How's That For Dreaming - Feedback and Advice appreciated
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 212 posts since 6 Sep, 2004
Feedback on this appreciated.
The tune needs a good coat of looking at.
Advice on where to take it, what could be developed from this would be most appreciated.
I like a melody, but a woeful lack of skills in many areas prevent me turning an idea into a finished product.
It's too long, repetitive and as usual the drums suck.
But I feel there may be something hidden in this.
Is there?
What would you do with it?
Any comments welcome. From bin this abomination to advice on structure, what have you.
https://soundcloud.com/landslide-victor ... r-dreaming
The tune needs a good coat of looking at.
Advice on where to take it, what could be developed from this would be most appreciated.
I like a melody, but a woeful lack of skills in many areas prevent me turning an idea into a finished product.
It's too long, repetitive and as usual the drums suck.
But I feel there may be something hidden in this.
Is there?
What would you do with it?
Any comments welcome. From bin this abomination to advice on structure, what have you.
https://soundcloud.com/landslide-victor ... r-dreaming
-
- KVRist
- 206 posts since 16 May, 2010
Hey, I thought this had quite a lot of charm & and doesn't sound all that bad, but since you asked, I'll lend you my critical ear
Composition:
- I don't think it's too long...
- melody & so on is fine
- the drums ARE very repetitive - not a bad thing... don't go overboard, but a bit more attention to detail/minuscule change ups will go a long way.
- decide where you want to go harmonically with the track & then do that decisively...you do change it up harmonically, but then it doesn't go anywhere - cf. 2:30 - 2:40
- track seems to lose steam/run out of ideas at 2:45 - thatt 'lull' didn't work for me in that place
- get an overall sense of the structure of the track, right now it feels like there's a short intro up to 10 seconds, then a repetitive part until 1:45 - then variations...a new part at 2:02 and then it's lots of different variations and a short return to the original...I guess I want to say, more focus & not that many variations might do wonders.
Production:
drums: what is the source? depending on that, try to achieve better sound to start with.
subtle use of fx - eg phaser or flanger on hats, etc. can make it much more lively...
check frequency spectrum...how does all that sit in the mix versus the huge bass?
maybe look into sidechaining - get more room for drums in the mix overall
basss: I like it, but it covers everything down there...// eq, sidechain, automate, turn down...you introduce it prominently, so we know it's there, you can perhaps downplay it when mix is busy & turn it up, when it has the stage to itself. /
it's very broad...look into the possibility of more sculpted basslines (sonically & compositionally)
FX: there's not much going on in that department, I think? - use sparingly, eg. for transitions, etc.
Lead: I think it's too loud in places, it competes with the arp, it's a bit too samey... maybe too simple to carry interest that long - perhaps automate/ e.g. filter, cutoff, envelopes... much like the bass it's very powerful - one of the reasons this might feel a bit static
-Assortment of string pads, etc...: check whether you need them, what they offer for the track, etc.
What I liked in particular:
-melody!
-arp & delay - great!
-love the plucky sound around 2:18
some directions you might explore, hope this was along the lines you were looking for...
-phoenstorm
Composition:
- I don't think it's too long...
- melody & so on is fine
- the drums ARE very repetitive - not a bad thing... don't go overboard, but a bit more attention to detail/minuscule change ups will go a long way.
- decide where you want to go harmonically with the track & then do that decisively...you do change it up harmonically, but then it doesn't go anywhere - cf. 2:30 - 2:40
- track seems to lose steam/run out of ideas at 2:45 - thatt 'lull' didn't work for me in that place
- get an overall sense of the structure of the track, right now it feels like there's a short intro up to 10 seconds, then a repetitive part until 1:45 - then variations...a new part at 2:02 and then it's lots of different variations and a short return to the original...I guess I want to say, more focus & not that many variations might do wonders.
Production:
drums: what is the source? depending on that, try to achieve better sound to start with.
subtle use of fx - eg phaser or flanger on hats, etc. can make it much more lively...
check frequency spectrum...how does all that sit in the mix versus the huge bass?
maybe look into sidechaining - get more room for drums in the mix overall
basss: I like it, but it covers everything down there...// eq, sidechain, automate, turn down...you introduce it prominently, so we know it's there, you can perhaps downplay it when mix is busy & turn it up, when it has the stage to itself. /
it's very broad...look into the possibility of more sculpted basslines (sonically & compositionally)
FX: there's not much going on in that department, I think? - use sparingly, eg. for transitions, etc.
