Please help me win a contest by telling me how I suck!

[Ubersheist]

So, here's the deal - a company called Image-Line makes music-production computer programs - most famously for Fruity Loops. They teamed up with a trance singer/artist named Veela, and are running a contest where us Image-Line users remix one of her songs in any way we like, so long as we use her vocals and at least one of a few specific programs that they produce. They will pick their favorites.

Here is the company's official statement about the contest, and here is her original version of the song.

I've decided to enter. The competition is very stiff, there's some really good home producers out there. That link above only shows a very, very small handful of the entries, and many more are better then the ones in that post. I don't really think I have too great of a chance at winning, but, it's a ton of fun, a great learning experience, and I think I came up with something pretty decent.

So, what I'm hoping from The Collectif is some critiquing. Of any sort. I've worked too long on this in my crappy home studio that I may have lost track of the song, and there's certain limitations that both my studio and my own perspective have that I'm probably overlooking.

If you could, please, please, please give me some constructive criticism. You don't need to be musically educated! In fact, I value the opinions of someone with a good musical ear then I do most people with doctorates or other advanced degrees in music. Seriously - it seems like a big percentage of them have lost touch with what moves most people musically.

So, please, if you don't like it, just tell me why if you can. If you think it's too "clangy," or the singer sounds pretentious or too whatever, that's a valid opinion, too.

Here's my entry (UPDATE - the "Version B" of "Night Visions" is a remixed version of the song and the old one is still there as a reference): http://www.reverbnation.com/joshwmye..._songs/1527591 - It's the "Night Visions feat. Veela Version B" song. If you're a Reverb Nation member, you can download it for free, or just PM me and I can email you that (or any other) song.

I've noticed a couple of things that I don't like so far that I'll be changing soon and updating on this file. However, for this one as it stands now, I've noticed one of the "you hear her whimper" lines is too quiet, and the fake harmony in the 1st verse (using one of the programs they require) doesn't sound very good to me and I'll rework that a bit.

Beyond that, I'd really love to hear your thoughts. Please be honest, don't pull punches, and tell me what you really think of it. Seriously. Many thanks in advance!

[Game Over]

not a fan of the 80's ballad type drum reverb but other than that i like it better than the original. its also kinda dry (aside from the random drum hit with reverb) have you mixed it as a whole?
edit- whole as in just a stereo mix...

[Art Shirk]

[caveat] No music training here, only know what I like [caveat] That said:

(1) I like your version better;
(2) I kinda hate that chick's voice and really hate the whiny uninspired part of the song where she breaks from "singing" and instead "acts distressed." Because of that, it was grating to have that part included in the remix, but maybe you are just stuck with lyrical elements of a shitty song;
(3) Because of (2), I would have liked to have the song more beat driven. In order to do that, I like the instrumental stuff that starts with no lyrics for awhile while the song builds on itself and you get into beat.

A decent example of what I am saying in (3): ETBG


Best of luck dude.

[Ubersheist]

not a fan of the 80's ballad type drum reverb but other than that i like it better than the original. its also kinda dry (aside from the random drum hit with reverb) have you mixed it as a whole?
edit- whole as in just a stereo mix...

That process is sort of the last process, called 'mastering.' I haven't yet, and that's a good point. I'll keep it in mind when I get to that next.

[caveat] No music training here, only know what I like [caveat] That said:

(1) I like your version better;
(2) I kinda hate that chick's voice and really hate the whiny uninspired part of the song where she breaks from "singing" and instead "acts distressed." Because of that, it was grating to have that part included in the remix, but maybe you are just stuck with lyrical elements of a shitty song;
(3) Because of (2), I would have liked to have the song more beat driven. In order to do that, I like the instrumental stuff that starts with no lyrics for awhile while the song builds on itself and you get into beat.

A decent example of what I am saying in (3): ETBG


Best of luck dude.

Hmm... Most of what you said would require a total rewrite. Fortunately, the contest allows for three entries. I want to try making one more, and I'll keep what you said it in mind. I'm not really tied to anything for the song, but I think I've got to stay sort of true to the lyrics to have at least a remote chance of winning. One of the other entries chopped up her lyrics down to syllables so that new words were formed. The song sorta sucked, but it was inventive.

The distressed stuff just sort of fit in well, and I thought it kind of carried the song along. I'm sorta tied to it in this version, but maybe a different version won't have it...

Thanks a ton for the in put, and please keep 'em coming if you've got some spare time!

[Art Shirk]

That process is sort of the last process, called 'mastering.' I haven't yet, and that's a good point. I'll keep it in mind when I get to that next.



