Help me understand this review please?

[Zaychi]

OK guys, I'm at a bit of a loss here on my first (rejected) review. It was a singer-songwriter listing, asking for positive emotions, with this (only) reference track:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yULNxXZcbWw

This was my submission:



Now I was expecting to get this back for something like "not broadcast quality", "vocal not good enough", "not contemporary samples" or maybe even "Health hazard due to high sugar levels", but here's what I got:



I'm actually quite glad that I did NOT get it back for the "broadcast quality" thing cause I'm ready to admit that my mixing/mastering ears aren't the best in the world, but I'm just SO confused about what I _did_ get!
- So the chorus/hook is good, even "memorable" (wow, thanks!) but the melody development isn't? Does he mean the verses, then? And if so, is it the individual verses, or the difference/development _between_ the verses? Cause I could easily list a thousand HIT songs where there isn't much difference between the verses (except the lyrics, of course)... what does he mean here?
- The other point is about the lyrics and mood... the lyric is about wanting to share love with someone for the rest of your life; how is that not "positive and inspiring", and "off-target for the request"? Cause the reference song is really about exactly the same thing... in fact I wondered if I wasn't ripping off too much when I wrote it... I could really have taken a "too clichee" comment, I'm not among the great poets for sure, but off-mood? Can someone else hear this is well, and try to explain it to me?

I REALLY don't want to rant here, I'm only looking to improve my next submission, and I just don't understand the comments! Can someone help me out here?

[cosmicdolphin]

Link not working. Try Soundcloud

[Zaychi]

Changed in post above.

[cosmicdolphin]

I REALLY don't want to rant here, I'm only looking to improve my next submission, and I just don't understand the comments! Can someone help me out here?

I think I found it your SoundCloud... IMHO you got away lightly with the Screener as your song is nothing like the reference track. Not even close.

Here's how I hear it:-

Guitar

Reference song : Double time feel finger picked Guitar patter with Capo giving nice bright light sound with minimal ambience

Your Song : Slower heavy feeling strumming drenched in reverb. Sounds out of tune in places but hard to hear properly.

Vocals

Reference song : Light head voice co-ordination , sang softly with close mic technique . Stays in head voice all the way through for light feel

You Song ; Deep chest voice co-ordination. No head voice . Sounds thicker heavy , duller and older

Lyrics

Reference Song : Good imagery, story telling . Song is clearly about someone else significant to the singer. Use of " You , we " etc. Slight cliche in chorus but not as main hook

Your Song : First verse as far as I can make out is all about yourself. That's not how you write a love song. All the lyrics are very literal ..I see fluffy clouds etc...slightly childlike with no imagary.

Mix & Production

Reference Song ; Very clean production, everything played lightly , minimal FX, builds by adding subtle piano chords and vocal harmonies

Your Song : Cluttered sounding even with just guitar and vocal due to mix FX , no space between the notes, think I hear some high strings toward the end wich might have worked if the mix allowed them to be heard

Overall the reference track is engaging , has a pleasing melody and chord progression with thoughtful lyrics and a tasteful production / mix. What you have sent them is none of these things, the chords and melody sound sombre , the production is heavy and adds to this feeling as does the vocal performance.

It really pays to take the time to write down all the elements you hear in the reference tracks before starting out . Even better on this opportunity was that the video gives you the recipe. You can see the Capo, you can see the piano and how it's played, and how he's delivering the vocals. Everything is there.

Hope that helps.

Mark

[cassmcentee]

Mark's comments are spot on
I hope that you dig in deep and keep going!

The guitars at the beginning have a really cool vibe ala Fleetwood Mac (though there is a bit too much low end that needs to get an EQ cut, and too much reverb)

[Zaychi]

I think I found it your SoundCloud... IMHO you got away lightly with the Screener as your song is nothing like the reference track. Not even close.

Well we' re not supposed to create copycat songs, right? In MY mind, they're both relaxed songs with a strumming accoustic guitar instrumentation and a held-back, dreamy vocal with a positive message for a beloved one. Yeah that's where the similarity ends (and yes I DO agree with your points as well!), but isn't that enough? Does reference song really mean following it even deeper; and if so, it means that ALL submissions should be tailored to the listing, and you NEVER have something "lying around" for a listing to come along, right?

Your Song : First verse as far as I can make out is all about yourself. That's not how you write a love song. All the lyrics are very literal ..I see fluffy clouds etc...slightly childlike with no imagary.

