I enjoy the gradually unfolding journey here, and great sense of menace in the atmosphere.
WhatsTheStory
The track sounds extremely dated and is pretty much just a continuous build up but doesn't actually build up to anything. I kinda wish I could get back that 11 minutes of my life lol. It should be about 7 minutes shorter with the amount of actual changes that add any real value to the track. It really shouldn't take over 2 minutes for the main bass to finally kick in. I'll Give you one alright comment though. That little melody you have after 8 minutes was alright but should have come in sooner and should probably be the main focus in the track. If you relied more on that I think the track would be better. You might wanna put in some breaks to build up the tension better. Your sample selection is kinda weird, Might want to try finding some different samples to use. The snare seems to get drowned out in the middle at some points and the kick while not sounding all that bad doesn't seem to fit the track imo. Its kinda funny that I recall you saying how ppl should push the envelope but don't practice what you preach. At least this track doesn't have a spastic beat lol. One last word of advice, I think you should try to stop relying so much on delay until you have some coherence in your tracks. It just seems like you compensate what is lacking by using delay. How long have you been producing?
I hope I wasn't too harsh..
EddieZilker
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Butler
I enjoy the gradually unfolding journey here, and great sense of menace in the atmosphere.
Thanks, Richard. I'll try and listen to your track, in a jiff.
quote:
Originally posted by WhatsTheStory
The track sounds extremely dated and is pretty much just a continuous build up but doesn't actually build up to anything. I kinda wish I could get back that 11 minutes of my life lol. It should be about 7 minutes shorter with the amount of actual changes that add any real value to the track. It really shouldn't take over 2 minutes for the main bass to finally kick in. I'll Give you one alright comment though. That little melody you have after 8 minutes was alright but should have come in sooner and should probably be the main focus in the track. If you relied more on that I think the track would be better. You might wanna put in some breaks to build up the tension better. Your sample selection is kinda weird, Might want to try finding some different samples to use. The snare seems to get drowned out in the middle at some points and the kick while not sounding all that bad doesn't seem to fit the track imo. Its kinda funny that I recall you saying how ppl should push the envelope but don't practice what you preach. At least this track doesn't have a spastic beat lol. One last word of advice, I think you should try to stop relying so much on delay until you have some coherence in your tracks. It just seems like you compensate what is lacking by using delay. How long have you been producing?
I hope I wasn't too harsh..
I have no idea who you are, let alone where you're coming from. You're intimating that you know me by making allusions to things I've probably said or songs I've posted. You honestly haven't been more harsh than anything I've thought about the track. You've provided a lot of subjective and generic feedback that has more to do with personal preferences than it does with any qualitative evaluation. It's not that it's necessarily invalid but there is no context (i.e. knowing you from previous exchanges, hearing your work, et al) to evaluate it against. Being that I've already thought about and tested the very features of the track you're decrying (too much echo, no break), I'm going to go ahead and dismiss this.
I used to be "harsh" in my feedback to other people. I've definitely pushed the envelope, in terms of being caustic, on line and if you've been subject to that, I apologize and it won't happen, again.
Trancelover03591
Very underground. It's unique and not cookie cutter that is for sure. I think it is difficult to transition from listening to super compressed club music to this. But once I transition into listening to it, things are subtle and you can get lost in it and like it.
Excess
this reminds me of the crazy awesome stuff that Breakfast has been doing while transitioning to the alias 'Keyworth'.
i think if you were to make the percussion samples of the track more contemporary, condensed the arrangement, made more use of FX, and cleaned up the mix down you'd have an awesome track here.
it needs a break (not 3 min tarnce break but something in the middle to add some dynamics the track), and less consistency with the elements you've used (sounds like you looped the percussion and just let it run for all 11 minutes, yikes).
