DavidOrr's audio Reviews on Newgrounds

[Ode to The Interviewer]

This came out great Ben! Love the intro and the entrance of the piccolo -- what a great take on the original!

BenTibbetts responds:

Thank you David!

[{BT} Alberti's Place]

Ben, this is a wicked cool piece of music! I love the long, dramatic build to 0:42. Awesome work, especially for one of your first ventures into the electronica wold!

[Words for Alexandra]

Beautiful Work

This is really well written, and the performance is filled with emotion. This is a true showcase of how moving music can be!

Awesome job Josiah. I didn't know her, but I'm certain Alexandra would be honored.

['11 The SuperBugs Attack]

Orchestral MAC Review

Composition: 9.0

You did a great job with writing the piece from start to finish - there was enough variation and complexity to hold my interest through till the end, yet nothing felt random or out of place. You have a great sense for writing harmonies and lines appropriate to the style you're writing in. Great work!

The dark, sinister opening was a great way to set up 0:42. Your brass lines felt really cluttered and hard to decipher at this point. My ears tell me it's an articulation issue that could probably be solved by choosing a more consistent sound. As it is now, the brass lines are difficult to focus in on because nothing is brought out. I think you'd find it more effective if you help the listener out by pointing their ear in the right direction. As the piece goes on this issue is remedied somewhat, but I feel as though overall your melodies and counter-melodies could have a bit more volume and punctuation. Considering the business in the percussion and woodwinds, I don't think you'd sacrifice any of the frantic, desperate sound you've (very effectively) created.

It's not always necessary to have a defining melody. But when you write one in, make sure it's brought out to the forefront or else you'll lack definition and clarity in your track.

Orchestration: 8.3

I felt as though your orchestration was good, but you left some opportunities on the table. Proper cymbal use has been a theme in my reviews, and this review is no exception. You'd hear a phenomenal contrast at 3:20, for instance, if you include crash cymbals on the beginning of your 8-bar phrases. You could include a suspended cymbal swell into 3:35, and perhaps even use a gong to climax the section. You have a great control of drums, but don't forget about your auxiliary percussion!

Your use of woodwinds was very appropriate. I loved your flute accents! In the future, consider bringing woodwinds out to the front to provide a welcome contrast to your music. I know current trends in pop orchestral scoring tend to treat woodwinds as mere afterthoughts of the orchestra... but they're extremely potent! The can provide bounce, airiness, sharpness, and warmth to your arrangement. I personally don't believe any of the other instrument families have the same span of color and texture that woodwinds have. Don't be afraid to use them more!

Mixing: 8.7

Mixing was solid - I particularly enjoyed your reverb and stereo choices on the drums. You gave each instrument room to breath, along with a defined-yet-thick sound. Nice work! The Low brass overall sounded too tinny and undefined to me. I think bringing up low-mids a bit in the trombones and horns will help give them more body. Eqing brass is a lot of trial-and-error. I think your (otherwise very solid) mix could be improved with a thicker sound from your low brass.

Overall: 8.8

There were a lot of great things about this piece - the contrast between sections, harmonic complexity, and range of articulations were all very well refreshing to hear. There were parts that sounded orchestrally cluttered. Remember that you can bring back supporting lines in favor of the main melody. This helps the music maintain its focus and clarity - which is crucial for a percussive piece like this!

[==(Sunken City)==]

Orchestral MAC Review

Composition: 8.0

For the most part, I really loved what you did with your compositional choices. You remained consistent in the style and ethereal atmosphere you set from the start, which can prove difficult when writing such a spacious piece!

Your melody was fitting, but I felt it was underdeveloped. In a piece that is 3:16 in length, you can do a lot of development - both thematically and harmonically. I understand and support your choice to remain harmonically grounded for the duration of the piece, given the atmosphere you're trying to create. But with such a simple (yet catchy) chromatic melody, there are many things you could do to develop your melody. Parallel chromatic lines work well in just about any interval (I'd try 3rds or 6ths for this one), and they'd thicken your melodic texture without cluttering the music. I like your hints at a counter-melody at 1:21 in the strings, but I feel very strongly that you could have done more of that throughout the piece!

