Newbie just received first custom critique

[BradleyHagen]

Hi All-
New member here.... I sent one of my better Modern Rock Tracks in for a Customer Critique, and just heard back.....
Here is the track..... https://www.taxi.com/members/DVGQpc37Tk ... he-calling

And here is the critique:
Style
The song is pop/rock with elements of emo and punk. The riff and rhythm section reminds me a little of bands like Bad Religion, although, the top line could be finessed to deliver a more raw energy (to tie closer to those types of bands).

Melody
Good base melodic idea in your verses. Lines come through catchy and well paced. I like the PRE idea, but could hear a more transitional energy heading out of part. I could also hear the first pass halved. Chorus melody tends to deliver a bit of weight/density based on the stacked up vocal approach. Overall, I'm left wanting a little more lift/break out qualities on the top line (in chorus).

Structure
The song is in good shape structurally as the song falls into a classic INTRO, VERSE, PRE, CHORUS, VERSE, PRE, CHORUS, SOLO, CHORUS format. Just a couple thoughts. The intro leans a little drawn out. A thought would be to fine tune the idea ever so slightly. Finally, a suggestion would be to offer a touch more closure to wrap the tune.

Lyrics and Title
The verse storyline connects well.. Pre-chorus ties into this idea as well. The chorus comes through slightly disconnected, though. The actual content is well done, but I could hear more cohesion with everything else (in chorus). Paying off the verse idea a little stronger is a thought.

Production
The drums, bass and guitar sound well recorded and mixed. Bringing a more raw energy to the top line vocal and soloing element is a thought for added punch. This does sound Broadcast Quality, but keep in mind, production quality vs what gets forwarded depends more on your consistency with whatever references are in a given listing (how they are produced etc).

The vocal, for instance, loses some steam in chorus with the stacked up approach. The singular vocal sounds a little sterile.. Would try for a less perfect sounding aesthetic.

Overall Comments
Hi Bradley,

Welcome to TAXI!!

I'll go through your track offering thoughts/suggestions.

INTRO: The intro feels a little extended out. The parts are good, but left feeling this could be fine tuned. The part just prior to verse leans better setup in my opinion. Perhaps you could streamline this idea ever so slightly?

V1: The melodic pacing is good. Tempo feels solid and forward moving. A thought would be a little more raw expression on the top line to liven up the part. Current delivery leans a little sterile, although, I dig the effort. Lyrics connect well on this first sequence.

PC: I like the subtle shift from verse, but would suggest halving this part. I would also suggest
going up in note range on "scars." This to me would have the part functioning more as short jumping off point to actual chorus over the extended out feel currently in place.

C1: I appreciate the vocal arrangement idea, but could hear a less processed top line, more cut in this sequence. An additional thought would be more break out qualities melodically from the pre for added distinction.

V2: I like the continuation of the storyline from verse 1. I could hear a minor tweak to the final line, omitting the second usage of "favors." This would streamline the phrasing ever so slightly.

PC2: I like the length of this one. What I'm hearing is the front end delivery of "Scars" being the same, but the "rrrs" part of the word could shift up into high range to offer more compelling setup to chorus.

C2: Based on the writing style (again) I would suggest a more raw, less processed approach on the top line. The energy tends to shift downward melodically in current form. Working with vocal treatment and melody is a thought to lift this part up. There is certainly some nice drive instrumentally, though.

SOLO: Good call to offer a break from your vocal melody. Based on the heavy riff idea, a thought would be a more raw, expressive guitar solo. over the synthetic energy currently coming through. Length of part feels good.

C3: Good way to wrap, although, I could hear a little more closure/resolve at the end. You could finesse the final melodic line to deliver a touch more wrap to this tune.

OVERALL: I think you do a solid job here overall. Main thoughts.. Deliver a little more expression/raw energy on the top line and in the soloing element. Try for a more transitional energy heading out of PRE into CHORUS. Experiment with chorus melody to see if something more break out/lifted presents itself. I feel marketability would be enhanced with a little more instant catchiness in the chorus sequence.

I hope my thoughts have been helpful. I enjoyed listening and wish you the best with your tune.

N/A 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 = Highest
Melody
Lyrics
Marketability
Song Structure
Production
Engineering
Vocal Performance
(Scores varied from 7 to 8 out of 10....Is this bad??)

Listener ID: 374

I found this to be EXTREMELY insightful, and while I do not agree with everything, the screener did take the time to really go through this track, and is much appreciated!
If anyone else would like to add to the screener's comments, I am all ears and NO Ego as a Newbie on here, and appreciate it in advance Thanks!

[Telefunkin]

Without reading the critique here's my reactions on listening....
- the intro is way too long (25s?) whereas it could have started at 15s.
- generally its a good sound and mix on everything but the vocals.
- vocals sound like there's some unusual effect on them, are unclear a lot of the time and not up to the standard of the rest of the track.
- the synth lead sounds dated.
- the hanging end is OK, but for sync it would have helped to have a resolve.

All subjective comments. Now, looking at the critique I think there' some general agreement (although the screener has also offered a lot of comment on structure and lyrics). That seems like good value (although mine was free ).

[Casey H]

Sounds like you got your money's worth on the custom! Did you include a list of questions when you requested it? (You also got your money's worth on Telefunkin's critique as well, LOL razzin' ya, Graham).

Not everything you read in any critique requires fixing. See what sticks for you. It's a bunch of suggestions/opinions on making things better. Not everyone will have the same opinion. But if you get a pattern of the same feedback from multiple reputable sources (screeners, experienced peers, etc.), it's a good indication that some change is required. Also, things depend a lot on the target. If it's for libraries, some will find it suitable for their clients as is, others not.

I'm not listening on good speakers (yet), but cool track! I'm surprised the screener didn't mention what Graham did, that the intro is way too long for pitching. 4-8 bars is plenty. Get to the meat quickly. A&R folks and music supervisors are busy folks who have very limited time to listen to a track and decide if worth their while. Easy fix.

Best of luck!
Casey

[BradleyHagen]

Many Thanks to both of you for your comments! I am just now beginning to figure out the major differences between writing songs, and writing for sync, and hope to learn much more about this at the Road Rally... As far as the synth lead goes, I thought that I was being "clever" by going for that instead of the typical guitar solo, but boy was I wrong! Great points on the intro, etc as well! Casey and telefunkin, I owe you a beer at the Rally if you are going! And to answer your question Casey about the actual submission of this to the screener, yes, I asked several questions regarding Structure, Lyrics, Melody, and whether or not it is broadcast quality, and they did answer every single one of them. I would't dole out $20 for every track, but this was well worth it, considering that Landr provides a similar service, but more on production values, etc, and they charge $35 and up!

[BrianCullen]

That is a very detailed and specific critique. It looks like you got good value. Feedback is always useful.
Brian