check out chameleon for reference:
things to note from chameleon that you should definitely strive for with your track:
-stronger percussion
-better (cleaner) delay/reverb
-intense transitions
-intense fx
you'd have a winner if you could translate those fixes for sure
TranceLover007
quote:
Originally posted by Excess
this reminds me of the crazy awesome stuff that Breakfast has been doing while transitioning to the alias 'Keyworth'.
i think if you were to make the percussion samples of the track more contemporary, condensed the arrangement, made more use of FX, and cleaned up the mix down you'd have an awesome track here.
it needs a break (not 3 min tarnce break but something in the middle to add some dynamics the track), and less consistency with the elements you've used (sounds like you looped the percussion and just let it run for all 11 minutes, yikes).
check out chameleon for reference:
things to note from chameleon that you should definitely strive for with your track:
-stronger percussion
-better (cleaner) delay/reverb
-intense transitions
-intense fx
you'd have a winner if you could translate those fixes for sure
To some extend I do agree with this statement but after knowing your style already (for last three years) I know that you are really drifting away from mainstream trend on the market and always aiming for something more of natural and self evolving journey and not only for some kick ass, deep and loud sounding music lol --> and that's what makes you and your style different from anybody else, .... the rest is up to the mature/more evolved listener/s which your music will/should target - nice one Eddie, cool little story my friend ;)
Cheers,
Darek
Trancelover03591
Breakfast is really good at using distortion.
Falken_za
I wouldn't exactly call this trance. Trance usually starts with a build up, then there's a break, then there's some more build up followed by another break, then there is a climax followed by a cool down. Well, that's how I understand the general formula to be.
This falls more in my opinion into the deep house category.
Pub Crawl
I'll agree with falken, this isn't my definition of trance but I actually really like this. That whole buildup from 3:30 to around 4:00 sounds really cool. If it was me, I would have gone with some different samples and made the highs a little brighter, and sidechained the bass to the kick just in case some release flows over from the bass to the kick.
Hope this helps
EddieZilker
Sorry that I haven't had time to get to this but school is back in and I've got a full course-load with lots of crazy going on around that.
quote:
Originally posted by Trancelover03591
Very underground. It's unique and not cookie cutter that is for sure. I think it is difficult to transition from listening to super compressed club music to this. But once I transition into listening to it, things are subtle and you can get lost in it and like it.
Thanks, man. I was hoping someone would pick up on a somewhat deliberate lack of compression. I really tried to keep it as dynamic as possible. Although I'm still not sure if it lives up to the quality I'd like to take credit for, it's probably one of (if not the most) cleanest mixes I've been able to pull off.
quote:
Originally posted by Excess
this reminds me of the crazy awesome stuff that Breakfast has been doing while transitioning to the alias 'Keyworth'.
i think if you were to make the percussion samples of the track more contemporary, condensed the arrangement, made more use of FX, and cleaned up the mix down you'd have an awesome track here.
it needs a break (not 3 min tarnce break but something in the middle to add some dynamics the track), and less consistency with the elements you've used (sounds like you looped the percussion and just let it run for all 11 minutes, yikes).
check out chameleon for reference:
< - Clip omitted - >
things to note from chameleon that you should definitely strive for with your track:
-stronger percussion
-better (cleaner) delay/reverb
-intense transitions
-intense fx
you'd have a winner if you could translate those fixes for sure
The best thing about posting in this forum is also one of the worst. Every now and again, someone pops in with carefully worded critique that rings true enough to be as bothersome as it is useful. Thanks for taking the time to write it and understand, I'm not being dismissive, but perhaps for future reference, I want to explain myself. The ty part is that I'm probably wrong and you're probably right and I still haven't figured out how to explain myself without it becoming something, that on retrospect, looks like I'm trying to defend my work - regardless of whether or not it needs defense. (At present, I don't think I've posted a single piece of my incessant musical drivel that is flawless enough to be beyond anyone else's criticism.)
