If only I could dredge up this much inspiration after recording questionable voiceovers.
This is tightly produced, nicely polished, and simply fun to listen to. The structure of the composition is quite traditional, and I don't mean that in a bad way at all. The sound is similar to other songs that fall into this brand of quirky/comedic music, but it strikes that tone without coming across as boring or by-the-numbers.
The instrumental sounds like it would make for excellent stock music -- which in and of itself might not sound entirely flattering, but I'm envious of that quality, haha. My own work tends to veer more towards the esoteric or specific niches; I have the hardest time trying to compose something that could be marketed on a more general level, and I think this hits that mark while still being perfectly enjoyable as a standalone piece of music, which is awesome.
Thanks very much!
Not bad. :) It's a fun track to listen to, though the more frenetic nature of the track makes mastering it -- at least to a reasonable extent -- arguably a necessity. I think the mix itself varies from 'average' to 'fairly punchy' to 'needs work' intermittently. There's a lot of high frequency content here that I feel would benefit from lowpass filtering to rolloff the more grating frequencies; because of the lack of mastering, the inherent perceived loudness differential between low energy noise and high energy is all the more apparent.
While that may have been deliberate, and, indeed, the track is geared more in that direction anyway, the more constant barrage of higher mid-range and treble frequencies is hard on the ears.
Here's a few quick suggestions based on my own current workflow, and some advice on mixing (and loose advice on approaches to mastering) and so on --
I personally prefer to compose 'into the mix' in the sense that I apply multiband compression and a limiter to the master bus in my DAW before I even get started and adjust if needed. With the type of music I generally make, I've found that I can generally get away with simply relying on the same settings within my compressor of choice (Waves C6) as long as the mix itself is solid overall.
For some tracks I'll have a couple additional compressors working within the mix on individual channels, but usually it's just a single instance of multiband compression with a fairly small ratio -- something like 2:1 at most, threshold of around -1.1 to -1.5 per band, attack setting of around 70ms per band, and release setting left alone.
Honestly, though, I wouldn't recommend delving into that until you try out other methods first. Probably best to go with the more tried and true methods beforehand and figure out for yourself what works best for you. Other advice:
- Regularly check your mix in mono. If it sounds good and balanced in mono, chances are it sounds more than good in stereo. Also, you'll need to do this to check for phase issues, anyway.
- Speaking of phase issues and such, you should always check your mixes with a spectrum analysis tool like Voxengo's awesome 'Span' plugin, which is free.
- I do arbitrary "audibility tests" for my own mixes, or at least have started doing so within the last couple months, that usually boil down to me not being satisfied with a mix until I can hear every individual element of the mix played back at the lowest level I can hear the track at when I'm standing at the other end of my room, etc. I'll check mixes with my noisy AC on and play it back on my phone, my monitor-style headphones, my 'listening' headphones, crappy earphones, etc. before I finalize stuff.
Here's what I'd suggest for the time being, mixing-wise (disregarding getting too heavy into compression or mastering). For now, I'd say just tack a limiter on to your master bus and set it to -1.1db or something. That's what I set all my stuff to because I don't want to peak past -1db, though that's a personal preference. For the record, setting it a limiter to -1db usually results in peaks just slightly above (-0.9db or so) unless measured with a more accurate meter, which is why I set mine to -1.1db. But I digress. I do this to avoid having to be overly conscious of my levels while actually composing because I'd rather have a limiter in place preventing clipping at the source than have to work around it from the offset, y'know?
Anyway, do that, and get in the habit of actually mixing everything with your monitors/headphones cranked down pretty low. One of the best habits get into for long-term accuracy when mixing, I find.
And if you try doing the whole 'multiband compression on the master bus' thing like I do, the key is generally to divide the individual bands of the compressor up in accordance with the way the frequency spectrum is defined, more or less -- i.e, something like 20-200 or so for low end, 200-2000 for midrange, etc. I hesitate to give exact numbers because my MBC has 6 bands and most have 4, but that's a good approach to take in the sense that it works for most types of songs.
Anyway, there you go. Hope that gargantuan wall of text helped, haha. Keep up the good work!
Wow, this was... this was really helpful. I can't pretend I understood every single thing that you wrote, but thankfully I'm starting to grasp more and more of the technical feedback, and I definitely agree with the excessive high frequencies. My headphones boost the low end, I think, and I tend to compensate poorly for that; those "arbitrary 'audibility tests'" sound like a good idea, really something I should already have been doing. I have quite a way to go on mixing and mastering, I know, so this is the kind of advice I need to hear.
I hope you liked the music itself though, haha. Thanks again for the in-depth review!
I don't intend to discourage you, but it's hard for me to listen to this, honestly. I'm not familiar with the source material, so all I can really focus on is the excessive 'machine gun effect' of the piano hammering away at the keys at the exact same velocity time and time again. Without any meaningful variation between the volume at which the notes are being struck, it all blurs together.
Granted, whatever piano plugin's being used in the first place isn't going to be winning any 'most realistic piano software' awards any time soon, but with the right amount of attention in the right places, you can make even crappy software sound good -- sometimes even great.
I don't know if you simply downloaded a midi file of the opening (I just did a quick search and found some results) and used that to create this rendition, but if that's the case, I'd highly suggest altering the velocity for each and every note -- or at least enough notes to ease up on the aforementioned machine gun effect.
