DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**AttableBewNaw** · 12-05-2007, 06:21 PM

Hi there - I'm the guitarist in this band.

RealTime - thanks for your input. I'm also curious to know what you mean by "polished"? Are you talking about sound fidelity (recording)? Do you think that the band doesn't sound "together"? I understand that the vocals are rather sub-par, but that's something I guess I just wasn't born with. So, maybe I should re-phrase my question. Given a different (better) singer (or, perhaps, better vocals by me), would you then say that the song was polished?

Thanks!
FH

By polished I mean I would like to hear a few things:

1) Better mix. The drummer is lost in that cut. If you listen very closely you can make him out. But I didn't comment on him because I could not really hear him. He was drowned out by the guitar and vocals. Also, the mix is a bit midrange-heavy. I think if you fatten the bottom-end in the mix it would help to alleviate some of that.

2) More rehearsed. I just did not get the impression that the band was "in the pocket", so to speak. The song is intense, and everyone should be on that same page of intensity. Nothing more, nothing less. So, essentially, rehearse and make sure each member doesn't exceed or fall short of the their intensity quota.

3) Maybe try a different approach to your transitions. To me, the bassist should lead the transititions, giving the listener subtle audible cues that there is a chord change or transition coming up. This can be done by jumping to a series of bass chords which compliment(harmonize) with both chords the band is currently in, and the chords the band is heading towards in the transition.

4) You do have vocal talent, but it's obvious you've put a lot more time in your guitar than your voicebox

. Not a travesty, but if you guys are serious about your band, you need to decide who is doing what and either put the work in to develop the skill or leave it to someone else.

As I said, I would very much like to hear a polished cut of the song. Polished, by the way, just means that it is the very best work you could do - which runs the gamut from lyrics, chords, musical performance, recording, mix, and even the pitch when presenting it for critiques such as this. Never volunteer the limitations under which you've worked, or the faults with the song. Assumed that someone that will take the time to listen will also give you an honest answer. In your pitch you should state facts. The lyrics were written by ___________. Musicians are _____ and ______. Produced by ___________. And so on. Maybe even post the lyrics so that the listener can follow along. Its up to you, but remember that everything you say before anyone listens helps to shape their opinion.

12-05-2007, 06:21 PM	#6
AttableBewNaw Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 431 Senior Member	Hi there - I'm the guitarist in this band. RealTime - thanks for your input. I'm also curious to know what you mean by "polished"? Are you talking about sound fidelity (recording)? Do you think that the band doesn't sound "together"? I understand that the vocals are rather sub-par, but that's something I guess I just wasn't born with. So, maybe I should re-phrase my question. Given a different (better) singer (or, perhaps, better vocals by me), would you then say that the song was polished? Thanks! FH By polished I mean I would like to hear a few things: 1) Better mix. The drummer is lost in that cut. If you listen very closely you can make him out. But I didn't comment on him because I could not really hear him. He was drowned out by the guitar and vocals. Also, the mix is a bit midrange-heavy. I think if you fatten the bottom-end in the mix it would help to alleviate some of that. 2) More rehearsed. I just did not get the impression that the band was "in the pocket", so to speak. The song is intense, and everyone should be on that same page of intensity. Nothing more, nothing less. So, essentially, rehearse and make sure each member doesn't exceed or fall short of the their intensity quota. 3) Maybe try a different approach to your transitions. To me, the bassist should lead the transititions, giving the listener subtle audible cues that there is a chord change or transition coming up. This can be done by jumping to a series of bass chords which compliment(harmonize) with both chords the band is currently in, and the chords the band is heading towards in the transition. 4) You do have vocal talent, but it's obvious you've put a lot more time in your guitar than your voicebox . Not a travesty, but if you guys are serious about your band, you need to decide who is doing what and either put the work in to develop the skill or leave it to someone else. As I said, I would very much like to hear a polished cut of the song. Polished, by the way, just means that it is the very best work you could do - which runs the gamut from lyrics, chords, musical performance, recording, mix, and even the pitch when presenting it for critiques such as this. Never volunteer the limitations under which you've worked, or the faults with the song. Assumed that someone that will take the time to listen will also give you an honest answer. In your pitch you should state facts. The lyrics were written by ___________. Musicians are _____ and ______. Produced by ___________. And so on. Maybe even post the lyrics so that the listener can follow along. Its up to you, but remember that everything you say before anyone listens helps to shape their opinion.
	Quote