herby190
Banned
Join date: Mar 2008
7,674 IQ
#1
C4C.

Just like with my last piece, I want to get opinions on what I've got before writing the rest, so I know if I'm going in the right direction with this or not. Currently, it's just the intro and the first verse. Rip it to shreds.

As always, be honest, be harsh, and most of all, be constructive.

Update: It's been completely rewritten. Tear it to pieces.

Edit: Did a little bit of rewriting, but nothing major, at least not yet. I was thinking for the third chorus, adding backing vocals would be enough to differentiate it.
Attachments:
Projecta 26.zip
Last edited by herby190 at Oct 25, 2009,
21Fretter
Tab Contributor
Join date: Jul 2007
414 IQ
#2
Don't like the intro picking rhythm. It doesn't flow for me, kinda like jerky.
herby190
Banned
Join date: Mar 2008
7,674 IQ
#3
It's honestly been killing me trying to figure out the picking rhythm for it; with the eighth notes, it doesn't sound right, but it sounds too slow and aimless without it.... I'm considering switching time signatures, but idk.
Victor V.
Registered User
Join date: Jan 2009
22 IQ
#4
Listening to this song got me the impression that on the acoustic intro, what you really wanted to do was a 3/4 time with grace notes... and the chord progression is too depressive :P
herby190
Banned
Join date: Mar 2008
7,674 IQ
#5
Quote by Victor V.
Listening to this song got me the impression that on the acoustic intro, what you really wanted to do was a 3/4 time with grace notes... and the chord progression is too depressive :P
The progression in the verse, or do you mean the arpeggiated (if that's a word) progression in the intro?
Victor V.
Registered User
Join date: Jan 2009
22 IQ
#6
Quote by herby190
The progression in the verse, or do you mean the arpeggiated (if that's a word) progression in the intro?

The 26-29 bars. It's not a bad criticism, however, just a comment.

As for what I said about the time signature, forget it, I totally didn't realise the third note on the intro was dotted, which led to a bad judgment.
frankibo
UG Board King
Join date: May 2007
3,093 IQ
#8
i like the intro and the post intro, although im not sure about the drums there. it had a nice melody though.
Verse and Chorus are both solid, i like the chorus lead, they're just a it repetitive.
Verse 3 variation was a nice touch.
Chorus 3 needed to change a bit, it felt too samey
Overall it was pretty good, 7.5/10 just needs to be shaken up a bit and the drums need redoing tbh, they ruin the flow in the verses
herby190
Banned
Join date: Mar 2008
7,674 IQ
#9
Quote by frankibo
i like the intro and the post intro, although im not sure about the drums there. it had a nice melody though.
Verse and Chorus are both solid, i like the chorus lead, they're just a it repetitive.
Verse 3 variation was a nice touch.
Chorus 3 needed to change a bit, it felt too samey
Overall it was pretty good, 7.5/10 just needs to be shaken up a bit and the drums need redoing tbh, they ruin the flow in the verses
Thanks for the review.

Were there any verses specifically that the drums ruined? Each verse had different drums (although the change from verse 1 to 2 wasn't very big).
frankibo
UG Board King
Join date: May 2007
3,093 IQ
#10
it was mainly 1 and 2, the drums should be more consistent instead of stopping and starting
Tom Araya
Registered User
Join date: Oct 2008
2,921 IQ
#11
It's not my style of music, but I almost liked it Reminds me of THE DAMNED kinda thing. The Intro & post-intro sound cool anyway. Stay true!
Msu_Man04
UG's Twitchy Fella
Join date: Jan 2007
1,811 IQ
#12
Well, I really like the beginning, it reminds me sort of Blink-182 [like "Stay Together for the Kids" or "Adam's Song"]

The electric intro is great, too, I like that you keep the same basic melody, just up a couple octaves.

Don't care much for the key change, it didn't sound natural, but as for the riff itself, I like that it's not flat chords.

The cymbals are WAY too fast here in the chorus, but that could just be the RSE's fault, it might sound better with real drums. Other than that that part was good. I like the constant lead.

I like the guitar in verse 3, the thirds, but up an octave.

The outro was... meh. I like to, even if the music stops abruptly, put in a few extra bars just so it... well, it helps with the abruptness. XD.

Pretty good, though, I'd say like 7.5 or 8/10.

Thanks for the crit.
paradox_047
UG's C++ Programmer
Join date: Apr 2008
352 IQ
#13
^I agree, it sounded very Blink-182ish in the beginning. I think the guitar during the chorus (lead) sound good, but it's a little too much, and all over the place. The crash during the chorus stood out, so you may want to rewrite the drums for that part. Maybe GuitarPro is at fault for that sound though. I really like the transition from the intro to the post intro. That sounds great.

And the end was kind of abrupt. I didnt mind that at all. If everybody stopped like that during a concert, it'd sound wicked. And if that was your last song, and the lights went out when you all stopped like that. Yeahh.

8/10, for your genre.

And thanks for the crit
If you could turn into a member of the opposite sex, would you make love to your former body? Think about that.
Last edited by paradox_047 at Oct 25, 2009,
sfaune92
Used Register
Join date: Oct 2008
616 IQ
#14
I liked this, even though it sounded pop-punkish. It had a great flow and a catchiness that kept me listening. Lacking a solo maybe, but that's ok.

The intro was great dude!

And please work a little more on the bassline! use a little thirds, fourths, and fifths. Or maybe wander in the scale at some places?

and the lead being on the right side only and rhythm on left side only at some places were a little annoying to me.

9 / 10
overall, good song


C4C?
Now, i got a gp4 and midi version of my song as you requested...
https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1222556
ERROR 0x45: Signature not found
Last edited by sfaune92 at Oct 30, 2009,