Step's audio Reviews on Newgrounds

[Rosso]

This is an NGADM Round 1 review.

--

Oh yes, professional-sounding work right here. You're a definite underdog with only 6 fans and such a great grasp on producing music, and like I said to another competitor, I hope this competition will help give you and the other underdogs some more recognition, because that's really one of the main things that this competition is about. You've got an absolutely excellent palette of sounds. I find it hard to believe you have 60 instruments to deal with, but there certainly is a lot of variety in sounds, and each sound has a good amount of character and fits perfectly. The drums are interesting - at times they sound a bit awkward but they're unique and work surprisingly well most of the time. By the way, the vocals are sung very professionally and sound great!

I have a few issues. I think you could've done a much better job with the vocals. The vocals themselves are excellent, but there really isn't much of them (they're often just the same audio file repeated), and at times they don't quite fit with the rest of the track, making them sound less like an integral part of the song and more like the vocals were taken out of an electro house vocal pack and added as an afterthought (not saying this is the case, even if it may be!). I was also a bit disappointed with the fact that this is a bit more generic than your audition, but it's still unique in quite a few ways so I won't deduct points for that. Finally, your mix is very good, but at times it's unclear unfortunately.

I have a few small gripes with this track, but it's a considerably well-made and enjoyable track in all!

Score: 8.6/10

TEIONmusic responds:

Thank you for your review.
I definitely do not have a big fan base at all; I guess I really haven't started reaching out to my fans yet.
I'm still not used to using vocals in the tracks, so that's why the vocal job sounds sloppy. They were done by my friend, so no I did not take them out from an electro house vocal pack. I did intend on keeping the song as an instrumental though, and adding vocals were kind of last second thought process.
I 100% agree with you on that it sounds generic. I didn't realize until the very end that the song sounded too mechanical for my taste, but I didn't have time to re-construct the song, so I had to let it be.
Thanks

[substructure]

This is an NGADM Round 1 review.

--

Oh man, I wasn't sure about this at first, but I actually love this a lot more than I expected, and let me tell you exactly why. The atmosphere, for starters, cannot get any better than that. I'm surprised and impressed that you managed to create an atmosphere with so much character and relatability while still making it sound unique. Your composition, while being mostly comprised of crazy quick (and badass) synth solos in the blues scale, was highly enjoyable. Fantastic ending, I love your percussion work to bits, and your production value is very good, just like Biohome! You've got a real knack for making really clean low ends by the way, and it shows in this piece!

My only production-related complaint is that I think your mix is a bit too spacey. This is often a good thing, and during the softer parts of this track it definitely is, but during the parts with the drums I actually wished everything was a bit more tight and compressed, so I could feel a bit more of a punch. In fact, the track is MUCH more enjoyable if I turn my volume up a little bit more than I usually do. This is a ridiculously small complaint though, and I might be wrong about it. What I think needs work is the intro - while it is really cool, it's a bit long and gets a bit boring. The piano also doesn't really work for me. It feels a bit bare and didn't feel as successfully integrated as it did in Biohome (sorry for always comparing this track to that one haha, I just consider this and that to be your two best tracks). Oh and one more tiny thing. Reverse cymbal is a bit loud.

This is overall a highly polished and detailed track which I enjoyed a lot. Excellent work.

Score: 9/10

johnfn responds:

Step, your reviews are so baller. I'm really glad you liked it 'cuz I have a lot of respect for your opinions and I think you hit the nail on the head with the stuff about compression. I kept on wondering how people could call this a chill track until I listened to it at a moderate volume and realized that a lot of details can fly under the radar. I seem to run into a tradeoff between how loud the mix is and how clear it is, which is why it's a bit quieter than other people's tracks, but compression could be an easy fix.

The other nitpicks are appreciated as well... you're right about the intro - I was finding it hard to judge the arrangement after I had become desensitized to the song at the 20some hour mark, so here's hoping that I can learn to improve through practice.

And finally can I say thank you thank you thank you not just for the review but for all the work you (and the other judges) do to set up NGADM? You guys are seriously the best.

And P.S. I totally get the comparisons to Biohome - this and that track are my clear outliers in the 'hours of work in a single track' category. My normal approach is to shove tracks out the door - I'm a quantity over quality sort of guy ;-)

[Fisherman's Fantasy]

This is an NGADM Round 1 review.

--

Well this is one interesting track. I had no idea you had such a firm command over the piano! Having heard your other submissions which are electronic for the most part, hearing a beautiful piano intro like that was certainly a (welcomed) surprise, as were the super subtle strings and woodwinds. Maybe the melodies of the piano were a bit plain or generic at times, but it's not really that apparent so don't worry about it. You have generally solid composition, and that even includes lyrics which, despite there not being many, were well-written!

I find it hard to understand this track though. After a long piano intro (which I can hardly call an intro since it takes up half of the track), you arbitrarily switch to some weird form of metal without any kind of transition towards it, and the production value goes down. The metal part sounds very thin (although well-composed), and the vocals really aren't good. Your choice of rhythms to fit the words often sounded very off, they were hard to understand, musically didn't sound great, and I don't quite understand your choice of making the vocals sound robotic. Practically the whole track feels like two different ones, with the only thing linking the two sections together being the fact that the second part borrows a few melodic ideas from the first (which is hard to notice at the first listen).

So yeah, this track got me confused, and I think if you scrapped the second part and developed the first part longer (or polished the second part much more and found a better way of linking them together) this would have benefited so much more!

Score: 7.2/10

SourJovis responds:

Thanks for your review. Well appreciated. I've had piano lessons for exactly 9 years now, and started playing some years before that. I'm not that great though, but I liked to use everything I got for this competition. It's difficult to write a melody that's both memorable and uncommon. I tried my best and I thought I struck a nice balance, but I suppose it can always be better.

To clear things up, the piano part isn't just an intro in my experience. The piano part and the metal part are two sides of the same coin. One tranquil, the other exited. Like yang and yin. That's because one of the themes of the game this song is based on is Wu Xing. I'm glad you noticed the similarities of the melodies. Most people didn't. But the second part doesn't borrow just a few parts of the melody, but every single note, as well as the chord progression, structure and even the length. The only differences are the style and meter. The first song is 3/4 the second a compound triple meter (4/4 with each quarter measure consisting of triplets). But the difference in meter I consider part of the style difference.

I don't know about the production value of the second part. It sounded good to my ears, but if you say it can be better I'm sure you're right. I do think the guitars could sound better. I was waiting for Frootza to perform the guitars life, and hopefully make them more powerful. Unfortunately he didn't have enough time, so I had to use clean guitar samples and add effects over it. I don’t know if it was me, the effects, the samples or a combination, but they didn't sound as good as I wanted. The vocals could've been better as well. Unfortunately I didn't have enough time to find a good singer to collaborate with, so I had to do it myself. I wrote this with a tenor voice in mind, but my voice is a bass (I think), so I had to sing it an octave lower, but then I just couldn't reach the lowest two notes. Also my voice isn't as powerful as I would like, that's why I've used the effects. It wasn't my first choice, but to me it wasn't even an odd one. Every single instrument in the track was either electronic (organ, synth), or electrically processed (guitars, base guitar, drums). A natural, processed voice wouldn't be so weird. But I wouldn't claim it couldn't sound better. If I can find a better singer I won't process his/her voice this much.

You know the thing with linking the two parts is; everyone who commented think the two parts don't fit together and the transition should be better, so there must be a problem. Yet this is exactly what I had in mind from the start (except for the guitars and singing). I didn't expect to get that kind of comments and I personally still think the two parts connect the way they should, and I really don't see a way to improve it when I don't feel it. Perhaps a cross fade of the guitars and the sea sound? Though I don't feel much for it.

[Claudius]

This is an NGADM Round 1 review.

--

The first team ever to make it into the NGADM is a highly successful one. This is an absolutely fantastic piece with lots of cinematic elements but even some elements inspired from the classical angle. I can hear a distinct contrast between Bosa's part and samulis' part, but at the same time they feel adequately linked. The instruments you both use sound amazing (although there is a clear increase in production value in Bosa's bit), and the composition is really solid. Great progression, flow, transitions, intro, ending... this nails almost every single aspect...

...except one. As I mentioned above, the part samulis made is lacking the production value that Bosa had. This does not mean that I preferred Bosa's part. I in fact preferred samulis' part by a little, because it had more content, was more compositionally strong and developed on the mood that Bosa set. That said, Bosa makes better use of percussion. You can really feel the might in his part, which isn't quite present in the sections that are supposed to be more climactic in samulis' part. The harp and piano parts were absolutely beautiful but when it progressed from there, especially once it reached the final chords (which were great, by the way), the song didn't quite deliver in the big sound that it needed.

