AcId
4 Oct 2004, 00:28
5
Well, there is a lot I can say about this song. When I first listened to it, the beginning didn’t sound at all like Tubeletric. After listening to it once, I saw the connection, however, the intro definitely is too long. Once you got into the real song, it all ran together, because you used the same piano at the same volume for all of the differing tracks. I would think you would at least have the lead instrument loud enough to hear over the bass. The shakers also sounded a bit off-beat.
The song itself sounds great, but all of these problems together degrade it quite a bit. If you fixed up the various errors, I would give it somewhere around 8-9. As it is, I give it a 4.7
7
Introduction:
A bit of original piano playing in the begin, some Tubelectric thrown in, and an overall decent arrangement, even though it blurs all together after a short while.
Song Analysis:
The arrangement is very good, actually. I have absolutely nothing bad to say about this, but. . .
Sample Analysis:
The samples really hurt the song. As mentioned above, the selection of samples used blur together far too well. It’s very difficult to decipher what notes are being played at what time a lot of the time. . . The samples themselves are alright, though. Except the drums. I hate the drums.
Final Analysis:
If this had better samples — a wider variety, and such — then this could be a phenominal arrangement. Or at least pretty freaking sweet. But it’s just average, thanks to the blurred pianos, and the drums. . . Bummer.
Download this. It’s not a waste of time by any means.
Special Notice:
You just got a new high score from me. =P
0_o yum I LOV IT. i totally disagree with all u moo moos
(Unsupported rating (10) removal. ~Violet)
Lark
4 Oct 2004, 19:07
I agree with AcId, it’s a good song, but I would’ve used a larger variety of instruments so it didn’t all run together.
Music, by 
