Nice work - very easy theme but also very effective. The combination of piano and celli always rocks :D This track reminds me of the movie "the truman show", when jim carrey reaches the door out of his artificiant world into reality. Nice flair and very nice harmonic work. Keep it on!
Reviews for "This is Not the End"
ChronoNomad responds:
You nailed it right there, Chris; simple yet effective is precisely what I was going for. I love The Truman Show, so that's a pretty excellent compliment in my book! That's by far the emotional centerpiece of the entire film, and now I'm imagining the scene with this composition behind it. Yeah, that's thoroughly awesome... Thanks for such an incredible comparison!
No worries there! I have no plans to ever stop making music. :)
This is an NGADM Round 3 review.
--
I am instantly going to start this review by saying that your melodic material is magnificent. Graceful, elegant, and the chord voicings in the background are lovely (1:50 especially). You'll be delighted to know that I think the generic quality of your previous tracks is not present here at all (*high-fives*). There are a lot of piano + string/pad tracks all over Newgrounds and the rest of the music industry, but this one has enough distinct characteristics to take away any predictable or generic factors that may have unfortunately resided in your other submissions. The contrast between the more fast-paced and trill/ornament-filled sections, and the soft, contemplative sections is beautiful, and shines through spectacularly during both the subtle changes of pace (such as 1:38) and the more abrupt ones (such as 2:33).
It wouldn't be nearly as beautiful if your transitions weren't so silky-smooth. The song flows delightfully, making for a piece that's quite easy to listen to, but still takes a few listens to comprehend fully, because there's a fair amount of detail and length in the composition. On a related note, both the intro and the ending are great. Your intro sets expectations for a soft piano piece, but really picks up after a few seconds, and without much of a gradual change, providing the awesome contrast I mentioned above. Ending the track by slowing down the arpeggios was a splendid idea, but I would've liked the final note to be held back a little more, just for a more satisfying ending.
On the production side of things, everything is clear, like it should be. You have a piano sound that's very bright. I agree entirely with Kor-Rune that the piano could do with being a bit deeper/warmer. I don't think it's a matter of EQing - the piano sample itself isn't very full-bodied (or it might just be because you don't use the low register as much). It's nevertheless a nice piano sound, and is backed up well by some decent strings that are a bit thin and low-quality but do the job. You've got a bit of unused headroom at times in this track, but that's not a problem at all for an emotional, dynamic and expressive track like this. It's soft, and even when it picks up the pace, it doesn't become a powerhouse, which is good to hear.
I had a hard time writing a full length review for this because there isn't much substance in it. While there are plenty of melodic changes, you recycle certain melodic ideas a fair amount in this track, and while some serve to bring the structure of the track together very well, others just make the whole thing a bit repetitive (like the excessively long 1:38 section). The texture of the track is also relatively samey. The melody of the piano is almost always in the high octaves, and you don't have many other instruments or sounds supporting the piano. It feels like the potential of this track is a bit restricted at times, both in composition and instrumentation.
Small issues aside, this is a truly beautiful track. You've delivered a musical experience that, I feel, is an improvement over your Round 2 track, at least compositionally, and I already liked your Round 2 track a lot. Each NGADM track of yours seems to improve over the last, and I'm really really enjoying your work. Consider me a fan!
Score: 8.8/10
ChronoNomad responds:
Thank you so much for so much thoughtful and impassioned feedback, Step! It seems like the one thing that really backfired on me was my "less is more" approach when it came to instruments, and that was something that I had decided on pretty early on, but I didn't quite want it to be nothing but solo piano. That being said, you've hit on a lot of salient points, and have given me a very well-received and appreciated mixture of praise and criticism.
The section being most criticized for its sameness (1:38) is one of my favorite parts, and my hope was that by continuing to layer new things over the main melody it would feel less repetitive. What works for me, ultimately won't sound as good to others, and I can always accept that. I was prepared to bow out gracefully from the instant I was matched up against Jordi in this round, but - interestingly enough - I felt much more confident in the last two rounds. I love what Jordi does, and losing to him while doing my best leaves me with no regrets. A hint of sadness of course, but I'm very happy for him.
I'm really glad that you like this track as much as you do! I've enjoyed being a part of this contest very much, and I have learned a lot about not only myself, but also many other great artists here on Newgrounds...some of whom I didn't even know about previously! I have learned a lot and done some growing, and I intend to keep on doing just that as I keep cranking out music for a long time to come. I hope that you'll stop by and visit me from time to time, and I thank you from the bottom of my heart for being a fan! I'm looking forward to being right there with everyone else to see how this whole thing ends.
EXCELSIOR!
What was I thinking not reviewing this one earlier? I absolutely love it. The melody that launches at :18 may be the best one I've heard all NGADM, so instant 9 stars already. There are three problems though-
1. The bridges between the different occurrences of the :18 melody are not very strong. I like some points, like 1:12-20, but generally they just feel like they're there to fill space. The thing is that when you have a melody as strong as :18, every other part of your song has to step it up or else it's going to be a disappointment.
2. You don't get enough mileage out of the melody. You wrote an awesome melody, you better get all you can out of it. Ideally I would like some strong bass and maybe even some big hits under it for some sort of climax, to really get the emotion out. I realize that might not fit the idea that you had for the song, but it's a melody that really seems to demand some more power under it.
3. Too much reverb. Easy fix, just turn down the release on your reverb. That will clean up your climaxes a lot, especially in the high end.
Anyway, I'm a huge melody guy, so this is already baller in my books. The whole song is great. Just wanted to make some minor suggestions to make it even better!
