if it sounds cluttered i think now 2 possible solutions:

-Special equialization, limiters,filters etc... which is a poor solution but getting rid of some "less-necesary" frequencies may help.

-Using a contrapoint melody, if they'vent specified you the change you've to do use your original melody and make a new lead that it's compatible with the original one and blend smoothly creating a "C melody" this can be a bit tricky but works fine, not many producers use this technique now but was very famous once upon a time.

WIth this last purpose you fill all the emptyness but sounds very harmonic if it's done properly, if you like this idea i think i can show you some tracks to get an idea of what to do.

If I may offer my 2 cents from the fence that I'm squarely perched upon...


I can see both sides of both sides here. The OP certainly has a legitimate gripe that the song was already signed before the label asked for the revisions. Changing one of the key elements of the song is something that should be discussed and agreed upon prior to signing the contract. That's just bad business on the label's behalf IMO.

That said, I also sense a little unwillingness to compromise on the OP's behalf, simply because he/she is being too idealistic and stubborn to even try the label's suggestion. We make compromises every time we change a parameter - some of these changes are negligible in context of the entire track, and some have ripple effects that change the entire character of the track, but most are somewhere in between the two extremes. I guess my point is just that there is no harm in trying the label's suggested changes AND giving it a fair shot with an open mind and time to let it sink in. In the time he/she has spent reading and replying to this thread, the OP could have tried it and either: (1) reinforced his/her opinion on the existing lead, or (2) realized that maybe the label was right after all and the suggested change actually did improve the overall quality of the track.

As others have pointed out, there's no guarantee that the label will release you from the contract, so IMO your best bet is to try to find some middle ground and not let your pride get in the way (well, not too much, at least).

___________________
cryophonik.com | facebook | soundcloud

Sonar Platinum | Ableton Live 9 | Logic Pro X | Access Virus TI2 Keyboard | Kurzweil PC3X | Nord Lead 4R | NI Maschine

let us fucking know!

quote:

Originally posted by orTofønChiLd Anyone know where you can find a list of all good trance labels and links to their demo submission page

http://trance.nu/v4/forum/viewtopic.php?t=135142

quote:

Originally posted by G-Con I think for a label to ask you to change certain parts, add leads etc etc is absolutely fine. I don't think it is okay though when they do this AFTER they have signed your tune. To me, if they sign it, it should mean they like it as it is (apart from minor mixing tweaks and mastering). If they want significant changes to the tracks composition, they should tell you this upfront and then it is up to you whether to make the changes and sign it to them or ignore them and go elsewhere.

Bingo; also is there not legal precedent to tear up the deal because they signed it then requested the changes? This seems crooked

Also; lets stop acting like adding A SECOND LEAD is the same as turning a compressors ratio down. That's basically asking to completely change the musical idea the artist came up with.

quote:

Originally posted by mfitterer1 http://trance.nu/v4/forum/viewtopic.php?t=135142

THANK YOU

quote:

Originally posted by mfitterer1 Also; lets stop acting like adding A SECOND LEAD is the same as turning a compressors ratio down. That's basically asking to completely change the musical idea the artist came up with.

Particularly since they apparently asked him to add another lead after the track was mastered. As an artist facing a request for mastering from the label, I'd have sent the song off to a mastering service. I would be super-pissed to have then been asked to add another track after having spent money on that.

It's weird, because I'd think, as a label, I'd want to be in possession of the mixdown and send it off to be mastered (or, at least do it, in house), myself.

___________________

Now with extra singles!
my old stuff, not quite up to snuff - but I still dig it - UPDATED 9/23/2012

i personally feel like label feedback is much appreciated, they listen, in my opinion, more closely than your friends would. they have a vested interest to do so, it's their name they're slapping at the end of this release. XYZ Artist - XYZ Track [XYZ Label].

now most label's won't give you ultimatums regarding changes, they'll simply give advice. humor them, give it a try and see if you concur. if you really feel like it does a disservice to your track, tell the label, most of them are promoting artistic creativity on a daily basis... they'll understand.

I think there is a difference between trying to give good input to a track, and trying to force the artist into a funnel of your own design, ment to give your label some unique sound and/or shape the music and what people like, yourselves, as opposed to letting it naturally develope.

___________________
i'm the alchemist without the cyst without a doubt out of the mist
dig out the grout expose the pest to take it out without the rest

they will attest my patients restorations from the best

i'm from the west i'm not an acmeist only the alchemist

quote:

Originally posted by cryophonik If I may offer my 2 cents from the fence that I'm squarely perched upon... I can see both sides of both sides here. The OP certainly has a legitimate gripe that the song was already signed before the label asked for the revisions. Changing one of the key elements of the song is something that should be discussed and agreed upon prior to signing the contract. That's just bad business on the label's behalf IMO. That said, I also sense a little unwillingness to compromise on the OP's behalf, simply because he/she is being too idealistic and stubborn to even try the label's suggestion. We make compromises every time we change a parameter - some of these changes are negligible in context of the entire track, and some have ripple effects that change the entire character of the track, but most are somewhere in between the two extremes. I guess my point is just that there is no harm in trying the label's suggested changes AND giving it a fair shot with an open mind and time to let it sink in. In the time he/she has spent reading and replying to this thread, the OP could have tried it and either: (1) reinforced his/her opinion on the existing lead, or (2) realized that maybe the label was right after all and the suggested change actually did improve the overall quality of the track. As others have pointed out, there's no guarantee that the label will release you from the contract, so IMO your best bet is to try to find some middle ground and not let your pride get in the way (well, not too much, at least).

Totally agree with you on most here, Im not sure if i mentioned it at all but i did spend days working on new stuff for that section of the song, before i even posted this thread, and after. I can't come up with anything to justify it. I wasn't unwilling to try something new, but when everyone of my peers who have heard the track (most of them pro-producers/DJs) and even they agree with me that it would be to cluttered...its a little intense for me, and makes me unwilling to compromise the direction i was going with the track.

Let me be clear, they arnt asking me to write a different lead...they are asking for a new one..ontop..of an already existing lead.

I would provide samples, and if the deal goes through, i def will so i can get your guys's opinion. But for now i have to keep it hush hush.

For the B-side, i spent days cleaning that up and hopefully they like that version, which was not mastered to begin with, but yeah, asking for edits to the track after they asked for the master is really unprofessional to me.

and to the guy with 1 post, whos telling me to grow some skin and that ill never make it,

Ive already made it farther than i ever dreamed of in the first place, but as an artist, im not willing to put something out that i am not happy with. Period. Why would i release something, that im not proud of? Just to get some airplay? No

Thanks but no thanks...Id rather give up the release...and wait for a better opportunity.

With that said, it's up to the label now, it's been sent out, along with the newer version of the Bside. Ill keep you all updated on how they handle it.

I'd say yes, this is a case of bad management. Any intelligent A&R would not sign a track if he isn't 100% confident about it's quality.

___________________

Storyteller Website | Storyteller @ Facebook | Storyteller @ Beatport | Storyteller @ Soundcloud | Stephen J. Kroos - Europa (Storyteller Remix)
Anthony Mea - Get It On (Storyteller Remix)

quote:

If less is more think about how much more more would be. -Frasier