LinuxMusicians

Hello,

This is a fast-paced 'organic techno' (of sorts) synth track. It was fun to mix.

Too Late for Goodbyes ?

Unfortunately the bass was mostly eaten by soundcloud. Almost sounds AM-like. I'll have to figure this one out when mixing: why is the bass
largely diminished on soundcloud and how to compensate, if possible, for this.

Cheers.

Strange space... trip into deep electronic mind... bit fussy... But maybe it's there, in the imagination of an UFO-intellect dance green people?
Fine track, very cool!

- It definitely has a kind of 'fun' quality that carries over well.

Then it is a strange hybrid: for a pop song, it is already a bit over the compact format prescribed for that idiom, whereas for a techno track proper, apt, e.
g., for a DJ-session, it could be 3x as long, with a lot of 'comings & goings' incorporated, like beat ceasing, pads remaining, dramatic build-ups, etc.- and no soloing. That, in turn, your particular kind of soloing, would actually be most at home in yet totally another genre - psychedelic, as nearly the only idiom officially allowing an explorative middle way between accomplished virtuosity and the streamlined simplicity of mainstream melodic motifs.

But simply taking the song as what it is, I quite enjoy it , and it shows some signs of your own hallmark taking shape, so I would dare predict it shall harvest a good number of plays.

Personal taste remarks: I could live without the transpose-experiment in the later parts. Your 'tribal percussion' has nicely evolved from the plain djembé of 'Flow Notion', clever also to leave the didgeridoo-reference at a hint, since that is already overpopularized in certain places. My higlight, apart from richness and clarity of sound of the percussion, is that fast-paced but otherwise mellow sounded arpeggio appearing from time to time.

forestandgarden wrote: But simply taking the song as what it is, I quite enjoy it , and it shows some signs of your own hallmark taking shape, so I would dare predict it shall harvest a good number of plays.

Thanks for the comments, I wasn't too sure about the transpositions either but they went through. I have a problem with tagging music. With soundcloud a tags are proposed, as well as custom tags. Either way, I often am stuck there not knowing what to choose or what to come up with. And then the role they might play (I don't know) with people searching with tags. If it was just for me I'd put 'music' as a redundant tag.

The bass ends up sounding all right, although I still have to do some tests. Someone commented that there's no sizzle, no high end in the whereabouts of 10KHz, which I also have to check it out.

By the way I read yesterday that Heinrich Hertz once shurgged when someone asked him about an eventual utility of radio waves: "Naah, this will never be useful". This is from a book I recently started reading, "This Is Your Brain on Music" by dr. Daniel Levitin. Seems to be a good book to read, fun to read, written by a researcher who used to play in a rock band and be a mixing engineer.

psyocean wrote:Strange space... trip into deep electronic mind... bit fussy... But maybe it's there, in the imagination of an UFO-intellect dance green people? Fine track, very cool!

Thanks. The picture suggests in a colourful way at least some earthlings going to use a rocket to visit some planet. seen in the sky. Could it be Nibiru or Planet X that is approaching the Earth ??? Hence, gotta go, no time for goodbyes !

As far as tagging is concerned, I'd suspect it's banal: more tags bring more search hits, whether they fit or not. You could probably enquire at uncle google's analytics department about tag popularity, and pick the top 10. Now if that's the road you want to travel...
And the book sounds interesting, if it is an ebook, I want it borrowed when you're finished

Nope, it's a book that's from the pre-historic era, made with trees. Another one I started, as I like to go from one to the other when it's related, is "How Music Works" by David Byrne (of the Talking Heads). He makes a point at the beginning about how music is shaped by the environment. Hence spiritual music in the Western world was made in places which had very good reverb, if not echo: churches. This modeled the music to be playable in those spaces. Airy music, floating, no sharp changes at all, chrod progressions that goes well together. Whereas spiritual music in other places, such as in Africa, is based on rhythm and played in open spaces.

I would imagine that Black American gospel singers could prefer churches with not that much of a reverb. So "we" came to conceive of spirituality as something in the sky, spacey and this goes on to a certain extent in new age, psych music that caters to the spiritual. We added some rhythm now but it's still not down to earth. The concept of spirituality for us is aerial. Rhythm, especially if we look back 50 years ago or so, is considered to be instinctive, calling for the part of us that's not spiritual. But for other people rhythm based music is spiritual.

He goes on with early jazz and the bar scene, then rock. The places where music is played models the music itself. Today we use headphones and speakers to play music in our homes. The music itself is often made likewise. We shape reverb and echo like we want, there's no restriction, especially for music which is primarily spread like this, with rare concerts here and there. That music is born between headphones and is transmitted to be played back within headphones, or home speakers, in small environments. When I listen for instance to jam112 I feel it's alright but thinking about it, maybe it's possible to inject more 'realism' into the mix, the playing, so that it reflects a 'natural' environment in which the music would bloom.