ChronoNomad responds:
You are seriously the best. Thank you so much for this outstanding review, John! Until now I've actually been really surprised at the lack of comments about the underlying melodies, so it's really good to know that those do not go completely unnoticed. I was starting to think that I was the only one who was really in love with them. :3
You've made some very nice suggestions in conjunction with your feedback, and I truly appreciate that. It's always nice to have some direction as opposed to the decidedly non-constructive "I don't like this" or "I don't like that" without any kind of explanation why or anything. I think I'm finally getting a hold of my love affair with reverb, but it's still a pretty delicate balance; less is definitely more in this regard.
Thank you again for leaving this very encouraging review. I'm happy to know that you enjoy this piece, and am still working on music post-NGADM, so I hope you'll drop by from time to time. Your presence is definitely welcome here!
NGADM Review
---
My word...this track is just so rich with detail, soothing sounds, and brilliant melodies. Your introduction is magnificent; I was lost in the wonderful melodic melancholy of it all. The instrumentation and orchestration in this piece is fantastic, and the mixing defines all of the instruments quite clearly (though there were some minor issues that I'll get into shortly). This track is quite moving, and you can hear the emotion in almost every note and chord right until the very end. I love, love, LOVE that sliding effect on the strings.
As others have said, the mixing comes across as a little flat (this could be indicative of instrument and sound choice) and there could have been more variety with those lower frequencies and bass instruments. Also, the chord pattern tends to get just a tad repetitive...but not so repetitive as to hinder the listener's interest in the song.
Well done, ChronoNomad! I love this track and I am looking forward to hearing some more of your work! :)
Score: 8.5/10
ChronoNomad responds:
Many thanks for such a positive review, N-B! I would definitely say it was worth the wait. :)
I put a lot of effort into this piece, and it's nice to know that - even though it ultimately lost the NGADM battle - it still holds a special place in people's hearts. Even I am surprised at the beautiful melodies that emerged during this phase of the competition, and that's how it still feels so often when I compose a new piece of music. The instrument selection was mostly predetermined in my mind before I even started working, but that ended up evolving a bit, as also tends to happen.
Initially, the idea was to simply use piano and cello, which - rather like chocolate and peanut butter - are two things that just seem to naturally go great together. Big brassy instruments and percussion had to sit this one out, but the addition of choir felt appropriately reverent even though I had just used the same one in my previous submission. The music then proceeded to seemingly write itself, which is always a good sign.
Is there a flatness to the mixing? Yes, and I blame that mostly on my lack of experience with the Stereo Shaper at the time. I usually like to leave the piano to its own devices since it pans naturally across the field, but applying that bloody Stereo Shaper just seems to have bastardized the sound. A poor and costly choice, indeed.
Thanks again for the lovely review! Please peruse my musical repertoire at your leisure. ^__^
Hello. I'm sorry. This is the end. :(
The Good:
-Your melodies are very pleasant, I like them quite a bit.
-I like the change at 1:09, it feels very nice. Similar for 1:32.
-The clear theme is very nice, I'm liking this a lot after all the pieces lacking them last round.
-AN ENDING! A CONCLUSION! I am happy about this. :D
The Not-So-Good:
-When focusong on a solo instrument, realism and atmosphere are both EXTREMELY important. This took a severe hit on the realism front.
-The piano doesn't sound like it has much dynamic contrast or change in velocity layers. Even with a basic piano you can have more emotion simply by using dynamic contrast. Also, some tempo automation would do wonders for realism.
-Strings are buried behind the piano at about 0:25. Less reverb on the piano should fix this up. You can automate the reverb to decrease at that point if necessary.
-Transition at 1:38 is a bit sloppy in that it's too sudden, only two notes leading up to the abrupt switch.
Overall: Score of 7.8/10. The absolute biggest hit was the lack of realism in the piano, seeing as that's the instrument carrying pretty much the entire piece. Everything else is background, so that piano needs to have some serious emotion behind it.
ChronoNomad responds:
I really want to respond to this in full, but every single time I read that first line it makes me thoroughly disgusted. Whether you meant it to be sincere or sarcastic, it just comes off as being both unnecessary and offensive. Maybe you will understand if someone ever has the lack of decorum to use one of your song titles in such an unfortunate play on words. That being said, after having it done to me, I wouldn't wish it on anyone.
So we got off on a really bad foot in this review with poorly chosen and thoroughly unprofessional words. Moving on, it's nice to see that there were some things that you actually liked about my Round 3 submission. This is one time when I wish the bad news had come before the good, but it is what it is.
It basically seems like I am being penalized for my SoundFont piano more than anything else when you speak of 'realism.' Maybe this doesn't apply to all the judges, and if so I apologize, but I distinctly remember Step mentioning that instrument quality was not going to damage our scores. This is the best piano that I currently possess, and I put a lot of time and effort into my velocity dynamics, which are constantly changing throughout the entire song, so this basically just leaves me feeling frustrated. I suppose if I knew how to add tempo automation I would have done it by now, so at least that gives me a vague idea of what to look into, but the velocity dynamics are plainly there for anyone with ears to hear...especially where the melodies speed up and slow down.
For the strings that gets buried behind the piano, here I'm being penalized directly for using velocity controls and softening up that cello, so trying to be more dynamic is apparently a lose-lose proposition. Finally, you refer to the two-note transition at 1:38, one that I feel works perfectly well and sounds lovely, as being a bit sloppy. I just plain don't understand how the term applies, but it certainly sounds more like a personal nitpick than anything else. Nevertheless, I respect your opinion in this regard and will simply agree to disagree.
This has been, by far, the most difficult review that I have ever responded to. I think I've managed to work out most of my frustrations just by 'talking it out,' and I apologize for any discomfort this may have caused you. Losing to etherealwinds had less sting than reading this to be quite honest, so hopefully you won't begrudge me a bit of honest indignation. Thanks for (most of) the review. :)