ADR3-N's audio Reviews on Newgrounds

[On Edge]

Opening almost reminds me of ME1 music. I would take a bit more care with your lower intervals. Octaves and 5ths sound clean in lower ranges than major 3rds, 4ths, and other intervals, which are better separated from your bass instruments. Recommend studying this concept, as it will massively improve your soundscaping ability.

In short, a lot of your interval clashes can be solved by either choosing to omit doubled thirds or fifths of a chord (most people will not double 5ths anyway because they're so strong) or use chord inversions. If you don't know a lot of these terms, I recommend you study music theory. There are plenty of YouTube tutorials for this, and it's fairly easy to understand and implement right away in your music if you're willing to just take a few minutes a day, write notes, and go back to practice some concepts. Seriously, it makes all the difference; take time to learn all the rules so you can later break them.

This piece actually does not sound as bad as you probably think it does. Other than really muddy low end occasionally pumping out, mid range counter melody sticking out a bit over the top of other instruments, and chunky low-mids, this piece is actually atmospherically sound. 3:17 it does start to overdrive and get into distortion territory. Watch your levels and try not to just rely on compressors and brick wall limiting to keep your headroom under control. Definitely recommend mixing and mastering tutorial study there.

Thanks for coming out to NGUAC!

Andethy responds:

Thanks for the feedback. I just didn’t have time to learn these things well, but at least I tried. I tried a lot to limit the distortion levels at that point but it kept making the mix worse :( Thanks again

[Hunter&Prey]

Opening chord sounds good. Could use less reverb/delay, as it doesn't quite sound clean.

Cello modulation needs to be a little bit quicker to emulate a finger sliding up a string. That synth could also use less low mid and more 12k-20k.

This piece has potential, but it sounds very unfinished. In fact, it's not so much the repetition that gets me but the sudden cutoff at the end. I was very much expecting this song to go places. You might appreciate some song structuring tutorials, etc., or perhaps listening to other songs in your chosen genre to give you an idea of where else to go with your piece. As is, you've just got a minor i chord. Have a listen to some synthwave and take the time to learn a little bit of the music theory/structure of the works. It will immensely expedite your writing process. I say this because what you've got here sounds like the intro to a potential 6 minute banger.

Overall, regret I can't justify giving a better score. There's just not enough here to form an opinion. Thanks for coming out to NGUAC!

tansuma1 responds:

Thanks for your honesty ADR3-N. If anything being in the NGUAC has shown me just how under prepared I was and how much more development I need to go through in order to make the cut. Whenever I have free time I shall continue to develop as a musician. This will be that 6 minute banger one day, I promise!

[Synapse]

Opening synth sounds like it has a lot of overtone hanging over in that reverb, kinda tin-canny. Needs a shorter release and a little more cut on it.

0:25, that 808 hit is soooo sweet, but it's run over by your leads, the low pads, and hihats, the latter of which I would recommend maybe panning. A fun thing to do with those is to have two different hats and pan them 40% L/R respectively.

Structure of this song is pretty solid without being overtly predictable.

I would stray away from such thick, parallel motion low-mid chords. Lower interval limits make for a useful study.

Definitely pull those pads, leads, and possibly clacks down a bit. Your 808, kick, and snare need to be the loudest elements of your track, and they need a relatively clean sound space to play in. Most of the space in a track comes from roomy percussion, not your leads -- I can hear the reverb tails on your leads clear over the bass, which is not a good thing. Turn down that reverb wet and cut it some more!

Other than that, decent track. I would definitely recommend a study of chord progressions, lead writing, and harmony. You've got structure down. Mixing would be my next concern, but you're getting there, and other than the relative clutter, nothing sounds horrible, peaky, or otherwise nasty. If your instruments were arranged a little more cleanly note-wise, a lot of that muddiness would clear up.

Overall, enjoyed the piece. Thanks for coming out to NGUAC!

StaticLF responds:

Thanks for both of your reviews ADR3-N. The feedback has been very insightful and informative. Never thought that I would get this much criticism back from doing this competition. Making these tracks has been a fun experience.

[Tears Ft. Lowpry]

Nice wobbly intro. Really does sound like a weedling record player. I'm liking the atmosphere of this piece.

By 0:50, the low sine bass is blowing the crisp highs off this piece. Turn it down some and/or swap to a grittier synth.

