Emotional trailer-stye instrumental

[superblonde]

Here is an A-B form demo I wrote this week. Is it on the right track to continue expanding in form to fit this listing? Simple thumbs up or down feedback is ok.

"We're looking for Instrumentals with a building structure that starts subtle and grows into a big, epic resolution. That said, each Instrumental should have one consistent motif and always stay very underscore-friendly, ie: No prominent melodies at all. Rather, your arrangements should keep the pieces interesting by creating what we call 'sound substance' (little sound tinkering, layering, development within existing elements (e.g. percussion), etc). So, the development should happen through the arrangement and the production and NOT by adding additional harmonic elements. Style-wise, your tracks should be much like trailer Instrumentals based on the sections and build, but with a clear hybrid approach and not overly orchestral/classical in instrumentation (but also not getting synth-y). Building, epic themes with a cinematic feel and a hybrid approach are what we want to hear. Again, imagine 'Arise From Ashes', Rebirth, etc."

"Please submit well-composed Instrumentals that have an overall epic, emotional sound and feel. Your submissions should have polished production, high-quality virtual instruments and samples, and 3 "acts" that build to a climactic ending."

edit - removed my old draft tracks

[cosmicdolphin]

Here is an A-B form demo I wrote this week. Is it on the right track to continue expanding in form to fit this listing? Simple thumbs up or down feedback is ok.

Sorry , thumbs down from me

The description is a bit confusing , I would suggest anyone take a list to the Ref Tracks before commenting https://www.dropbox.com/sh/yknzmslvyvv9 ... IsqQa?dl=0

These are not typical Trailer tracks, I would describe them more like Epic Emotional Pop/Rock

What you have served up here however sounds more like Muzak..there are some low quality instrument sounds and the laid back style is nothing like the references to me. There is nothing epic or emotional about the track at all. If I had to take a guess it doesn't even sound like you wrote it to this listing.

Mark

[superblonde]

True I didnt listen to the ref tracks when writing it. I went with the description: " 'Arise From Ashes', Rebirth, one consistent motif "

Now that I listened to the ref tracks, yeah the description does not seem to match the refs other than maybe form and overal dynamics..

[cosmicdolphin]

True I didnt listen to the ref tracks when writing it. I went with the description: " 'Arise From Ashes', Rebirth, one consistent motif "

You can't NOT listen to the reference tracks and expect to land anywhere close IMHO - The listing text is too open to interpretation..more of a supplement to tell us what THEY are focusing on in the refs

[feaker66]

Hi SB I liked everything, including the build, until 24 sec and then it went. I don't know, differently. Good start IMHO

[superblonde]

The description also says in bold " and always stay very underscore-friendly, ie: No prominent melodies at all. "

Which is backwards considering both ref tracks have strong melodies from the start. The "glimmer of hope" track has a strong guitar melodic lead line which stands out from the track significantly in front, for the A section, then a B section where it goes away to be replaced with sparse piano melodic notes, then a short C section which doesnt have a melody. The "stronger than hope" track has a strong electric piano melodic lead arp which stands out, then this changes to slow & prominent violin melody in the A section, then the B section, the piano lead arp comes back but is buried by the tutti, then in the short C section where the piano lead arp comes back again in forefront. It almost seems like the description is trying to say, "write something that is only like the middle section of these two tracks, not like the A section of these".

Both refs use significant additional instruments to add texture in the middle section for growth, though the description says emphatically, " NOT by adding additional harmonic elements." Weird. It would be far simpler to just use correct music theory terms to describe the desired effect.

[mwb2]

The description also says in bold " and always stay very underscore-friendly, ie: No prominent melodies at all. "

Which is backwards considering both ref tracks have strong melodies from the start. The "glimmer of hope" track has a strong guitar melodic lead line which stands out from the track significantly in front, for the A section, then a B section where it goes away to be replaced with sparse piano melodic notes, then a short C section which doesnt have a melody. The "stronger than hope" track has a strong electric piano melodic lead arp which stands out, then this changes to slow & prominent violin melody in the A section, then the B section, the piano lead arp comes back but is buried by the tutti, then in the short C section where the piano lead arp comes back again in forefront. It almost seems like the description is trying to say, "write something that is only like the middle section of these two tracks, not like the A section of these".

Both refs use significant additional instruments to add texture in the middle section for growth, though the description says emphatically, " NOT by adding additional harmonic elements." Weird. It would be far simpler to just use correct music theory terms to describe the desired effect.

IMO I wouldn't call the melodies in the refs "prominent" or "strong" at all. They're very basic melodic outlines; they ain't Brahms. They don't grab my ear's attention and I don't think they'd hold up on their own.

[cosmicdolphin]

IMO I wouldn't call the melodies in the refs "prominent" or "strong" at all. They're very basic melodic outlines; they ain't Brahms. They don't grab my ear's attention and I don't think they'd hold up on their own.

No I agree they just kind 'sit in' and keep time

[superblonde]

edit - to not confuse anyone with my typed up notes from several livestreams, i've removed it

[Casey H]

Massive over-analysis. All the educational materials you cited are excellent. But not everything fits perfectly textbook. That's the case in any profession. I'm a software engineer. If a customer asks me to make something and it goes against what's in the textbooks, which way should I go?

It sounds like you are taking a very exacting surgical approach to your music as if there is a a magic one-size-fits-all formula. You need to step back, focus on the ref tracks and the key points of a listing. Worrying about whether that contradicts books and other advice is not helpful and a waste of time and energy.

Good luck!
Casey