Shoegaze Indie Alt-Rock (S230508GZ)

[Casey H]

Nope. And the type of chord changes in your B section makes it more off target.

[irthlingz]

Knowing nothing about your production setup, you could try cutting the reverb length (displayed in s or ms) in half and go -7.5 db on its wet part. Maybe try high-passing the wet part of the reverb at 250 Hz and the whole track at 80 Hz to remove low frequencies that muddy the water. As I wrote, knowing nothing about your work process or setup, it is difficult to recommend anything, but if you can do these things, why not try them out and see what it sounds like?

Tom

Thanks, Tom, for the specifics! Version III now in the first post

===
Michael & Sharon

[superblonde]

If you cant sing in-tune, then dont sing at all. Instant return. Could only listen to the first five seconds of the verse before closing it. Everyone here likes to talk about mix, vst, etc. but that assumes the performance and writing is good first which here it is not. Was there a plan to heavily autotune the vocals?

[CTWF]

Thanks, Tom, for the specifics! Version III now in the first post

===
Michael & Sharon

Hey Michael, version III is way better already! For the vocals, I would possibly try the Valhalla with a mix of somewhere from 33%-50%. Size and width I'd possibly also reduse to 50%. Just try to first find a point, where the reverb is not overpowering. You can add more (or other effects) later on.

Tom

[irthlingz]

So we did submit to the listing, and the screener comment was basically that it didn't fit the refs overall. Lesson learned is that you can't just choose one ref and use that for comparison - especially if it's not the first ref.

feedback here

[CTWF]

So we did submit to the listing, and the screener comment was basically that it didn't fit the refs overall. Lesson learned is that you can't just choose one ref and use that for comparison - especially if it's not the first ref.

feedback here

The good news is you got no negative feedback on performance/production. That does not mean necessarily that there were none, but at least nothing stood out enough such that the screener felt the need to tick a corresponding box.

Tom

[irthlingz]

So we did submit to the listing, and the screener comment was basically that it didn't fit the refs overall. Lesson learned is that you can't just choose one ref and use that for comparison - especially if it's not the first ref.

feedback here

The good news is you got no negative feedback on performance/production. That does not mean necessarily that there were none, but at least nothing stood out enough such that the screener felt the need to tick a corresponding box.

Tom

Thanks for pointing that out, Tom!