps felt a little mechanical and technical and jarred from the really emotional feel of the opening and final sections.
Ahah "Nostalgia Dreams" is an amazing name for a song. (It's so good that I want to make a song called nostalgic dreams now.) This, however, sounds nothing like nostalgic dreams. It sounds like I'm awake and excited! :D
So lets get the good stuff out of the way so that I can complain more. I love complaining. The composition is pretty great overall. I like the overall melody and the final coda thing at the end is excellent in that we've been building towards it the whole time. It feels like a coherent and complete song, not just a string of different ideas (which I sorta said last time).
Honestly I only care about composition and melody and arrangement, so you're pretty much good. (You can think of the first 4 stars as for composition and the final one as for technical stuff, even though that's not true.) Still, there are a lot of technical problems with this song which detract from my enjoyment of the composition, so let's just go through the technical side and I'll point out some offenders.
Mixing: The beat sorta disappears towards the end. Cranking up the beat and making everything else a little quiet is probably the single biggest single thing you could do to improve this song.
Piano at 1:34: You should to vary the velocities on the notes. Right now it sounds like a robot is playing it, which is bad. Tweak the velocities to make it sound like a human is playing it. It sounds simple (and it is simple) but, if done right, it will add SO MUCH expressivity to the piano. I was amazed the first time I did it.
Trumpet sounds fake. I don't blame you. I never use trumpets because good trumpet soundfonts (that don't cost millions) are practically nonexistent.
Song sounds disjointed. This is a big one, so pay attention. Currently when people listen to this song they can't get into it, because it kinda jerks you around. This means you should work on your transitions. Consider the transition at 1:29. There's no indication that a transition is coming up at all, and then suddenly boom crash and a new instrument. This is really jarring. Put in a little drum fill before 1:29, or do some sort of lead in into the new section, and the transition will flow much better. Do this throughout the entire song and it will flow way better and be easier to get into the groove of. (If you want more on transitions, go talk to SkyeWintrest lolz.)
Too many instruments moving at the same time: Am I really about to tell someone they have too many melodies when I do even worse things in my own songs? Answer: yes. hahahah. Passages like 1:38 feel very 'unstable' (describing music is hard) because so many instruments are moving simultaneously. If you made the bass simpler I think the whole thing would 'stabilize'. Usually when I want many melodies going at the same time I follow some rules:
1. One focal point - It should be pretty obvious which melody you want your listener to follow, because it's the loudest. The rest should be quieter.
2. "weaving" - make one melody have gaps in it, and then bring in the other melody during those gaps. You don't have to do this, but it helps.
3. separation - Don't put two different simultaneous melodies too close to each other in frequency - they should never overlap. e.g. 1:33 in this song. Though there isn't a noticeable problem with overlap, they are still too close and it's a problem.
4. Panning. Use it. You could make some of your sections a lot more comprehensible by panning the instruments left/right. Definitely by the end it's practically impossible to tell what any individual instrument is saying because they're all overlapping. Panning can help.
So like I said... it's filled with technical problems, but the melodic and compositional side of things is strong. I think if you work at it for like 6 months or a year or something you could work through the technical problems and be writing REALLY good stuff. (I hope that's not, uh, discouraging or anything. Music takes work, but it's luckily a lot of fun too.)
(Composition -> This is prob why Steampianist likes you. Ordinary non-musicians can't really hear past mixing errors, so if they listen to a poorly mixed song they won't be able to understand it. But good musicians like steampianist can sorta hear the intent behind a song. You have good intent but bad mix. A lot of people have bad intent but good mix, but it's much easier to fix mixing than composition imo, so you're in a good position. ...I'm rambling a little bit here.)
Holy crap. Dat review. Well, let's take it from the top!
=> Nostalgic Dreams => Aha... yeah... it's not TECHNICALLY mine. Heh. Now I feel ashamed, sorta. http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=32208 <-It's from a game called Magic: The Gathering. Whoops. I think I gave "credit" in the audio file under the lyrics section, though. I named it as such because I was listening to it on a loop, trying to figure out a melody to add to it (which I'm not too good at). Anyways, I fell asleep and had this one dream that I hadn't had since early childhood. It reminded me of that card, so I knew I had my name. I get that it probably doesn't work for everyone, but I enjoy my little hidden details that not everyone gets.
=> Good stuff etc. => Thanks! I'm glad I improved under your standards as well as mine.
=> Mixing => Really? Most of the time, my drum beats are WAY too loud. This time, I used a slightly different approach to the drums and I get two comments chastising it. I'll take that under consideration.
=> Piano at 1:34 => Funnily, I did try and do a bit of velocity stuff, just not so much in sections such as that one. Next time I do something like this, I'm definitely going to thoroughly analyze the dynamics of piano music, since whatever I'm doing, it can easily be better. I see it too.
=> Trumpet => Okay, less trumpets. Noted.
=> Disjointed => Transitions are definitely something to work on. I never had very much formal training in music and all that (which is why I tend to make comments very un-terminologically (pretty sure that wasn't a word)), so I'm not that good at adjusting the various nuances of my pieces that would really make it work together. Most of my knowledge of good composition and good mixing comes from reading reviews such as this one, although almost never on my own work. Thanks again for that, by the way.
=> Melodies =>
• => Focal Point => The melody thing here was a bit experimental, seeing as I'm not that good at melodies anyways and I was trying something new. The focal point thing is what I normally do.
• => Weaving => I've never tried that before. Sounds like something fun to attempt in a future piece.
• => Separation => Interesting. I'm going to change something in the song I'm currently working on for this.
• => Panning => Well, you're the master. Panning is especially effective when I'm having a rough day and just need to lie down, close my eyes, listen to some music, and relax. Panning is not at all effective when I'm doing something else at the same time as listening to music, have one earphone and the other out, and miss half the song. Since I do the latter a bit more than the former, I don't do that much panning in my music. I guess it really fits the mood of the song. However, I'll definitely try and implement it in later music.
Do you really analyze your melodies and music this much while making it? I feel humbled by the process through which you make music.
=> So like you said... + Composition => Oh, that's not discouraging at all! I plan on making music for a lot longer than 6 months or a year. Thanks for the dash of hope. For some reason, whenever I begin to work on something, an authority figure always goes "You're doing one thing right and one thing wrong. However, it's lucky that the one thing you're doing wrong is a lot easier to correct that the one thing you're doing right." Is it just me, or does anyone else get that as well?
Thanks a ton for the ultracomment, johnfn! I really will take your words to heart and see if I can please you and everyone else a bit more with my next few pieces.
~SW~ Extrote 
Spacewalk 
Grone Lunden Cover 
The Door - Platform 
Jumpy 
The Forgotten Past 
Delgith 
Nostalgic Dreams 
