@@rileyplaysguitar Are you familiar with the channel @scaleitbackarchive ? It helped me to address some of the issues in my composition. I recommend the video 'Counterpoint is the Answer'. Good luck with your channel.
@@BlackSailPass_GuitarCovers I appreciate the recommendation but I’m also a bit confused by this comment. Is there anything specific you could point out that you would consider an issue within this composition?
@@rileyplaysguitar Sure - I'll continue this thread under the 'This is true modern Progressive Metal' comment. ___ (Edit: here it is copied across, so it doesn't get lost...) First of all, well done for accepting criticism. There's an unwritten rule on some channels that only positive comments are welcome, but this leads to artistic stagnation. You have talent, and I've subscribed to see where that leads. In short, melodic development is where an already-established melodic theme (a riff, lead or vocal melody) is transformed in some way (altered in pitch, rhythm, sequence, expression, instrument, context, or some combination of those) in order to progress the song and tell a story. The simplest version in Metal is probably 'when the riff comes back, but slower', but at its best it can connect a series of cool-sounding, isolated ideas into a musical journey. A lot of modern Metal relies on 1/2-note rhythmic patterns with no melodic content to transform, or it has themes but they are awkwardly jumbled together with no connection or sequence (Opeth are guilty of this, which hurts because I love that band). It's become acceptable to connect genre tropes in a ABABC sequence and call it 'progressive' because it's in an odd rhythm, but what made those bands progressive in the first place? It's because i) their ideas were innovative and ii) they were presented in a compelling way which was conceptually and melodically coherent. The best progressive bands knew how to transform themes, and every change in their song was intentional and purposeful. To come to your song… - It starts with a 1-note chug overlaid with some ambient notes, but this feels like a false intro, as it then goes into a different part with no thematic connection. This feels designed to grab attention with familiarity, but it doesn't make sense in context. You do return to the chug riff later, but it’s not transformed in a way that connects it to the main ideas (0:40 and 0:55). - The sequence from 0:33 is effective because you start by outlining the chords, then building on that with a distorted riff. This feels like the true start of the song. - It then goes into the best riff in the song (0:55). It’s memorable and has melodic ideas. The same chords are still playing in the background which loosely connects it to the section before, but this would have benefitted from using transformed fragments of the previous riff to tie them together coherently (e.g. incorporating the melody at 0:54, maintaining the same root notes or bringing the chromatic part at 0:59 into the previous riff). - You cut it short by going into the chug riff, but it doesn’t feel coherent. You use this chug part to staple together ideas again later in the song. - The next part 1:14 introduces a guitar solo over what sounds like a variation on the 0:40 riff. Nice work with this. It develops the idea. Although it switches it up a bit with the rhythm, this riff mainly just cycles over in the same fashion. It sounds very ‘in the box’, like it’s guitar exercise moved up and down the neck. Mixing in some ideas from earlier sections would really have elevated it. - The part at 2:17 (I'll call it the 'chorus') brings back the root note sequence from the main riff at 0:40, and then ties it back to that idea by playing them together. Excellent. I said before that this is the highlight of the song in my opinion and here’s why - it expands on an established idea by playing it in a new way, then layers new ideas over the top of it. Great stuff - it would be good to hear more like this, not necessarily in the note choice but in the way the ideas are combined. - 2:54 is a basic example of development, which should have been earlier in the song. It elaborates on the riff. Unfortunately it doesn’t know where to go next and falls back on the Meshuggah chug again. - This song’s main issue is that it keeps using the 1-note chug without connecting it to the main ideas of the song. It doesn't build on your ideas (and there are some good ones here) meaningfully. The only exception to this is at 3:40 which does link it to the chorus root notes, but this highlights an approach which really would have worked better - use this part as a post-chorus transition to go from the chorus back into the chugging part, then express it in its full form at the end. That way you create a logical connection and flow between sections. I’ve written a load, so will leave it at that. Hope that helps.
