[coughingfit]“P.S. Review of tranquility to come out soon, I can’t believe what I miss in the forums.”[/coughingfit]
I like reviews :3
Finally, to QVX’s great relief, my review on Tranquility:
Now I’d like to say that the title instantly reminded me of my collab with Kamarai, one of my favorite collabs. So even before I opened the song, it had a nostalgia value for me. Not that it means much to anyone else, I just thought I’d mention that. Commenting further on the title, I’ve noticed that you limit yourself to one word. You’ll quickly run out of good titles that way, mostly because there aren’t that many single words that can describe a song. Personally I’d suggest using at least two, a maximum of four (I don’t include words you’d leave lower-case like the and of). It allows you more freedom to choose a title that really fits the song with making the title ridiculously long. It also shows that some effort went in into the title, whereas Tranquility may have been the first word that popped into your head. Eventually you song titles will be unoriginal, and when I browsed through your OP, I had trouble distinguishing the songs because the titles didn’t remind me of the songs themselves.
Enough about the title. I’m going to use the same style as the last song, mostly because I liked how it was organized better. It’s less cluttered, and also less imposing. In short, it’s less of a mountain to climb to read the whole thing. I think adding things like colours and bold, itallics, and underlined letters will further my goals. I may need to make a template for my critiques in the future. Okay wow. I’m going to review the song now.
Intro (sheet 0): It’s hard to tell when the intro ends and the song starts, mostly because after taking a look, there are only two sheets that don’t use sheet 0’s string pattern. Considering the fact that I have not listened to the song in a while, I found this EXTREMELY worrying. Obviously, I’m not going to say the song is repetitive at this point, I’ll be taking your advice QVX and will listen to the song in full in order to ascertain the level of randomness vs. repetitiveness, and how well the song flows. As an intro, I felt it was fine, it introduces the base nicely and doesn’t try any funny tricks. But because the intro is so standard, it loses points in my eyes.
Overall rating: 3.5/5
Transition (sheets 1-5-4): I mostly didn’t like the instrument choice here. Tha acoustic guitar is too harsh, and that doesn’t compliment the light strings. I feel that the part could have been switched to a brass or woodwind instrument and it would’ve ended up better. The variations in the sheets are somewhat interesting, but since they don’t seem to play a real melody, I soon grew out of them. The sudden jumps from low to high didn’t help either. Overall, I didn’t see the point of these sheets and only liked the ending cymbal.
Overall rating: 3/5
Chorus (sheets 2-3): The steel drums work much better with the strings, and the melody actually sounds like a structured melody and not a random solo. I really liked the drum reverb, it made me jealous that I can’t seem to use it like that correctly. Still, the song feels empty, and I think the main problem is that some light drumming and a bass would be a good addition.
Overall rating: 4/5
Verse (sheets 6-7-8-9): I’ve already said a lot about the acoustic guitar that applies to these sheets. That’s bad because it indicates repetition, and most of my earlier points were bad too. One thing I really noticed this time around was the final measure in each sheet, it always ends with the same half-note D half-note C, same as the strings. After noticing this I went back and found the same thing in the earlier sheets, but it was less pronounced. I’m also starting to think that the entire problem the acoustic guitar creates could be solved by simply moving it down an octave. I did like the introduction of drums though, it gave me hope.
Overall rating: 3/5
Chorus (sheets 10-11-12-13): I really began to like the melody the steel drums present at this point. The addition of drums was a huge support, even if they were a little more modest than you usual drumming. Which is good! It fits the song better. Only thing I wish you could’ve added was a nice high-hat. I really liked how you use sheet 11’s pause as a way to add an unorthodox drum fill into the song, It really worked well. At this point, this section is the song’s silver lining sheet.
