Deprecated: mysql_connect(): The mysql extension is deprecated and will be removed in the future: use mysqli or PDO instead in /storage/content/49/145849/famitracker.com/public_html/forum/classes/dbHandler.php on line 29
FamiTracker
This song started out trying out the one-channel echo effect.
Eventually, I saw how easily it could be turned into a catchy song, and worked for about an hour and this came out.
Oh, nicetas, the other song that's in my "This better?" thread, you said it showed no improval. A whole community of rock musicians begs to differ. And that song was techno, so it had less chance of scoring with rockers.
Man, you're quite vain aren't you? You repeat a three second loop a hundred times and add dissonance and claim it as a good song. Most people leave the quality of their songs to be judged by others, and to me, this is terrible. It's the same as all the other mindless three second loops you've created.
Also I have no idea what rock musicians you are talking about or why I or anyone else should care. I also find it odd that you're using this new thread to continue a conversation with nicetas that could easily be continued on the previous thread. Why not create one thread, designate it as your own, and use it to repost your FTM files time and time again so you can stop spamming?
This is like my last song, but with a different tune. And, I'm going for getting the "best amatuer buildup song award" someplace. If the judge of that WORLDWIDE award sees my songs.
[quote=kinkinkijkin]This is like my last song, but with a different tune. And, I'm going for getting the "best amatuer buildup song award" someplace. If the judge of that WORLDWIDE award sees my songs.[/quote]
What the hell are you even talking about? Seriously?
[quote=kinkinkijkin]This is like my last song, but with a different tune. And, I'm going for getting the "best amatuer buildup song award" someplace. If the judge of that WORLDWIDE award sees my songs.[/quote]
Sadly, you're asking the world-wide web to judge it (& they give you flying colors... Flying like a rock off of a cliff!).
[quote=kinkinkijkin]Oh, nicetas, the other song that's in my "This better?" thread, you said it showed no improval. A whole community of rock musicians begs to differ. And that song was techno, so it had less chance of scoring with rockers.[/quote]
Improval isn't a word; you're looking for the word improvement. Besides, it's difficult to not get approval from rock musicians as they don't have the technical knowledge that the guys up here have on electronic music with limited hardware.
kinkinkijkin, I know that you haven't learned any music in school, so I'll give you a little advice that, I hope, you heed. This advice; everyone in music knows, regardless of education.
Your song is, indeed, very repetitive. It's because the brunt of your tune is nothing more than your use of bass in all of your VRC6 channels, your triangle channel & your 2A03 square wave channel 2.
My advice to you is to eliminate the tune you have in your 2A03 square channel 2. Then, create a tune using both your 2A03 square channels; a tune with notes of a higher octave that complement your bass.
This tune should have some variance; this is called syncopation. When you create a tune with syncopation, it will typically carry some minor note changes while keeping it's same, basic theme. It should then alter itself into something a little more different, yet it should still complement your bass.
You'll see this in my attached example (three songs I chose from my last original sound track, for FamiTracker 0.3.0). I think this is something you should study; the use of two square wave channels for your main theme (one which has syncopation & complements your bass tune in the other channels). Mind you, there are other works up here that are a million times better than this sample!
_______________________
Technology: the one thing that's hated & cursed at by all engineers, technologists, scientists & technicians!
Umm, I kinda get what you're saying. Kinda like this song that I threw together thinking about this accidental 2-square flute that was somewhere in the other song?
[quote=kinkinkijkin]Oh, nicetas, the other song that's in my "This better?" thread, you said it showed no improval. A whole community of rock musicians begs to differ. And that song was techno, so it had less chance of scoring with rockers.[/quote]
I said that in the thread 'Extremely Incomplete WIP', but if you think that your work in that thread deserves to be said having no approval, then just stick the whole 'nicetas_c ruins my life' thing into your mind, and I cannot stop yourself from doing so anyway.
[quote=kinkinkijkin]And, I'm going for getting the "best amatuer buildup song award" someplace. If the judge of that WORLDWIDE award sees my songs.[/quote]
Sounds like "best amateur-ish song amateur-ishly claimed to be a tad bit more tolerable award" to me.
1. You totally deviated from the song that you originally made this entire posting about.
2. All you did was copy square channel 2 into square channel 1 & offset it to make a repeated echo pattern. Where's the variety? Where's the syncopation?
Here's what I meant for you to do:
1. Go back to your yet_another_unnamed_good_one.ftm project file.
2. Completely erase the pattern in the 2A03's square channel 2.
3. Write one unique track in a moderate octave (i.e.: octave 3) in the 2A03's square channel 1 that complements your bass & carries some variance. This will be your main theme.
4. Create an accompaniment in the 2A03's square channel 2 to complement both your bass & your square channel 1 (making sure that it's at least one octave lower than the main theme).
Like I said, download the attachment of mine, listen to each individual channel (while muting out everything else,) listen to all the channels at once & try to see how I've done my tune.
_______________________
Technology: the one thing that's hated & cursed at by all engineers, technologists, scientists & technicians!
.png){kind=avatar}
