Rhythm Section for 1st Movement

  • Thread starter Thread starter Seafroggys
  • Start date Start date
Seafroggys

Seafroggys

Well-known member
So I'm being a bit decadent and making a rock opera. I have the rhythm section for the first movement done (drums, bass, rhythm guitar, organ, and synth). Obviously no melodic elements yet, but otherwise, how does it sound?

http://soundclick.com/share?songid=6690226
 
Wow, this is pretty ambitious (guess that goes without saying if you're aiming for a rock opera). Nice job so far. The bass is very busy but not necessarily in a bad way. There seemed to be a slight lurch forward in tempo around 30 secs in...maybe I just had a moment...

This will change drastically no matter what you layer on top of it, but it seems to be suitable backdrop for a variety of possibilities.

1st movement, huh? 1st of how many?
 
You caught that tempo change right. It goes from 81 to 86 bpm. Yes, it is deliberate (I made a tempo chart to play along to).

And this isn't the entire 1st movement...there is actually a minute before this, but I have it saved in another project file, and at this time is nothing but synth and bass, so its really not presentable. How many movements really depends on how much I sub-divide everything. The total length is around 38 minutes, so I'm gonna say about 12 movements in all.

Anyway, thank you for the comments. Anybody else?
 
Hard to judge without the melodic elements, but I'd say you're building a real nice foundation. Mixwise, I think maybe the guitars could be a little more upfront, considering how up front the drums are. BTW--the toms sound killer!

Why the slight tempo change? Seems that going from 81 to 86 might just big enough to be noticed, but not big enough to sound like a dramatic change. In other words, do you risk it sounding like a bug rather than a feature? I suppose that all depends on what's going on over the rhythm section anyway.

Great job--keep posting as you develop more of this ambitious project!
 
I have say, the tempo change sounds like a mistake. I would make it more pronounced.
The chord progression is confusing to me. If you're writing tonal music, there's only so many things you can do that "work". Maybe it would sound better with a melody over it, but I don't know where the progression is coming from or where it's going. I-ii-I is a strange progression (the very opening of the piece). Sorry I have so many negative comments. :(
That said, kudos for taking on an ambitious project. Big music is a challenge to write. It's easy to lose your focus on the overall sweep with so many "moments" that must be written. So, don't get too caught up in details (such as my nitpicking), but focus on the whole story you're telling and the melodic contour. Music is not "the notes"--any notes, however "wrong", can be played musically. ;)
 
Thanks for the comments.

For all your information, the ENTIRE thing was written about 4 years ago, so I know what its gonna sound like (at least in midi form). Its interesting some people's take on the slight tempo change, I have never had issues with it, it coincides with the key change and brings a little bit more forward momentum.

As for the rhythm guitars being so far back, its that way because I want them to be buried in the mix...not noticeable but definitely felt. The lead guitars and piano will sit on top of this, with vocals as well.
 
Sorry for the double bump. I re-recorded the rhythm guitar, but instead used my Fat Head II ribbon about a meter back. It sounded so much better that I just axed the SM57 recording; fills out the mids more, less "crunch" so it sits back in the mix...plus I didn't have to add reverb at all, which was nice.

Anyway, I want to thank VomitHatSteve on these forums for providing the rhythm guitar, he's doing great :)

The mix is now updated, with the new guitar recording and a few minor tweaks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top