Overall rating: 4.5/5
Transition (sheet 14): This sheet re-introduces the intro as a transition into a new part. Normally I’d say that’s a good thing, but because the song re-used the intro every where else, the repetition will probably make it a bad thing (wait till that section of the review for me to confirm or deny this). Either way, it was nice to hear the strings front and center again after so long. Only thing I don’t like is the acoustic guitars at the end, it fill me with a sense of anxiety for the next few sheets.
Overall rating: 4/5
Solo (sheets 15-16): Only now do I realize the tempo change. I believe it was very well transitioned into. Tempo changes are very good at cutting repetition, as are solos. For an ambient song, I wouldn’t say a solo is strictly necessary. Either way, I did enjoy the full solo. I didn’t like the toms, mostly because I felt they were in need of a snare to keep them in line.
Overall rating: 4/5
Transition (sheets 17-18-19): This was done insanely well. When you put effort into a transition, especially a speed change one, it really can impress. There are no problems with these sheets.
Overall rating: 4.5/5
Verse (sheets 20-21-22-23): These sheets really dragged on, and while deviations exist, they are far too minor. Again, most of what I already said about the acoustic guitar applies here.
Overall rating:3/5
Chorus (sheets 10-11-12-13): Because it’s a repeat, no rating will be given.
Outro (sheets 10-24): I know sheet 10 is repeated again, but I don’t consider it a part of the second chorus. Instead, it seems to be there to establish sheet 24, which is a repeat of sheet 11. That is a fine sheet to end on, as it was probably my favorite out of all the sheets. The ending is fine, but not very inventive. I’d rather see you try to loop the song, because then it would work perfectly as an ambient song.
Overall rating: 4/5
Now that I’m finished with the song, I’m going to re-listen to the song in full, and give my opinions on repetition and flow. All text below this line will be after doing so.
Thoughts on Flow and Repetition: Even though I was worried about repetition early on, it actually wasn’t as bad as it would’ve been in any other genre of music. Ambient songs are supposed to be repetitive, and thus this one is. But what ambient songs try to do best is flow extremely well. So, when I went back over the song, this was my higher priority. When I felt the tempo change coming I became especially worried, but again, the transition in and out of these was done so well that the flow of the song was uninterrupted. So while the song is repetitive, I didn’t see that as much of a problem as I normally would. However, because of the disruptive acoustic guitars, I felt that the flow wasn’t done perfectly, which is a bit of a let down. Oh, and going back to sheet 14, I say it was a definite positive point of the song.
Overall rating on Repetition: 4/5
Overall rating on Flow: 4/5
Full Rating: 3.79/5 (Well at least that worked liked I’d hoped. I consider this a fair rating)
So, does anyone like this new way of critique? It’s a lot more colorful, but there is a lot of explaining to be done. The scale is from red to yellow, with only orange in between. I also highlighted bad points in red and good ones in yellow. Although now that I look at it, I consider that unnecessary. Because of the way the review is structured, users can read a single paragraph and have easy reference points to where I am in the song. I am open to suggestions (I found QVX’s to be quite helpful).
The intro: I felt the nostalgia comment at the beginning was a little unnecessary, but I understand your need to share it with us, and it is nice just hearing any background thoughts. I did like when you talked about titles. Criticizing on titles is rare, yet I think it should be done more often. You made some good pointers and suggestions about choosing titles correctly and mentioned QVX’s unoriginal titlea. I’m sure this is all very useful to QVX, and to me and everybody else, and it was great of you to mention it.
Next you state your style of the review, along with giving reasons why you like it better. I do agree with all of the things you said there, and as you’ve mentioned it I’ve noticed the details more carefully.
(Intro): I think the colours and other formatiing make it a lot easier to read. As soon as I glanced at the paragraph, “Intro (sheet 0):” came to my eyes. Sometimes it can be hard to know what part a review is talking about and this formatting makes it a lot easier.We can plainly see where you are referring to. It’s also nice that you made negative comments red, but I think you may have been too harsh with the “EXTREMELY”. It was nice how you mentioned some of QVX’s advice in listening to it. Although you only actually criticized the intro in the very last paragraph, but I know it was short. I liked how you coloured “overall rating” a sharp cyan, so we can quickly glance through and see the important ratings. Also I like how you’ve dynamically coloured the ratings so that we can easily see the rating visually and it looks good. I can glance through the review without reading a single thing and ascertain the ratings for each section.
