ADR3-N's audio Reviews on Newgrounds

[Shimmer]

Overall really smooth writing. My critique would go on mix.

We're really heavy in mids -- good mixing of more live-y instruments and samples like the chimes and piano.

At times I feel, such as around 0:42 those fantasia sounding leads high up in predominantly the left channel are much too loud -- about a dB or two. They're such high frequencies, they're just going to be heard by virtue of being there. On drops they don't stick out as much later, but still overpresent.

At 2:19 there is mild clipping.

I would bring out your talking lead more, and possibly put a resonant auto-filter on it to bring it to the front more. A lot of the instrumentation stands out on top of it, leaving it to be heard as the lead only because it's the only instrument in that space moving.

I really like the chord progressions going on here and your writing itself. Thanks for sending me this!

trunotfals responds:

it's funny how you can hear all of these other things but you get really blinded to your own music sometimes I listen to this over and over and I never heard a problem until you point them out and now that you've pointed them out it's blaringly obvious to me. Thanks for this review!

[this is not (the eyerocket dream)]

It's like, nightmarish elevator music.

[Serrated Shadows]

I'm not sure I'm sold on parallel motion of the chords and melodies here in your intro, as well as through the 0:52. Obviously takes talent to play rather than program, but I feel like we're moving the same chord around over and over, which with power chords isn't so obvious. You could change this feeling by not using the bass note to just play the tonic of the chord.

The rest of the piece, reverb is waaaaaay too loud. It sounds louder than the actual attacks of notes themselves. I'd sooner listen dry than with that FX on. It's loud enough the track distorts by 2:41 and I can't tell what's too loudly mixed or not because the reverb is just grabbing resonant sustained notes and holding them out. It's like being in a warehouse. Only the strongest points of your mix stand out, and the finer intricacies are obliterated.

I am able to hear that twah-twah attack on the choir and would recommend switching it out. I'd like to hear you reupload this without that reverb. Underneath it is a good sounding track that could probably use your synths turned down a dB or two. If you simply must have this reverb, don't put it over the whole track. Maybe just the hi-hats, the lead, and the snare.

Chernobyl studios does a great series of tutorials on mixing rock. I recommend checking them out.

Anyway, thanks for coming out to NGUAC!

Mechanical-Head responds:

Edit: I probably sound like a jerk with this response. Just so you know i understand all the points you made, and i'm seriously looking forward to improve. Still keeping my whiny comments for preservation :P

Thanks you for this constructive review! Yeah, you may have noticed i'm far from being an expert when it comes to mixing. I just began doing music this year and all i use is the free included plugins in Reaper. And yeah, i used reverb on everything, mostly because i really hate how dry and robotic modern metal sounds. My main goal with my mixing is make the songs sound old school, human (maybe i should've used compressors but i feel uncomfortable using them). Obviously i still need to learn a lot, i'm far from being perfect, and i still need more experience in handling reverb, aside from better equipment and such.

Maybe you should've focused more on the composition rather than the mixing, as the latter just isn't one of my strongest aspects. Maybe you were expecting a more professional sounding song, which is something i just can't deliver right now. Also, i mixed this in less than a week, of course it's going to sound bad.

Hopefully i'm not sounding like a jerk over your review (Edit: i was). I know you are looking forward for how i improve in the future, and that you wish the best. I want to improve, because i know i'm not perfect, and that there's room for lots of improvement. I was not expecting to pass to the next round of NGUAC anyway, i'm just not on the level of these really good and amazing contestants.

Anyway, thanks for the review :)

[XTechno - Graffiti]

Right off the bat, I'm not sure on those low down chords. I would either take the piece up a couple semitones if you want to keep those inversions, or space the notes out some more. Chords stop functioning the same way, the lower they are in interval, due to overtones conflicting.

I'm not the biggest fan of your lead writing throughout -- we pass over a lot of the same notes up and down, don't emphasize the peak of the melody a lot, and resolve down almost every time, which is fine! But it leads to sounding like you've written a countermelody, not a melody. So maybe a little studying of lead writing.