It needs more melodic development... 2:30 was a highlight because it built on earlier themes, but the track is mostly rhythmic chugging and guitar exercises. Can it really be considered progressive or original if it's just reiterating what other bands have done in the past? You can play. Keep doing what you're doing, but remember that there's room to improve and develop your own voice.
@BlackSailPass_GuitarCovers I appreciate the somewhat constructive criticism. I'm curious, could you expound on what you mean by "melodic development"? Using your example of building on earlier themes, that happens more than once within this composition, although it's certainly possible my ideas didn't translate in the way I hoped they would (or it simply went over your head).
@@rileyplaysguitar First of all, well done for accepting criticism. There's an unwritten rule on some channels that only positive comments are welcome, but this leads to artistic stagnation. You have talent, and I've subscribed to see where that leads. In short, melodic development is where an already-established melodic theme (a riff, lead or vocal melody) is transformed in some way (altered in pitch, rhythm, sequence, expression, instrument, context, or some combination of those) in order to progress the song and _tell a story._ The simplest version in Metal is probably 'when the riff comes back, but slower', but at its best it can connect a series of cool-sounding, isolated ideas into a musical journey. A lot of modern Metal relies on 1/2-note rhythmic patterns with no melodic content to transform, or it _has_ themes but they are awkwardly jumbled together with no connection or sequence (Opeth are guilty of this, which hurts because I love that band). It's become acceptable to connect genre tropes in a ABABC sequence and call it 'progressive' because it's in an odd rhythm, but what made those bands progressive in the first place? It's because i) their ideas were innovative and ii) they were presented in a compelling way which was conceptually and melodically coherent. The best progressive bands knew how to transform themes, and every change in their song was intentional and purposeful. To come to your song… - It starts with a 1-note chug overlaid with some ambient notes, but this feels like a false intro, as it then goes into a different part with no thematic connection. This feels designed to grab attention with familiarity, but it doesn't make sense in context. You do return to the chug riff later, but it’s not transformed in a way that connects it to the main ideas (0:40 and 0:55). - The sequence from 0:33 is effective because you start by outlining the chords, then building on that with a distorted riff. This feels like the true start of the song. - It then goes into the best riff in the song (0:55). It’s memorable and has melodic ideas. The same chords are still playing in the background which loosely connects it to the section before, but this would have benefitted from using transformed fragments of the previous riff to tie them together coherently (e.g. incorporating the melody at 0:54, maintaining the same root notes or bringing the chromatic part at 0:59 into the previous riff). - You cut it short by going into the chug riff, but it doesn’t feel coherent. You use this chug part to staple together ideas again later in the song. - The next part 1:14 introduces a guitar solo over what sounds like a variation on the 0:40 riff. Nice work with this. It develops the idea. Although it switches it up a bit with the rhythm, this riff mainly just cycles over in the same fashion. It sounds very ‘in the box’, like it’s guitar exercise moved up and down the neck. Mixing in some ideas from earlier sections would really have elevated it. - The part at 2:17 (I'll call it the 'chorus') brings back the root note sequence from the main riff at 0:40, and then ties it back to that idea by playing them together. Excellent. I said before that this is the highlight of the song in my opinion and here’s why - it expands on an established idea by playing it in a new way, then layers new ideas over the top of it. Great stuff - it would be good to hear more like this, not necessarily in the note choice but in the way the ideas are combined. - 2:54 is a basic example of development, which should have been earlier in the song. It elaborates on the riff. Unfortunately it doesn’t know where to go next and falls back on the Meshuggah chug again. - This song’s main issue is that it keeps using the 1-note chug without connecting it to the main ideas of the song. It doesn't build on your ideas (and there are some good ones here) meaningfully. The only exception to this is at 3:40 which does link it to the chorus root notes, but this highlights an approach which really would have worked better - use this part as a _post-chorus transition_ to go from the chorus back into the chugging part, then express it in its full form at the end. That way you create a logical connection and flow between sections. I’ve written a load, so will leave it at that. Hope that helps.
P.S. Scale It Back Archive - 'Transitions and Their Utility' goes into detail about this idea. He's a little confrontational but makes some great points.