(Transition): I didn’t quite like the dashes in “(sheets 1-5-4)” because if you just had "(sheets 1-5) I would think 1 to 5, ie 1,2,3,4 and 5. But still, minor problem. I liked how you began with a short summery sentence, before going into detail. You also provided alternatives and improvements which I applaud you for. And I liked the overall-review of the part at the end, the parts you didn’t and did like.
(Chorus): I can see you use yellow for the positive things, which are nice. Although I would have preferred a different colour than the one used for the song parts, it could get a little confusing. Also you said how you wouldn’t be able to do that drum reverb correctly, it’s always nice to get personal and it makes the song-maker feel good. Then you said said “the main problem is that” but instead of following up with a problem you followed up with an improvement. But improvements are always good.
(Verse): You mentioned that the problems in an earlier part applied to here, which is good because sometimes people just ignore problems after they’ve mentioned it once. You also give a kind of “investigation” about where something sounds bad, which is interesting. Also you gave a nice possible improvement. I don’t know why you yellow’d “it gave me hope”, but I assume you really like the introduction of drums.
(Chorus): You gave a lot of positive comments here, with just one small improvement. The more positive comments the better! Also you alluded this section to the song’s silver lining, which is a nice metaphor.
(Transition): This part has no colouring, which makes me immediately thing it’s not to good or bad, which was kinda the truth. Only thing is the last sentence didn’t really make that much sense, but other wise included some very good comments.
(Solo): I like your comment about ambient songs not needing solos, I think it’s nice to include things like that. Also you gave the effects of tempo changes, which also can be useful for future songs. Also it’s great that you always give a reason for liking or not liking something.
(Transition): Sometimes a simple comment is all that’s needed! Although you didn’t give a reason why it was so good it is easy to figure it out.
(Verse)
(Chorus)
(Outro): I like when you make comments trying to figure how a song works. Also it’s nice of you to pick out a favourite sheet, and write an improvement.
I think it’s great you decided to do a separate section for repetitiveness and flow. You did provide one, but I would have liked more examples of where there was flow and repetition. Also I don’t know Flow has a high rating if you didn’t like it as much as repetition. But you said good and bad points, and gave awareness to these factors.
The full rating then is much appreciated. Also when it goes to 2 decimal places you know it’s really exact and professional.
Then you have a note on your critique style, where you share your good and bad points. I do agree with you, the colours are slightly unnecessary. One way you could have it is colour all the negative sentences slight red and the positive ones slightly green. It would just allow us to see overall which parts seemed the best or worst and also it would be pretty. But QVX will I’m sure read the review fully so I think anything’s unnecessary. One suggestion I have is just to list some of the good points and bad points at the bottom simply. It would just be really quick and easy to see general criticism and other people could see what you thought of the song instead of reading the whole review. But I don’t know.
Overall, I have to say you’re really good at critisizing. You go over each part rigorously, picking out all stuff that no-one else would ever notice. You always provide suggestions and improvements which are the most helpful. Also you have a good way of complimenting people. Also I loved the ratings and the paragraphing, they really made this the best review ever. A big improvement from last time. It’s easy to read and understand and is just about a perfect review!
4.999999999/5.
I think the statement “the main problem is that light drumming and bass needs to be added” is just worded wrong. It should read The main problem is there isn’t any drumming or bass at this point.
Also, The reason flow and repetition have the same rating is simple, if the song were in any other genre, repetitiveness would be at 3 and flow would be 4.5. But because this is an ambient song, repetition is more allowable as long as the song flows perfectly, which this song nearly does.
