Free butchering of your own original songs offered [OPEN]

right on the mark. it really is a tech demo. the only inspiring thing about iot, and it did not come across, is the name of the amp; Meteor.
so I took that and tried to overdrive a small amp. the idea behind the tech piece, a meteor is falling from the sky. it gets brighter. you cannot stop it. it hits and ends abuptly.

I agree 100% with the reviewer. I now want to take this piece of idea and expand on it.
thanks so much.

if you want a real song how about 'factorygirl'?

if you want a real song how about 'factorygirl'?

The list is closed right now but when I've catched up feel welcome to add it. I know it sounds extremely anal for such a friendly environment as GN but I'm just protecting myself from being flooded with stuff. And good luck with expanding on the piece. :)

Moonrider - Voice of the Rose

Next up is this, according to Moonrider himself, psychedelic rock song. Now that is already enough to make me sit up, but what's even better is that it's based on Stephen King's 'Dark Tower' series of novels. For those unfamiliar with it King took a fairly big step from of his usual 'unreal horror' material with this, creating what is IMHO his best work. On a side note, I've always assumed Moonrider is a guy, so I'm taking the liberty to assume this is a collab with someone cause of the vocals. My humble apologies if I'm wrong, I couldn't find any liner notes with more info on it.

Now let's jump right in the track. Voice of the Rose starts with a fairly big, in-your-face sample-based soundscape that makes you sit up and pay attention, after which it falls back pretty rapidly to a very 'empty' theme that will be the backbone of the entire piece. On top of the muted and staccato guitar parts the vocals freely float and drift creating an almost ethereal sound. Slowly more and more sounds get added and before you fully realized it you're listening to a fullblown rock track. Sharp biting guitars jump in and out while the groove slowly builds up in intensity. On the downside the vocals seem to hold back a bit whereas a bit more growl wouldn't hurt here.

From this point on it's becoming more and more obvious that the greatest strength of this song is not the production, performance or composition but the actual arrangement. The actual musical material is very thin and scarce but it's arranged in such a way that you never really realise it: the piece is always moving and changing, dynamics change, instruments sneak in and out and all the time the vocals keep floating over it in a rather angelic fashion.

All nice and well, but is this song any good? Sorry for spoiling the end but IMHO this is a great track. I'll go into nitpicking mode in a second but this track is a must-listen for anyone interested in writing original songs as it's a fantastic example of how an interesting arrangement can change the simplest of themes into a powerfull piece of music. If you haven't already checked it out, stop reading this and listen.

So what's not good about this? To start with, and bear with me, the vocals could be improved upon. Now don't get me wrong, I actually dig the tonal quality, the expression and overal feel but on the whole the vocal track doesn't have the dynamic range of the rest of the music. This could be by design, and I can see some reasons for that, but at times I had the impression that whoever was singing got slightly nervous and insecure when the track got louder and rockier. That's a shame, because apart from that the vocals are great.

Performance wise the rest of the music is very much okay. It's not polished like modern day rock music, it really made me think of Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young at times but that's fine with me. The rough and direct way of playing fits well with the production. Even though the guitar tones themselves are too buzzy and fuzzy for my taste they fit the mood and style well. Ofcourse it's still clear that we're not dealing with a million-dollar studio production, how much of problem that is is something everyone has to decide for themself.

[score]
Originality: Very original. From the sampled intro and outro to the arrangement and ideas behind the song. 2.5/3
Production: More then sufficient, although not great or excellent. 3/5
Performance: A good performance, nothing that breaks the mood. A more dynamic vocal performance could push this into the 'really great' range but it's more then fine like this. 7.5/10
Fun-factor: Very enjoyable if you ask me. Clearly a song that has been written, performed and mixed with great care. 8/10
Final score: A very nice piece of music, well recommended to anyone who might be interested in this kind of music and a must for anyone interested in songwriting. This one will be staying in my playlist for a while. 75%.