At 2:15, my interest dwindled as I heard nothing new brought to the table. Here is a perfect time to try out some changes in instrumentation, or to get creative with a variation of your melody. Make sure every section adds something to the overall piece. If a section is simply a copy and paste of something already written, make sure you're making the choice to recycle because it will help the progression and development of the piece.

Orchestration: 7.4

I felt like you didn't take enough leaps with your orchestration. A piece with as few notes as this should have some surprises within the instrumentation. Perhaps consider using some string or woodwind effects. I'm not sure which orchestra VST you're using, but most of the big ones have a patch or two of instrument screeches, whirls, breaths, and more. I hear a hint of orchestral experimentation in here, but you could easily use a lot more. After all, an atmospheric piece thrives with atmospheric orchestration!

Have you considered moving the chromatic flute melody to different instruments throughout the piece? A glockenspiel with soft rubber mallets would fit the atmosphere really well, as would a celeste, harp, and marimba. And those are just choices I thought of off the top of my head! I'm sure you could add a lot of diversity to that line purely through orchestration. You'd give the ear a breath of fresh air (so to speak!), and hold your listener's attention for longer as they anticipate which instrument will have the melody next.

Mixing: 9.0

Your track was very well mixed to my ears. Your pizzicato bass notes were particularly moving. The clarity and punctuation, yet sheer weight of each note set the underwater atmosphere beautifully. And, the piece sounds great on my monitors, Mixing headphones, as well as cheap $10 headphones. That's a sign of a great mix - well done!

Overall: 8.2

I applaud your minimalistic efforts! Atmospheric music is some of the most difficult music to write, and you capture the feeling of being underwater very well. When you write fewer notes in a piece, the significance of each one increases. Pay extra attention to every part, and ask yourself "Is this a crucial piece of the texture I'm creating?" If not, you can free up space for other parts without degrading the atmosphere you're trying to conjure.

[NP - The False Memory]

Orchestral MAC Review

Composition: 7.5

I loved your introduction. The strings were very voiced and sounded very professional. You have a great grasp for harmonization!

You kept my undivided attention up until 1:18. You regained it at 2:08, and then lost it again at about the 3:00 mark. I admit I'm slightly exaggerating, but to make a point. With 4:23 seconds worth of music, you have more than enough time to take your listener somewhere far away, force him to grow and mature, bring him back, and show him the world from an enlightened perspective. Unfortunately, I felt like the world I came back to was no different than the one I (briefly) left at 2:08.

You've laid the ground work for a fantastic work of art, but something is missing. I didn't hear any memorable melody established at the beginning. Sure, you were going for an airy, yet darker mellow sound (and you very effectively captured it), but that doesn't mean you need to abandon melody. As the music progressed, I didn't feel like I went anywhere because I didn't have much help setting my bearings at the start. I think you have wonderful samples, but because they're so good you're leaning on them a little too much. How would this piece stand up with General MIDI sounds? Great orchestral music usually won't need awesome samples to make it great. Using the natural texture of the ensemble is wonderful, but that's only one piece of a very large puzzle. If you give yourself more material to work with, you can do more to develop the music as you progress through the piece.

Orchestration: 8.1

As I said previously, you've orchestrated this piece well, especially in the strings. I love your sparse use of percussion as accents throughout the middle section, as well as your orchestral effects. Nicely done! While you handled all of your instruments well, I don't think you used the orchestra to its full potential. Low brass could have been very effective at the end to help thicken the bass line as you draw the piece to a close. Trumpets would have helped heighten the climax at the end, setting an arrival point and giving the piece a sense of accomplishment. Orchestra bells with a soft rubber mallet would have helped the piece sparkle (you have them very briefly). This would have been a nice contrast at the middle or end of the piece.

My main point is this: with a full orchestra, you have LOADS of options. Don't restrict yourself to just a few instruments from each family. Every instrument has its own color, texture, and range; each brings a unique offer to the table!

Mixing: 8.5

Overall, I thought your mixing was very well done. You added a healthy dose of reverb, which helped fill out spaces in the music. This track's mixing has a professional sound to it, great work! My biggest suggestion would be to watch out with note overlaps. In your strings, there are moments when notes overlap a little too much, creating unintended dissonances. This sounds like just a sequencing error (and is pretty easily fixable), but make sure to keep an eye and ear open for any excessive spill-overs. It can make the music sound muddy and unrefined. Also, some of your melodic notes popped out of the line excessively - make sure you go through and smooth your velocity levels with a fine-tooth comb!

