Hi, I've just joined the list. This track is beautiful. I can't stop listening to it. I understand the critics on the drum part. But I have to disagree. The drum pattern - but also the piano - is a bit naif, it's ingenuous. Therefore it is beautiful. Working on it would be going in the direction of a more commercial (some might say alternative) production, which would be silly. We don't need expensive software (and hardware) to make music anymore, we don't need a publisher anymore. So we don't need to adhere to some silly commercial cliches anymore. Cesare Marilungo Thorsten Wilms wrote: >On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 12:30:38AM +0200, Wolfgang Woehl wrote: > > > >>>http://83.141.72.40/music/92/complete.ogg >>> >>> >>David, the piano theme makes me think of children smiling, of age, of a >>tree's beauty. To me it is very, very moving. I think part of that is >>that the "piano" is deeply anchored in our acoustic and social world, >>like you hear a century when you hear a piano. And part of it is the >>beauty of simple things, like a child that smiles at you. Like the >>movement of your theme. I'm listening over and over. >> >> > >No children or trees here, but it's sure nice. Allthough I would >shorten the track a bit. > > > > >>Another thing, bluntly put: The drums suck so very hard that they manage >>to make me cry after all. Know what I think? That drum-sequencers are >>just wrong. They do strange things to people. They did to the 80s. >> >> > >I like obviously sequenced drums in many cases. But here the drums >have an entirely different feel from the piano. A bit slow for that, but >kick an claps still say "party" to me. That doesn't make the fact they're >sequenced the problem, since drums can be programmed to match any kind >of feel. >David: my advice would be to listen to some ballads, maybe older stuff >from Mariah Carey and to analyze the drums regarding sound and rhythmic >characteristics. > > >--- >Thorsten Wilms > > > >