Hmm... Most of what you said would require a total rewrite. Fortunately, the contest allows for three entries. I want to try making one more, and I'll keep what you said it in mind. I'm not really tied to anything for the song, but I think I've got to stay sort of true to the lyrics to have at least a remote chance of winning. One of the other entries chopped up her lyrics down to syllables so that new words were formed. The song sorta sucked, but it was inventive.

The distressed stuff just sort of fit in well, and I thought it kind of carried the song along. I'm sorta tied to it in this version, but maybe a different version won't have it...

Thanks a ton for the in put, and please keep 'em coming if you've got some spare time!

Yeah, my comments didnt add much as they would require a major scrap and you are kinda ham-strung with what you are given from this lady. I thought the distressed stuff was mixed in well, it was just her voice I hated.

And for my final piece of non-useful advice, I would simply tell you to make the audio version of boobs.

[Ubersheist]

And for my final piece of non-useful advice, I would simply tell you to make the audio version of boobs.

Lord knows I try.

BTW, I may have a new signature... for that music forum!

What gets me is that the tracks we were given were already mostly pitch corrected, eq'ed and compressed. I wish they were given straight up raw tracks to work with, but that might have really shown the girl's limitations in talent...

Actually, she's no Britney Spears. While she is at least as good of a singer as Britney, if not better, she writes, performs/programs and produces all of her songs (except for the remixes floating around). This is most certainly not her best song/track. Some of her stuff is very good, gets radio play and placement on TV shows and movies. I guarentee you've heard her stuff somewhere recently, perhaps in a movie or at Macy's. And the bitch is only something like 17 years old. When I was her age, I could barely take an order at Domino's, let alone produce a high quality track that gets radio play.

[grubbers]

so i have no music theory background and am just barely starting to understand how to program a synth without using any presets, let alone how to produce an entire track, but hopefully my advice will be of some value. you've got a good foundation with it, i definitely can't say that it's a bad track.

it definitely needs to be mastered, the vocals at around 1:40 are way too loud and some other parts just need to be cleaned up a little. i like that slow, undulating gritty synth (only way i can think to describe it right now), but i still feel like the song is lacking a bit of a bass line. i think a subtle more sub bass sounding synth with a similar chord (or note) progression to that of the other synth could add a little more depth to the song, especially in the intro. in some ways i feel like the vocals outpace the chord (note) changes in the intro, but i also feel like a faster progression could also sound a little weird. i'll leave that up to you. hopefully that made some sense.

[Game Over]

That process is sort of the last process, called 'mastering.' I haven't yet, and that's a good point. I'll keep it in mind when I get to that next.

i just think mastering is a term reserved for a professional working on good gear in a even better room. but yea it is mastering no matter who does it.

[Ubersheist]

its also kinda dry

Heh... I exported the vocals for some processing in a different program, so I turned off all the reverb and EQing. I forgot to turn it all back on. Good catch! Thanks!

i just think mastering is a term reserved for a professional working on good gear in a even better room. but yea it is mastering no matter who does it.

'Mastering' is the process of putting on some final processing (eq, reverb, compression, etc.) on a 2-track stereo mixdown from all the recordings on separate tracks. "Mixing" is making sure the vocals aren't too loud, the cymbols are too quiet, the guitars are panned to the right or left properly, that individual instruments are eq'ed ok and sound good, or certain instruments don't have odd resonating frequencies, etc. It's the part of the recording process where the guy is sitting behind a massive board of knobs and faders, and the producer says 'bring up the bass,' so he pushes up a fader and the bass gets louder. I'm in this process.

After that's done, the song can be 'mastered.' This is the bastard stepchild of mixing, is 100 times faster, but is equally important, as it can royally screw with a song, or make it sound even better. It's when the song's instruments and vocals are mixed into a stereo 2-track format (like an mp3 or wav file, or maybe on a CD or on a reel-to-reel tape), and then tweeked so that the song as whole sounds wet enough, is eq'ed ok, etc., or 'mastered.'

'Mastering' is the name of the process of specifically tweaking the stereo 2-track song (as opposed to a multi-track song where each instrument or vocal has a stereo track), and can be called 'mastering' even if it's done by us hacks. It may sound like crap when we do it, but it's still the 'mastering' process nonetheless.

[Game Over]

i usually submix before mastering, keeps it clean

edit-i really like "forbidden palace" btw.

[Ubersheist]

Thanks for the compliment, Steep. It's appreciated. I'm working on a cleaned up version of that song, too... I recorded the harp with a real harp, and it turns out I'm a TERRIBLE harpist. Who knew until I tried?? So, I've been meaning to fix up the harps on that song, but haven't gotten to it yet.

In any event, I remixed and sorta 'mastered' the song as best as I could, although I'm thinking it might be a bit too compressed. Here's a direct download: 2011-06-03_Night_Visions_B.mp3

It's also updated on the Reverb Nation page.