Overall: 7.8

Your introduction was well-written, and the thick chords you scored in the strings throughout the piece created a strong foundation for the rest of the ensemble. I didn't hear enough direction throughout the four and a half minutes. That's plenty of time to take the listener somewhere distant and bring them back, but I didn't feel like I had moved very far by the end. In soft, lush music like this, a full-ensemble climax can be extremely powerful. If you're paying the whole ensemble to play your music, don't be afraid to use every player!

ProudAardvark responds:

Hey David, thanks for the thoughtful review. I really appreciate the time that you and the other judges put into making this contest happen, it was a lot of fun.

I only have one point of disagreement with your review, namely the idea that I was somehow "leaning" on high quality samples. I think you are severely underestimating the amount of work that went into making this sound how I wanted it too. I don't have an "easy" button. I will instead take it as a compliment that you liked the sound quality and leave it at that.

Thanks again for the review!

[Ballroom, 1899 (NAC)]

Orchestral MAC Review

Composition: 8.3

I was pleased when I heard your submission written in a more "traditional" style. There is definitely some modern flair thrown in the mix, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. What's most important is that you took this bouncy waltz style and used it to enhance your scoring.

My biggest critique lies within the repetition - I feel as though you could have done more both within the composition and orchestration of the piece. You follow the standard A B A form, which is fine and appropriate. The B section, however, is typically very contrasting. You do change key (which is great) and introduce a new melody, but the mode is still major and there are no distinctive changes in texture. For instance, consider altering the bass line to be more (or less) rhythmic and percussive. Or perhaps double the length of your phrasing. Changing large, distinctive traits from one section to another is the best way to provide contrast. After all, it is called "B" in the form for a reason.

It is not uncommon to alter the second A section (often spelled A' when there are alterations to the original A). You do some of that within the orchestration (trumpet with melody), but I feel that you were a bit too conservative with your additions. You could slightly alter the melody line rhythmically, add in distinctive runs and embellishments, or even adjust non-anchor notes within each line. Chopin was a master of this. Don't be afraid to pull out all of the stops to bring a refreshing, new feel to old material!

Orchestration: 8.8

I honestly have very little to say about your orchestration. It's extremely thorough and very appropriate. I agree with your choice of instrumentation across the board - but have a couple of suggestions to make it even more effective.

As I mentioned in the composition component of my review, your B section lacked a strong level of contrast. One way you could help that out is by greatly altering orchestration. You make some slight variations by giving the woodwinds a little more spotlight, but the orchestral texture remained largely the same. Considering dropping out all but a few instruments, or removing one register of the orchestra (I.e low-end, mids, highs). This would give an instant and unmissable contrast that would require zero straining to hear. As it is now, it was only my third time listening through the piece could I pick out all of the distinctive changes. Keeping something of the subtleties is great - but don't be afraid to throw out an obvious clue for the first-time listener! It will ultimately keep them more engaged.

Mixing: 7.7

Your mixing was clean, and all instruments could be heard comfortably. While your samples aren't top notch you worked well with what you had. Consider doing some EQ work on your brass and low-end woodwinds to give them more body (uping the low-mid frequencies should do the trick). Also, you could afford to use a bit more reverb - perhaps layering on an addition "room" styled reverb will give your more thickness.

Overall: 8.5

Well written! It was refreshing to hear an entry in a more "traditional" style. I know there is a lot of repetition in waltzes by nature, but there were times where I felt you could have created more contrast in your writing. Consider writing in a more pronounced key change, or perhaps even a change in mode would provide the music with a big enough change to keep the listener engaged. I was impressed with your orchestration - it was clean and well-suited for the style!

[Dream of being best]

Orchestral MAC Review

Composition: 6.5

I enjoyed that you weren't afraid to take your time at the beginning. Soft, lyrical passages are brought to life when there is flexibility with the tempo, and you did a good job controlling time to your advantage.

