Jordan - New track

[jordanneke]

I'm on a bit of a manic streak at the moment.

This isn't house, at least I don't think it is.

Tried to channel the old days of 'hands in the air' bliss.

It's not exactly subtle Neither were mitsubishis

Please, any comments welcome.

[Evert]

I'm not a big fan of the noise bursts on the kick. They sound too dry imo.
I would use some reverb on them.

The changes in the arrangement are also a bit abrupt, for example the synth that starts at 1:51.
It would be nice to add some incidentals/HPF on the low end/... to announce these changes.

[jordanneke]

Thanks man. Appreciate it.

Followed your advice. Turns out the distortion was doing funny things. And you were right about the transitions. Updated the file.

Thanks again

[dubdub]

Sounds like house to me!

Mix feels decent. Hats and claps sound a bit thin compared to the rest of the mix. A bit more saturation on them might help. Kick maybe is a touch "pointy".

[Val Endrada]

Some thoughts:

The vocal samples sound like they're only varied in volume throughout the track. Making variations to them by continually changing EQ and reverb settings - close/far - big/small - might make them seem more alive (make it seem more like actual live singing). The strings entering at 1:34 are quite rough/noisy in texture compared to the otherwise smooth sounds you've used, causing them not to blend in very well. The chords in the break section are perhaps heavier than needed. Spreading out the individual chord notes over several octaves, instead of having them close together, could make them seem lighter.

One "trick" I often use, is to build chords corresponding to the natural overtone row:



The above example has the note A as the root note. The first overtone is the octave and only then, above that, the fifth (E). So, the natural fifth is actually 19 semitones (almost one and a half octave) above the root note. The natural major third (C#) is a further nine semitones above that.

Chords built like this are relatively hard to play and recognise on a normal piano, which is probably why most people are taught to play chords with the notes "bundled" closely together instead. This has more to do with pedagogy and teaching music theory than with what sounds good, though.

I originally found this trick in Johann Joseph Fux's "Gradus Ad Parnassum" (a medieval manual on vocal composition).

☮

[jordanneke]

Some thoughts:

The vocal samples sound like they're only varied in volume throughout the track. Making variations to them by continually changing EQ and reverb settings - close/far - big/small - might make them seem more alive (make it seem more like actual live singing). The strings entering at 1:34 are quite rough/noisy in texture compared to the otherwise smooth sounds you've used, causing them not to blend in very well. The chords in the break section are perhaps heavier than needed. Spreading out the individual chord notes over several octaves, instead of having them close together, could make them seem lighter.

One "trick" I often use, is to build chords corresponding to the natural overtone row:



The above example has the note A as the root note. The first overtone is the octave and only then, above that, the fifth (E). So, the natural fifth is actually 19 semitones (almost one and a half octave) above the root note. The natural major third (C#) is a further nine semitones above that.

Chords built like this are relatively hard to play and recognise on a normal piano, which is probably why most people are taught to play chords with the notes "bundled" closely together instead. This has more to do with pedagogy and teaching music theory than with what sounds good, though.

I originally found this trick in Johann Joseph Fux's "Gradus Ad Parnassum" (a medieval manual on vocal composition).

☮

Thanks for the time taken to listen.

Some of the things that you mention were personal choices, such as the vocal samples and the strings. The vocals are chosen and deliberately repetitive and unchanging. The string was also purposely overdriven to make it much rougher.

I'll look more into academic chord progressions in my next track.

Thanks again.

But thanks for the

[Val Endrada]

Some of the things that you mention were personal choices, such as the vocal samples and the strings. The vocals are chosen and deliberately repetitive and unchanging. The string was also purposely overdriven to make it much rougher.

I'll look more into academic chord progressions in my next track.

I feel like most people here are miles ahead of me technically, so I was just trying to comment from a subjective/listeners point of view. There's nothing objectively wrong with a distorted string sound, of course.

Bringing up medieval voice-arrangement was actually intended to go against normal academic music examples. If you read books or watch videos on chords, the examples will generally use chords that have the notes "bundled closely together" (usually within a single octave and playable with one hand).

In my school days, we called this "school master piano", because it was usually the way teachers would accompany communal singing - reading the chords from chord symbols (ciphers?) notated above the song melody, forcefully punching them out on the piano in closely bundled chunks.

[jordanneke]

Some of the things that you mention were personal choices, such as the vocal samples and the strings. The vocals are chosen and deliberately repetitive and unchanging. The string was also purposely overdriven to make it much rougher.

I'll look more into academic chord progressions in my next track.

I feel like most people here are miles ahead of me technically, so I was just trying to comment from a subjective/listeners point of view. There's nothing objectively wrong with a distorted string sound, of course.

Bringing up medieval voice-arrangement was actually intended to go against normal academic music examples. If you read books or watch videos on chords, the examples will generally use chords that have the notes "bundled closely together" (usually within a single octave and playable with one hand).

In my school days, we called this "school master piano", because it was usually the way teachers would accompany communal singing - reading the chords from chord symbols (ciphers?) notated above the song melody, forcefully punching them out on the piano in closely bundled chunks.

Man, no worries about feeling that others are ahead of you technically. The pro's here totally intimidate everyone. The point I was trying to make is that the things you mentioned were conscious decisions on my part, and integral to my vision of the track, so if they didn't work, then I'd rather scrap the track than try to change them.

Also with the chords, I have a minimum of an idea what I'm doing. I am totally learning. So what you suggest, I'll try next time.

[illit_]

Really like that track, sounds crystal clear to me