Improving rejected piano solo

[irthlingz]

I recently submitted a cue (“Yes We Can”) to the solo piano listing copied below. The main feedback was that ”the piano could be replaced with something more up-to-date and less hollow.” (Feedback here and at the end of this post.) The piano VST was Pianoteq NY Steinway D Classical with a bit of compression and reverb. In addition, the screener said the composition needed more developmental arc and variety.

Recently, pianist/composer David Easton (https://davideaston.com) mentioned using two Native Instruments piano VSTs – The Grandeur and Noire – layered to get a rich piano sound, so I thought I would try that with the cue I had submitted, with the Grandeur louder than the Noire. I also raised The Grandeur an octave in the third section of the cue, hoping to give it some lift. The result is “Yes Yes We Can”.

Curious what people think.

Thanks! Michael

SOLO PIANO INSTRUMENTAL CUES are needed by a very successful boutique Music Library that's distributed by Universal for placements in Promotions, Advertising, and other TV Programming.

This is a catalog you want to be in! Please listen to the following references to get yourself in the general wheelhouse of what they need:
Believe In We Campaign
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsNCyYl ... Department
MasterChef (from 0:40 – 1:14)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_aKGIW ... eOklahoman
WeCanWeWill Campaign
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcV10oW ... hangeWales

Although one of the references has some additional instrumentation, please submit Solo Piano Instrumentals only for this request.

Please submit well-composed Instrumental Cues that feature Solo Piano as their only instrumentation. Your submissions should have one, central, captivating motif; top-notch arrangements with plenty of dynamics, interest, and forward motion; and excellent musicianship. Your pieces can range mood-wise from uplifting to sentimental to somber to just about anywhere in between – just be sure to stick with one mood so that your pieces remain cohesive. Your production should be polished and any and all virtual sounds or instruments you use need to be of the highest quality and current-sounding.

All submissions should be about 2 minutes long, give or take. Good edit points and non-faded, buttoned/stinger endings are required. Do NOT copy the references in any way, shape, or form. Use them only as a general guide for tempo, tone, texture, and overall vibe. Do NOT submit any material with unauthorized samples of any other artists’ music, sounds, or any other form of media. Broadcast Quality is needed.

IMPORTANT NOTE FROM THE LIBRARY: "Many composers throw in way too many ideas and are not focused on ONE CENTRAL MOTIF: they try to keep things interesting by adding new harmonic lines and elements (melodies, even improvisations, etc) instead of focusing on the production and textures." Put simply, keep it SIMPLE! We know that other Libraries like to receive music with complementary A and B sections, but this Library is NOT one of them – stick with ONE CENTRAL MOTIF per submission, please!

NOTE: This company has a strong preference for composers who understand music licensing companies and how typical music library deals are structured. Go ahead and submit to this opportunity if that's you! Also, if you're an experienced producer that can deliver the goods in this genre, they're especially interested in hearing what you can do!
This Music Library offers an EXCLUSIVE deal with a cool twist.  You’ll keep 50% of all gross income generated by your music, plus you’ll get 100% of the Writer’s share income generated by your PRO. In other words, if the company licenses your music under a blanket deal, you’ll get income. If they license it for a YouTube video, you’ll get income. Not all music libraries pay you for things like that! The Publisher will get 100% of the Publisher’s share.

Because this is an Exclusive deal, the music you submit for this pitch cannot already be signed with other Libraries or Publishers. You must own or control 100% of your Master and Composition rights. Please send as many Instrumental Cues as you’d like, online or per CD. All submissions will be screened and critiqued by TAXI. Submissions must be received no later than 11:59 PM (PDT) on Monday, April 24th, 2023. TAXI # S230424NU

FEEDBACK:
What I like most about this song:
Thank you for following the track length and the style could be fitting for the listing.
I think you could improve this song by:
I think the piano could be replaced with something else that could be more up-to-date and less hollow.
I returned or forwarded this song because:
Production quality could be higher.