Hope that helps, and good luck with the final rendition of the track!
I don't have any software that gives piano, without playing my piano and recording it. (I don't have the supplies for that :P )
So I used a midi converter online.
I used a midi online as a template to create this (which garnered me access to new understanding on how my program works @w@ )
I'm still learning, I'm by no means a professional. I apologize for the harshness that it caused with the 'machine gun affect' :P
Next time I'll actually take the time to just fuss with my program to give me something akin to piano xD
This is awesome. So much energy and movement, and a very tight, crisp production all around. Currently away from home and listening to this on really, really crappy speakers, and it sounds great, so I'm pretty stoked to check it out on my monitors. Here you go -- you earned it! *hurls five actual stars in your direction*
Thank you for your review :)
Incredible. Not sure what else to say, honestly. Fantastic composition, tremendous vocals, catchy and original lyrics, pristine mix with outstanding presence, punchy without sacrificing dynamics...I mean, c'mon, haha. It's almost not fair how good it is. I bow before the majesty of this track.
You are too kind Jeremy! Glad you like it so much.
Absolutely LOVE the atmosphere and mixing in this. Puts me in a really good place. Around the 2:40 mark is what really sold me (not that I wasn't already sold). Excellent job! :D
It's not bad -- certainly much better than my god-awful first demo reel(s) back in the day -- but there's a few things I'd keep in mind when moving forward with any future reels.
While impressions are all well and good (and certainly a skill in their own regard), ultimately, you should strive for originality in the types of voices you deliver to the best of your ability. For example; it’s one thing to voice a character in a manner that sounds similar to Gollum if it’s right for the character at hand, but not to the extent that people will hear the voice and immediately think “Oh, it’s Gollum”. When that happens, you’ve essentially put yourself into the same boat as anyone else who does the same general impression/voice.
Moving on to Pogo the clown. First and foremost is the issue of volume. To clarify, in this instance, I’m referring to the actual volume and projection of your voice in-person rather than the output of the rendered audio. When I think of a creepy/potentially evil clown character, I think of the following traits first and foremost; loudness and eccentricity. You can go for the creepy-quiet approach, but that would typically a different type of character altogether -- something a little more Heath Ledger Joker-y. For Pogo, think something closer to Mark Hamill Joker-y in terms of energy. I’m making fairly broad generalizations here, but that’s because that’s usually what voice acting for more ‘specific’ types of characters like that boil down to.
Also, for voiceover reels, the general concensus is to avoid any and all effects (postprocessing basics such as compression, EQ, etc aside) because you’re trying to convey what you can do with your voice alone. A voiceover reel should therefore be solely limited to plain and simple voiceovers without any of the aforementioned manipulating of audio.
Hope that helps!
Thanks for the feedback buddy! I'll definitely keep that in mind for Pogo!
In terms of Gollum, I didn't do Gollum, it was supposed to be an alien haha!
There was, however, an attempt at Gimli in there just to show my ability to do impressions.
Thanks again for the feedback, I really appreciate the detail you put into each section.
Oh god this is good. Much respect!
Thanks Jeremy. ^_^
Nice! The mix is far from terrible, especially considering how much movement you've got going on. It's tight, bright (without being gratingly so) and clearly defined, and that really lets the creative interplay at hand flourish.
Being a fan of weird breaks and experimentation in general, I can definitely dig the way this track's structured. If had to make a critique, it'd be that I find it a touch too loud even by EDM standards. I'd bring it down a little bit, myself.
All in all, a very cool track bristling with lots of interesting nuances and variety!
Thank you dude I am reassured for the mix ^^ thanks for your apprehension and advice it means a lot :D
I really like this a lot -- I'd have to agree with TheDukeOfJuke regarding the mix, though. I'd suggest the following.
First and foremost, I'd throw in a generous amount of saturation; Klanghelm has a fantastic free plugin called IVGI that adds this lovely warmth and clarity to anything you throw it at. It's got lo-fi and hi-fi settings, a knob to control the 'symmetry' of the mix, a 'drive' knob to amplify/distort the signal, and an output knob to boost volume. I typically have it loaded up as the first plugin on my master buss and generally employ a subtle amount of saturation on just about every single mix. If I'm dealing with a genre like New Wave, though, I'm less subtle and tend to crank the saturation to capture a more authentic analog hi-fi sound. As it stands, to my ears, this track (in terms of the mixdown and not the emotional response it illicits) comes across as very neutral; saturation could go a long way towards remedying that, especially within this genre.
The vocals definitely need to be bumped up a good amount to compete with the rest of the track. Some EQ boosts in the areas around 1 to 2.5kHz could also help with clarity. Speaking of EQ; while reverb can be a crucial element to these types of mixes, I feel like it could be made a little tighter if you were to EQ out the high/low end of the reverb with a low pass filter and high pass filter at around roughly 6000-7000hz and 100-150hz, respectively.
The kick is too pronounced and a little too sharp/woody-sounding, in my opinion. Cutting out 1-2 db of EQ around 400-800hz or so and bringing the volume down so that it's not quite so dominant could help that.
That's all that comes to mind, in a nutshell. That aside -- I really, really like this!
newgrounds.com — Your #1 online entertainment & artist community! All your base are belong to us.