Thanks for the nice review, Arjen. The vocals on Voice of the Rose were done by my daughter, and will be redone as soon as I can get her to schedule time for it. She's a busy girl between work and school.

The rest of the review tells me I'm very close to accomplishing the goals I've set for the song, although the comparison with CSNY did make my head start to swell. Thank God my wife is very handy with a straight pin :wink:

Thanks for confirming I'm headed in the right direction with this one.

Moonrider, I'm grooving to Voice of the Rose now, and I think it's just great! I'd definitely like to be able to hear the words a bit better, I agree with the previous comments about the vocals--well done but could be a bit better. The arrangement and all the instrumentation is groovy, I really like the feel of this song.

Jeff

Smokindog and the Bluezers - Whiskey Slide

And there we go again with yet another variation on the blues, this time a country-blues variant. Again. As far as originality and structure goes I can be brief, it's the same as usual. And as I said earlier that's no big surprise as this kind of music hasn't been known for it's novelty factor for quite some time.

So what's left to judge is the performance and the production. Let's take a look at the performance first. The basic 'backing' is done by a bass-guitar walking arpeggios, a beat and a banjo playing the main theme, based on the chords. On itself there isn't much to say about it, it does what it sets out to do. They are not virtuoso parts nor are they bad on themselves. It provides a solid, although somewhat repetitive foundation for the 'main dish', consisting of vocals, lead guitar and bluesharp. The vocals are done well, and carry the piece for me. Sung with power and conviction it manages to keep up with the groove and add to it. The lead guitar is mostly pentatonic driven, as you'd expect, and plays with those notes the riffs you'd expect. Sharp and biting it creates a rather vicious feel, fitting the overal mood and lyrics. Finally the bluesharp is sufficient, but not much more. I'd really love to hear some big bends or such to give it some mojo of itself but right now it kinda 'sits' there without really adding anything that isn't already being done by other instruments.

With that we arrive at the production side of things, where, IMHO, there are some problems. To start with having a bass, banjo, guitar, bluesharp and vocals all work around the same basic harmonies make for a very crowded and busy track without too much dynamics. Since the tracks don't seem to be EQéd too much they are pretty much constantly fighting for some space, which gets even more obvious because of some slight tuning issues. It's hard to point at who did what wrong but the entire mix in itself is not exactly in tune, which adds even more to the business. Most disturbing to me, however, are the vocals. They are sung well and need very little further processing, yet for some reason most of the production time seems to have gone to the vocals. Very fat effects really give a plastic-like tone to the vocals that distract far more then it adds. Really a shame because the vocal performance is more then good enough and doesn't need this, nor does it fit in with the general feel of the genre in general or this song in particular.

[score]
Originality: A twelve bar blues. Need I say more? 0/3
Production: Not too big on the production. Too crowded, too much effects on the vocals, not enough EQ-carving for the instruments and slight tuning issues. 2/5
Performance: On itself a fine performance. Not much that makes me sit up, and certainly not the best I've heared from you. But somehow you always have this 'basic foundation' you can fall back on. 7/10
Fun-factor: Well, truth be told I've heared this song in many different variants and this isn't one of the better ones. It sounds somewhat 'unfinished', almost rushed. Still listenable but the total lack of originality plus the not-so-great production really hammers the song down. 5.5/10
Final score: I hate to say it but when I compare this with other tracks of you I have to say this lacks the real passion a song like this needs. To me, as a listener, it sounds like you weren't really in the zone and were kind cruising through it on auto-pilot. Still a nice performance but music like this simply needs more soul and drive. That's not really criticising you as I know you can do better then this. 52%.

Hey thanks Arjen :D Its about what I expected. I know Mr Couch did a very good vocal, in fact he carried the song :D His harp was OK but not really top notch. But i liked it anyway . I liked the guitar , not really that great, but the licks are not to bad IMHO . It was pretty much a style I learned from a guy named "Skeeter" back in the early 70's. He was a stone country picker that tried to teach us young players how to play in a band and stage etiquette and things like that :D He passed in 1981 :cry: Dale Moore was another guy I played with back then. He was another country picker I learned from back in the day.