The reference starts with "Early in the morning, when the colors reappear, I will be here"; about "me" and an observation of the world around, in fact my line was "stolen" from that idea. I'll readily agree that his line is more poetic, but not that you can' t write a love song from the "me" perspective... "Hard day's night", anyone?

Your Song : Cluttered sounding even with just guitar and vocal due to mix FX , no space between the notes, think I hear some high strings toward the end wich might have worked if the mix allowed them to be heard
the production is heavy

Thanks for those observations. I think I got misguided by this "broadcast quality" boogieman phrase; and I didn' t even realize that it IS a heavy production. As I said, I don' t really have the production ears (YET, I hope!) and I assumed too easily that BQ meant (among other things) "of course you use lots of effects". Oh and about the strings, I pushed them too far back probably because the listing said "other instruments should be secondary to the guitar". Yeah, that' s how trying to follow the listing bites us in the ass, I guess.

I hope that you dig in deep and keep going!

Yeah, that' s the plan... no reason for a devastating critique like Mark's to just quit, right?

I just listened to it without regards to the listing and reference. If I were you I would take the raw stems and mix that thing as long as it takes to sound reasonably close to a reference of your choice (I think Cass mentioned Fleetwood Mac), just to get a feel for it and to see if this song could be brought to BQ maybe for another listing.

Heh well, as observed above, if Mark's comments are spot-on, the chances for the right listing to come along are virtually zero...

Actually thanks guys for your comments, but they were almost like a new review... My initial question was about the screener's comments, the "melody development" and "off-mood" comments... still a bit in the dark on those ones, I must admit.

[Zaychi]

Mark's critique is detailed and provides a lot of information on what to improve. I understand that it might be tough to read, it's not easy to get holes poked in your work, but it is the best way to improve the quality of your work.

I read it as exactly that. Sorry if I gave the impression that I was defensive, cause I really don't feel that way and am looking to improve, and criticism is very welcome indeed. So keep the blows coming please!

[cosmicdolphin]

Well we' re not supposed to create copycat songs, right?

Think of them as belonging on the same playlist. In fact put them in an actual playlist , take them out in the car or on walk sometime when your ears are fresh and your not at your DAW. Insert your track three quarters of the way into the list and see how it sounds when you've heard several of the right kind of tracks. Does it fit ?

In MY mind, they're both relaxed songs with a strumming accoustic guitar instrumentation

There's no strumming in the ref track. That's part of the reason your track isn't similar enough

Does reference song really mean following it even deeper; and if so, it means that ALL submissions should be tailored to the listing, and you NEVER have something "lying around" for a listing to come along, right?

Yes always write to the listings. It will improve your skills by writing over and over to new references and will probably force you to listen to more contemporary music in general ( i.e. if you don't already do that). The more new songs you write the higher the chance you will have of something that will fit a subsequent listing because you'll find some of the reference tracks will repeat or they will be of a style that more.

I.e. Here is one I co-wrote a couple of years back ( now signed to a LIbrary ) but had it been hanging around on my HDD I would have submitted it to this Listing as it incorporates a lot of the same elements even though the reference track was a completely different one. https://soundcloud.com/user-45178330/every-piece-of-me

The reference starts with "Early in the morning, when the colors reappear, I will be here"; about "me" and an observation of the world around, in fact my line was "stolen" from that idea. I'll readily agree that his line is more poetic, but not that you can' t write a love song from the "me" perspective... "Hard day's night", anyone?

Line 2 " I will be here "...indicates the presence of another

Line 3 " but when I get home to you "....indicates the presence of another ( would argue it's not a love song in the sense of the reference anyway )

Line 1 " I was breathing you in ".....indicates the presence of another.

Thanks for those observations. I think I got misguided by this "broadcast quality" boogieman phrase;

That's a whole other rabbit hole. First rule is a bit like a Doctor.. ' Do no harm ' ...i.e your mix probably would have sounded clearer with very little to nothing added.

There's lots of mixing courses out there, my recommendation is the book " Mixing Secrets For The Small Studio " by Mike Senior as it focuses on the issues of home studio users and gives a logical step by step guide whereas a lot of other mixing books I've read , good as they are seem to assume you are working in a proper studio environment.

Strive to make each song better than the last and over time you WILL improve. You can also try instrumental cues which are generally quicker to write and more simple to produce / mix as there's no vocals to worry about so it can help get you used to different genres and techniques. And whatever you need to know , someone has probably made a Youtube video about it that's worth watching.

Mark