Counterfeit Kingdom, Instrumental/Prog/Metal (GP4)
View Full Version : Counterfeit Kingdom, Instrumental/Prog/Metal (GP4)
12-01-2011, 10:57 PM
Finally I've finished this song, taking up most of the last half of 2011. This is the most psychotic (And biggest in regards to file size) piece I've written, (And my other current WIP's are only solidifying this direction) taking inspiration from Michael Romeo, Steve Vai, Stephan Forte and Ron Jarzombek/Blotted Science. The opening sweep passage (A Section) consists of an altered scale in particular bars (G Lydian b6), Section B uses chordal substitutions, creating a "pseudo-modulation" and the solo uses polytonality through parallel minor second harmonies. Enjoy!
FFO: Progressive Metal, Shred Metal, Instrumental Metal, Stephan Forte, Steve Vai, Jeff Loomis, Micahel Romeo, Ron Jarzombek/Blotted Science.
12-02-2011, 10:55 AM
I hear so much Loomis in this song it's insane.
Really sweet stuff man and great chops. I would say that it's almost too shred for my liking though, there were a few points where you slowed things down and I was really digging it but before it could really get the full effect you were off in a full out shred fest again.
Regardless, props to this epic song.
12-02-2011, 11:20 AM
Heh, crazy arpeggios at the beginning, hope you can play them! Like BloodReverence said, I get a Jeff Loomis vibe in the lick at bars 12-13. Playing groups of 3 notes in 16th notes, reminds me of a part in the Final Product solo where he plays groups of 6 notes in 16ths, or something like that. Like the clean part that comes in after that to give a change in feel and keep it interesting. Good to have a more melodic lead part for a bit before more shredding again. The parts with different time signatures work well. One thing, it might be impossible to play the harmonized tapping lick in time whilst ritarding.
Anyway overall it was very impressive and it all flows together as well. Excellent work!
12-02-2011, 12:42 PM
Would love to hear it recorded, guitar pro is not enough for this piece :)
Life Is Brutal
12-04-2011, 12:28 AM
Honestly, I disliked the opening phrasing, there's something indistinctly off about it. Its possibly in the transition into the diminished arpeggios/chromatics, but I dunno. Also, the chromatics in the backing chords make the diatonics seem strange and difficult to follow.
(B) and (C) don't seem to have that problem, although I disliked the transition from 17-18. The addition of the triplets in the diminished arpeggio make it sound jumbled/just tossed in.
I thoroughly enjoyed the clean section at C. :p:
I didn't have any qualms with the lead when it began, interesting phrasing and melody, but at 35 you do a harmonized lick in E minor but resolve it to B with the backing.
Other than that, no real detectable harmonization problems, and I liked alot of the key changes/chord modulation and whatnot. :haha:
Bars 75-78 give me more of a metal core vibe for some reason, and it seems like too sudden of a stop.
The rest was all pretty good. :p:
12-04-2011, 01:57 AM
@BloodReverence: Thank you very much, Jeff Loomis is probably without a doubt my biggest musical influence and hero. To be compared to him is fantastic. Thank you very much.
@MetalCommand: That's the scary thing... I can play it all. If you're curious, I use GP5 as my backing track so I'm playing each part exactly to the file. Otherwise I don't think it would possible to record this piece by myself.
@Erra93: My dad says the same thing.
@Life Is Brutal: Different strokes for different folks? I always used chromaticism as a way of thinking inside the box. Where you start at one point (Which is harmonically 'safe') and finish at another point (A, Which is also harmonically safe) and then I'm free to wander as far away from my tonal centre until I reach point B. That's how I do chromaticism anyway.
I've also got some cool panning/equalisation tricks planned to avoid clutter which isn't necessarily possible in GP5.
That's another modulation trick. Not everyone likes it but I thought it was fitting and thus decided to use it.
I don't know how you got a metalcore vibe but I absolutely despise the stuff (Any 'core' music that is). I was listening to 'And The Maiden Spoke' by Nevermore when writing that section. Just before the solo, there's a 'jabbing' type riff. That personally doesn't sound like metalcore at all to me. I don't actually like the sudden change in vibe either but I can't find anyway to fix it and I love the tapping so it's going to stay.
The modulations were inspired by Symphony X so if you aren't familiar you should listen to them.
Thanks for the fantastic crit, you no doubt have another magnificent musical manifestation coming soon? ;) Make sure you send me a pm or something so I can take a gander. Thanks again.
12-04-2011, 02:21 AM
...I dont come here much at all anymore. And this song had done nothing to make me want to start coming back more. Sorry in advance for the harshness. Because it will be quite harsh. I see no need to pull my punches; it ain't personal, and everyone else on this board is gonna jizz over this piece anyway.
Basically, big fat meh. For all it's technicality, there's really only one part I thought was memorable or expressive, the rest of was just a flury of notes, pretty much, exacerbated by the fact that the drums have no dynamics or eloquence to them.
The beginning tries hard to be dramatic, and while it sorta almost succeeds, the backing makes it falter. There's something distinictly off about the rhythm, as LiB said. Separately, the parts would actually work well enough though. Dont like the fourth harmony is probably part of it.
B I found very, very dull. C is ok, but the drums are awful. They'd be fine if you were trying for something metal, or in the second half when the melody enters, but as is? They're bad when it's just clean. That said I actually liked the melody.
D is actually very good, reminds me of Guthrie Govan and Marty Friedman, but it feels very disjointed and out of place, in the context of the song. And the transition back to the intro thing is awful. Absolutely botched that one. B sounds the same and not very great still.
C's drums afore the melody are still shit.
H is awful. Buth sudden in transition and shit. I is the worst part of the song by far. It's absolute shit. And doesnt fit. D comes back and it still feels out of place but saves the song from going too far down the shit-can cause it's still good, despite not fitting [it's too happy, for one thing].