I don't quite like that crackly sample you're using on the offbeats of your choruses. Sounds like stirring a pot of sticky mac or popping that weird foam ball stuff in your hands that girls used to dig some years ago.

Beyond that, some stellar olskool. I'd like to hear a little more hard hitting perc, just to give the track some punch, maybe more low mid, a little more sibilance, etc, but that could just be my personal taste talking. Track works functionally and aesthetically well.

Thanks for coming out to NGUAC!

Ruko29 responds:

Thank you uwu

[I]

That reversed piano sounds so familiar! May be because I'm used to hearing keys in G maj, haha. Very smooth intro, although that low register chord is really chunky sounding to my ears. I try not to play major thirds that low down.

I could also do without the vinyl scratching. It's bugging me in the left ear. It sounds like it's looping.

Chord progression around 1:10 is also a little chunky sounding in the low register. Recommend Adam Neely's Q&A #52 on lower interval limits.

I'm not really sure where this piece is going. Find myself losing attention occasionally if I don't make the effort to keep focused on the sound scape. A lot of your melodic content is covered up with reverb and boxy low-mids throughout.

I initially never would have guessed this was synthwave were it not for 3:05, and the transition into this section was a bit clumsy. 2:53, for reference. Not only is there not a lot of dynamic contrast there, there's no indication this section here is not in fact the final chorus, so when we do hear it, we don't know what's going on.

Additionally, across all of your choruses, the pads and bass cover up both your percussion and leads, sucking the energy out of the track. The two-chord progression you use for your drop I would expect for a bridge. I really don't feel any resolution. So, while the contrast between sections is great, I'm not really able to feel a sense of climax at the points you most want to convey it.

Still, good piece. Enjoyed it. Thanks for coming out to NGUAC!

Red65 responds:

hey man, appreciate your feedback. I'll reupload an improved version of the track once the judging phase has passed because looking back, it doesn't really deliver as much as I thought it would.

//red

[Outcast]

This mix is really low-mid heavy. I would recommend cleaning up the individual tracks with hi-pass to get those frequencies out of the way of your bass and other elements. Johnfn does a nice tutorial on this. Might ask him for it.

Volume levels -- snare is way down in the mix. Leads are louder than everything else in the space, which ensures they'll be heard but sucks the power right out of the rest of the track at the same time. 0:04, the sub is just too loud. Mid range overtones take up most of the sound space.

0:40, that snare doesn't need to come up so much as everything else needs to come down. The track sounds like it's floating around the maximum possible level of compression and minimum headroom that can be managed without outright overdriving the sound. I can hear this on quieter sections where the song sounds very clear like 1:19, versus your drop, which sounds absolutely squashed. I recommend Ben Levin's video "How to Hear Compression," on the subject.

I would also recommend about -6 dB headroom before you apply mastering FX. Some swear this is a myth or a holdout from the analog era, that we should all be mixing in 32 bit floating point, or w/e, but I find it really does help get a clearer sounding mix in the end. If your mix sounds good at -6 dB, it'll sound even better mastered. Try it.

Note, sidechain will not fix everything. You still need good levels to keep maximum loudness on your percussion instruments, or whatever you choose to side-chain. Done wrong, it sounds like ducking and pumping, just like improperly compressed tracks pump up random elements of a track when used like a brick wall limiter. I see this happening here on quiet sections, more severely on your releases.

That said, I enjoyed the presentation, and you've got a solid chord progression going with interesting switch-ups every so often. Keep up the good work!

Thanks for coming out to NGUAC!

NoobGameYT responds:

Thanks for telling me the things i need to fix :) I will try to learn how to mix better soon

[Arcade]

Interesting play chopping off those releases and porting a marimba synth. 0:26, I'm interesting in where you're going to go with this videogame synth, though the interplay between ears is a little much on naked sections. It probably sounds cool on a big speaker system.

0:48 section sounds great but for percussion that seems almost absent and a build up that sounded a bit awkward. I would bring down most of your instruments and/or sidechain your kick and snare. I can't really hear a snare if there is one, actually, just a clap in the right channel. It actually seems like most of your track is panned right with a slight delay to the left.

With the percussion down so low, all the energy is sucked out of the track. I'm not able to properly enjoy it.

Piano outro is super cute, with some really nice changes. I'd cut that silent tail off though.

Mix wise, this piece was very low-mid heavy, and until your choruses, there was not a lot of breath to the piece (airy highs). As such, it felt very narrow. Some things I'd like to hear more of, cymbals/hats, transition swooshes (let's face it: I'm a sucker for 'em; they just sound so good!), and percussion.

