[universe + rock]--> "white eyes" °(◒‿◒)

[enroe]

I enjoyed it! I liked the vocal treatments and the mix is well spaced.
I hear a lot of simple elements that have some complex relationships, which make for surprising moments when a groovy syncopation emerges for a moment.

Thanks for sharing!

Yeah, thank you, justin3nam!

[Genetic_Junk]

I'll briefly add the questions that I deleted at first:

1. What strikes you most about this song?
2. What would you do differently if you were mixing the song?
3. The loudness is -10.9 dB LUFS-I. Is that too loud or too quiet?
4. Are the lyrics of a song generally important to you?
5. Do the song lyrics and animation here go well together - or is the animation rather distracting?

If you feel like it, you are welcome to answer these questions -
thank you for that!

1. The rhythmic feel. At times it is strange. At others, it makes sense. Overall, I think that makes the song more interesting to me.
2. Some of the guitars sound a bit constricted frequency wise. So I might address that.
3. Probably a bit too loud, but I wouldn't worry too much about that.
4. Yes the lyrics are generally important. Depending on the genre they may be the most important part.
5. The animation is not distracting. I really enjoy your animations. I think this one enhances the song.

Thanks for sharing, I enjoyed.

[markkuja]

Great rock music. I liked the vocals and sounds.

[enroe]

1. The rhythmic feel. At times it is strange. At others, it makes sense. Overall, I think that makes the song more interesting to me.
2. Some of the guitars sound a bit constricted frequency wise. So I might address that.
3. Probably a bit too loud, but I wouldn't worry too much about that.
4. Yes the lyrics are generally important. Depending on the genre they may be the most important part.
5. The animation is not distracting. I really enjoy your animations. I think this one enhances the song.

Thanks for sharing, I enjoyed.

Yes, thank you Genetic_Junk!

(1) - a new version of 2.3. should address the rhythmic feel-issue.
(2) - also we changed this with the 2.3.-version.
(3) - no change here.
(4, (5) - ok.

As you can see, we greatly value your answers!
Thank you!

[Genetic_Junk]

1. The rhythmic feel. At times it is strange. At others, it makes sense. Overall, I think that makes the song more interesting to me.
2. Some of the guitars sound a bit constricted frequency wise. So I might address that.
3. Probably a bit too loud, but I wouldn't worry too much about that.
4. Yes the lyrics are generally important. Depending on the genre they may be the most important part.
5. The animation is not distracting. I really enjoy your animations. I think this one enhances the song.

Thanks for sharing, I enjoyed.

Yes, thank you Genetic_Junk!

(1) - a new version of 2.3. should address the rhythmic feel-issue.
(2) - also we changed this with the 2.3.-version.
(3) - no change here.
(4, (5) - ok.

As you can see, we greatly value your answers!
Thank you!

Nice update. I also forgot to note that I enjoyed the strings and the organ.

[enroe]

Great rock music. I liked the vocals and sounds.

Thank you, markkuja!

[enroe]

Nice update. I also forgot to note that I enjoyed the strings and the organ.

Aah yeah, thanks!

[enroe]

I have been aiming for -16 LUFS (for my mainly ambient-style music), but even my more beat-oriented tracks are at a similar level. One of my New Year resolutions for 2024 was to push the levels up a little. The only problem with this scheme is that I haven't made a new track this year

This song is at -10.9 dB LUFS-I. But this is "rock style". Apart from that, I
believe that the volume in LUFS-I is not only very genre-dependent (as you
said: Ambient is much quieter), but also depends very much on the
individual song.

My experience is that with any song you can increase the loudness to the
point where important dynamics are lost. This is achieved earlier with
some songs - including ambient - than with other songs.

[Bansaw]

1. What strikes you most about this song?
Its unique, and a good deal of work has gone into it which is appreciated.

2. What would you do differently if you were mixing the song?
I think your voice alone cannot quite carry the early verses effectively. I think at least double track +octave, -octave, + 5th etc. and add dimension to it, or hire a [female] singer off fiverr to add a response to your calls.
Thats not really a mixing comment but arrangement. The mixing is OK with good separation between elements.

4. Are the lyrics of a song generally important to you?
Yes, often. They add to the journey.

5. Do the song lyrics and animation here go well together - or is the animation rather distracting?
Not sure what you mean by animation. Do you mean vocal FX? If vocal FX I thought they were interesting in very small amounts, but in this song they are overdone imho.

[enroe]

1. What strikes you most about this song?
Its unique, and a good deal of work has gone into it which is appreciated.

2. What would you do differently if you were mixing the song?
I think your voice alone cannot quite carry the early verses effectively. I think at least double track +octave, -octave, + 5th etc. and add dimension to it, or hire a [female] singer off fiverr to add a response to your calls.
Thats not really a mixing comment but arrangement. The mixing is OK with good separation between elements.

4. Are the lyrics of a song generally important to you?
Yes, often. They add to the journey.

5. Do the song lyrics and animation here go well together - or is the animation rather distracting?
Not sure what you mean by animation. Do you mean vocal FX? If vocal FX I thought they were interesting in very small amounts, but in this song they are overdone imho.

Thank you, Bansaw!

My short responses:

1. Thanks!

2. You make good suggestions. If so, then I tend to hire or
motivate a singer. As you already wrote - this is of course an
arrangement decision.

5. Here I mean the animation which is shown on the website here.
But that's just "additional".