Apart from the kick & snare, there are small changes in the percussion elements but nothing monumental. The changes were kept (perhaps mistakenly, if I'm entertaining a critical reflection) understated at effort to facilitate a contiguous flow, throughout the piece. I'm not saying I couldn't have done more (it is 11 minutes, after-all) nor did I withhold attention to the rhythm section out of shear laziness. I did what I did because of my intention with the song.
Today is the first day I've had the chance to listen to the Breakfast/Keyworth piece and, where you're hearing the potential (by your estimation) of my track, I'm hearing disperate musical goals. I'm not saying you're wrong, though. At worst, I'm just saying I don't get it. I can hear the differences - even the ones I think you're pointing to - but, beyond some similarity in sound selection and the fact that both of us side-chained the kick to a slightly similar lead element, I'm quite unsure as to how I can relate one song to the other. The best I can think is to be listening to that song, the next time I try and produce one, and make something that's derivative of its mix and sound-design aesthetics.
Don't feel like you wasted your time. I'm not ignoring your feedback but I am done with this song and going back through all of the routes I took to get it to the point it's at currently, to get it to sound more closely with Breakfast, would take (at least) twice as long as starting from scratch. It's definitely worth considering, however, when I'm working on my next song.
quote:
Originally posted by TranceLover007
To some extend I do agree with this statement but after knowing your style already (for last three years) I know that you are really drifting away from mainstream trend on the market and always aiming for something more of natural and self evolving journey and not only for some kick ass, deep and loud sounding music lol --> and that's what makes you and your style different from anybody else, .... the rest is up to the mature/more evolved listener/s which your music will/should target - nice one Eddie, cool little story my friend ;)
Cheers,
Darek
Thank you, Derek. I really appreciate this, as always.
quote:
Originally posted by Falken_za
I wouldn't exactly call this trance. Trance usually starts with a build up, then there's a break, then there's some more build up followed by another break, then there is a climax followed by a cool down. Well, that's how I understand the general formula to be.
This falls more in my opinion into the deep house category.
quote:
Originally posted by Pub Crawl
I'll agree with falken, this isn't my definition of trance but I actually really like this. That whole buildup from 3:30 to around 4:00 sounds really cool. If it was me, I would have gone with some different samples and made the highs a little brighter, and sidechained the bass to the kick just in case some release flows over from the bass to the kick.
Hope this helps
Well, I don't think it hurts. :D
Thank you and Falken-za.
Deep House is no more defined by the absence of a breakdown than Trance is defined by having one or more; let alone adhering to a formula. I'm calling it trance because of its four-on-the-floor beat, rolling bass-line, predominantly synth driven instrumentation, and 135 BPM tempo; among other reasons. I'm sure someone, somewhere, might be able to find a deep-house song with the above-mentioned characteristics but it will still sound like a deep-house song and not a trance song.
My song has no jazz phrasing or chord work. The kick is placed in a much smaller relation to the rest of the instruments than it would be in Deep House. The mix is much more dense than what typically occurs in Deep House and the transitions in Deep House, along with the rest of the form, are far more melodically anchored and typically (but not always) organized around more traditional song structures (i.e. intro, verse, bridge, chorus, et al).
I'm not defending my work, here. I really have no hang-up about it being called Trance and I'm not going to be offended if someone else says it reminds them of Detroit Techno. I think a lot of attention is mistakenly paid to very superficial attributes of music, in general, in trying to categorize it. I also think that when a genre becomes commonly defined by its stereotypical tropes, the nails have been put in the coffin, in terms of its longevity or relevance. The best categorizations are derived from a constellation of attributes and how they relate to one another, without a particular focus on significant features that are either present or lacking.
WhatsTheStory
quote:
Originally posted by EddieZilker
I have no idea who you are, let alone where you're coming from. You're intimating that you know me by making allusions to things I've probably said or songs I've posted. You honestly haven't been more harsh than anything I've thought about the track. You've provided a lot of subjective and generic feedback that has more to do with personal preferences than it does with any qualitative evaluation. It's not that it's necessarily invalid but there is no context (i.e. knowing you from previous exchanges, hearing your work, et al) to evaluate it against. Being that I've already thought about and tested the very features of the track you're decrying (too much echo, no break), I'm going to go ahead and dismiss this.
