MABB v6.6.6

I've decided I want to rewrite everything before 0:54. After listening to it a million times I feel like it's not up to par with the rest of the song, I think it sounds kind of amateurish. Everything after 0:54 feels like a "build up" to me and this last section sounds like the beginning of the climax. But I really feel like the first half of the song needs to be changed..



The section that begins at 1:57 is what I've been working on most recently and earlier today. I'm having a hard time telling whether it flows with the song well or not. Some of the harmonies feel kind of weird. I don't want to stray to far from the overall sound the songs been going with.



I'd really like some/any criticism from anyone. do you think things don't flow well or right out suck? let me know



[youtube]Tlv9OV4HEaE[/youtube]

I like it as it is. I'm assuming that's not the end of it though, it doesn't sound resolved to me.



I get this a lot with my stuff, you're so close to the song and have been there since it was complete silence. Other people will take it for what it is, only you personally will pick out individual notes and say "I wish I'd done that different". The listener will know no different.



On the other hand, you should always write to please yourself. If you personally aren't happy with something then change it.

[quote name="Devy"]I like it as it is. I'm assuming that's not the end of it though, it doesn't sound resolved to me.



I get this a lot with my stuff, you're so close to the song and have been there since it was complete silence. Other people will take it for what it is, only you personally will pick out individual notes and say "I wish I'd done that different". The listener will know no different.



On the other hand, you should always write to please yourself. If you personally aren't happy with something then change it.[/quote]



No it's not the end, just where I'm at right now. Thanks for the input, really like what you had to say. I think my song writing has improved during the course of this song, so I don't want some of it to sound good and the other part amateur. I like the beginning but I think it could be way better

The direct answer is that this will always happen. If you improve the start, who's to say you won't then think the ending sounds amateurish?

Go with your ears sir, if you think it needs improving then improve it. Just know when to call it a day otherwise you'll be improving it forever. I've done exactly the same thing but because I was in a band at the time I had four other people saying "FOR CHRIST SAKE LEAVE IT ALONE!". That helped put it in perspective

i think it sounds pretty awesome man, im looking forward to hearing the finished product.

I'll have to listen later (at work).



I'm also going to do something similar & ask your advice on a song (remix/rearrangement of a track from 'Fleisch'). Bit stuck of where to take it, but keeping it within the 'area' of the original track. It's hard to turn a non-dark industrial metal track into a death/tech track.

the first riff in the song is pretty damn awesome. the perfect fourth harmonies are pretty boring to me. the little harmonic zing at 2:12 is awesome. i would like to hear more of this, maybe combined with a melodic structure like the beginning riff.



sounds awesome overall.

The start is fine if you ask me.Really I wouldn't try make it any more technical or else it will probly end up sounding like all the other technical riffage out these days.What pedal are you using btw?

[quote name="cat hallucination"]the first riff in the song is pretty damn awesome. the perfect fourth harmonies are pretty boring to me. the little harmonic zing at 2:12 is awesome. i would like to hear more of this, maybe combined with a melodic structure like the beginning riff.



sounds awesome overall. [/quote]



harmonic zing at 2:12? not sure I know what you're talking about.. and the fourth harmonies I kind of like, i want some kind of harmony in all that confusion, need to mess with it though

[quote name="mabb_"]The start is fine if you ask me.Really I wouldn't try make it any more technical or else it will probly end up sounding like all the other technical riffage out these days.What pedal are you using btw?[/quote]



plugged straight into my mic jack and using guitar rig

[quote name="zim"]
[quote name="dog hallucination"]the first riff in the song is pretty damn awesome. the perfect fourth harmonies are pretty boring to me. the little harmonic zing at 2:12 is awesome. i would like to hear more of this, maybe combined with a melodic structure like the beginning riff.



sounds awesome overall. [/quote]



harmonic zing at 2:12? not sure I know what you're talking about.. and the fourth harmonies I kind of like, i want some kind of harmony in all that confusion, need to mess with it though[/quote]



not harmonic, harmony.

anyone else?

[quote name="zim"]
[quote name="mabb_"]The start is fine if you ask me.Really I wouldn't try make it any more technical or else it will probly end up sounding like all the other technical riffage out these days.What pedal are you using btw?[/quote]



plugged straight into my mic jack and using guitar rig[/quote]



Zim's 'cjsound' is the best metal shits around on GR

..i ought to rename that

So I'll tell you what I think. You're really on the right track, but I think the transition at 0:54 is a little too sudden. You ought to put a few more bars in there, maybe, to transition. And what I really think you're hearing is the difference between the style of the riff before the changeover and the one after. If you incorporate a little of the second riff into the first one, maybe jump the part you're playing up a minor third or something in the last bar before 0:54, then it would signal a clearer endpoint to the first part. I think it could use maybe a little rhythmic subdivision variation towards the end of that riff too. Just a slight modification, and I think you're there.