Extra half-star for smooth chord progression and clean structure, as well as adventurous approach. Definitely see some mixing and mastering tutorials for your chosen genre. They'll make up the rest of the difference.

Overall, still enjoyed the piece despite its flaws. Nice work. Thanks for coming out to NGUAC!

MishkoLalko responds:

Thank you! It was very important to me. ^-^

[Fight for the truth]

Smooth piece. Would recommend a stronger, less twangy articulation on your solo cello in that intro. Instructors I've had constantly harped on that unless it was expressly directed -- and even then, strong articulations.

This piece as a whole is quite well written. The only real issues are mixing and panning, other than a few synth articulations, which I believe are fairly minor.

0:48 is a great drive. At 1:05 I was expecting to be driven over the cliff -- may apply some more dissonance here, a chunky low swell (think Rite of Spring's violation of lower interval limits for effect), or possibly even a hybrid transition. Timpani roll sustained would also function well here, with a crash on the end.

I would definitely like some cymbal play throughout. I feel this is what the track is missing.

Pan flute sounds great!

1:18, the nylon guitar that enters sounds... very robotic and dry. I would humanize the attack milleseconds so it doesn't sound so gridlocked. Also recommend Ample Sound's free AGML -- think it's a Taylor, for its key switches and chuckas, which would have been useful as aux percussion.

2:53 is a wonderful modulation. Love that. Timpani roll and cymbal finally comes in not long after, and we are greeted with sweet little arps. This is what I have been waiting for. Now, just waiting on that conclusion.

3:54, swelling, and... oh, what is this? Ta takita ta takita, etc. -- if you haven't looked up Indian rhythmic solfeggio, Ben Levin does a nice overview on that. I was very much not expecting this section to be over so soon, at least not without another moment like 3:09 or 3:11.

Overall, great piece. Really enjoyed it. Some things I would fix once you get the chance, this track is very boxy in the low-mids and lacks a bit of presence in the high register. At points, low mids (like 3:57) are the most prominent part of your track, with very little breath to make up for it. Other portions, pounding percussion sounds like it's in a totally separate soundspace from the very spacious strings and other instruments. I notice this as well with the nylon guitar.

Otherwise, great. Thanks for coming out to NGUAC!

lukiaffe responds:

Thank you a lot for this genuine and helpful feedback. I aspire to become a serious music composer and listening to this feedback is great! I am amazed how little I know the more I read your feedback, I have yet so many things to learn. It inspires me so thank you. Some things you mention is due to the deadline I had with the contest. I was originally making another piece but due to my own mistake I had to abandon that track for this contest and decided to quickly try and make another piece which became this. Doesn't matter now, I'm content with what I managed to do in this timespam. Cheers!

[Used to Be]

Watch the articulations on that vocal synth. The articulations give you away. Rather than having two strong attacks on the same note, since there don't seem to be a lot of round robins or legato settings in play, I would just hold and swell the same note somewhat on where you'd want your next articulation. Throughout, this synth sounds fairly dry and naked in the mix.

Now, this is R&B, so I'm going to move it to the proper genre once this review is finished. Before I checked the genre, I was actually going to say, this initially sounds very open, all the elements of the track just out there. At points it does sound too thin with the quick decays on the instruments, and it's hard to tell where leads have been placed, volume wise -- but extended over your usual R&B song structure, this song would make a great backing beat for vocals.

Initially I didn't like the booming sub bass where it is -- the long sustain on the sub does feel like it gets in the way of some of the other instruments, and it seems to be the only bass instrument in the song. I would work for a bit of a balance between that boomy kick and a bassline in future works. For this piece, the sparse presentation works, but it won't work for every piece.

There is a little peaking issue at 0:28, as well as most places where the sub hit occurs. It's a lot louder than all other elements in the track, to the point it almost overshadows them in the mix. I think I hear some soft clipping/overdrive.

It also looks like this track is unmastered from looking at the waveform in some places. That, or it's been approached more or less like a 90's R&B track. Definitely recommend researching some mixing and mastering tutorials for your genre on YouTube, maybe study some song structure formats to help you pace yourself musically. Had lots of good ideas and motifs here, harried just a bit by seemingly not quite knowing where to go.

Overall, enjoyed your work. Thanks for coming out to NGUAC!

KnockVoltage responds:

Thanks for the feedback!