Awful transition back to the intro makes another appearance. Intro still does nothing for me.
The clean bit sounds kinda like it could be really good. But it just kinda... happens and doesnt get to develop. And doesnt get to stick around.
The solo itself is pretty good but I'm pretty sure I've heard that backing riff before by SOMETHING. Perhaps even by someone on this board. JR or DminishedFifth I think? I dunno. H and I return though and they still suck.
Then again the non-fitting but good melody, and then the terribad transition comes back and it becomes the intro again.
God, so much gratuitous note masturbation, I can't take it.
Then it basically does this gratuitous outro solo thang that sorta still doesnt fit at all, mood wise, and then it ends.
So yeah. Not good. Really not good. Tries hard to be ambitious, and for me? Fell flat on its face. Not to mention for all the technical stuff it still manages to somehow be terribly predictable structurally, and for all the modulation, it still manages to somehow feel like it went nowhere. Just kinda meandered about for a bit and then ended.
And it also does the opposite of this quote that pretty much guides me in all my composition [writing, music, or whatever]: "It is not hard to compose, but what is fabulously hard is to leave the superfluous notes under the table." So yeah. Safe to say it's not my cup of tea. I can't really give you an honest critique. Get rid of H and I though and it'll be slightly better. Perhaps give it some more emotion/expression and it'd improve a lot. That is to say, controlled restraint >>>>>>>>>>>> superfluous, gratuitous flashy playing.
Life Is Brutal
12-04-2011, 02:27 AM
you no doubt have another magnificent musical manifestation coming soon?
I lol'ed hard, I hardly think of my music as magnificent. :haha:
Unless that was supposed to be a hyperbolic statement. :p:
I actually haven't been writing much in GP lately, mostly just been practicing classical guitar so I can officially declare my major as music.
I did sit down and write/elaborate some stuff I've been working on/wanted to do. Hopefully I'll be able to write more during Winter break, assuming Skyrim/MW3/Guitar doesn't interfere. :haha:
And I've also been transcribing Shostakovich's String Quartet No.8 (Movement II) for electric guitar. And by electric guitar, I mean a full on Death metal arrangement. Piece is brutal. :haha:
12-04-2011, 04:22 AM
@Burning Angel: I did put a 'For Fans Of' note in the original post, I'm sorry you're not too crash hot on the piece. At least it isn't 'core' music though. ;) I would also argue I put all my emotion into this piece, despite the fact I rarely show it. Possibly meaning I find music very emotionally exhausting. I'm not attached to my music though. I don't think you can measure emotion though, only technicality and influence.
@Life Is Brutal: Well you definitely has some very unique and interesting ideas that I like. Good luck with your studies in Classical guitar. Jeff Loomis now plays Lag Acoustic/Classical guitars, there are sound clips of him playing and it is amazing. I did a Thrash/Death Metal arrangement of Danse Infernale by Igor Stravinsky for one of my music perofrmances (Assessment)... I got a VHA (A). Make sure you let me here this arrangement. I always thought Romantic/Baroque/20th Century Classical music has so much in common with Metal.
Life Is Brutal
12-04-2011, 05:07 AM
Burning Angel seems to hate on everything. :haha:
12-04-2011, 08:26 AM
I'm not a fan of any of the artists you listed but I still thought it had some interesting stuff going on - liking the drums in particular. Some of the guitar was a bit 'shreddy' for my tastes but I suppose that expectable. One thing I will say is that when Part M came along I was all "Yay a quiet part" but then it got loud again. I think it'd be nice if you expanded that part. Tbh, I though the best parts where the parts you used less often - maybe you should include more quiet sections (like Opeth or something). Just a thought.
EDIT: Basically what Of_Wolves said - it's good but misses memorableness (real word?)
12-04-2011, 01:23 PM
I'll preface this by saying first, I have indeed listened to a lot of your influences for this one (I like them moderately well and can appreciate, but not quite my cup of tea) and secondly I'm sorry if this crit is either short, redundent or .. where what ever else might be wrong with it haha.
I'm not going to bash on the shredding as its pretty par for the course in this genre. You did fairly well with it I'll give you that. In fact the thought you put into chord choice did it for me. What I mean is, you've struck that happy medium between showing off with theory and it melting into the background, making things better and tighter, but not sticking out too much. Some of the tapping leads in this inspired me I must admit, but I couldn't take it any further than inspiration (I'm the kind that needs to have a guitar at hand to compose tapped sections, and I very rarely compose that way.)
However (and I'm sorry if this is too big of a however), I didn't get much out of this piece. Everything was nice, fairly well executed and for the most part in the right places, but it felt like it was lacking something. Since I'm not convinced I could do this piece any more justice than you already have I'm instead going to echo the above UGers and say that some longer sections of dynamic interlude would have been nice. Something more along those lines would probably make the sheddish sections stand out more in fact by value of being different, whether tonally or rhymically, or whatevs.
I would love to be able to delve deeper into your note choice, but I'm afraid I might devolve into taste-based comments like "make it more catchy!", sooooo, I'll leave it there. I hope I've helped at least a tiny bit.
If you have the time:
12-04-2011, 01:48 PM
Burning Angel seems to hate on everything. :haha:
:o Indeed. Can't help it that I generally don't like the styles people here choose to explore, with the exception of a few people.
That said I agree with HH, at least this isnt core, and at least he is trying to do something ambitious with his own voice, if you will. While I have some issues with it, it may by and large just be a strokes-for-folks thing, because I literally don't listen to any shred anymore beyond Guthrie Govan.
12-05-2011, 03:34 AM
:haha: I love you Burning_Angel
vBulletin v3.0.9, Copyright ©2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.