My biggest issue with the piece was with the stagnant chord progression. You can do a lot of things with 2:30 of music. You can modulate, develop themes, alter time signature, change moods, and a host of other things to keep the music fresh and interesting. Unfortunately, the piece felt too layered and lost my interest by the 1:30 mark. Stacking new parts on top of old ones in an endless cycle creates a high level of predictability that is best left for a television or movie underscore.

Here are some ideas for you. Perhaps at 1:22 instead of continuing with the same i - VI - III6/4 - VII progression, initiate a modulation (go to whichever key you'd like). The longer you stick with the same chords, the more difficult it becomes to break away from them because the ear comes to expect them. As soon as you can break away from the mold, you'll no longer be a slave to predictability and you'll have a whole new palette of harmonic possibilities to work with!

Orchestration: 7.5

For the most part, I felt your orchestration was fitting and well-suited for the piece. The strings were well scored, and voiced appropriately as to not overwhelm the melody. I also enjoyed the percussion, which provided a strong rhythmic pulse to the piece as it built.

Consider using brass and woodwinds to add variation to your writing. From a practical point of view, it's unlikely that you'll find an ensemble in real life that matches what you have. While it's not necessary you write your music with the intention of it being performed live (we can dream though!), you should still be aware of what other instruments bring to the table. A flute, for instance, would be a perfect instrument to take over the melody in a softer, lyrical section, whereas horns and trumpets could do wonders to create a sense of climax as you bring the piece to a close. Know all your options and you'll begin to see new, more effective ways to present your musical ideas!

Mixing: 8.0

Your mixing was the strongest aspect of the piece. The strings were very emotional at the beginning, and you did a great job introducing the violin at 1:00. The violin did sound a bit thin for my taste - perhaps a rise in the mids with an EQ would give it more warmth and help it sit better in the mix. Your percussion sounded great on my speakers! Every instrument was tastefully balanced and you set your cymbals at a volume that didn't cause noticeable distortion to the track. Well done!

Overall: 7.2

You have good control over your samples, which is a skill I believe every budding composer of the 21st century needs. Solo string instruments are especially difficult to replicate, but you did a good job working with the solo violin samples you have. The weakest part of this piece was in the chord progression - there was absolutely zero variation for the entire two minutes and 30 seconds. Look into expanding your palette of chords, and you'll keep your listeners engaged much longer!

["Warped Galaxy" Orchestral NAC]

Orchestral MAC Review

Composition: 8.2

You clearly had a vivid image in your head while writing this piece - I could almost see a version of this piece serving as the introduction theme to the next realization of the Star Trek sci-fi tv series. Nice swell at 0:20. Your trumpet hits would have been more effective if they had a stronger, sharper attack to them. This moment at 0:24-0:29 is your first big moment... don't disappoint! Contrast is key - as it is now, it feels as if you're saying "I think I want this to be big and triumphant sounding, but I'm not sure yet so I'll go 50/50." You could also consider some snare drums to help the trumpets.

I enjoyed your buildup into 1:32. I was somewhat disappointed once the melody came in, however. It didn't feel nearly as strong as it should have, given it is the climax of the piece. The melody is well-written, and a fitting choice for the driving atmosphere you're creating.

In general I found the piece quite harmonically interesting. You threw in enough chords outside of the standard mold that my interest was kept throughout the entire piece. Experiment more with modulations. You did modulation from C to F, but a more outlandish modulation (perhaps C to D#) would give more energy, unpredictability, and drive to the music.

Orchestration: 7.2

Your weakness was in orchestration. There were moments that were nice (I think the introduction was tastefully scored), but your inefficient use of percussion cause a lot of potentially great moments to pass. From 1:32-end, most of the cymbal hits should be with the crash, not suspended. Using suspended hits are good for when you don't want an edgy, starting sound because sus hits are much more rounded with a longer attack time. At this section of the piece though, you're looking for power and punctuation. Crash cymbal would give you everything you need. Also, your tom part should probably be a snare part for how you have it scored. As your percussion is scored now, you have a lot of wooshes and rumbles, but not a whole lot of punctuation. Consider doubling your trumpet part down the octave with trombones - it'll give you a fuller, richer sound. You might have to do slight alterations to the part, but the trombone is quite an agile instrument and a good player shouldn't have much difficulty with that line.

