yakko - the reg screen is standard for ANY one downloading mp3 music from ANY mp3.com artist...you only fill it out once and never have to worry about it again. just put in some random false information, and hit ok.
Kadarin
Lifer
- Nov 23, 2001
- 44,296
- 16
- 81
<< bump - no comments Astaroth33? >>
Sorry! I'm not ignoring you; I simply missed some bumps here.
I think the chart system isn't perfect; like ATOT, people will tend to just listen to whatever's on the first page (thus increasing the income of whoever's at the top at the expense of those towards the middle/bottom). It sounds to me like it would take some time and/or luck to get your song noticed so that it can float to the top. Is there any accountability on the part of mp3.com to make sure the chart is accurate? What exactly does it represent?
I love the concept, but believe the implementation needs some hammering out. I can't stand radio (thanks, ClearChannel, Inc), and this is a viable alternative (I listen to melodic trance, for the most part).
Ok, that thing that happens at 1:00. Destroy it. Burn it. Skin it alive! Just don't make me listen to it again 
Try to find another beat.
Try to find another beat.its funny cause just for fun, i actually sat here one day hammering hits on my songs, changing my IP. as if its not ironic enough, my ranking went way way down - like by double. it doesnt make any sense to me at all either...like having 15 hits / day on a song, consistently being around #100 or so on a genre, then getting 30 hits or so one day and being around 400-500. then it'll slowly go back down a few days later. it doesnt make any sense! its almost as if they can tell if you are the same computer (even though its a different IP) and punish those who hammer. oh well - it was a nice experiment. i've done it twice now with the exact same results.
thanks for the comment about the fill at 1:00 - i actually like it myself, and havent heard any complaints yet, but i'll definitely look into it with the final version.
thanks for the comment about the fill at 1:00 - i actually like it myself, and havent heard any complaints yet, but i'll definitely look into it with the final version.
My wife and I are painting a bedroom today, I saw your post, clicked on PLAY ALL, and cranked it!!!
Thanks! They are all great!!
Thanks! They are all great!!
BeauJangles
Lifer
- Aug 26, 2001
- 13,941
- 1
- 0
Hmm... I dunno, I'm torn on liking or not (which might sound odd), but the bass is high, and I would have to agree that, at least, in this song (I haven't listened to your others), that their isn't much of a 'journey.' I'm going to go back and listen to your other songs now Also, congrats, I think you did a good job.
Also, congrats, I think you did a good job.well, I'll be up all night working on a CS project... I'll listen to your stuff till I get sick of it. Nah, not really, I tend to not get sick of music But I'll be back with more comments later.
I wish I knew what the names of all these 'instruments' were so I could be more specific. Care to give a rundown for me and anyone else here who likes the music but has no clue how to refer to it?
[edit]: Like someone else said about Future Now, I don't like the part at about 1:03 (where it 'breaks'? -- I don't know any of the terminology here, so just hear me out and let me know if anything's unclear). I get a great deal of tension from the first minute of the song, and I know that a beat is coming, and I'm waiting, and waiting, and it's building, and the tension is great, and then it gets to the point where it's inevitable right about 1:00, and then the beat cuts in, but not in the way that I feel it should to have a proper 'release'. I really like the 'heaviness' of the beat starting at about 1:40, and I think that you should go straight into that at 1:05, rather than have the 'wuss' beat for a while. That said, I really like the buildup in the 1:20s. But I just feel like you need a stronger break at 1:05. Maybe add a cymbal, and make it shorter temporally, with maybe 4-5 bass drums, getting faster , like: bump...bump....bumpbumpbumpbump (I guess that'd be whole, whole, 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4) maybe with a little extra something in the midbass to fill it out, with the cymbal coming in twice or three times, getting louder each time.
I know that I've just described the typical beat drop-in from every song in the history of the genre, but I like it. It's a commonaity. People like to have things as points of reference. Mozart wrote with certain forms, and certain signals to the listener to indicate sections and whatnot, and it didn't diminish his music at all. I don't think that you should do something different just for the sake of being different, because the commonalities between songs make the listener more comfortable when hearing something new. Give the listener what he/she expects
But I'll be back with more comments later.I wish I knew what the names of all these 'instruments' were so I could be more specific. Care to give a rundown for me and anyone else here who likes the music but has no clue how to refer to it?
[edit]: Like someone else said about Future Now, I don't like the part at about 1:03 (where it 'breaks'? -- I don't know any of the terminology here, so just hear me out and let me know if anything's unclear
). I get a great deal of tension from the first minute of the song, and I know that a beat is coming, and I'm waiting, and waiting, and it's building, and the tension is great, and then it gets to the point where it's inevitable right about 1:00, and then the beat cuts in, but not in the way that I feel it should to have a proper 'release'. I really like the 'heaviness' of the beat starting at about 1:40, and I think that you should go straight into that at 1:05, rather than have the 'wuss' beat for a while. That said, I really like the buildup in the 1:20s. But I just feel like you need a stronger break at 1:05. Maybe add a cymbal, and make it shorter temporally, with maybe 4-5 bass drums, getting faster , like: bump...bump....bumpbumpbumpbump (I guess that'd be whole, whole, 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4) maybe with a little extra something in the midbass to fill it out, with the cymbal coming in twice or three times, getting louder each time. I know that I've just described the typical beat drop-in from every song in the history of the genre, but I like it. It's a commonaity. People like to have things as points of reference. Mozart wrote with certain forms, and certain signals to the listener to indicate sections and whatnot, and it didn't diminish his music at all. I don't think that you should do something different just for the sake of being different, because the commonalities between songs make the listener more comfortable when hearing something new. Give the listener what he/she expects
I'm listening to future now and I personally don't enjoy it. It's not doing it for me as a dance song (not enough going on to get into the groove) and the constant flickering of the "melody" makes this too intensive to be regular chill music. The bass-line is nice. You should keep the bassline and change the stuff around it. A less drawn-out melody will make this a nice dance rendition
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter