C4C New song 3. melodic hardcore


PDA

View Full Version : C4C New song 3. melodic hardcore


pmeg568c
06-29-2009, 11:04 PM
another of my bands songs. This one is almost done. much simpler than the others. I kind of threw the intro together in guitar pro because i havent written it yet. the structure is down, i just might do some variations of the riffs when they come back.

this song is more vocal driven. some of the rhythms are strange. all the triplets are swung triplets, and i didn't know how to notate that. don't mind some simple mistakes. And some of the dissonance sound strange on guitar pro. I have a really sloppy recording of 3 of the riffs in my profile but its not even close to good.

c4c of course.


EDIT: new intro is up.

EDIT: www.matahari.bandcamp.com "explanation aftermath"

StewieSwan
06-29-2009, 11:10 PM
Ummm

Care to explain how this is 'melodic'?

As for the actual song, I think it's dreadful. Might be better with bass and drums, but as it is now, it sounds terrible. Sorry

pmeg568c
06-29-2009, 11:12 PM
? im really confused... care to explain how it isn't melodic? or why its bad? I think its a sweet song. obviously there are no drums so ill explain what they sound like

the first 2 parts are d-beat parts. the third part is a combination of a bunch of drum fills and a d-beat. the slow part at the end is just a slow heavy rock beat.

you clearly don't know what "melodic hardcore" and im pretty confident that this song is not awful.

Thomasoman
06-30-2009, 12:35 AM
Well I enjoyed it. This is a lot like the stuff I actually listen to lately and I think its solid. Cant wait to hear it recorded as with all your stuff.

pmeg568c
07-09-2009, 01:11 PM
Ummm

Care to explain how this is 'melodic'?

As for the actual song, I think it's dreadful. Might be better with bass and drums, but as it is now, it sounds terrible. Sorry

still waiting for you to explain yourself

tukk04
07-09-2009, 01:22 PM
I didn't like that at all

but the music on your profile is very good! :golfclap:
so you must just be having writers block because this song is nowhere near as good as the music on your profile


CFC?
the first or second song in my sig
or both if you feel like it

pmeg568c
07-09-2009, 01:28 PM
you people arent being very helpful. that song IS in my profile anyway. care to explain why you dont like it

ninja.kitty
07-09-2009, 01:49 PM
i didnt like it much either... it seemed like whenever you got a good thing going on, you just drove it down into the dust. like from 55 sounded like it was building up into something good, but then it did that 3-2-1 thing and killed the momentum... im with stewie, its not melodic. you can call it melodic if you like, but there is no melody, and that just kills it for me

pmeg568c
07-09-2009, 01:55 PM
im fine with you thinking it killed momentum. i agree with that. its kind of hard to tell without drums. all the riffs actually flow very well. i don't really understand how it isn't melodic. what do you consider melodic? just because there isnt a simple melody it doesnt mean it isn't melodic. its just full of weird melodies.

icronic
07-09-2009, 02:33 PM
Yeah it didn't do a whole lot for me either. I loved Widower and the song you posted after it, but this one just feels a bit too masturbatory. From the chords you've chosen to the rhythms everything about it just feels forced. It feels like you're trying to make some kind of statement as if to say "look how much I know about theory, and how advanced my songs are" but while you're doing that you've completely forgotten the basic fundamental aspects of writing a good song.

I can see why you're calling it melodic, and I agree that it is. But again it's so completely outside the box that nobody's going to recognize it for what it is, and if they do they still probably will have a tough time appreciating it.

tukk04
07-09-2009, 02:41 PM
Yeah it didn't do a whole lot for me either. I loved Widower and the song you posted after it, but this one just feels a bit too masturbatory. From the chords you've chosen to the rhythms everything about it just feels forced. It feels like you're trying to make some kind of statement as if to say "look how much I know about theory, and how advanced my songs are" but while you're doing that you've completely forgotten the basic fundamental aspects of writing a good song.

I can see why you're calling it melodic, and I agree that it is. But again it's so completely outside the box that nobody's going to recognize it for what it is, and if they do they still probably will have a tough time appreciating it.
hows it going, icronic!
you mind checking out my unfinished alt rock song, cause you helped me a lot when you brokedown/critiqued my other song, still reworking the acoustic-y song solo though :/

icronic
07-09-2009, 02:44 PM
hows it going, icronic!
you mind checking out my unfinished alt rock song, cause you helped me a lot when you brokedown/critiqued my other song, still reworking the acoustic-y song solo though :/

I will, but next time use a private message... Or at least give pmeg568c a crit if you're gonna jack his thread :)

tukk04
07-09-2009, 02:49 PM
I will, but next time use a private message... Or at least give pmeg568c a crit if you're gonna jack his thread :)
i already crit'd him plus were bumping his thread, so he owes us :D

jbridge90
07-09-2009, 03:57 PM
I'm with the majority, its not melodic.

You're rhythm's were kind of awkward to be honest. It seemed like you were just trying to write something 'orginal', but it turned out sounding like some awkward distortion and overdrive sexfest.

Defining musical characteristics of melodic hardcore:

Minor sevenths and minor ninth chords used in combination with an open string modal playing style. This style was probably inspired by Bob Mould, extended by Brian Baker in Dag Nasty and later by Dan Yemin with his work in Lifetime (their early releases on New Age Records are good examples of the genre).

Drop D-tunings on guitars and bass is common for post-1990 melodic hardcore to achieve a heavier sound than possible with a standard tuning.

200bpm and 220bpm is a very common tempo for post-1990 melodic hardcore.

Guitar licks and vocal hooks with 5th or 9th harmony is common in post-1995 melodic hardcore.

Triplets and tapping (both for guitar and bass) are becoming more and more common features in newer melodic hardcore.

The common time signature in melodic hardcore is 4/4.

pmeg568c
07-09-2009, 06:27 PM
I'm with the majority, its not melodic.

You're rhythm's were kind of awkward to be honest. It seemed like you were just trying to write something 'orginal', but it turned out sounding like some awkward distortion and overdrive sexfest.

Defining musical characteristics of melodic hardcore:

Minor sevenths and minor ninth chords used in combination with an open string modal playing style. This style was probably inspired by Bob Mould, extended by Brian Baker in Dag Nasty and later by Dan Yemin with his work in Lifetime (their early releases on New Age Records are good examples of the genre).

Drop D-tunings on guitars and bass is common for post-1990 melodic hardcore to achieve a heavier sound than possible with a standard tuning.

200bpm and 220bpm is a very common tempo for post-1990 melodic hardcore.

Guitar licks and vocal hooks with 5th or 9th harmony is common in post-1995 melodic hardcore.

Triplets and tapping (both for guitar and bass) are becoming more and more common features in newer melodic hardcore.

The common time signature in melodic hardcore is 4/4.


hey man, can you name 4 modern melodic hardcore bands? i live, dream and breathe this stuff. i doubt you know enough about modern melodic hardcore to comment. and wikipedia is not a valid source for your information especially on genres of music such as this

i agree that the song sounds awkward, and it isn't my greatest work. but if you listen to it with drums in my profile, youll see that it flows and grooves just fine except for the last part.

smokeyalater
07-12-2009, 04:47 PM
this sucks balls , it isnt melodi at all , ovbiously you have a warped veiw of melodic

andrew12398
07-12-2009, 04:51 PM
I'm with the majority, its not melodic.

You're rhythm's were kind of awkward to be honest. It seemed like you were just trying to write something 'orginal', but it turned out sounding like some awkward distortion and overdrive sexfest.

Defining musical characteristics of melodic hardcore:

Minor sevenths and minor ninth chords used in combination with an open string modal playing style. This style was probably inspired by Bob Mould, extended by Brian Baker in Dag Nasty and later by Dan Yemin with his work in Lifetime (their early releases on New Age Records are good examples of the genre).

Drop D-tunings on guitars and bass is common for post-1990 melodic hardcore to achieve a heavier sound than possible with a standard tuning.

200bpm and 220bpm is a very common tempo for post-1990 melodic hardcore.

Guitar licks and vocal hooks with 5th or 9th harmony is common in post-1995 melodic hardcore.

Triplets and tapping (both for guitar and bass) are becoming more and more common features in newer melodic hardcore.

The common time signature in melodic hardcore is 4/4.

Agreed.

85-91 were the only parts I actually enjoyed.

Intro is a big no-no though.

jimmyled
07-12-2009, 05:34 PM
Ummm

Care to explain how this is 'melodic'?

As for the actual song, I think it's dreadful. Might be better with bass and drums, but as it is now, it sounds terrible. Sorry
Basically this. I personally don't like the disharmonies here. Some of the disharmonies, those done on purpose are pretty cool. I personally don't like the style, but with bass and drums this could be pretty good.
Edit: C4C: My songs (http://www.ultimate-guitar.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1160749)

pmeg568c
07-13-2009, 02:41 AM
this sucks balls , it isnt melodi at all , ovbiously you have a warped veiw of melodic


SIGH

nobody is listening to me. just jumping on the bandwagon. If you don't think this is melodic hardcore, your opinion is void. i doubt most of you who said it isn't melodic couldn't name a single melodic hardcore band.

K rhythms are awkward yes we've established this. they work fine. this song is more vocally driven.


and care to explain why the intro is a big no no? I really wish you people would explain yourselves.

DC EP
07-14-2009, 12:18 AM
I think it's hard for most people to grasp the idea of melodic hardcore, especially when this track has no vocals. I play in a band that dabbles in a fair bit of melodic hardcore, so I see where your coming from with this. To be honest with you, it sounds like you had a few extra riffs and ideas laying around and then put them together. To me, the song doesn't flow very nicely between the different parts; it's a bit too dissonant and harsh.

JesseBlanchard
07-14-2009, 01:05 AM
Dude, dont worry what everyone else is saying. They really dont know what theyre talking about and are probably listen to power metal or prog and are too caught up in how awesome they think their music is, to have an open mind about other genres.

pmeg568c
07-14-2009, 12:15 PM
ps people, there are only 2 dissonances in the entire piece, and they appear in the second part and when it comes back again. but i guess that is way to much dissonance. just because a chord or melody isn't major or minor it doesn't mean its dissonant.

ninja.kitty
07-14-2009, 01:21 PM
you know, you asked for this to be critted, and people have. now you're flipping out them because they dont like it. dont be so flippant about the genre and forget the music. it doesnt matter if they dont know what melodic hardcore is. if they think it sounds bad, then thats what they think, and thats what you asked for posting it in this forum. end of. if you dont want people to share what they think about it, dont post it. if all you want is praise, write something good, instead of writing and then getting mad at everyone that doesnt like it. that is just stupid.

now... *puts up flameshield against pmeg568c*

pmeg568c
07-14-2009, 01:28 PM
people gave me crits. And i agreed with lots of what they were saying. the only things i got upset about were the things that didn't make sense or that people didn't explain. someone told me the intro was a big no no. why? and how about the numerous "this sucks" "I didn't like this" posts with nothing else. how would you feel if someone said that and didn't explain themselves.

this happens every time i post a song in this forum. some people will not like it but won't explain themselves or say things completely false about it. if anyone thinks they can half ass a crit i'll be the first one to be able to tell. my other songs have gotten more positive feedback than this one, which is understandable. it is not my best song.

and it obviously does matter if people know what the genre is because the two people who knew the genre liked the song...

icronic
07-14-2009, 03:14 PM
people gave me crits. And i agreed with lots of what they were saying. the only things i got upset about were the things that didn't make sense or that people didn't explain. someone told me the intro was a big no no. why? and how about the numerous "this sucks" "I didn't like this" posts with nothing else. how would you feel if someone said that and didn't explain themselves.

this happens every time i post a song in this forum. some people will not like it but won't explain themselves or say things completely false about it. if anyone thinks they can half ass a crit i'll be the first one to be able to tell. my other songs have gotten more positive feedback than this one, which is understandable. it is not my best song.

and it obviously does matter if people know what the genre is because the two people who knew the genre liked the song...

What we have here is a failure to communicate.

People can't explain to you why they don't like it because they don't understand enough about theory to properly put into words what they're trying to convey, and any attempt to do so gets shot down because they used the incorrect terminology.

No, it's not nearly as dissonant as people think, but I can also see why people think it is. It's the same kind of thing as playing a I IV V progression and hanging it on the V. People are going to say it sounds dissonant, when it's simply unresolved. You're using really advanced concepts here, and to be completely honest I'd be impressed by anyone who could figure out what key(s) or scale(s) you've used without spending a good 30-60 minutes analyzing every single note.

Melody. First and obviously most people don't get the concept of voice leading. It also doesn't help that the distorted guitars in GP do a lot to mask it, and the recording in your profile disguises it even more. On top of that, the melody isn't very pleasant. Everything about it is tense and uncomfortable, and for anything melodic, well that's usually the last thing I'd aim for.

That said, I switched both guitars to acoustic and listened again. I liked it a lot more like that than I did with distortion, and I'm willing to bet people would be significantly less negative if you reposted the song with clean guitar sounds. Still, I didn't really like the song.

Simple fact of the matter is, you've chosen a style that only other musicians will ever appreciate, and very VERY few of them at that. The music that you write is not only above peoples comprehension, but the sound you're using is so completely alien to the ear it's simply not enjoyable to listen to.

If you really want people to really appreciate what you're doing, you really have to put some limitations on what you write. Don't write a song that's completely out of the box. Start with simple concepts that people can grasp and melodies that people understand, and then throw in those outside concepts and sounds at the proper time and place, instead of assaulting people with them for an entire song.

pmeg568c
07-14-2009, 03:29 PM
well honestly i don't really care what people outside of the genre of music i want to play for think about it. im just trying to see if people can appreciate it and have some understanding of different genres. i understand its not necessarily an easy song to grasp, but i dont really think its that out of the box, except for the second riff, but then again, i listen to this kind of music. Again i understand some peoples gripes with it, i just dont appreciate being told things are bad and not offering at least an improper explanation. id rather hear improper terminology than "this sucks".

but i totally understand what you mean about limitations. there is a point at which this music becomes less catchy and too complicated to leave an impact. we are working on that

Elathan
06-03-2011, 01:12 PM
Its definetly harsh to just say. This suck balls. PERIOD. I agree with the poster who explained how cleaner guitar tracks wouldve really made a big diffrence!

Elathan
06-03-2011, 01:15 PM
Oh and BTW poster who copied the wikipedia for melodic punk. Can you explain what a 5th or 9th harmony is aswell as the other concepts? I think that would help fans of the genre alot.

pmeg568c
06-03-2011, 01:23 PM
geez well since you bumped a 2 year old thread I guess I have a chance to post this song again.

its on this EP

www.matahari.bandcamp.com

Grave Robber
06-03-2011, 08:30 PM
Holy shit, that sounds amazing recorded! The riffs... they just work so well. I'll be honest i thought it sounded shit on GP, I wish all the other people could hear it now.

NegiTom
06-04-2011, 01:33 PM
Listened to the real song and it's not as bad as everyone says actually.

pmeg568c
06-04-2011, 02:38 PM
yea nice edit. Obviously that is a terrible tab, it has many mistakes and is not even complete really.

I don't even know why this thread was bumped haha. so pointless. This isn't our best song obviously but its more than a lot of people that post in this forum accomplish.

Metal_Master_0
06-05-2011, 03:15 PM
I thought there were a couple good riffs in the song, and if you had trouble with the timing that's probably why it sounds little off too. 19-33 has to be my favorite part, I like what you did there except for the last chord. All of it seems a little forced, especially your dissonance parts. Try to make it flow together a little bit more, and be drastic with chord changes when you wanna climax the song. I thought it was decent, not awful, but it needs work. C4C on my thread? :3 http://www.ultimate-guitar.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1448767

EDIT: I also forgot to mention that you should try some harmonies and some diminished arpeggios, it'll give a creepier vibe.

huevos
06-05-2011, 03:36 PM
The recorded version is immense.
Been a long time seen I've seen you pmeg568c. Good to see that you've been busy making some grand music brotha.

JCAshworth247
06-05-2011, 05:18 PM
without drums this song is only half finished basically

pmeg568c
06-06-2011, 02:47 PM
The recorded version is immense.
Been a long time seen I've seen you pmeg568c. Good to see that you've been busy making some grand music brotha.

haha thanks man, I remember you. I can't say i'll be around to often but glad to see people are still going at it here!

frankibo
06-10-2011, 06:08 AM
The problem here is that you can't tab out your own song so it sounds a lot worse on GP than the actual song does. The tempo is wrong and a lot of the note durations are wrong as well in the tab. I also think it's a lot more post-hardcore (like Vanna) than it is melodic hardcore. Actually you remind me of Vanna a lot, vocalist too.