This is excellent. I was worried that a collaboration for the NGADM might not work that well due to deadlines and whatnot, but it worked wonderfully.

Score: 8.9/10

Bosa responds:

thank you sm!

[Departure]

This is an NGADM Round 1 review.

--

I was looking forward to hearing your track, and now that I finally have I am not in the least bit disappointed. This is a gorgeous piece with sensible instrumentation, beautiful chords, and tasteful dynamics (especially that extraordinary crescendo from around 3:50 to 4:42). Production value is, as always, through the roof. Your strings, especially, sound incredibly warm. Your intro, by the way, is spectacular, and while your ending is a bit less sophisticated in voicing and approach, it's a tried-and-true way of ending a track like this, and it's elegant and effective. This is certainly a departure from your usual works, and it was without a doubt, successful.

The only problem this has is the same problem as the one I mentioned in the NGMT. Your instrumentation, while suitable, is quite generic and standardised. This causes many sections of the track to have a less unique atmosphere than I was hoping for, opting for a more film-like cinematic sound (except the sections with the piano and glock combo which create a crystallic texture that I adore). The whole film-scorey vibe also makes the track lack melodic development, sticking more to beautiful chords and progressions, which is a bit of a shame.

Pretty much the only problems I have with it. This is phenomenally good. Keep it up.

Score: 9.4/10

EvilRaccoon responds:

Hey Step! Thanks for the review I really appreciate it. I'll try make it more original and give my stuff more of an edge. Thanks again, I really appreciate the feedback!

=D

[Sustain This Night]

This is an NGADM Round 1 review.

--

That was quite a listen! You've got a pretty straightforward but well-developed atmosphere from the start, that slowly but surely evolves into something much more jumpy and exciting. You have a good grasp on composition and instrumentation, making this lovely to listen to. What's more, your sounds are high-quality and you mix them well too (some of the string passages could do with sounding a bit warmer but that's a minor complaint). And to my delight, you make excellent use of dynamics. The track never really turns into something "epic" or fortissimo, so to speak, but you balance your dynamics just right, and consequently your track isn't just enjoyable to listen to, but can even tell a story. Definitely the right way to go with a piece in this genre.

Regrettably, what I'm really not a big fan of is the pacing. This is a long track, clocking at 5 minutes, and I felt like a lot of sections overstayed their welcome, especially when the bowed instrument (violin, I think) comes in, playing melodies that don't have that much variety. In fact, most of the melodies could do with being a bit more varied. This caused the track to occasionally and unfortunately fall into the trap of being boring, especially when you couple the slow pacing with the fact that you're using a pretty overused chord progression. Some transitions, mainly 0:32 and 4:44, were too abrupt (although I love how you ended the track). Lastly, the percussion was alright, but I was hoping for something less boomy and more exciting/fitting for the more upbeat moments.

You've got a great track here which I really enjoyed, despite it getting a bit boring at times and having some smaller issues here and there.

Score: 7.9/10

Veneox responds:

I greatly appreciate the honesty, and even I myself find the pacing all over the place. My only problem was the violin and piano (live and in some improv) left me not having a correct ending.

[A Storm Over Lavender Lane]

This is an NGADM Round 1 review.

--

Wow, now this is a surprise. I've heard some of your other music, including of course your audition, and all of it was certainly well-made but never compositionally complex. In fact, Dear Mario was (probably intentionally) made to sound simple, with plain chords that never really try to sound sophisticated, and then you come in with a technically flawless, complex and incredibly well-composed piece of classical piano music out of NOWHERE. This is very, very good. You move between sections and even entirely different moods and keys so effortlessly that it leaves me in awe. And naturally, the excellent instrument samples you used are just icing to the cake.

It took me a few listens to find flaws in this, but I found that even after listening to it various times and then turning it off, it doesn't quite remain in my memory. You've got such masterful progression and you've squeezed in plenty of different sections in a track that conventionally isn't very long (by modern standards), but the fact that you don't have any central theme can make this ultimately forgettable, and sometimes a bit directionless. I understand that not having a leitmotif is a stylistic choice of the musician, but over here I don't think it quite gives the track the lasting impact it deserves.

Really though, I'm only trying to nitpick. You've got very strong melodic content here and I'm impressed! Keep up the great work.

Score: 9.6/10

headphoamz responds:

Step, thank you! I'm grateful you took several listens to this piece, and very happy you enjoyed it. :)