#1
If you don't have GP5, I'm sure you have tuxguitar.

This song was inspired by Every Time I Die's Hot Damn! but ultimately it ended up with elements of Botch and Pig Destroyer. It goes by fast so one listen probably won't be enough, but do as you please. I'll check out anyone's songs, but if they're not my style I won't be able to give proper criticism. Link anyway. You can link multiple songs too, I don't care, I'll criticize one or more of them eventually.

USE MIDI.

Thanks
Attachments:
WHAT.gp5
i don't know why i feel so dry
#2
Kick ass
Gear:
Epiphone Archtop Dot
Ibanez RG120
Peavey ValveKing 112
Dunlop Crybaby
Boss Distortion Ds-1
MXR Carbon Copy
Rocktron Banshee Talk box
#4
Quote by slayerfrk
i can honestly i didnt like this, mathcore is to unmelodic for me, i just dont feel rhythm or melody in it, it just sounds like noise that tries to be complex. im sure people that like mathcore would like this though, sorry.


Maybe because it lacks an overriding melody or rhythm? As for trying to sound complex, that wasn't my goal. In fact I tried to make it kind of simple. Your comment is appreciated anyway, thanks. Same with the first poster.

My inspirations were around this area...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNtJegKyA_s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3PU0JgAvF0
i don't know why i feel so dry
Last edited by Eastwinn at Jul 12, 2010,
#5
I like mathcore. The Chariot and Every Time I Die are in my regular rotation. This just had no structure. It was just riff after riff, and nothing ever repeated. What I would suggest is take three or four of the riffs, tie them together into a recognizable structure, and make that into your finished song.

On a second listening, VI does use some similar shapes as the first riff, but other than that, I couldn't identify any structure.

As far as C4C, the closest thing I've done to mathcore is 'I'm Not Left Handed, Either,' which is linked in my signature, as 'The result of a long night with The Chariot.'
#6
Alright, like I always do in my crits, lemme break it all down:

I (2-16): First off, I really don't know why everyone does the cliche quarter symbols on the first bar, but especially for your song I felt it was unnecessary. That first kinda bang of the intro is really awesome without the symbols. The guitars were pretty awesome, percussion fit well, and the bass was pretty badass when it went solo.

II (17-25): Very solid as well, kinda the same tone as I, only complaint is track 2 on bar 25 doesn't sound right. But still a solid part.

III (26-46): Still kinda the same sounding as the rest of the song. Here is where it starts to get kinda boring.

IV (47-54): Now it just sounds like you're going up and down whatever scale you're using. Kinda redundant and boring.

V (55-67): I got a kinda dark vibe out of it, but still kinda boring.

VI (68-83): I really liked this part. It had a kinda badass watch-your-back kinda tone. I could really hear this is some kinda horror movie.

VII (84-100): Again just kinda boring. Kinda dull, nothing too special.

Overall: I'm not saying I didn't like it, it was a solid track. I wouldn't really say it was mathcore though, it sounded more black metal or something along those lines, I haven't listened to metal in a while, so I'm not too sure. Anyways, the riffs were kinda nice, overall it was just kinda repetitive though, the guitars just slowly got more dull to the point where it was annoying. It all sounded sort of the same throughout with the tone. I think the riffs are great, but you need to throw in more structure and more kinda tone switches.

I think it more sounded like a collection of riffs you came up with and put side-by-side. But, then again, that could be the sound you're going for, it's your song, and if you enjoy it, then why not?

All in all, it was a solid track, just sort of boring. It's one of those songs that's nice the first time, but you don't really wanna listen to it again. Great work, still.

[ C4C ]
#7
I wanted to try something new and throw structure out the window, so yes that was what I was going for . Thanks both of you, your comments were totally valid and I do agree with most of them. Specifically, though, Sief9, V was supposed to be slightly boring in preparation for VI. I'll attempt to give a very detailed crit of yours too.
i don't know why i feel so dry
#8
Thanks for the crit! Sorry it took me so long to get back to you!

Critting as I listen:

I - Very active. I love the little "fills" every 3 bars. Sounds very PTH to me, honestly.

II - Very PTH-ish. I like it a lot.

III - Pretty straight forward riffing. I liked the "breakdown"ish section. Good way to break it all up.

IV - Needs more drive! It sounds a bit lacking. Maybe more double bass? And put something on the first two bars of it... that "drop everything and play riff" thing gets kind of boring after awhile.

V - I think you repeat that riff too much... maybe do it only twice and see how it sounds. When the rest of the band comes in at VI it's a little better. This is just begging for a fast paced lead over the top though.

VII - Favorite riff. Love the drums. No complaints. What you did with the toms and stuff were awesome. The way you ended the song was very reminiscent of the way Dir en grey ends their songs.

Overall it wasn't bad. It got a little boring after awhile (until VII). It just needs more drive. Some of the riffs were very well done, but the lack of anything behind them just takes away from the power of them.

8.5/10
#9
I was really interesting

the rare measures in II make it sound kidna weird but cool

in III you just keep doing the same idea of the last sections for too much time

the break at IV fitted well

at V finally something different is added to the song, plus it is really interesting

VI obviously is inspired in V, which doesnt make the song sound like a random collection of riffs

didnt like VII that much

C4C