randomkarmageneratorrandomkarmagenerator

Main Audio Reviews Stats 2 Fans

Contact Info / Websites

All 12 audio Reviews


Dj Cargo = Flute gate Dj Cargo = Flute gate

Rated 4 / 5 stars

A critical opinion...

Good kick/snap/clap combo. The melody could use some tightening though. Particularly the bass synth and high-pitched strings synth, which could be tweaked to accompany each other a little better. Nice breakdown starting 1:25. Perhaps some overuse of the splash though. If it were me, I would have used a snare patch with more rasp, but that’s not my primary reservation. I really like the flute melody in the build, but dropping it at 2:50 seems anticlimactic, then reciprocating from that section into a progressively descaled outro seems to rob it in a most subtle way of the all-in payoff that should have happened at 2:50. I would normally give this a 3, but considered the many 0’s anything and everything is subject to, 4 it is.


bjoaierjbioaerjgoerj responds:

thanx for the advice!


Egyptian Robots Egyptian Robots

Rated 4 / 5 stars

Aptly named.

I like. Catchy main melody. A bit glitchy for my tastes, but no harm in that. For being only 3:05 you could have encoded at 128kbps, at least. Why 56kbps?
Voted 4 on the reservation that there’s no padding between the rhythmic melodies and percussion (save for the extensive and often muddy bass decay), which, although that may be a stylistic intent, retracts from the cohesiveness as a whole. In any case, keep it up.


MrTheJazz responds:

Why? I don't know the difference between the encoding speeds and the difference it makes in music yet. I know. I = noob, but we all are at some point, eh?

And I wish I knew what padding was. I confess, I know little at this point in time and am still experimenting. You caught me.


Invunerable--_--(FULL) Invunerable--_--(FULL)

Rated 4 / 5 stars

Production vs. musical merit

What you have here is a mediocre song, but a pinnacle production. The music itself is lacking in diversity, dynamic, and it's almost missing some of the sentient atmosphere in your previous work. It makes for an overall creepy, machine-like feel, but inherent in its dimished sentient atmosphere it is missing a defined character. This is an ideal candidate for an action/shooter game, but short of a given imagery, it doesn't really have its own direction. As for the production, this is some of your best yet. I can see why you think of it as a masterpiece. You've utilized proper gain structuring and eloquently implemented some fundamental mixing techniques, and as a result it sounds very good. Keep this production up, but don't forget to focus on the underlying composition of your work.



Mary Jane Mary Jane

Rated 2 / 5 stars

Terrible

Please do not take anything contained in this review personally.
I'm not exactly sure what this is. First off, it's in the wrong genre, classical rock is not some kind of experimental ambient psychedelic trip (psychedelic rock would be closer than classical rock, but still a long shot from accurately categorizing this). For that, there is either the Ambient or Misc. genres. The vocals were poorly recorded, executed, and modified. The pad was monotonous, unimaginative, and did not contribute in any way to the song, aside of crude background noise. I percieve no musical merit in this, as the support instrument(s) only use one long note through the whole song. What few lyrics are not inaudible are incoherent. The track clips in several places. The mixing quality is below a point I could have imagined was possible in a song with only two instrumental components. As for its potential commercial music value, I do not believe it has any. This is hardly listenable, and as an artist or producer, I could not possibly construe this to constitute music. I would strongly suggest to review some music theory and take a slightly more commercial approach at songwriting.


RNR responds:

Sorry but I did take this personally. You really offended me because this was my most creative song I've ever wrote. BTW, it is classical rock because Pink Floyd does similar experimental stuff. Psy-rock is in the roots of classic rock, if you didn't know that. It is not Ambient or Misc. because of the song structure. It just wouldn't fit. The vocals were recorded by a great program and the reason they clip a few times because i lowered the pitch of my voice using that program. The pad, on the other hand, gave it the plain but mysterious sound to it and added a lot to the song, actually. I no the background isn't musically genius but it still makes the song. And whatever you been by the lyrics not being inaudiblle or incoherent... I don't care if it has no potential commercual music value, it's a song and I'm not a total fan of artists that are making music just for the money and the fame. I do it for the music, just like some of my favourite artists in my profile. This isn't enjoyable to listen? Personally, I have been making better songs with my new program than I ever have with anything else. This has to be one of my favourite songs. I have taking music theory in my music lessons and I've been writing songs for a while now and I've kept more than 10 that I liked. In fact, I'm writing more songs almost everyday. I appreciate your comment for being honest but I wish you could've told me what you did like about it... if you even did like anything about it. Thank you.