Also, all your suggestions will be noted. No more dashes, although in a song with a more erratic sheet numbering, I put (sheets a, b, and c) instead. Also, I found a summary review to be a good idea, I just hope that people won’t skip the main review and just look at that instead. Still, the review is for the song maker and no one else really. So I’ll add one in to my template. Green definitely would work better for positive notes, also I’m going to remove the darker orange from my ranking range:
4.5
4
3.5
3
Reviews of reviews 
I certainly liked this one the most so far and i definitely agree with it being the best so far. I did think the red and yellow (maybe green instead?) should’ve been more pale because it really makes the errors stand out, but as long as the text is there i’m happy XD
I will definitely keep all of this in mind 
(i think i need to start making a list though so i don’t forget any of your hints/tips 
)
Nuse, that was a very nice review of a review 
You should’ve added colour though XD
That was a bit short, but I agree, colour makes everything better.
/review of a review of a review of a review.
Your review of a review of a review of a review is shorter 
XD
Well, inspiration hit me…
=D
A two worded title this time…
Fruity Omasum (Its named this cause its completely random):
In case you wanted to know…omasum is the third stomach of a ruminant (buffalo, deer, antelopes, giraffes, camels etc.)
So yeah, its entirely random…
Oh and don’t mind the…interesting choice of instruments…
Oh it’s good! The instruments do sound odd together though. By the way your mom is fat.
IT LOOPS!!!
That was very nice. I believe the chord progression could have used some work, but I like how you managed to use those instruments together and not create dissonance.
No, yours is (For anyone who doesn’t get it, Fruity Omasum is an anagram for “Your mum is fat”)
Thanks
Yes it does loop
The instruments were quite random…
I first started by just grabbing a random instrument (sax hit), and then almost added a tuba as bass, but i ended up changing that to a french horn…i then grabbed another brass/wind instrument whcih was the muted trumpet and found out that it sounded really nice higher up , i then added drums of course and soon the claps.
I then added the metal guitar as a joke…but it ended up sounding really good with the metal guitar there XD
After that i added the other sax in the mini-solo thing…
Randomness.
My head is so mixed up right now…but i think i managed to make the song better from what it was…
So basically…is this decent?
If yes, whats wrong with you, and if no, whats wrong with it… XD
(and yes i am also asking you to criticise my drumming cause i’m well aware that it is NOT my best)
The problem with the opening is that the melody is in a more “happy” mode, as if its major, and the bass seems minor. Also, the bass has a bunch of passing tones, adding a lot of dissonance to a song that doesn’t need or want dissonance. Sadly, you don’t know much about chords (supposedly, or did you lie to me? ) and neither do I, so I don’t have any new suggestions for the bass.
It’s not your best drumming. Sounds very unrealistic. Normally, I write this off as a limitation of Notessimo, but since its you, I take off a bunch of points instead.
I’m not really following what scale this is in. The opening suggest A minor or C major, but the opening chords are v-VI with VIII, or iii,IV, V, respectively. Not common, and doesn’t seem to work well.
It then seems to modulate… twice… It works well, but the transition needs work. You then decided on more counter-point… Pretty good, but some of the melodies need work.
I could see this sounding really good with the bass being changed!
I agree with this. The song just sounds weird to me.
http://notessimo.net/viewtopic.php?f=1334&t=82991
I tried working on your chord progression. Do you think this sounds better? (the opening)
GAAAAAH TEH MUSIC THEORY ARRRRRRRGH D:<
What’s wrong with music theory D:
im only saying that because QVX doesn’t know much (a little less than much) about theory, and you should have known this if you have read his thread enough. Then you bring it up in, out of all the other threads, here.
Music theory.
Don’t do tritones [F + B; F# + C; G + C#, etc.]
End.
How else am I supposed to critique him.
I KNOW he knows what a bass is, and I know he knows what a lead is.
The paragraph with the roman numerals is more of me rambling and thinking out loud, and he doesn’t really need it.
Modulate = key change.