4 posts in this topic

Hello everybody I would love to have feedback about this cover. Is really important for me to know your opinion!

Also I'm new here would like to know more people and more music work!

Thank you so much. 

 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Hi Melody

You guys are technically VERY proficient.  A complex piece..  Very well executed  Do you have a link of the original version?...  Seeing as it's a cover, and this is definitely not my genre of music. I find it a bit hard to comment.. 

Regarding the piece..  You jump right in going at full throttle.. It stays the same intensity, and the atonal aspect of the piano riff, starts to make me feel neurotic.  Now I suspect that's exactly what the piece intends.. and you perhaps wanted to stick to the intent of the original.  I like the different instruments interjecting.. your choice of the different musicians coming in/out is quite well done..   

As a musical piece in itself (and this would be your interpretation and arrangement of it.  I would like to hear the intensity and complexity  build up/down more..  For instance perhaps when one of the other instruments interjects, you hold a piano chord.. , or don't play all the notes of the piano riff. or it might be simpler, just lowering the volume of the piano while other instruments are speaking.  

The piano part in itself is extremely demanding.  You can't help but pay full attention to it...  So it almost sound like the piece is fighting with itself.. That is everything is 'demanding' my attention, So I start to get frustrated and actually worn out, trying to keep up with it. and when a piece becomes too intense or too much the same, the brain, just starts to consider it as 'noise' and loses interest. an idea might be, when another instrument interjects, the other instruments, percussion, just hit the down beat, and let the instrument solo for its bar or two.. then things build back in/

Hence my asking to hear the original version.. If you did a faithful performance of the way it was written, then in that aspect, it is completely valid..  (actually in any consideration the piece is completely valid, it is EXTREMELY well executed.)

If you wanted to do your 'interpretation' of it.   You might consider, playing some variations of the riff. or not playing all the notes of the motif each time..  I tend to think of music compositions, as a guided tour thru a flower garden..  That is you walk along the path, and the guide points, out the little waterfall here..  further down the path, is a patchwork of two  different colored flowers, or the rose bushes, sculptured like an animal  .  You could also think of it as the spotlights on a stage play.. The lights brighten, and dim on the different actors, and sections of the stage to guide the listeners attention..  You want to guide the listeners attention..  You could have a couple of sections where everyone goes full throttle, but, from a listeners standpoint, you need to give them 'room to breath',   The listener gets easily fatigued following the density and intensity of the piece.  

For me, I think the depending on the complexity of the different riffs, your ear/brain can only follow 3 - 6 threads of musical data.. More if the parts are tightly woven, and work together as one thread..  Strings playing a line, flutes doubling a few notes of it here and there.  The bass sticking more with 1's and 5's.. Take for instance, Jimi Hendrix, or some jazz trios, If there are just three musicians, they can all play pretty complex parts, AND the listener can follow the piece.  the more players that come in, some of the other players have to 'dumb it down' or work much more tightly with each other.  For instance a 4 part brass section, are playing tight harmonies, blocking out the current chords.. So in one aspect they act as 1 instrument.. 

VIEWPOINT - As music accompianying an intense video chase scene.. then this music can perfectly stand as it is.. cause it definitely evokes a very strong reaction from the listener 

I have found sometimes when doing covers,  (and I do 'interpretations' and take some liberties with the piece).  I might alter things.. For instance I recently did a cover of the The Beatles 'Fool On The Hill'.  I loved the original.. But when I did it very faithfully,  I found the recorder, trombone section, which repeats 3 times start to sound to repetitive, and rigid (yet on the original, I didn't get that feeling) .  So I made some alterations of each of those sections.. cause it complemented (in my mind), the other parts I made.  It also expanded the horizon of the piece, giving it more variety.. Now some people might not appreciate the liberties I took, but others might appreciate the variety. 

So you as the performer have to decide are you going to do a note for note interpretation, (in which case, everything I've mentioned is moot)..  Or if you are going to interpret or 'stylize' it..

In conclusion,  it is brilliantly executed..  things I've mentioned are 'subjective' and may or not apply for you.. 

Keep up the great work, and welcome here.  

 

Edited by markstyles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a funny piece. I would vary the piano line a bit more by moving it up and down and changing the rhythm, but that's all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now