[kucheravka]

Hey, I've posted about my band on FM before (we were named Aletheuo back then), but we have a new song up, called "Betrayal". Its the first song listed on our MySpace, and should be the first song that starts playing. I and the rest of my band think it's our best song yet, and we think the area we improved on the most is the songwriting/lyrics.

Anyway, I'm curious to see what all of you think of it... I like hearing constructive criticism, or compliments, or whatever you want... though i ask if you criticize, you explain/backup your statements at least to some extent. Oh, we are generally more of a Hard Rock / Metal band, but we have varying influences. And we're not terribly into trends... we play in whatever style we want, whether its considered a more mainstream style right now or not.

http://www.myspace.com/brethrentheband

Oh, I'm the bassist!

[Frogzlovzy]

Not bad. And by not bad, I mean in comparison to mainstream acts, which is what I have to compare it to.

Musically, it is apparent your band possesses some talent. I do like the lyrics and the guitar work is rightly placed in the overall mix. I also like the use of transitions in the song during the buildup.

Overall, the song badly needs polish. This cut is not something I would have shared if I were fronting a band. First, you say you are not into trends. However, that should never be an excuse for not polishing your work. The opening held my attention, but was mostly due to the guitar. The vocals throughout were a distraction, mainly due to tonal wavering and lack of direction. I would have liked to hear the voice strained to contrast the brooding guitar in the intro.

While the buildup and transitions are nice, their execution left me behind, songwise. Akin to throwing cold water on me while sleeping - maybe that was your intent - but for me it was a distraction.

The vocals found some direction in the bridge and refrain, but the wavering was again distracting.

I would very much like to hear a polished cut of this song. I think the writing is good. The chord choices agree with the mood of the song.

Thanks for sharing this. [thumbup]

[lionsiy]

ahh yeah... for now, our guitarist is also our vocalist... we used to have a dedicated vocalist, but he left. and we havent gotten a new one yet, and the guitarist just decided to do the vocals himself, as he usually ended up writing the vocal lines anyway. he doesn't necessarily have a "rock" voice per se, and normally he just sings backing vocals. But for this song, he tried to reform his voice to get it to sound better for lead vocals.

as for polish, i appreciate the suggestions. you're generally saying the vocals need more polish... what about the rest of the band? and, also, did you like the singing better in the third verse (its the first verse with distortion + bass + drums)? he sang that verse with more intensity... is that the kind of vocals you meant when you said strained vocals?

[PilotJargon]

tone death[thumbdown]

[Krruqgwt]

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

[AttableBewNaw]

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.

[hernkingAnank]

hey man, ill respond to the other points you made later... although, they dont all necessarily need responce because i am not arguing against them... we appreciate the input and are definetly taking it into consideration for posting a future mix of the song.

however, i would like to point out one thing:

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.

the mix is mid-range heavy because you are listening to the myspace stream, which is a 96kbps MP3 stream. idk how familiar you are with what MP3 compression does to music, but the lower the bit rate the more it tends to cut out the highs and even some of the deeper lows. plus it tends to muddy up the sound some. we do agree that the drums could stand to come out more clearly; however, on the full quality version they do come out better, especially the cymbals (really, every instrument sounds better, the rest of the drums & the rest of the band). the snare and toms could stand a bit better balancing, perhaps some EQing and not a gain boost is what they need. so, really, the reason its so mid-heavy and a bit lacking in definition has 99% to do with it being a 96kbps MP3 stream.

[jokiruss]

hey man, ill respond to the other points you made later... although, they dont all necessarily need responce because i am not arguing against them... we appreciate the input and are definetly taking it into consideration for posting a future mix of the song.

however, i would like to point out one thing:


the mix is mid-range heavy because you are listening to the myspace stream, which is a 96kbps MP3 stream. idk how familiar you are with what MP3 compression does to music, but the lower the bit rate the more it tends to cut out the highs and even some of the deeper lows. plus it tends to muddy up the sound some. we do agree that the drums could stand to come out more clearly; however, on the full quality version they do come out better, especially the cymbals (really, every instrument sounds better, the rest of the drums & the rest of the band). the snare and toms could stand a bit better balancing, perhaps some EQing and not a gain boost is what they need. so, really, the reason its so mid-heavy and a bit lacking in definition has 99% to do with it being a 96kbps MP3 stream.

Makes sense. I am aware of compression loss and the limitations of digital audio, which fits the evidence of mid-heaviness in the cut.

Looking forward to hearing more.