TaintedLogic's audio Reviews on Newgrounds

[Niko - Devil]

I like the rhythmic texture and instruments at the beginning. The transition into :13 is solid, but that snare sounds really harsh. I’d suggest equalizing out some of the mid-high tones on it. That way, you can create a cool layering effect where it almost sounds like two snare, but simultaneously takes a bit of the edge off. The distorted vocals at :41, while also a little harsh-sounding and repetitive, fit into the texture well and add some fun thematic content. The drop at 1:22 was fun, if a little minimalistic. In general, the production quality here is really good. The mix is loud and clear, even if it needs a bit of polish on some of these harsh tones sometimes. The breakdown at 2:17 was good for some structural variety. I also appreciate how you cut the vocal section a bit short during the second build-up cycle, and transitioned into the drop with that maniacal laugh sample. While a bit cheesy sometimes, the synths here provide a cutesy innocence that contrasts the distorted breaks and dark vocals quite well. You did a good job of structuring this piece too. The ending was a tad abrupt, but I liked the idea of having a suddenly quiet last note like that. Overall, this is a fun piece with a good amount of variety and strong mastering. Keep at it, Nikolopoblete!

8/10

Mixing, mastering, and balance
1.75/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
1.25/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
1.75/2
Instrumentation and sound design
.75/1
Emotion, atmosphere, and catchiness
1.5/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
.5/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
.5/1
Composite score
8/10

[Once and For All]

The build-up at the beginning is cool, but I don’t think the very beginning of a track is the best place for a build-up. The piece might need more of a proper intro. The airy synths at :16 were really cool, though. I love the atmosphere of the piece and the smooth bass. Given the build-up at :41, I don’t even think you need the build-up at the very beginning at all because it doesn’t lead anywhere. That said, the drop after the build-up at :41 was also a bit underwhelming - minimalistic, but also not very hard-hitting. There’s a lot of reverb to fill in the texture here, even if it doesn’t affect the mix too much. I also think the drums could’ve louder during the refrain there. There’s also not much prominent melodic content in this piece, and you overuse generic build-up patterns. The breakdown at 2:38 was a welcome moment of tranquility, and I also really liked the atmospheric texture at 3:35. That said, the composition isn’t very dynamic after that point, and the piece seemed to drag a bit towards the end. You never really offered the listener a final climax that resolved all of the themes of the piece. The atmosphere, instrumentation, and production in this piece are really good. Loud though the mix is, I think cutting out some reverb would really help it out, though. My main concerns here include the highly transitory nature of the composition (a lot of build-ups, but not a lot of cathartic/climactic moments) and the lack of melodic content. Overall, you’re clearly a talented producer with a good sense of harmony. Now you just need to consolidate some of your ideas a bit more effectively (i.e., fewer build-ups, but more real directionality to your piece). Keep at it, Naval76!

7.5/10

Mixing, mastering, and balance
1.75/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
.75/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
1.5/2
Instrumentation and sound design
1/1
Emotion, atmosphere, and catchiness
1.5/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
.5/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
.5/1
Composite score
7.5/10

[Chicken Feather]

The arpeggios at the beginning are pretty cool. Instruments are clearly inauthentic, and are also a tad dry. The panning works pretty well for the most part, although the mix was also pretty quiet in general. The progression was very slow until 1:04. I enjoyed the melodic content at 1:04, short-lived though it was. I think the mix could be sharper. A lot of the drone-like elements begin to sound indistinct during the busy section (1:06-2:08 or so). I also think that the transition into 2:08 wasn’t super strong. For a solid 20 seconds, those string arpeggios are the sole element of the texture. Then, when a melody comes in at 2:28, it’s completely overshadowed by the arpeggios. I think you need to do a better job of prioritizing melodic content in the mix. The ending was a tad abrupt, but also sounded pleasing because it ends on the tonic. Overall, I think the composition could sound a bit more dynamic, especially during the second half, and I’d encourage you to use more phrasing, dynamic contrast, and automation. The mastering could use some stricter equalization, compression, and maybe more advanced techniques like stereo widening if some of your harmonies share too many frequencies. As it is, the panning is a bit heavy at times. I’d encourage you to keep a more mono-stereo approach to mixing as much as possible. Overall, though, this is a fun piece with a lot of melodic and emotional content. Keep at it, Mrcoolisimo!