Sweet Acoustic Jam Sweet Acoustic Jam

Rated 3.5 / 5 stars

Flash or BED

If this were less active it would be relaxing. I can't say much for the mixing or production qualities, but for an acoustic jam, that's not important. The compositional elements are fairly typical for this genre, it's smooth and somewhat flowy, but, as with many jams, not exactly cohesive as a whole. True to form, it ends unresolved, as there is no reciprocal melody and as a result, it doesn't have much re-playability. For that reason, its character is limited. This may become useful for a movie flash artist focusing on an 'outback' atmosphere. Short of that, it isn't much of a standalone song. You could expand on some of these ideas, and having as many structural elements as it does, you would probably find that a simple rearrange may lend to a mostly complete track. As for the execution, it's not bad for being live instrumentation, but too many inconsistancies decrease its cosmetic value and ultimately makes it best suited as a BED track.


HDG responds:

wow. you've given probably the most detailed review i've seen yet. anyway, thanks a lot for it. this was basically a little demo of what i plan to expand on. the title, containing the word "jam" wasn't really meant to be taken very litterally, but i can't blame you for pointing out specific things since this is a review. as for the production, it's pretty much the best i can get right now with my extreme budget 'recording studio.' anyway, i appreciate your feedback....


Drop Bottom Combat Theme Drop Bottom Combat Theme

Rated 3 / 5 stars

Not great, not bad

This is catchy. It reminds me of many a game soundtrack battle theme. Effectively named, that. It's a bit short, the 303-ish bass lacks diversity (a changeup every now and then wouldn't hurt), the lead synth is outright annoying (of course, what game OST lead synth isn't?), but taken with a grain of salt and the right application, this may come in handy for a flash artist. It doesn't really hold its own as a complete song; as a loop it may, but then the problem is that it doesn't perfectly loop. The mixing is okay, but not particularly sharp. The cymbals (especially hi-hats) could be a bit louder, a 3-6dB boost (Q=3) to 12k on them may make a significant difference. I may be mistaking, but it sounds like you mastered it with the Reason multiband.. that's all well and good, but it doesn't tend to give much and in this case I can hear it pumping. This would probably fit reasonably well in an action/adventure game, but I'm not optomistic about its musical merit standalone. Then again, perhaps it isn't intended to be standalone in the first place. In short: not great, but not bad either.


tedJohnston responds:

hey, thanks for the review!

yeah, about that lead synth...it's WAYY too loud. made this song on my crappy headphones...i guess the extended version doesn't help too much either, eh?

hi-hats...hmm. i like to have hi-hats alot quieter than most people; most techno artists LOVE to pump their hi-hats up as loud as can be <- pet peeve of mine.

as for the mastering, the Reason Vocoder was soooo yesterday (am i sounding like a valley girl?). with version 3.0, they've integrated a whole new Mastering Suite which includes some crazy EQ'ing tools. i can't hear any of the pumping you're talking about. perhaps it's the "sound optimization" settings on your sound card? (turn those things off! they're usually nothing more than a crappy compressor ^_-). check out Reason 3.0 and the new Mastering Suite, it works wonders.

overall, your review is pretty fair. i didn't intend this to be a masterpiece in any way, and i guess its actually accomplished its purpose.

thanks for reviewing! cheers an g'day.

-Ted Johnston


Evolve (4mins50secs) Evolve (4mins50secs)

Rated 4 / 5 stars

Impressive

You certainly have some fancy footwork going on the synths in the background and the occasional drum fill is well executed. It's a slightly more compressed than my ears want to hear, but it's trance, so it is within acceptable limits. The breakdown at 2:06 is a bit sudden, but the pickup is nice. As someone mentioned before, the strong kick throughout does spoil the prospects of a huge payoff. By 2:40 the sawtooth lead gets a bit grating, but having the synthbells in the same general space partially covers for it. You have a very smooth production here, but unfortunately, the late reciprocal to the lead melody makes it feel somewhat monotonous until it finally shows up in the end. The strings start to come out again at 3:48 for a nice resolution, however the sawtooth lead makes it a bit tense. This is somewhat original for a mainstream trance song, but it lacks what is perhaps the most important element, the payoff. I like it a lot, but it just breaks down and out too soon. Listening over again keeps bringing me to the same place, 4:30. At this point it seems it should be going into the payoff instead of the outro. My instinct suggests holding out a measure or two with an arp echoing out then in over some pads into a kick or snare roll and then all-in for an over the top finale. Despite these things, this is a very impressive track. Keep this up!