I used to be "harsh" in my feedback to other people. I've definitely pushed the envelope, in terms of being caustic, on line and if you've been subject to that, I apologize and it won't happen, again.
wow of course you are gonna try to say that because I thought your track wasn't good that somehow I have some personal vendetta against you lol. I was actually an active member way before your time on here and stopped posting around 5-6 years ago so no cant say i've been subjected to anything from you. Fact of the matter is this track is utter garbage.It lacks any soul what so ever and should as I said in my first post be 3-4 minutes long with the elements that you even have in it,11 minutes? Really? That to me was one of the saddest parts of the track that you think it had to be that long lol. Anyone who listens to this kinda music would have shut it off in the first minute since you decided to have the main bassline come in almost 2 and a half minutes in.By the 4 minute mark I was falling asleep. You really should consider these kinds of things in your future music making sessions. Same old story lmao, And of course you would say that my evaluation isn't valid because you haven't heard my work. Do you go to school for arguing on the internet 101 lol.
It is funny the fact that I wasted my time trying to be helpful and giving you feedback that would help make the track better and you decided to defend it even though you always claim you don't do any defending lol. You did the same thing to excess who you must be friends with cause no way would anyone compare this to breakfast if you guys werent lol. I dont think you will ever be able to achieve that kind of sound if your life depended on it.
Edit..
quote:
Originally posted by EddieZilker
Deep House is no more defined by the absence of a breakdown than Trance is defined by having one or more; let alone adhering to a formula. I'm calling it trance because of its four-on-the-floor beat, rolling bass-line, predominantly synth driven instrumentation, and 135 BPM tempo; among other reasons. I'm sure someone, somewhere, might be able to find a deep-house song with the above-mentioned characteristics but it will still sound like a deep-house song and not a trance song.
My song has no jazz phrasing or chord work. The kick is placed in a much smaller relation to the rest of the instruments than it would be in Deep House. The mix is much more dense than what typically occurs in Deep House and the transitions in Deep House, along with the rest of the form, are far more melodically anchored and typically (but not always) organized around more traditional song structures (i.e. intro, verse, bridge, chorus, et al).
I'm not defending my work, here. I really have no hang-up about it being called Trance and I'm not going to be offended if someone else says it reminds them of Detroit Techno. I think a lot of attention is mistakenly paid to very superficial attributes of music, in general, in trying to categorize it. I also think that when a genre becomes commonly defined by its stereotypical tropes, the nails have been put in the coffin, in terms of its longevity or relevance. The best categorizations are derived from a constellation of attributes and how they relate to one another, without a particular focus on significant features that are either present or lacking.
Man you sure are delusional. Rolling Bassline? synth driven instrumentation? More dense than deep house? Wtf. Do you live in LaLa land lol. Firstly you main bass isnt a rolling bassline. Its a simple offbeat that has been played out since 2000. You wanna claim that you attempt to be original and then put in the same kind of bass as maybe 10 billion other tracks the last 20 years... Synth Driven? lol man you should pick up being a comedian. As I said in my first post the synth you have after 8 minutes was the highlight of the track but that first synth you have playing over almost the entirety of the track has 4 notes(prob should've added some delay to it lmao), Which makes the fact that you think this is a dense arrangment even more funny.. it sounds like you have 5-6 elements besides the random drum fills you have playing throughout the track. It is a shame that there is way to much open access to music making tools now a days. That is the problem with why music has become . Now everyone and there grandmother thinks they can make "beats"
You never did answer to my question of how long you have been producing.
I've heard tracks from ppl on here who have been producing less than 6 months that have their music better put together.Tracks like this just prove that there are too many ppl who dont know what they are doing when it comes to producing. I don't think this track would have been acceptable even 20 years ago...