Composition:
Could have a better developmental “arc”
Too repetitive

[mteezykeys]

the piano vst sounds fine. In the first section the piano playing is a bit choppy. It sounds like maybe the sustain pedal isn't catching all of the notes you're wanting sustained (:05, :12, :20,). I like the concept of the right hand part up the octave in your 3rd section but I start to miss the low end. Maybe experiment with the R.H. up the octave and keeping the L.H. in the bass range. Maybe even try the root notes down an octave throughout, the entire cue seems to be mid range and up which could be why the screener said it feels "hollow". Just a few thoughts.

I love the Noire Piano from NI by the way, I use it all the time.

[irthlingz]

the piano vst sounds fine.

!

In the first section the piano playing is a bit choppy. It sounds like maybe the sustain pedal isn't catching all of the notes you're wanting sustained (:05, :12, :20,).

Will look into that, and thanks for taking the time to listen, and for your other suggestions, which I will experiment with!

===
Michael

[irthlingz]

Hi, I agree with the feedback already given, but would add that some of the midi velocities, especially in that thinner last section, are quite high. I imagine the pianist would be hammering the keys to get that effect. Therefore, my additional suggestion would be to temper that but without losing the emotional ebb and flow.

I'll try lowering velocities on the higher notes in that section. Thanks, Graham!

[bmete]

Hi,
Nice little song!
I definitely agree with lowering the velocities. In that vein, a lighter touch when playing would smoothen it out a bit. To avoid the repetitive issue try taking the chords and arpeggiating them, it will give a different timbre and feel, and give the impression of forward motion. Mixing different piano plug ins is important too, it creates depth to the piano sound.
Good luck with it!
Bob

[irthlingz]

Thank you, Bob, I'll look into that!

[superblonde]

that feedback received is weird. it is weird and it seems incomplete. yes, the piano sounds choppy and it seems the pedal is not handled correctly and the velocities are out of whack. but is that the real problem in this track? I dont think so.

"Your submissions should have one, central, captivating motif; top-notch arrangements with plenty of dynamics, interest, and forward motion"

your "Yes We Can" / "Yes Yes We Can" is far too harmonically dense compared to the references and the above spec, and it is song-like, it does not have a 'very short repeating melody of no more than 4 notes' (what they seem to be calling a motif). your track sounds like Elton John, the references don't sound like that at all. I spent a chunk of time today listening to the S230424NU forwards and similar tracks making these comparisons.. The listing should have used a better description, to suggest specifically using a pedal tone and slowly building with a repeated melodic fragment as ostinato (because that's what they wanted).

- "believe in we campaign" uses a pedal tone exclusively as the motif.
- "masterchef" uses a three-note motif (a fragment) and very sparse harmony (no left hand for most of it).
- "we can we will campaign" uses a pedal tone.

Two (three?) of the forwards are based around a pedal tone; all of them begin with very thin texture (very simple and very boring) and several build the harmony very slowly. They essentially mirror the references in melodic style. Additionally, this is why I believe one of the worst content of this and other listings is this lie: "Do NOT copy the references in any way, shape, or form. Use them only as a general guide for tempo, tone, texture, and overall vibe. " What you should absolutely be doing is 'copying' the references directly; in SHAPE and in FORM and in MELODIC STYLE; especially copying the texture quite blatantly.

Even if your VST and midi shaping were perfect, your track does not match the request's melodic requirement. <- and that is what the screener should have written.

It is always very valuable to see others post the feedback received on their returns, so thanks for that.
I'm eager to see the results of S230420TX based on how S230424NU turned out.

with that said, "Yes We Can" seems like a solid track for another listing which requests piano of a different style, maybe a "uplifting piano instrumental" instead of "thin piano instrumental cue 'with one central motif'".

Here, you can have a listen to a piano track I quickly wrote and submitted to S230424NU to validate my own MIDI piano tone & MIDI shaping (I knew it did not use pedal tone and has a complex texture compared to the refs so would most likely not get forwarded, it didn't, I am ok with that, there were no complaints other than the melodic mismatch). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=revAbjyhXIA Read the feedback I received in the comment of the video, which based on that, I've made a quick revision to align with the References (revision still in progress) here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQEAqWCRJKo


edit.. I see now there is S230523SN sent out today which will also be interesting to follow: SIMPLE, SENTIMENTAL PIANO INSTRUMENTALS and/or INSTRUMENTAL CUES