Re: Ballad of Reading Gaol - Oscar Wilde - 1896


<kartoun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1137242102.738873.156830@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Hi,
>
> I composed "Ballad of Reading Gaol":
>
> http://www.compactech.com/blacklemon/The_Ballad_of_Reading_Gaol.pdf
>
> http://www.compactech.com/blacklemon/The_Ballad_of_Reading_Gaol.mp3
>
> Your opinion please.
>

Since you asked (so politely no less :-)

Big Disclaimer: These are just my opinions, and I'm just some guy on Usenet
whose onions may or may not mean anything to you, and they are solely, my
opinions. Please feel free disregard any criticisms or suggestions, though
all criticisms or suggestions herein are meant to be constructive - at least
from MY perspective.

First off, this type of piece strikes me as something someone writes who
isn't really concerned about its "marketability". In other words, it seems
to be less of a 4 chord Sum 41 approach, and more like (and I mean this as a
compliment) a Radiohead approach. My question though is, why so repetitive?
It strikes me as very repetitive. Rather than the 1 measure loop that
everyone complains about as being uncreative, it sounds like a 32 bar (or
whatever) loop instead. While I like dreamy, mantra-like music, a little
variety is still appreciated. From a compositional standpoint, you've got a
verse and a chorus thing that's basically got repeat bars around it. While
the guitar thing breaks help to break it up a little, it's still, very
repetitive. Remember, you're asking for opinions on a composers newsgroup,
and compositions are usually considered to contain a fair deal of variety,
or use a form or genre (Chaconnes, Minimalism, etc.) where repetition of
some sort is expected. Now, I know that our current style of music is to be
very repetitive for radio airplay, but again, this doesn't seemed to be
"designed" for that, so why not some more variety?

I'm not crazy about the production: The drums and keys are dry, very
"unified", and the voice is very effected. I like the dreamy quality of the
FX on the voice, but they seem a little out of kilter with the other two. It
makes them sound very "separate" in the mix. Same is true of the guitar
thing - it's got a similar wash of FX that brings it in line with the vox,
but not with the other parts. So it comes of as two cats in one studio,
singing and playing guitar, and two cats in another studio playing drums and
keys, and then, as an afterthought, someone stuck them together. The piece
actually reminds me of some Pink Floyd or early Genesis (that again is
intended as a compliment) but the production lacks that overall dreamy (or
potentially, drug-induced torpor) quality and the accompaniment instruments
sound a little "stark" - or too "real" comparatively. Now you may want that
kind of juxtaposition, but if you don't, I think production needs a bit of
work.

Also, production-wise, I feel the drums are a little close. I like the
quality of the voice as "distant" overall, but if there's any intent for it
to be distinguishable (again, you may not want that) it needs a little more
work. It reminds me of Tool (again a compliment) where the vocals are
usually quiet (compared to a lot of pop records) but they are "quietly
intense" - that is, despite their physical volume on the recording, there's
an intensity which we perceive as maintaining a prominent position in the
recording - that is, not competing with the other sounds for attention.
Here, I feel that the voice is not competing for space, but has resigned
itself to being just "there".

A little aside - and I don't mean this to be mean. I'm no singer - though I
do sing, and I know I've got pitch problems, and have been through this with
recording myself sing, so I'm relating this from personal experience - which
may or may not apply here. There are pitch problems with the voice here. In
many cases, people try to use many FX, and bury the part in the mix to
"compensate". Sometimes that's intentional, sometimes it's not. But, I just
bought some early Stones songs (like Play with Fire, or more especially, As
Tears Go By), and have noticed 1. how sloppy the playing was, and 2. how
poor Mick's pitch is in some cases. But all of Mick's wrong notes are right
up there in the mix. They didn't care (they were after all, the "bad boys of
rock"). So they didn't try to bury anything or "hide" it (and again, not to
imply that you're trying to do that, but just as an observation). If it were
me (and it's not :-) I'd re-record the vox and correct some of those
problems, or find someone to sing it a little better than I could (I'm
assuming you sang it yourself, but that may not be the case). Otherwise, if
I was intending it to be off pitch, I'd try to make it sound like I wasn't
covering up that fact - Id' want to smack the listener in the face with it -
hey, I'm off pitch, and I just don't care. Of course, they may not care and
ignore my recording too, but hey, everyone's got their own tastes!

I would love to hear a the drums moved back a little, and the voice either
made more intelligible, brought up front, or both.

I really like the little laugh and whispering parts, though they seemed very
identical each time around. I think they're great ideas but I'd love to hear
them a little different each time around (less cut and paste, and more
original sources). The "guitar" part I liked - its position in the mix
(which was actually kind of far back, but I liked it there). I didn't care
for the tone quality of the sound. It's a bit thin sounding, but that's OK
for its position in the mix - too fat might make it too up front. But it is
"hissy". The distortion is more of a "synthy" type distortion which can be a
cool effect in itself, but here I think it makes it sound like it was poorly
recorded, rather than intentional (i.e. it sounds like some 13 year old kid
recording through his Crate amp direct into Cakewalk - which for all I know
you may be!).

So sorry - it sounds like I'm really dumping on your work. But for my taste
(and solely my taste mind you), I think compositionally, it could stand a
little variety, and technically, it could be clearer about what it's "trying
to be" - the things I perceive as disparate elements might be more effective
if brought into a more unified or "focused" production. But I think there's
a lot of substance here. I'd consider it a third draft of "The Importance of
Being Earnest", rather than a final draft of some crap novel we've never
heard of (again, intended as a compliment :-).

You asked....

Best,
Steve



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Kishori Amonkars Kafi Kanada?
    ... I tend to agree with Akash on AA - voice throw too different. ... pitch is still different). ... DG I did try speeding up the recording by 10% this makes the taans ... The resulting pitch is still low for Kishoritai, and yes, the way she ...
    (rec.music.indian.classical)
  • Re: Voice changer : How to disguise voice
    ... But i am researching about How to change pitch of my voice. ... I mean i want to perform two processes: recording my voice and change the ... It's said that DirectSound can do that, ...
    (microsoft.public.win32.programmer.directx.audio)
  • Re: Prices Aida(s)
    ... If he is not a voice ... Rather than being cutesy and insulting, Kerner ... the recording sessions, they were all exhausted. ... OPERA NEWS do not necessarily represent the views of The Metropolitan ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)
  • Re: Ian Partridge Re: Most Beautiful Tenor Voice
    ... The timbre & quality of the voice deepened, ... votes for the most beautiful tenor voices I've heard are Alain Vanzo, ... utterly musical artist is Mr. Ian Partridge. ... I first heard his voice on a Turnabout recording in which he ...
    (rec.music.opera)
  • Re: Great new singer songwriter. great tune, check it out.
    ... first 15-30 seconds is never going to get my attention. ... about a great singer/songwriter, try Tom Smith. ... You only seems to endorse opinions that back up your own. ... explain your ignorance regarding wire recording. ...
    (rec.audio.misc)