Reviews for Wolftacular NGADM Round 3

[SkyeWint]

Hello.

The Good:
-Well, this is more cohesive than your second round piece. I particularly like the guitar in my left ear.
-I like the pizzicato arpeggios quite a bit. They're definitely well-done.
-No clipping in the mixing, which is a good thing.
-When the synths come in at about 4:30, that provides some much-needed variation, though the new feeling doesn't last long.

The Not-So-Good:
-That drumset is so weak, the kick and snare are almost completely buried under just the piano and guitar. Some compression would do wonders here, or just turning up the volume period.
-This definitely feels incomplete. While there are a few chordal motifs and ostinatos, there isn't really a specific motif for the entire piece tying it together as a main melody or main rhythm even.
-Alright, this is repeating quite a bit and barely changes the feel at all throughout the entire piece. It feels a lot like a pop song, actually. A lot of the individual phrases repeat note-for-note, which brings down the overall quality of a repeating phrase.

Overall: Score of 6.4/10. Some good ideas here, but not very good execution - it really does feel unfinished to me. Even if you had used an instrument other than voice to make a main melody, it would have been significantly better than it is now.

Wolftacular responds:

Pleased to hear about the good, ready to fight the not so good as always, albeit a little late.

The drumset thing, yeah, I definitely agree. It's one of those things I failed to notice because of listening to the song over and over. The guitar is also quite low in this mix.

I WOULD argue this second point, but yeah, it IS incomplete, so I guess I half agree. It's not that there isn't a motif, it's just not as sugar coated or obvious without a lead instrument.

I definitely will argue this last point. For starters, it sounds like you might be contradicting your previous point by saying that there's a lot of repetition in that these repetitions obviously mark the main rhythm. Disregarding this, though, I think all you should've criticized is that it follows a pop structure. If the song was cut down in half, keeping the ending and intro alike, and basically avoiding the repetition of the entire thing, there is barely any repetition at all. I'm even inclined to think you agree with me here, given that your conclusion states I had good "ideas", plural.

I worked with three different sections, each with their own feeling (which goes hand in hand with the missing lead). I can understand if you think the first [0:00-1:18] and second [1:18-1:58] sections sound similar. The only way I can think of explaining it is that they're sort of "neighbor" feelings. If you listen closely, though, the second section doesn't sound nearly as "happy" as the first section, and I doubt I need to compare the third section. Placing what I said earlier in repetition (lol), I think the only part I agree with about this last point is that the song follows a pop-oriented structure, and I'm not sure that's bad at all.

Overall, and like last time, I agree with your technical feedback, but not so much with the writing stuff. It could be that we simply differ in styles and taste, or the fact that I don't yet have the production expertise to bring everything that's in my head into my music, or both. Either way, I can't help but feel that 6.4 is maybe a little too low of a score for the things you pointed out, even assuming I agreed with them all, but that's just my opinion. You nearly failed me, and I handed most of my work in D: lol

Last, but not least, thank you for taking the time to listen and review my shit. Contest or not, judge or not, agree or not, I always appreciate it. Both your reviews specifically caught my attention, so thanks!