Lead: I think it's too loud in places, it competes with the arp, it's a bit too samey... maybe too simple to carry interest that long - perhaps automate/ e.g. filter, cutoff, envelopes... much like the bass it's very powerful - one of the reasons this might feel a bit static
-Assortment of string pads, etc...: check whether you need them, what they offer for the track, etc.
What I liked in particular:
-melody!
-arp & delay - great!
-love the plucky sound around 2:18
some directions you might explore, hope this was along the lines you were looking for...
-phoenstorm
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 212 posts since 6 Sep, 2004
Thanks mate.
This is exactly the sort of feedback and info I'm looking for.
Really appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts.
Lots of food for thought here. Just what I need.
Thanks again.
This is exactly the sort of feedback and info I'm looking for.
Really appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts.
Lots of food for thought here. Just what I need.
Thanks again.
- KVRAF
- 7691 posts since 11 Jun, 2006
its twinkly like a thousand twinkling stars! the synths sound nice on this one. theres an electronic musician i listened to alot from the 80's that your style reminds me of. his name is Serge Blenner. he also uses softer percussions with great melodies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLurIn6v5jA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLurIn6v5jA
HW SYNTHS [KORG T2EX - AKAI AX80 - YAMAHA SY77 - ENSONIQ VFX]
HW MODULES [OBi M1000 - ROLAND MKS-50 - ROLAND JV880 - KURZ 1000PX]
SW [CHARLATAN - OBXD - OXE - ELEKTRO - MICROTERA - M1 - SURGE - RMiV]
DAW [ENERGY XT2/1U RACK WINXP / MAUDIO 1010LT PCI]
HW MODULES [OBi M1000 - ROLAND MKS-50 - ROLAND JV880 - KURZ 1000PX]
SW [CHARLATAN - OBXD - OXE - ELEKTRO - MICROTERA - M1 - SURGE - RMiV]
DAW [ENERGY XT2/1U RACK WINXP / MAUDIO 1010LT PCI]
-
- KVRian
- 702 posts since 19 Mar, 2014 from Denver, CO
You're right about the drums. It's very easy to change up the drums by adding a high hat here, high hat there, don't do the same thing for all sixteen bars in a row, etc. In this type of music 4 on the floor is expected as is the snare/clap on the 2/4. So, change it up with the hats.
Drums are also too quiet.
I wasn't a fan of the stereo field in general. You panned a number of elements, but the lead was coming almost solely out of my right headphone, and a lot of the supporting, non-bass stuff was left - or at least more left than right. Use reverb and volume levels for that supporting stuff to help create more of a sense of front to back as well. Personally, I'd put the lead in the center, have the supporting stuff on the sides.
You don't have a lot of bass going on, so I'd have the pads (at spots in the song) lower in frequency - down an octave so as not to distract from the lead/arp.
Don't forget automation - you can do a lot to "change up the song" with automation. Filter cutoffs in combination with resonance can provide some interesting stuff now and then. Listen to some deep house/techno. It's very repetitive stuff, but the hats are changing frequently and there's a lot of subtle automation or layering being brought in and out. Automation is also a powerful tool for bringing out the emotions in certain areas of the song.
Drums are also too quiet.
I wasn't a fan of the stereo field in general. You panned a number of elements, but the lead was coming almost solely out of my right headphone, and a lot of the supporting, non-bass stuff was left - or at least more left than right. Use reverb and volume levels for that supporting stuff to help create more of a sense of front to back as well. Personally, I'd put the lead in the center, have the supporting stuff on the sides.
You don't have a lot of bass going on, so I'd have the pads (at spots in the song) lower in frequency - down an octave so as not to distract from the lead/arp.
Don't forget automation - you can do a lot to "change up the song" with automation. Filter cutoffs in combination with resonance can provide some interesting stuff now and then. Listen to some deep house/techno. It's very repetitive stuff, but the hats are changing frequently and there's a lot of subtle automation or layering being brought in and out. Automation is also a powerful tool for bringing out the emotions in certain areas of the song.
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 212 posts since 6 Sep, 2004