A little more detail on returns

A cozy place to hang out and discuss all things music.

Moderators: admin, mdc, TAXIstaff

Post Reply
User avatar
elser
Serious Musician
Serious Musician
Posts: 2234
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 9:32 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

A little more detail on returns

Post by elser » Wed Jun 29, 2022 9:51 am

I just had two returns, which I’m not bitching about, it’s to be expected, but the only reason given was “production, recording”. That’s very vague and could include a lot of things. Some more detail would be helpful for everyone. Was it too compressed? Too loud, not loud enough? Did the drums sound bad or maybe the guitars? When everything else seems to be good i.e. songwriting, style, performance, etc… it would helpful to know what exactly in the production/recording area could be improved.

User avatar
Telefunkin
Serious Musician
Serious Musician
Posts: 2478
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 12:37 pm
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: A little more detail on returns

Post by Telefunkin » Wed Jun 29, 2022 10:39 am

Hi, it can be difficult to understand how others perceive our music when we're so attached to it, but if you would like some impartial opinions then please post the tracks along with the full feedback. Without those things there's not much anyone can say.
Graham (UK). Still composing a little faster than decomposing, and 100% HI.

User avatar
elser
Serious Musician
Serious Musician
Posts: 2234
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 9:32 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Re: A little more detail on returns

Post by elser » Wed Jun 29, 2022 10:42 am

I was hoping for more detail from the screeners but if you’re willing to take a listen I can post the tracks on Peer to Peer shortly. Thank you. FWIW I’m not especially attached to the tracks, I’m completely open to constructive criticism.

User avatar
melodea
Committed Musician
Committed Musician
Posts: 578
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2021 2:42 am
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: A little more detail on returns

Post by melodea » Thu Jun 30, 2022 12:09 am

Could you post the exact screeners' comments? I never with all my returns had only two words as a reason for not being forwarded.
[glow][/glow]Melodea a.k.a. Chris Moser

User avatar
elser
Serious Musician
Serious Musician
Posts: 2234
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 9:32 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Re: A little more detail on returns

Post by elser » Thu Jun 30, 2022 11:27 am

I've copied and pasted the comments for both tunes, thanks for your interest,

Song #1
I like the instrumentation and develop on this number.

I think you could improve this song by
The production tones could be a little more polished for this pitch. Dialing to "Moonshine & Gasoline" by Blues Saraceno territory is a thought here.

I returned or forwarded this song because
Production could be at the level of the ref tracks.

Song #2
What I like most about this song
Solid progression idea and on point instrumental choices.

I think you could improve this song by
Rhythmic groove comes through a little sluggish and production aesthetic could be punched up to the level of the ref tracks. Could be just a mix thing, but I would try to get closer (sonically) to "Moonshine & Gasoline" by Blues Saraceno for this request.

I returned or forwarded this song because
The production could be at the level of the ref material.

On both songs the only box checked is Recording/Mix

The songs are Swankee Dank and Muddy Boots on my Taxi page.
https://www.taxi.com/members/jon-esler

Thanks again!

User avatar
melodea
Committed Musician
Committed Musician
Posts: 578
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2021 2:42 am
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: A little more detail on returns

Post by melodea » Fri Jul 01, 2022 12:41 am

Ok, now it's clearer. Compared to the reference your tracks sound a bit too mid-frequency focused. The Bass range needs to be tightened up a bit. The musical ideas are spot on, no doubt. The performance could be a bit tighter, more in the pocket. The benchmark for this genre is really up there and the submissions need to be very close to the quality of the refs!
BTW: don't pay too much attention to the checkboxes, It's all in the personal comments of the screeners!

good luck with your music and don't get discouraged by returns they are in 99% of the cases very valuable free lessons!!!

Best

Chris
[glow][/glow]Melodea a.k.a. Chris Moser

User avatar
Telefunkin
Serious Musician
Serious Musician
Posts: 2478
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 12:37 pm
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: A little more detail on returns

Post by Telefunkin » Fri Jul 01, 2022 2:51 am

The Blues Saraceno ref seems to be the one the screener was gravitating towards, in which case I'd say that Muddy Boots is not really on brief. On both, I agree with Chris's comments. Some nice playing too. For me, Swankee Dank is a lot closer and works a lot better as a composition, but is perhaps still a little too laid-back and doesn't quite have that final bit of production polish to get through a high-bar listing. Nevertheless, I reckon you should be able to get that track into a library looking for this type of material. Its worth revisiting the mix to try and squeeze every last ounce of impact and attitude from it (particularly the low end v mid balance, and maybe tame the slide lead so it doesn't poke through too far) but everything is there and even if it didn't get through this time it'll surely find a home. Good luck :).
Graham (UK). Still composing a little faster than decomposing, and 100% HI.

User avatar
elser
Serious Musician
Serious Musician
Posts: 2234
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 9:32 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Re: A little more detail on returns

Post by elser » Sun Jul 03, 2022 6:49 am

Thank you both for your input and I agree you both. In retrospect Muddy Boots as a composition isn’t there. And I agree entirely about the mixing comments on Swankee Dank especially about the low end. Those things will be fixed. Your input has been very valuable.

Thanks
Jon

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AdsBot [Google] and 28 guests