6.75/10

Mixing, mastering, and balance
1/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
1.25/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
1.5/2
Instrumentation and sound design
.5/1
Emotion, atmosphere, and catchiness
1.25/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
.5/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
.75/1
Composite score
6.75/10

[Max]

I like the pizzicato-y synths at the beginning. The rhythm is a bit bizarre, but comes off as being more creative/experimental than anything bad, per say. The piece has a nice ebb and flow to it, but progresses very slowly harmonically. I like the instrumentation switch-up at 1:18, but the harmonic content is still the same. There isn’t really much strong melodic content in this piece, but the piece does seem quite varied in terms of intensity and structure. The mixing and mastering are strong, and you clearly have a good sense of harmony and rhythm. That said, the lack of variation in the harmonic content really started to bother me after a while. I don’t think there was quite enough variety in the energy and rhythmic content to justify keeping the moving notes the same for the entire piece. I also thought the fade-out was a pretty underwhelming way to conclude the piece and that the instrumentation is pretty generic. Overall, nice job with the production, structural variety, and atmosphere. I’d like to see you do more with some of the compositional elements next time. Keep at it, LordJabeebus!

7/10

Mixing, mastering, and balance
2/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
.5/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
1.5/2
Instrumentation and sound design
.75/1
Emotion, atmosphere, and catchiness
1.5/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
.5/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
.25/1
Composite score
7/10

LJTLegendaryL responds:

Thanks for the evaluation :). I'm happy that this time I got a better score, I'll be sure to find a way to make mix things up a bit in future compositions. This was really helpful!

[laying in the backseat, staring at the ever-shifting stars]

I like the chill mood at the beginning, but I think you didn’t execute it as well as you could’ve. The heavy panning sounds pretty harsh; I can barely hear anything in my right ear. I also think the instrument at the beginning is a little cheesy and generic. Then, the synth that comes in at :19 is completely in the right ear. It seems like you’ve prioritized mixing clarity over blending, and also that you’ve taken that approach a bit too far. I’d suggest looking into stereo widening techniques rather than panning both of these instruments to one extreme side of the spectrum, especially when they’re the only things going on. The mood of the piece is really calming, and as the texture thickens the blissful nature of the bell-like synths really comes through. The instrumentation is still a little cliche, though. Usually 3xOsc is a pretty unpolished plugin to use for harmonic content (great for sweeps and sub-basses, though). The mix remains loud and clear as the piece goes on, but the panning still bothers me. As for the composition, I’d like to see you use more advanced techniques of creating variety than just adding and subtracting instruments over time. I’d suggest trying to use more dynamic contrast, phrasing, and automation. Also, the piece doesn’t have much structuring. All it ever does is grow in intensity and, while it does have its cathartic moments, I think there needs to be more of an ebb and flow within this paradigm of “one big climax” in order for it to be most effective. Overall, learning to mix without relying too much on panning would be a worthwhile investment for you. You should probably spend the plurality of the time you spend mixing adjusting equalizers, not compressors or panning. Fleshing out the composition more is an important step, too. Still, the mood and atmosphere of the piece are really nice. Keep at it, Lofiskyline!

5.25/10

Mixing, mastering, and balance
1.25/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
.25/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
1.5/2
Instrumentation and sound design
.25/1
Emotion, atmosphere, and catchiness
1.25/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
.5/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
.25/1
Composite score
5.25/10

lofiskyline15 responds:

thank you! I definitely agree on the equalizer thing and I'm actually working more on ambient fade ins rather than straight-up instrument adding/subtracting. I actually never really rely on panning as much as I did in this song, and it's kind of more for a full sound (kind of like a Panic! At the Disco situation) haha so when the second synth with the different timing kicks in, the contrasting timing catches you off guard. it also is supposed to work as kind of something to catch you off guard so as to help you remember the song more. but it could definitely be frustrating.

in terms of catchiness and song structure, this is also kind of a weird one for me. I was trying to emulate M83 in a more D.I.Y. sense as the instruments pile on. regarding the synth choice, it is a little cheesy. I was kind of going to, through free synths, go for that D.I.Y feel without losing the emotional intensity. it could totally backfire though (haha)

a song I've uploaded recently, minor truce, is probably the craziest thing I've ever done and I feel like it responds to a lot of your criticisms in terms of generic build song structure and a lack of originality. there is panning but it's a lot less minor, and, while the beginning builds in dynamics through slowly adding drums, there's several switch ups that make it worth it.

these are fantastic criticisms, though. thank you very much!

[[Dubstep] Firewood VIP]

I like the ominous intro. The panning is a little strong for my tastes, especially at the beginning where it wasn’t entirely necessary for the clarity of the mix. I like the climax into :41. The drop at 1:10 is especially hard-hitting, and the production quality is pretty sharp. I think the drop lasts a little too long without much variation, though. You transitioned smoothly into the section at 2:04. Overall, there’s a lot of minimalism in this piece, and you overuse the transition with the snare rolls (2:29, for example). I also think you could’ve changed up the drop a lot more the second time around. There was a lot of copy and paste during the second half of the piece, and not a lot of overarching sense of direction in the composition as a result. Nice job with the atmosphere during the outro, though. Overall, solid production quality, instrumentation, and progression. More variety and melodic content would help out this track a lot, though. Keep at it, LaxLewis-579!