AdmiralConquistador responds:

I've already had most of those changes in mind... I'll have an updated/improved version of this song uploaded soon enough. Thanks for the great constructive criticism, by the way.

-ac-


Never Never

Rated 2.5 / 5 stars

A skeleton

You have some ideas here, but this doesn't hold its own as a complete song. For its genre, it may have a promising underlying compositional structure, but the recording quality is very poor, it doesn't sound well planned, and the execution needs work. I would strongly suggest, if you intend to expand on this, to write down the individual components and rearrange it into a verse/chorus/verse/bridge/chorus 2 minute punk song. Among other things, it particularly lacks bass, drums, vocals, and maybe an additional guitar, as would be standard for a punk song. It has potential, but that would mostly rely on how well other instruments, especially vocals are executed. That is to say, on its own, it isn't particularly dynamic, and gives somewhat of a 'cruise control' feel, at least that's my take on it. As I mentioned, I think this has potential, but completing the production up to independant industry standards might as well be just as much work as writing an altogether new song. If I were you (retaining my personality), I would consider the stage of production seen here to be more of a milestone in my development to writing commercial music.


EckHart responds:

The thing is, it DOES have bass, vocals, and drums. But my band is on vacation right now, so I couldn't really record it without them here. So once they get back this Sunday, I'll re-record it all, and post the final version. It will sound a hell of a lot better. Thanks for the review, I see what you mean. Thanks for the review, and I appreciate the comments.

~Erik Eckhart~


Saying Goodbye- Loopable theme Saying Goodbye- Loopable theme

Rated 4.5 / 5 stars

Some cosmetic faults, but very good overall.

I really liked this. It felt more resigned and calm than sad, at least to me. The brass/wind is very well done. Two mixing issues I noticed were clipping in various places throughout the track, and the cello at 1:00 is slightly too loud. A bit more reverb then some compression on the piano might help bring the orchestral instruments out, since it was hard to hear through the piano for some of the more subtle elements. A nice dose of mastering reverb on this might also go over well. I can definitely hear some expansion on this one.. such as a reciprocal piano line at 1:16 and building from there, instead of just fading out. Keep it up!


SuperTonic64 responds:

Wow! Thanks for your detailed and awesome review! ^_^

You see, I decided to go with a grand piano instead of a bright one, and maybe that is what it is causing to sound compressed.

The clipping could be caused by what notation program I use. :P I have write out the song in music software program first, before I enter it in FL Studio. But I'll work harder next time to prevent the clipping from happening. ;) And next time, I'll remember to turn down the cello patch! :P

The piano is really loud compared to the other instruments, but I think that it wouldn't hurt to increase the volume on the flute a little bit, now would it? :)

I'll probably rework this into a longer piece with an actual ending, soon, so I'll remember all your great suggestions! Thanks for the review!


This Is Radio Freedom This Is Radio Freedom

Rated 3 / 5 stars

An opinion...

You certainly get to the point. This is an obvious statement, and while I agree completely agree with the 'just do your thing' approach, the end result is often half-baked. I realize that within a minute and 16 seconds' time it isn't easy to fit together a cohesive production, but short of that, at least some fancy footwork is needed to make it engaging at all. This is more of a segue track instead of an actual "song" and as such I would consider it high-end of mediocre, but it seems to be more along the lines of 'just your style'. To be blunt, it doesn't do anything interesting. If there were accompanying works to make up a more cohesive whole production-a family, of sorts-then I would find it far more listenable. I don't intend to be harsh, and I'm giving it a 4 to help compensate for the score, I just think it needs a bit of work. Keep it up!


tRiPhOp68 responds:

hey thanks for the review. This 'track' was done on a Roland BR8, not the best for using samples and such. It is supposed to be like a filler track, short, sweet, easy. Used turntables and a Oldies sample from a record. Just did it to see how hard or easy it would be to make a production on my 8-track digi recorder - Status....dont try it, to hard, takes too long, stick to the computer progs for it.