Arjen, I really think you have a gift for this sort of thing :D You can give an honest opinion without being mean spirited. A good thing in my opinion 8)

Dneck - Prelude in D-minor

Yes, you've heared it. Next up is an actual prelude by Dneck.... So what exactly is a prelude anyway? Well, a prelude (like many other terms from classical music) can mean a lot of things: a mostly improvised part to warm up, an intro to a suite or fuga or even a completely independant composition. Based on the usage of the main theme I'd say it's not improvised, so until I hear the follow-up piece I'll assume it's a stand-alone prelude in the grand tradition of Chopin and the likes.

This piece seems to have been played on a mandolin, or another such instrument that greatly resembles the sound of a lute. I like to think of this as a solo lute piece, whatever it's played on because it seems to fit the imagery of the sounds well. The composition is, to be honest, rather short, and consists of a main theme plus variations that is being harmonized in a mostly arpeggiated manner which creates a very barren, empty and somewhat lonely athmosphere. If this song were a season I'd be standing knee-deep in the snow on my own, far away from the closest settlement. The tempo changes are somewhat on the uneven sides and while adding variation they don't really steer the song as much as possibly intended. However, due to the dreamy nature of the composition that hardly matters.

Performance wise the piece is not yet perfect, espescially when it comes to dynamics. While I don't mind too much about the harmony notes the melody notes really demand to be played with great feel, espescially because the legato options are severely limited on a mandolin. The rather uneven picking does take away from the overal mood, although anyone with half a musical imagination can clearly hear the intent all throughout the piece. The recording is, IMHO, very nice. I love the airy, dreamy reverb. For the rest there isn't much to the recording. So whatever choices had to be made werte made well as I can really see the song as well as hear it.

A big massive negative however is the main melody. It simply exists already. I'll have to look it up by who it was, and it wasn't done on a lute-based instrument originally, but I'm pretty sure it's not original. Since I can't give you the title or composer I won't distract points for it but just felt like mentioning it.

[score]
Originality: Incredibly original from a GN perspective, and still refreshing on the whole. 2/3
Production: No complaints, although a top producer might have wanted to fix the individual uneveness of the notes. Matter of preference if that is being a perfectionist or being a musical cheater. 4/5
Performance: It's not too tough a composition to play yet it's not played flawless. Practice this week for another week and I'm sure you'll see what I mean. 5.5/10
Fun-factor: I like it but it's way too short, even for a prelude. I know, I know, of all people I'm the last person who should say that but still. Give me the full piece and I'll die a happy man. 7.5/10
Final score: A great little dreamy track. Maybe not flawless performed, or maybe not a composition demanding virtuoso performances but this song has a soul. And that's the greatest compliment a musician can receive in my opinion. 68%

Thanks for the crit. A few comments. It is going to be for solo mandolin. It is the first of a 3 movements slow-fast-slow, they should be played one right after the next. I am working on the fast part now, it is pretty awsome IMO.

It is not a hard song to play. It is a very hard song to play right. I am still working on getting some real borrowed time going on. Really good musicians usually consider the slow songs the ones that are hard to get right. And you are correct that the soul of the song is not quite in this recording, but as a musician I feel like you can hear what it COULD be. I'll record the whole thing when I have finished and can look back at the whole song.

