TaintedLogic's audio Reviews on Newgrounds

[-Dormant-]

Ooohh, I've missed your dark ambient tracks. The pulsing texture towards the beginning sets the scene nicely, and the airy percussion that pops in at around :35 is super nice for a more rhythmic appeal. The pacing remains a bit slow until the second half, and I thought the transition at 1:53 could've been a tad more creative. That said, the distorted percussion at 1:57 is really neat, and the more intricate rhythmic elements during the second half help keep me engaged. The composition could've used a tad more ebb-and-flow at times, but the atmosphere, rhythmic components, and production are all on point here. Keep it up, WF! ^^

[The Forbidden T Word (poem)]

I too found these article titles unnerving when I first heard you talk about them. But I think you're missing the forest for the trees here.

The central argument of the Slate article is that the media's obsession with "fact-checking" isn't going to change anyone's beliefs. Appealing to shared values, however, is more likely to do so. Zimmerman gives the example of someone who believes that "all terrorists are Muslim." Pointing out the many examples of terrorism conducted by people of other religions isn't that helpful if the person's fear of Muslims runs deeper than that. But having a conversation about the deeper issues at heart (i.e., subjective things like what makes a person feel safe, etc.) is more likely to leave the anti-Muslim person with a more open and nuanced perspective, and also help them find common ground with others who they may otherwise disagree with. And btw, Zimmerman's article is categorized as "Science" because there's credible academic research showing that this "feelings-based" method of persuasion works: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282668982_From_Gulf_to_Bridge_When_Do_Moral_Arguments_Facilitate_Political_Influence

The point is that judging the articles by their titles alone isn't really helpful. I don't appreciate Slate's use of overly-provocative clickbait as a headline either, but these articles are worthy of more thoughtful discussion than just "see how ridiculous the MSM is being".

Nevertheless, your poem was amusing.

SilverFoxJams responds:

Thanks for your honest feedback.

[Move [Rap/Metal] (Extended Version)]

You certainly doubled down on the eerie mood and energetic elements here compared to the original. The intro works well for setting up the apprehensive tone of the piece, although you may have gone a tad overboard with the chopped-up vocals, and the shift in the instrumentation at :44 could've been a bit smoother. The drums definitely sound louder, but I also think they're distorting the rest of the texture a bit now. In a piece like this with a lot of attack on the guitars, I'm not sure you need a kick this heavy/prominent. The vocals sound like they're ducking in and out of the mix sometimes, though, which is probably my main concern. I like the change-of-pace in the instrumental track at 2:41 - adds a touch of variety towards the end. I'm honestly not sure this edit would've changed my score enough to justify the 5% "late tax," though. Maybe that's just me confirming my own bias against encouraging people to take the tax, but that's my opinion. :) Still, listening to this piece for a third and fourth time only reassures me that the flow in the rap is top-notch and the sound design is stellar here. It's a really captivating piece - the challenge remains how to have each of the competing elements (guitar, vocals, drums) sit well in the mix. But hey, if you're doing any more rap/metal hybrids, send me a PM! This is stuff I don't see a lot of on Newgrounds, so it's refreshing. Until then, cheers! ^_^

ProjectSoary responds:

Thank you! That's all I wanted to know. That 5% is pretty brutal. Thanks again for going the extra mile and writing this 2nd review! Much appreciated. See you in NGUAC 2022!

[Temporal]

Right off the bat, I’m liking the energy and the rhythmic elements of the vocals. The production quality is great, although the lyrics are a bit cheesy. The pitch-shifted vocals at :37 work really well, but that section also felt a tad over-compressed. By 1:22, the vocals seem a bit repetitive, but the synth melodies at the second drop at 1:50ish are really refreshing. The arrangement and some of the chord progressions are a little generic, but I also like the change-of-pace to the beat at 2:50. Overall, you nailed the mixing, sound design, atmosphere, melodies, and arrangement. A little more variety and originality would’ve been ideal, but this is a strong effort. Thanks for coming out to the NGUAC this year, Veryfakeguest! It’s been a blast. ^_^

Mixing, mastering, and balance
2/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
1/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
2/2
Instrumentation and sound design
.75/1
Emotion, atmosphere, and catchiness
1.25/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
.5/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
1/1
Composite score
8.5/10

[Sleepmarching]

I like the twittering synth at the beginning and the rich atmosphere. The sound design is great, perhaps with the exception of the vocaloid. It sounds pretty realistic for a vocoder output, but admittedly that’s a pretty low bar. The production is strong, and I especially like the rhythmic “t’s” toward the end starting at around 1:45. It’s a great subtle way of using the vocoder that makes it impossible to tell it’s a vocoder. The lyrics themselves are also really good, and the theremin melodies at :45 hit the spot too. The composition could have a little more ebb-and-flow over time - right now the energy level is pretty constant, although the piece flows smoothly and seems really cohesive, but also well-varied harmonically. Overall, I’m really enjoying the bright mood, mixing, and rhythmic elements here. The vocaloid strikes me as low-hanging fruit for improvement, but I like the other vocal samples you included here at around 1:30. Thanks for coming out to the NGUAC this year, Vermeen! It’s been a blast. ^_^

Mixing, mastering, and balance
2/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
1.25/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
2/2
Instrumentation and sound design
.75/1
Emotion, atmosphere, and catchiness
1.25/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
1/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
.75/1
Composite score
9/10

vermeen responds:

It's been quite the ride! Yeah, I defs agree with the voice, didn't mold it out enough and the arrangement was done in one go (I made it on the same day the song got published lmao)! This song went through so many drafts like it was making me lose my mind but I'm glad I still finished it and didn't tap out. I've learned so much through participating. Thank you so much for your invaluable words and for setting up the contest!