Another thought is that the riff at 0:54 seems like it would work better somewhere after the slow and fast section that comes next.

I think it sounds great.

I love the start.

The middle is cool - i think maybe it could be 'opened up' with some arpeggios either with a clean guitar or acoustic (but acoustic that could be gay & cliché).

I dig the 4ths, but for the arpeggios, make them differ, like take it to a 9th or higher (like that Scott Henderson vid, he did some scale ideas by jumping in 5ths at various points).

anyway... that's all I can give you as I'm not really a tech metal composer.... but overall Zim, it's fucking broots toots from the poops chutes

i also need to listen to it on my good speakers... just now only listened to on shitty PC speaks & a co-worker complained

[quote name="FUKKET"]The middle is cool - i think maybe it could be 'opened up' with some arpeggios either with a clean guitar or acoustic (but acoustic that could be gay & cliché).[/quote]



I think that could work, but only if you leave it with distortion and do something more unusual than just your standard arpeggio; something dissonant.

[quote name="HbW"]So I'll tell you what I think. You're really on the right track, but I think the transition at 0:54 is a little too sudden. You ought to put a few more bars in there, maybe, to transition. And what I really think you're hearing is the difference between the style of the riff before the changeover and the one after. If you incorporate a little of the second riff into the first one, maybe jump the part you're playing up a minor third or something in the last bar before 0:54, then it would signal a clearer endpoint to the first part. I think it could use maybe a little rhythmic subdivision variation towards the end of that riff too. Just a slight modification, and I think you're there.



Another thought is that the riff at 0:54 seems like it would work better somewhere after the slow and fast section that comes next.[/quote]



I've thought about that transition a lot, I feel like the whole section after the blast-beats up to that transition lasts too long. But I agree with what your saying, it should be changed up a bit. (and to add this is the part I'd really like to rewrite)



The part at 0:54 is meant to be a kind of "break" from the fast part, only one chord is supposed to ring out over that whole section. But due to my recording situation if I let only one chord ring out it would feedback like all blue chocolate fuck, so I compensate by striking the chord at the beginning of each beat.



[quote name="FUKKET"]I think it sounds great.

I love the start.

The middle is cool - i think maybe it could be 'opened up' with some arpeggios either with a clean guitar or acoustic (but acoustic that could be gay & cliché).

I dig the 4ths, but for the arpeggios, make them differ, like take it to a 9th or higher (like that Scott Henderson vid, he did some scale ideas by jumping in 5ths at various points).[/quote]



By middle I assume you're talking about the part that starts at 0:54. I've thought about a solo or something right there, I even tried an arpeggios thing right there , it didn't sound bad but not great. It was more of a standard thing though, the same arpeggio but switched around a couple of times. But I agree; it could sound more 'open' if there was something else

[quote name="zim"]

[quote name="FUKKET"]I think it sounds great.

I love the start.

The middle is cool - i think maybe it could be 'opened up' with some arpeggios either with a clean guitar or acoustic (but acoustic that could be gay & cliché).

I dig the 4ths, but for the arpeggios, make them differ, like take it to a 9th or higher (like that Scott Henderson vid, he did some scale ideas by jumping in 5ths at various points).[/quote]



By middle I assume you're talking about the part that starts at 0:54. I've thought about a solo or something right there, I even tried an arpeggios thing right there , it didn't sound bad but not great. It was more of a standard thing though, the same arpeggio but switched around a couple of times. But I agree; it could sound more 'open' if there was something else[/quote]



nah... I was referring to the 'break-down'... where it was half-time and had chorus/flange(?) on it - but like i said, i got asked to turn it off... so kinda lost track of where it was minutes wise... i'll look at home tonight

i like all the parts individually, sounds really good. the ordering feels a bit off-kilter to me though. i'd experiment with taking the rest of the song starting at ~1:45, and placing that after 0:54. in my head, it gives kind of a short break from the fast parts to foreshadow that middle section (which would become the end), and then quickly picking back up and building on the momentum and tension of the beginning, allowing that to resolve before taking a nosedive off the cliff into the slow parts.

i really like that idea, i'll have to experiment with it

[quote name="Famous Mortimer"]i like all the parts individually, sounds really good. the ordering feels a bit off-kilter to me though. i'd experiment with taking the rest of the song starting at ~1:45, and placing that after 0:54. in my head, it gives kind of a short break from the fast parts to foreshadow that middle section (which would become the end), and then quickly picking back up and building on the momentum and tension of the beginning, allowing that to resolve before taking a nosedive off the cliff into the slow parts.[/quote]



This is along the lines of what i was thinking. Although with vocals added, the slower riff after 0:54 could establish itself as a pretty sweet verse.

I don't know about rewriting, but I will say don't scrap the start to 0:54 section. It's good.