Emax

Thanks.

Last time i used the Emax in a piece of music, I used Jamstix for the drums.

This time I wanted to get a certain sound - kind of Depeche Modish Emulator II - as you said, and of course this will sound a bit simple so some people.

Other than the drums, BTW, I sampled all of the sounds myself. Believe it or not, they are all vocoder sounds from my Korg Radias, including the bass.

Thanks for taking the time to write this useful criticism. If/when I do another version of the song, I'll certainly take it into account.

Daniel

  
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Wind 
  To: emax@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 7:59 PM
  Subject: [emax] Re: Imaginary Friend - my latest song


    
  Since you asked! 

  To my ears it sounds a bit too minimal. And too much like Depeche Mode. Or some other early 80s dreary band. I don't find it too dreary though, but mostly minimal. Sounds like only a 6X recording? I would recommend (just for production's sake) adding some big accent-or-supporting sounds covered in reverb in the background to give it some depth in the 7th and 8th tracks. The keyboard sounds themselves are alright but the drums sound DIY style. Nothing wrong with using more expensive sounding drum samples (it will sound more "produced" and after all that is how producers make all that money). 

  The concept was fine, I don't have a problem with the vocals, the song, or the story. But the drums need to swing a bit more (even before quantization control we had ways to simulate "feel"). Don't be afraid to put an SM-57 in front of some egg shakers or something. This review was intended to give you some useful feedback, not in any way to criticize. I didn't get an Emax to sound like DM, but rather to have, essentially, a Fairlight. I've had many wonderful production excesses with it with that in mind. That may not be your cup of tea, I understand. Experiment! Anyway, I enjoyed your song. 

  --- In emax@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel Baum" <daniel@...> wrote:

  > 
  > It be very interested to hear what you think of it.
  > 
  > Thanks,
  > 
  > Daniel



  

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]