00:00
00:00

Reviews for "Bamboozle"

Something about this track reminded me of "La Folia", especially the faster interpretations of it. But I'm not going to dig into exactly what that is. Mostly harmonies and progressions and such :p

I agree with OmegaP that a harpsichord would've been a cool addition. But I like listening to this in it's current format too.

Here's a thought. There has always been one thing that I've had a slight difficulty of appreciating to its full extent with this kind of classical music. Don't get me wrong, I totally love classics of this kind as a whole. But I feel that in some ways, there's not enough variation in some of them. Especially when it comes to rhythm, and structure. Not everything has to have variation either, of course, but still... The melodies are great, as are the chord choices.

The progressions and movements, even in different chords and scales stay similar throughout the track, to the most parts. On the other hand, I do enjoy the contrast between the bass melodies and the higher melodies, while allowing room for eachother. But I guess that the reason I may feel that the method is overdone, is because it has been done for centuries XD
Nothing wrong with using an old technique if it works :)

And as I said, it's only a personal preference. And I couldn't honestly remove any stars for it even if I wanted to (which I don't), because you absolutely nailed the style of Bach with this, which is what it would seem you were aiming for.

And I'm far from deaf to the actual changes in progression. That was more of a comment as to why I can only listen to bach's preludes for so long before getting bored, than a comment on this actual piece. When you take a more "chaotic" (although still structured track) like Toccata and Fugue, I'm onboard for the entire ride, even if there are instances of what I talked about. Just a preference when it comes to style of arrangement :)

But in this track, there is actually more variation than in many of Bach's preludes (the ones I've heard at least), which I really appreciate. I especially enjoy the little extra (perhaps a bad choice of words, but currently I have no better) parts like the ones at 0:37, and 2:07, for instance. The slowdown at the end, although it sounds mechanic, works wonders. I say mechanic, but a real orchestra could definitely play that part in the same style as well. I guess that I simply prefer something where the musicians are more independent, and their own individual styles shine through, than something like this that would most like be directed exactly according to the sheets, as most major orchestras tend to want to reflect the original composer's style and intentions as closely as possible.

Now, as I've said, the melodies and progressions are wonderful, and stay true to the style you were going for. It's a shame that Kor-Rune was disqualified though.

Overall, I really enjoyed the track, for what it is :)

P.S. This turned out not to be much of a review, now did it, hahha? XD There's no need to leave a long response to this :)

Phonometrologist responds:

Instead of a harpsichord, how about I keep the piano and add a Moog? I've updated this so it can sound more chaotic, and it doesn't sound quite as old

Interesting idea experimenting with the 5/8 time signature. I wish you had found a way to lead into the strings' entrance at :57 more. I like the progression of this piece, although I think it needed something more in the way of dynamic contrast. I think you've mimicked the baroque style very well, though. This piece is conclusive, well-structured, and very flowy and smooth. It's also coherent enough to be regarded as a structurally complete work without being overly repetitive. I will say that the lack of dynamic contrast makes it sound almost like it was written for some sort of montage. Especially since this is a classical piece of music, I think you should've made your fortes louder and your pianos softer. I can sort of tell that you wanted the part at 1:07 to be the "structural relief" and/or breakdown section, but it should've been much softer. That way, you could offer some more dramatic phrasing work (i.e., a crescendo) into 1:42. It would help give this piece all of the shape and emotion it deserves. In fact, many classical composers didn't write dynamics into their pieces, and musicians were simply expected to play the dynamics based on stylistic preferences of the time period. However, I personally regard you as the musician as well as the composer, and therefore this piece needs some more phrasing. If that's the main problem I have with this piece (which it is), though, I'd say you've got a pretty strong track here, Phonometrologist. Keep up the good work. ;D

9/10

....

*looks around*
....

Great Piece! x)

Phonometrologist responds:

lol thanks. Though I'm not sure why you felt the need to look around
....

*looks behind me in fear*

So, you've made it to the final round. You've clearly proven yourself. Time to judge by NGADM standards - scoring will be harsher as a result. In any case, here are some pointers for improvement.

The Good:
-Ah, of course. Straight classical piece. This reminds me a lot of the Invention pieces.
-Very interesting and excellent chord progressions. I very much like it.
-Good mixing.

The Not-so-good:
-Honestly, this is very well-done, but the biggest problem with it is pretty simple. This is basically a series of chords with straight runs to transition between them. It's very pretty, but very difficult to discern any kind of theme aside from the chord progression - which isn't particularly recognizable enough to make a clear theme. The biggest thing this needs is a change in mood and speed of notes. As it is, it sounds essentially like the same thing the whole way through, with 3 changes - one in instrument, and one in chord progression to something different in the middle.

Final score: 8.5/10. Gripe aside, this is a pretty solid piece - it's simply less composition competition material so much as it is particularly well-composed exercise book material. And believe me. I would absolutely love to have this kind of stuff in my old piano exercise books in order to practice my runs and finger positioning.

Phonometrologist responds:

Lol you know your classical because it's straight up an Invention piece, or did you just notice the tags? This is actually not that harsh of a review from you. I agree with the criticisms. I'm going to re-upload this with more melodic/rhythmic content from different instruments. Probably not going to change the mood or the speed, but I did find the arrangement to be a little too naked which makes the middle section a bit uninteresting to me. I wanted it to have a little more layers and therefore become chaotic to give it less of a classical feel/"exercise book material." If I had more music than 2:32, I probably would heed to the advice of changing the tempo a bit but I don't desire more of this. Thanks for the review.

NGAUC Review
-----

First off, my apologies for the EXTREMELY late review -- but, better late than never!

What worked well:
- Interesting, often captivating composition.
- Good mixing.
- Great progression!

I love the introduction, it sounds so very methodical yet boundlessly artistic. Such is classical music, I suppose! I honestly have very little to say here. The mixing was quite good -- everything was clear and easy to listen to/pick out. Also, the composition in general was a real treat to listen to!

What to consider:
- Moog sound worked as a double-edged sword.
- Mostly just a chord progression; further use of dynamics would help!

The intro of the Moog sound at 1:41 was both a pleasant surprise, and just a bit off-putting. I'm torn on whether it is awesome or if it would be best to implement it in another way. As a result, I think it works as a double-edged sword. It both works and does not. That being said, I think it added flavor to the piece all the same.

I understand that you wrote this with a goal in mind (and you accomplished that goal wonderfully), but emotionally and thematically this piece is rather dry. The section from 1:06 - 1:41 sounds quite triumphant, though the rest of the piece is a chord progression through and through. Again, you were working towards a goal, and I always keep that in mind when reviewing so it wasn't that big of a deal. It would have been nice to hear some soaring strings and the piano working together to create more of an emotional response though!

Great piece of music! I would like to hear this mocked up with greater tension and perhaps more melodic content, but otherwise, wonderful job. Keep it up!

Score: 9/10

Phonometrologist responds:

Love your review and I agree with all the criticisms about it. Especially the Moog choice and how I implemented it. It's much easier to handle when I can let go of trying to tame it. It tends to make the piece sound a bit chaotic which I can learn to love about this. I've discovered that initial vision and making it reality is the hardest part in music. It could've been so much more, but I mistakenly expected and tried doing this for a contest with limited time. Based on your comment on a lack of melodic content, I think you found out in this piece that I really care for chord progressions more than I do for melody. Thank you for your words!