Mix wise, your percussion is hiding somewhat under all the other instruments. I would turn them down until the snare and kick cut through nicely.

Also, I caution from using reverb to give a piece width, warmth, and space. Always turn it lower than you think it should be, and cut low end on it up to 250 hz so you don't get that boxy low wash cluttering your mix.

Otherwise, good piece. Enjoyed the listen.

Thanks for coming out to NGUAC!

[Legacy Part 2]

I think you could do without having that kick and clap in the first several bars of your track -- leave room for transitioning. Speaking of transitions, that's probably the biggest issue I have listening here. Sometimes they're handled well. Other times, they feel like they lead to nowhere. You might like a video on the subject by Kush After Hours, the rule of pairs. He explains a basic rule of transitions that a lot of hit producers use. Add or change two elements for each transition, and take two away :)

Overall I was kind of underwhelmed with this piece. We have a lot of interesting melodic content and a structure that isn't too bad, but I don't really hear a bass. I hear some chords really low down that I don't know if you mean to be the bass. It's very low and I don't really hear it at all. Your mixing rig may be bass boosting or something, if that's not what you mean.

The high transitions are really sibilant and are the only things that sit in that space through the whole song. I would turn them down some. We're not going to not hear them just because they're a little lower.

Really I feel this song could benefit most from just having a clear bassline that I can hear. Your chords aren't bad at all. Your leads could probably benefit from not being sustained so much, just a personal preference, but all the drama is sucked out of the track just by not being able to hear a bass.

Anyway, don't take it to heart. There are plenty of resources online to help you get out into producing. You're halfway there. I think you should revisit this sometime :)

Thanks for coming out to NGUAC!

Xrus responds:

I made this song in an hour. It was just to test out some things.

[Adipogenesis]

Arrangement is nice here. My critique could probably be reduced to mostly mix.

That hihat in the right on the intro, I would probably take it back over to 40% right. The sax could also come up a half dB. Snare could also stand to come up in the mix. It sounds like we may be having some clipping on 0:22 seconds when the kick hits.

I think those leads on the sides are too loud relative to percussion. It seems to be throughout the piece as a whole as I'm listening, with sidechain used to bring it back through. I find myself wanting a crunchier kick.

That said, your rhythms are blazing and the melodic content is tasty.

I would take down the lead piano before 1:40 by about a quarter dB to a whole dB, apply more compression.

Percussion throughout really is so quiet in the mix and sounds tinny by 2:26. Overall, the track tends to be tinny whenever those trappy stabs come in.

I really like the WHAT THE F- sample. Very tonal and has a lot of character to it.

Writing of your growls is good. I found myself wanting the droning bass under it to be an octave lower and maybe grittier on drops -- like a trap 808, distorted.

It sounds like you have a lot of reverb on your sustained synths and stabs. I would cut that down by quite a bit and make sure to lop off 0-250 hz on the wets to leave room for your bass. I feel that contributed somewhat, especially with such heavy compression, to the lack of oomph from the sub.

Overall, without your wonderful writing, I'd have a lot less nice things to say, but this is a solid and cohesive piece. I can really see where you put a lot of your effort, and it does shine through. The rest of my critique would fall in line somewhere around trunotfals, maybe a little less compression, and it would sound cleaner and less high-end heavy. Make sure you're mixing with your master FX off, or a lot of these issues become more or less impossible to fix, especially tinny-ness. Speaking from experience.

But anyway great piece. Will be stuck in my head a while yet. Thanks for coming out to NGUAC!

Walpang responds:

Thanks for such a thorough review!
Mixing/mastering is still a relatively new process for me, so I'm not surprised that it's lacking a little in that department. I'm glad you enjoyed everything else, though.

[Wolves (Ft. Andy Chamberlain)]

This is a really cool concept!

I'd like a different synth at 0:45. Personal preference is that to me it's a little cheesy.

