The arpeggios at the beginning are pretty cool. Instruments are clearly inauthentic, and are also a tad dry. The panning works pretty well for the most part, although the mix was also pretty quiet in general. The progression was very slow until 1:04. I enjoyed the melodic content at 1:04, short-lived though it was. I think the mix could be sharper. A lot of the drone-like elements begin to sound indistinct during the busy section (1:06-2:08 or so). I also think that the transition into 2:08 wasn’t super strong. For a solid 20 seconds, those string arpeggios are the sole element of the texture. Then, when a melody comes in at 2:28, it’s completely overshadowed by the arpeggios. I think you need to do a better job of prioritizing melodic content in the mix. The ending was a tad abrupt, but also sounded pleasing because it ends on the tonic. Overall, I think the composition could sound a bit more dynamic, especially during the second half, and I’d encourage you to use more phrasing, dynamic contrast, and automation. The mastering could use some stricter equalization, compression, and maybe more advanced techniques like stereo widening if some of your harmonies share too many frequencies. As it is, the panning is a bit heavy at times. I’d encourage you to keep a more mono-stereo approach to mixing as much as possible. Overall, though, this is a fun piece with a lot of melodic and emotional content. Keep at it, Mrcoolisimo!

6.75/10

Mixing, mastering, and balance
1/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
1.25/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
1.5/2
Instrumentation and sound design
.5/1
Emotion, atmosphere, and catchiness
1.25/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
.5/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
.75/1
Composite score
6.75/10