TaintedLogic's audio Reviews on Newgrounds

[Way Back Home]

I like the dreamy atmosphere at the beginning and the nostalgic tone of the vocals. The vocal delivery is great - conversational in tone, but also captures the introspective lyrics well. I like the crisp drums and airy pads too, although the drums could’ve been a tad stronger in the mix at times. Writing-wise, the instrumentals here could’ve been a tad bolder at times - the solo at 2:06 is catchy and blends in with the atmosphere well, but it also could’ve had a bit more range to really sell the emotional appeal of this piece. The chord progression and aspects of the arrangement are a tad cliche, and I would’ve liked to see you create a more climactic section in the second half of the piece. Despite these nitpicks, I still really like the sound design, vocals, and atmosphere of this one. I think “the embers might not glow” is my favorite lyric in the piece. Thanks for coming out to the NGUAC, AveragePhoe! ^_^

Mixing, mastering, and balance
1.75/2
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
1.5/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
.5/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
1/1
Composite score
8.5/10

[AndrewCR × Upcoda - Glee]

I like the cute synth pattern at the beginning and the subtle build-up into :18. The production quality is solid, although the first minute already feels pretty repetitive. I like the melodies at :54 - very upbeat and dynamic. The breakdown at 1:31 was a nice change-of-pace, and the tense atmosphere at 1:50 created a good backdrop for the build-up into 2:26, although the build-up itself felt a bit dragged-out. The mix sounds a bit strained at 2:26, with the snare in particular struggling to pop through at times. The glitchy outro at 2:45 was a nice touch, but also a bit overly repetitive. Overall, I really like the sound design, melodies, and progression of this one. The composition could be a bit bolder at times, especially later in the piece, and at times the pacing feels a bit slow too. That said, the triumphant mood and bouncy synths are still very strong elements of this piece. Thanks for coming out to the NGUAC, fellas! ^_^

Mixing, mastering, and balance
1.75/2
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?)
1/1
Composite score
8.5/10

upcoda responds:

thanks for the review taintedlogic! believe me we will really take the comments into account!

[Finale]

I like the dreamy atmosphere at the beginning and the funky rhythmic elements of this. The melodies at :45 are really majestic, and the strings blend in really well with the synth harmonies. The piece flows really smoothly into the breakdown at 1:09, and the vocals at 1:52 were a pleasant surprise. The piece comes together nicely with the second climactic section at 2:14, although the mix there sounds a bit thin in the middle and the repeated vocal verse at 2:37 already felt a tad stale. Overall, the production quality and sound design here are really good, though. Love the rich bass at :45 and the crisp percussion throughout. The first half of the piece in particular sounds very refreshing and unique. Overall, strong work here, ALGO! ^_^

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
1/1
Emotion, atmosphere, and catchiness
1.5/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
1/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
.75/1
Composite score
9/10

[dubble-bubble (NGUAC 2024 Knockout Round)]

I like the flashy beats and cute synths at the beginning. There’s a nice subtle build-up into :30. The drop is catchy, but the mix sounds like it’s missing some mid-range tones. Maybe some more prominent pads or something would help fill it out a bit more. The atmospheric bridge at 1:17 is really nice, as is the transition into 2:02. At some point, I would’ve liked to hear some more depth in the harmonies. That said, the production quality is really strong, and the rhythmic content here is top-notch. Some of the synths sound a bit thin in the texture, and that’s especially noticeable when most of the instruments playing during some of the busier sections of the piece sound like that. That said, overall the sound design blends together well and has a nice, light and airy flair. Really evocative piece here, and fitting of your username! Keep it up. ^_^

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
1/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
.75/1
Composite score
8/10

whymsical responds:

thanks for rating! i admit that mixing mids are kinda rushed, and the synths arent layered.

[The Wave]

I like the eerie texture at the beginning and the smooth descending guitar line at :09. The distorted vocals at :20 sound a bit bizarre in context, although the drop at :33 is catchy. The texture is still pretty minimal, although the shimmering pads at 1:16 and the mixing effects help keep things interesting. The “underwater” effect at 1:27 sounds really cool, if a tad goofy given that there’s not much going on in the texture there. The reverse percussion at 1:23 is pretty cool, too. Overall, I would’ve liked to see some more depth and variety in the harmonies here, but the experimental texture of this is definitely really engaging and unique. You have a real knack for creating a rich and dynamic atmosphere with relatively few sounds. Keep at it, Walpang! ^_^

Mixing, mastering, and balance
1.75/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
1/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
1.25/2
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?)
.75/1
Composite score
8/10

Walpang responds:

Thanks as always for the specific and incredibly constructive feedback!! Comments like these really help with dialing in the exact feeling that I'm after.