Very interesting speech to text rap. How long did that take to get out?

1:30 section sounds like it may be overcompressed and mixed too loud. I would take down those leads some and let your percussion shine. It's hard to pay attention to them in the mix with those synths up so far. I'm also not a huge fan of the overall tones I'm hearing. The rhythm is good.

Personally 2:17 isn't my cup of tea when that lead comes in. The foley in the background is giving me a weird lump in my throat feeling, until it just suddenly isn't there.

The solo is nice but I would apply more compression to it. The lead pumps up and down a lot volume wise. On higher frequencies it's a bit ear piercing. Well written there.

Next section has a lot of intricate work on the panning and stereolizing. I'd like less of a flange-chorus type effect on that, less reverb overall, and more saturated high mids. Make it crunchy.

Other than that, with some issues with your presentation, I really enjoyed the piece. Probably one of the more interesting I've seen.

Thanks for coming out to NGUAC!

uvimusic responds:

Thx for the great review! I'm glad you noticed my attempt at trying to be creative :) Mixing is definitely my weakest point so thx for the suggestions there too! The tts rap actually wasn't too hard to figure out, all I had to basically do was put the lyrics through the tts to mp3 website and change up the timings a bit to fit the rhythm of the song.

[Call for Thunder]

Like the marimba rhythms -- bass was unexpected but is welcome. I would actually take some of the reverb or chorus FX down on that, or add some white noise to it. I'm wanting a crispier bass.

By 1:20 the snare line has been a bit samey for me, good time to drop it out, but I would personally write more changeups in that line. Just a more unpredictable line. When it comes back in at 2:08 it's not bad. For some of your auxiliary percussion I would not pan them so hard left and right. I think one is around 80% or 90%. Or if I were to do that, I'd take them down a bit in volume there and alternate them in the left and right channels just to give that balance.

3:21 is very interesting chord wise. I wanted a breakdown with those chords. The octaved bass synth has the high end that I wanted on your first bass, but I feel it's a lot too loud, and it wasn't what I was looking to hear.

Percussion wise, I actually like your snare, and I think the kick is fine. It probably could come up a bit in the mix. Maybe side-chain. The sustains in the mix all felt comparatively flat. You could still layer a kick on top of this one and have it function as a sub pillow.

I did find the claps a little uncomfortable. You could probably cut them shorter and bitcrush them?

Overall, the mix is creepy and cool, which I enjoy. Really wanted more chords from this piece, but it is what it is, and I enjoyed the listen.

Thanks for coming out to NGUAC!

[Dark Rarity]

We're pretty low mid heavy in our intro, with lots of reverb throughout the whole track, which sort of gives the feeling of having the whole top of the EQ lopped off the track. However, I do like your writing, and your transitions are solid.

One area I wish I heard more of, your drums, overall they're much quieter than the rest of the mix, especially the snare. I would turn everything else down until they're clearly heard. Believe me, those chords aren't going to go missing -- they're the only instrument in the space :)

Musically you've written quite a journey, with lots of interesting twists to follow. Sometimes I am not a fan of the chords in the low mids chunked together. Other times I think they work. Maybe some theoretical study on inversions and chord voicing will be helpful to you, but that's not hurting your presentation so much as just not being able to hear what's going on.

Overall I enjoyed the piece. My biggest recommendation would be just to study mixing, particularly as we try to get this big spacious vibe. There are great shows to watch such as Kush After Hours where mixers talk shop. I would start there, maybe try some of the tricks you learn on an old project you like. My main gripes in mixing is making sure to low cut reverbs up to 250 hz, and turning down the reverb lower than you think it should be, for the sake of cleanliness. Reverb is nasty and muddy if you let it be, and takes away from the clarity of a track.

But anyway, interesting piece. It was fun to listen to. Thanks for coming out to NGUAC!

TheSentiment responds:

Thank you for your insight! I'll definitely make the drums more prominent. I also put a book of advanced theory topics on my wishlist, so I hope to learn more very soon.