Mixing: 7.4

Your mixing suffered most because of a few orchestration issues. I think in general levels were alright. I'd recommend running an EQ over your trumpets to lower the mids and bring up the upper mids to give them a bit more sparkle. Right now they lack definition, and a little EQ work would fix that. Your suspended cymbal level seemed great in the introduction, but got out of hand at the 1:32 section. I think this is more an issue of overuse. Mixing an orchestra is very, very difficult and something that takes many years to master. You've done a lot of great things here - just keep an eye out for overbearing parts!
Overall: 7.6

You have a great imagination! I really liked the fact that your introduction wasn't overly predictable harmonically - it kept my interest. Unfortunately, you missed out on a lot of percussive opportunities in the piece. I'd recommend studying orchestration in further detail to learn how each family of the ensemble fits together.

[-Lost But Not Forgotten-]

Orchestral MAC Review

Composition: 8.4/10.0

I like your ideas Nick. There is a lot of maturity in your writing, both in your ideas and control of the ensemble. The beginning was very strong - you set the tone of the piece well and I could imagine this in a movie trailer. You did a great job building intensity by moving the bass line upward at 0:16. Don't be afraid to use cymbals to help swells within the music. To heighten the intensity even further, you could have added a suspended cymbal along with a choked crash cymbal to close the intro at 0:27.

My favorite part of the entire piece began at 0:30. You show maturity here - your swells within the orchestra were very well done, and the introduction of the choir and percussion at 1:07 was particularly moving. While following all the rules of traditional voice leading techniques isn't necessary, you have a couple of spots where rough voice leading considerably weakens the music. One particular part is at 1:09 in the trombones. A diminished 5th should be resolved inward (in this case Eb and G). I can almost guarantee you'll find this a smoother, more pleasing resolution than what you have. In a piece that relies so heavy on smooth, powerful movements within the ensemble, having a weak resolution can completely undermine the otherwise beautiful atmosphere you've created.

The section at 1:51 feels cluttered to me. There are multiple moving string lines that line up well at times, and not as well as others. I'd have to look at the score to give you specifics as I'm having a hard time hearing the cello(?) line. Try isolating those two parts and see if they sit well with you. You may find having the trombones double the bass line up the octave more fitting, as it'd provide more stability. I loved the piano part at the end - it's very fitting and provides a satisfying yet unexpected closure to the piece. The tempo was a little uneven. I understand you wanted to keep it freer here, just make sure the fluctuations in the tempo are smooth. Lining up the hands when they have notes together should help remedy the issue.

Orchestration: 8.6/10.0

Overall your orchestration was pretty good. Your flexibility with the ensemble (as I mentioned earlier) is very commendable. It can be difficult to have the ensemble swell for over a minute as you do 0:30-137. Well done!

You could be more liberal with the cymbals at the beginning (again as previously mentioned). Cymbals are extremely versatile instruments - they can be used for swells, transitions, abrupt hits, and more. Be careful not to overdo it though! At 2:10-2:30, you use them so much that their value becomes diminished. Try to reserve crash hits for particularly important moments. This will maximize their effectiveness and prevent them from fatiguing the listener.

Mixing: 8.3/10.0

I have a few suggestions about the mixing, but overall I felt it was good and didn't detract from the listening experience. Solo melodic lines that you want to stand out can be artificially raised (volume) in the mix. Also, reducing the reverb slightly on these instruments will give the impression that the player is in the front of the ensemble and the ear will naturally be drawn to the sound. With full sections (I.e all violins) it can be trickier because you don't want to create an unnatural sound, but the same rule can apply. The section at 1:52 could be assisted by applying this idea to the cellos and violins . As it is now, it sounds cluttered and undefined - but if you back off on reverb slightly and raise the volume you should get a cleaner sound.

Overall: 8.4/10.0

You have a maturing sound that enables you to create truly moving music. I think you'd benefit most from paying a closer attention to your voice leading, and ensuring that the choices you're making strengthen the mood you're trying to set. It can be easy to get lost in the sea of instruments that is the orchestra, but that is what makes writing for full ensemble so difficult (and satisfying). The strongest point of this piece lies in the contrasts you create - however you decide to further develo