[loss of consciousness [NGUAC24]]

I like the glitchy meter at the beginning, but the lead synth sounds a bit harsh in the mix. I’d suggest softening it with a tad more wet reverb and other mixing effects. The drums towards the beginning could also use a boost with some more compression. The bass line at :25 is cool, but sounds a bit overly contained in the mix. I might suggest moving it up an octave and then playing with the filtering and equalizer to keep some of the original contained effect, but just make it more dynamic-sounding. The piece really comes together well at 1:05, with a richer texture and better balance of frequencies. The composition could still use a bit more fleshing out here, though, and you also overuse the glitchy stop-start effects after a while. I’d encourage you to keep working on this. I’d love to hear a full-length version of this piece that has a bit more depth and variety in the harmonies. Really cool sound design and progression here, though. Keep at it, VirtuaLIkimono! ^_^

Mixing, mastering, and balance
1.25/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
.75/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
1.25/2
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
7/10

[Red Thirst [NGUAC24]]

I like the waltzy meter and eerie harpsichord harmonies at the beginning. Whether intentionally or not, the slight stumbling of the notes at :14 only contributes to the ominous mood, and there’s a nice gradual build-up into 1:10. The evil laugh at :45 and screaming at 1:09 add to the thematic content nicely. The drop at 1:10 is nice, if a tad bottom-heavy. I would’ve liked to hear more of the backing pads in the mix there. The melody at 1:38 is catchy, but also could’ve been a bit more dynamic. There are a lot of repeated contours in it. The chord progression at 2:07 is nice, and I really like the echo-y upper-mid pad at 2:47. Overall, the sound design, flow, and rhythmic content here are all great, and the production quality is also solid. The composition could use a bit more depth later on, with a thicker texture and more of an ebb-and-flow in the phrasing. Still, I love the foreboding mood and progression of this one. Keep at it, TotallyPorff! ^_^

Mixing, mastering, and balance
1.75/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
1/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
1.25/2
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?)
.75/1
Composite score
7.75/10

TotallyPorff responds:

Thank you so much for the advice! I look forward to next time!

[Discordance : Found Sympathy [NGUAC 2024 Knockout Round]]

I like the pensive atmosphere at the beginning and the piano arpeggios at :19 and the build-up into :44. The drop at :44 is very minimal and stagnant, especially compared to the rich atmosphere earlier in the piece. The production quality in the piece is pretty good overall, but I can tell the strings at 1:11 are getting distorted by the heavy sidechaining, and the mix in general is also a bit quiet. I like the rhythmic content at 1:42 and the transition into the moody breakdown at 2:07. There’s another good sense of build-up into 3:02, but overall this piece never seems like it gets back to the same intensity level as the first 44 seconds. At some point, the piece also could’ve used some more dynamic melodic content. The string refrain is nice, but the contour is also very repetitive within the phrase itself. Still, this piece has some great sound design and neat compositional details like the funky rhythms at 1:12. Fill out the texture a bit more during the body of the piece, and maybe add a bit of polish to the mixing, and this would easily get another point or two from me. Keep at it, TotallyDementedOff! ^_^

Mixing, mastering, and balance
1.25/2
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
.75/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
1/1
Composite score
7.75/10

[He's Into Lolicon]

I like the classic early 2000s rock feel at the beginning. The vocals are delivered well - nice conversational tone and articulation - and the lyrics have a good comedic value. The vocals could’ve been mixed a little further up-front, though. It’s hard to make out the lyrics at times, largely because the vocals aren’t staying on top of the texture too well. A little compression and some stricter equalization on the instrumental track might help make them stand out more, but admittedly my own experience with mixing live-recorded guitars is limited, so just be careful not to cut into their frequency range too much. That said, the composition here is really strong. The melodies are dynamic, your guitar skills are excellent, and the entire arrangement flows really nicely. The bridge at 2:01 is really hilarious and self-aware. The vocal layering during the last 20 seconds or so isn’t perfect - it just doesn’t blend very well, and might need to be re-recorded. Otherwise, this is a very well-executed composition. You remind me of @UlfusNG, who made a bunch of similar comedy songs back in the day. Keep at it, TofuTehSurvivor! ^_^

Mixing, mastering, and balance
1.25/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
1.5/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
1.75/2
Instrumentation and sound design
1/1
Emotion, atmosphere, and catchiness
1.5/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
1/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
.75/1
Composite score
8.75/10

TofuTehSurvivor responds:

Noted! Still learning mixing 🤣 thank you for the feedback!

[Strike the Ground [NGUAC 2024]]

I like the catchy four-on-the-floor beat at the beginning. The airy pads at :33 are nice and dreamy, although the piece is pretty slow to progress, and you start overusing the “shake the earth” vocal sample in short order. The drop at 1:32 is catchy, if a bit minimal, and the post-chorus melody at 2:02 is nice as well. The synth at 2:41 sounds a bit harsh in the upper register - maybe you could soften it a bit in the EQ. The mix sounds a bit distorted once the pads come in at 4:42, but overall the production quality of this track is solid. I can hear all the instruments clearly throughout, and the frequencies are generally well-balanced. The second half of this piece in particular could use a lot more variety, though. The riser/faller combo at 4:00 was pretty catchy, but also didn’t really add much to the overarching progression of the piece. More harmonic layering and variety on the main riffs would really take this piece to the next level. Until then, it’s still really catchy and smooth-flowing, with some cool compositional details and decent mixing. Keep at it, TheMagBros! ^_^

Mixing, mastering, and balance
1.5/2
Structure, transitions, phrasing, and variety
1/1.5
Melody, tonality, harmony, and texture
1.25/2
Instrumentation and sound design
.75/1
Emotion, atmosphere, and catchiness
1/1.5
Originality and uniqueness
.5/1
Overall (how do the elements above interact?)
1/1
Composite score
7/10