7.5/10

Mixing, mastering, and balance
1.75/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
.75/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
1.25/2
Instrumentation and sound design
.75/1
Emotion, atmosphere, and catchiness
1.5/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
.5/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
1/1
Composite score
7.5/10

[Kirefyx - Klassy]

I like the intense orchestral-sounding instrument at the beginning. The progression is a little slow for the first minute or so, but starts picking up just in time for the build-up at :52. I liked the drop at 1:02, even if it was a tad minimalistic. The production quality here is sharp. That snare has a lot of bite. That said, the mix isn’t all that loud. You transition pretty well back into the “verse” at 1:44. Perhaps the texture could use a tad more variety at times. You also overused the transitions with the crashes (and reverse-crashes). I think the piece gets very repetitive after a while, and has several sections that are pretty minimalic, regardless of the drop. I think you could stand to add a little more atmosphere to the piece and thicken the texture otherwise. You have a good sense of harmony and rhythm, and the thematic content and production are excellent. My main concern here is that the composition could be a lot more dynamic and varied. Otherwise, keep at it, Kirefyx!

Mixing, mastering, and balance
2/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
.75/1.5
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
.5/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
1/1
Composite score
8/10

Kirefyx responds:

Thanks for the feedback! Will consider this for the future

[[DJKB] B4 I Leave]

Cool progression at the beginning. I liked the quirky synths and the downtempo beat at :11. The melody synth at :23 is pretty cool too, if a tad cheesy. There are multiple instances in this piece where you use sweeps as transitions without anything on the other side of the transition to cushion the change in instrumentation. For example, the sweep into :47 definitely sounds like you’re leading somewhere, but the minimalist texture on the other end doesn’t quite release that energy that you built up with the sweep. Sounds a bit like you’re patching up a bullet wound with a band-aid, to use a trite saying. That said, the progression is pretty good by the time the refrain rolls around at 1:11. Again, sound design could be a bit cheesy at times (like that high-frequency-range perc). I also think the mixing and mastering could be a bit tighter there. The kick doesn’t come through very well, and in general it sounded like the pads were taking up a bit too much space. Catchy content, though, and I like the call-and-response action you have going on in the post-chorus (like at 1:50). The melodic content at 2:05 is nice, too. I guess my main complaint (other than the abrupt transitions) is probably the lack of shape in the composition. I’d encourage you to do more with phrasing, dynamics, and automation to keep things interesting within individual sections of the piece, especially since this track is so harmonically similar throughout. I appreciated the variations on the final chorus at 2:53. I don’t think the piece loops well, although maybe you didn’t actually intend for it to loop when you wrote it. Overall, catchy and fun piece. My main concerns are the mixing and mastering quality, sudden transitions, and a couple other compositional details. Keep at it, Kbenitezlugo!

7/10

Mixing, mastering, and balance
1.25/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
.75/1.5
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?)
.75/1
Composite score
7/10

[To The Moon!]

The frantic synth arpeggios at the beginning are cool. I wasn’t a huge fan of the vocals, though. They sounded really muddy and indistinct, and just didn’t add much to the texture imo. The piece cycles through a couple of mini-buildups before the texture changes much, though. Once the drop comes at around 1:06, there’s not much harmonic content. I’m also a little confused about the transition into the drop. There’s not really any distinct structuring there (drum fills, crashes, etc.), so I can’t tell when the drop starts. That’s an indication that you could do a better job of keeping the listener grounded. As the piece goes on, the progression still doesn’t have a strong directionality to it, and the abrupt transition at 1:41 was really jarring. There are a lot of moments of minimalism, sudden transitions (another huge offender at 2:29), and overall very little harmonic content of value (like melodies). The bass riffs are catchy, but not very memorable, and it seems like the only moving notes you have above 1,000 Hz for the entire piece are those synth arpeggios that keep coming back as filler content all over the place. The piece ends just as suddenly as I’d expect, too. It’s really a shame that the composition and arrangement of this track never come together because the production is fantastic. All the synths and drum patterns sound so clear and polished throughout. I can’t say that the frequencies are too well-balanced (mostly because there’s a lot of bass and not a lot of anything else), but I’m thoroughly convinced that you’re a talented producer by now. I think you should really focus on your composition skills from now on. For your next piece, try to structure it around a specific chord progression and melody. That way, your listener will have a more solid harmonic foundation to stand on when you change up the texture around the harmonic elements. Good luck (but don’t be discouraged! Developing strong composition skills is really hard). Keep at it, K0TiC!

5.5/10

Mixing, mastering, and balance
2/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
.25/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
.5/2
Instrumentation and sound design
1/1
Emotion, atmosphere, and catchiness
1/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
.5/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
.25/1
Composite score
5.5/10

K0TiC responds:

Thank you for the response, I’ll make sure to work on my transitions and structure. I do admit that I could have done a lot better with this track. Again, thank you, I’ll be sure to take your advice in to every other track / song I make.