[Crown of Grace]

I like the tranquil mood at the beginning. The instruments don’t sound entirely authentic, but the phrasing and tasteful use of dissonance (like at :57) are appealing here. The emotional appeal of the piano at 1:32 is really nice, although the beat that starts fading in at 1:43 or so seems a little too regular and energetic for a piece like this. The build-up into 2:41 was well-done, but the section at 2:41 itself felt a little bland and chordal. Some stronger melodic content at some point would’ve really helped tie this piece together. The meandering mallet riff at 3:24 seems a bit square and aimless to quite serve the “strong melodic content” purpose here. That said, I really like the rich, well-balanced texture and progression here. Some of the compositional details could use a bit more fleshing out imo, but the production, arrangement, and atmosphere are all very well-crafted here. Keep at it, Undervania, and thanks for coming out to this year’s NGUAC! ^_^ It’s been a blast.

Mixing, mastering, and balance
1.75/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
1.25/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
1.5/2
Instrumentation and sound design
.75/1
Emotion, atmosphere, and catchiness
1.25/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
.75/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
.5/1
Composite score
7.75/10

uvimusic responds:

Glad you liked it! Thanks a lot for the criticism:)

[Under Frost]

I like the heavy guitars at the beginning and the energy. The throaty vocals are great, but sometimes their delivery is a tad awkward - “behind...your eyes” at :34, for example. The lyrics themselves are good, though. The mix holds up incredibly well here despite the busy texture, and I’m enjoying the more melodic flair to the guitar riffs at 1:12. After a time, the structure of the piece feels a tad cyclical and formulaic, and I was waiting for a bit more variety in the energy level and tone of the piece to help keep me engaged. The section at 2:38 helps scratch that itch a bit, but the section itself is pretty bland and short-lived. The extra low-register vocal layers at 3:25 really give an extra edge to the end of the piece, and the guitar solo at 3:48 seems to have an added sense of urgency to it that adds a sense of arrival towards the end. Still, the end felt a tad abrupt somehow. I think it’s hard to convey much in the way of phrasing when the intensity and instrumentation of the piece is so uniform throughout. That said, the ominous, foreboding tone and dense rhythmic content of the piece are really engrossing here, and I continue to be impressed with the production quality throughout. Strong work, TSRBand! Thanks for coming out to the NGUAC this year. ^_^

Mixing, mastering, and balance
2/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
1/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
1.75/2
Instrumentation and sound design
1/1
Emotion, atmosphere, and catchiness
1.25/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
.75/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
.5/1
Composite score
8.25/10

TSRBand responds:

Thanks so much for hosting the comp and the detailed review! I'm glad you liked it :)

[Dreams in Scarlet Reverb [II. Hollow]]

I like the nature sound effects at the beginning and beeping/heavy breathing. That said, the transition at :37 was a little abrupt, and didn’t end up crafting the sound design at the beginning into a very coherent direction. The tone of the piece after around the 1-minute mark is much brighter and even adventuresome-sounding. The pacing is a bit slow, but I’m enjoying the more prominent vocals at 1:45 and the gradual climax into 2:09. The texture is pretty minimal at 2:10, but the use of compression and variety across phrases helps keep things interesting. The production quality and sound design are both really strong here, although I wonder if the arrangement could be a bit more cohesive - there are a couple of sudden transitions, such as at 3:50, 4:16, and 5:32 - and the instrumentation and mood change so frequently that it’s hard to keep tabs on the overarching sense of direction here. A lot of the melodic motifs and rhythmic elements are really enjoyable - I especially like the cutesy vocals at around 4:30. The piece didn’t quite come together by the end for me, though. The arrangement is a tad choppy at times, and I didn’t quite get a strong sense of narrative arc or development from the piece. It might help if you had consolidated some of your ideas a bit more, as I feel like the complicated orchestration pattern and phrase structure here are a bit disorienting sometimes. That said, the sound design is pretty unique, and the texture feels well-balanced and full for much of the piece. The rhythmic content, atmosphere, and mixing were also strengths. Overall, solid work here, TheVodouQueen, and thanks for coming out to the NGUAC this year! ^_^

Mixing, mastering, and balance
2/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
1/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
1.5/2
Instrumentation and sound design
1/1
Emotion, atmosphere, and catchiness
1.25/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
1/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
.5/1
Composite score
8.25/10

[Angels Voice "NGUAC Final"]

I like the beats at the beginning and the creative use of sweeps. The piece is a little slow to progress, and I would’ve liked to hear some more creative drum patterns at some point. The production quality is strong, and the sound design fits well in context, even if it is a bit cliche at times. The snare was a bit far back in the mix for most of the piece, but otherwise the mastering holds up well. The piece flows really smoothly, and by around the 3-minute mark the meaning of the theme of the “angel’s voice” is clear to me. I was itching for some more dynamic melodic content at some point, and I think the climax into 5:23 was a bit of a missed opportunity for that. The second half of the piece is quite repetitive, and much of the foregrounded content is rhythmic/chordal in nature. That said, I really like the atmosphere and rich texture here. The composition could’ve been a bit bolder in places, but the production makes up for that imo. Keep at it, TerraNation, and thanks for coming out to the NGUAC! ^_^

Mixing, mastering, and balance
2/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
1/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
1.5/2
Instrumentation and sound design
.75/1
Emotion, atmosphere, and catchiness
1.25/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
.5/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
.5/1
Composite score
7.5/10