And as for the opeing melody existing already, it is a bit similar at times to some other songs that harmonized to a natural minor scale and never develope (kind of sounds like the bassline from house of the rising sun I think). But it is sounding against the melodic minor harmony (at the start) with some stressed chomatic parts, I felt that it sounded different and was used to a different end. The more I listen to and learn songs by other composers, the more I find that everyone sounds like everyone to an extent. Its impossible to write something that someone else hasn't already used somewhere, and if you find something...there is probably a reason nobody ever used it :P With arpeggio's, rhythms, strong progressions, stepwise motion, and resolving leading tones you have to stand on the shoulders of those that came before you if you want your results to sound like western music. And if you decide to break the rules then you just end up sounding like all other the people who broke them before you.

I guess the point im trying to make is that you shouldn't judge a song in peices or it will always look like a stream of copies. Its how you use the arpeggios, strong root progressions, rhythms, stepwise motion, and resolving leading tones as a WHOLE to reach your musical goal that matters.

Thanks for the crit though, I will be working this and the other parts in the coming weeks.

Good luck with the full piece, looking forward to hearing it!
I guess the point im trying to make is that you shouldn't judge a song in peices or it will always look like a stream of copies.

I think how I should or shouldn't judge music is up to me. What you do with that judgement is up to you. :)

Jewtemplar - The Bridge #2

Jewtemplar's The Bridge can best be described as a back-to-the-basics accoustic song, featuring an accoustic guitar and vocals. The song kicks off with the main progression being arpeggiated which slowly gets thicker and faster after it kicks into the first verse. While the rhythm and playing accuracy seems to be somewhat lacking initially the progression is good enough of itself and provides plenty of opportunities for the vocal melody. As soon as the vocals kick in the guitar changes to a strumming pattern, which seems to improve the fluency of the performance.

The vocals are really interesting in the strictest sense of the word. At times pretty off and nasal the vocals at other times leave no doubt about the level of detail that's being attempted. The vocal range required in this song is pretty large I'd say and some fairly big interval jumps are made pretty well. Apart from that a lot of attention seems to have gone to the dynamics and vibrato speed and depth. At times it's apparant that more training and practice is required for the physical aspects of the vocals but the mental aspect, which I consider to be the one closest related to 'musicianship' already seems well developed. The guitar performance is decent. As soon as tempo changes are introduced things get a bit messy and not all chords are grabbed perfectly so there is room for improvement. The strumming part is better though, and while still not perfect it doesn't distract or bother me.

The production is not really much to judge. It's a guitar with some vocals, and that's precisely what it is. Doesn't seem to have been processed too much with anything, nor does there seem to be a reason to go crazy on the plug-ins.

[score]
Originality: On itself not overly original but some nice tempo changes and different picking/strumming patterns do keep it varied and fresh. 1.5/3
Production: Not much to say, to be honest. 2.5/5
Performance: In the end it's 'decent'. Both guitar and vocal performance could do with improvement, but I wouldn't worry about it too much. Based on what this track alone I'd personally guess that you have a musical mind, so just keep practicing to perfect the physical aspects. 5.5/10
Fun-factor: Yes, it's a fairly simple song, and no, it's not superbly performed. But I still like it, and that's what matters here. 7/10
Final score: Definitely promising, but needs more work to be really good. 59%

Thanks for the review. Glad to hear that you think the biggest flaws are in execution rather than concept/intent (my thought as well). Hopefully I'll play this at some open mikes and get it together a bit more. As it is I still get some anxiety even in front of a microphone in my basement.

Well that was about judging in general not your particular judging style.

About that though, I don't really understand the "fun factor" part. Seems like a personal tilt which is totally fine, but why is it valued 3x more then creativity?

Well that was about judging in general not your particular judging style.

About that though, I don't really understand the "fun factor" part. Seems like a personal tilt which is totally fine, but why is it valued 3x more then creativity?
Because it's more important in determining how good the song is? If you like you can make a new weighting system, and convert the ratings he gave. I think the system makes sense, because intangibles mean a lot for the overall quality of a song.

Ya with music there is big intangible "do I like it or do I not" even if it is good or bad or hard or easy. I actually think that it does make sense for it to be more then creativity. I just feel like creativity and expression go hand in hand.