Vid of Perspectives at Art City!
skip
Home » People » LV » prophetic dreams » Reviews

Reviews for "prophetic dreams"

fourstones
.
permalink   Mon, Mar 13, 2006 @ 5:46 PM
nix, I have to say I think you’re remixes are weak. All of them have serious key dissonance issues, timing issues, mix level issues.

Perhaps it would be better if you took a lot more time on each mix and really payed attention to these thing — and they are not small things.

If you doing these things “on purpose” then it’s possible you’re just in the wrong place since, if you listen to the other uploads (especially editors picks and highly rated user picks) then you’ll realize this is just isn’t that kind of site.
shagrugge
.
permalink   Mon, Mar 13, 2006 @ 6:10 PM
I think the mixes are rather unique. A break from the norm is good and musical rules can be broken…google Charles Ives or Bela Bartok for some classical composers who broke the rules of traditional harmony.

As long as you know what the rules are…you are certainly entitled to break them…musically speaking that is ;).

Additionally, this music reminds me a bit of some of Gurdo’s dissonant tracks. He may find some of nix’s stuff useful for “morphing”.

Nix’s tracks may not fit the mold of the ccmixter remix artist…but uniqueness is an asset IMHO.
gurdonark
.
permalink   Mon, Mar 13, 2006 @ 9:15 PM
The problem I have with this mix is that it tries to do too much.
You have a rich percussion and melody combination, that is pretty workable (a few solvable mismatch issues). You then add to that, though, all sorts of things that don’t fit the piece or even juxtapose against it well.

I’m fond of artistic juxtaposition, including the use of dissonance, but here the juxtaposition doesn’t work for me.

On the positive side, if one took out some of the mismatched samples,
then there’s the potential for a solid piece here. As it is, though, it comes off less as experimental and more as mismatched.

Shagrugge mentioned that this is the kind of piece I could “morph”
into other things, and I think that he’s correct in that. I think you’d probably be fun to collaborate with on a piece, because I like to morph disparate sounds.

But I must confess that I don’t think that this one works. To me, the problem is once again that you have some great ideas, but try to do too much. I’ve certainly committed that same sin often enough to perhaps have an enhanced familiarity with it.

I can hear that you’ve got a lot of ideas going on here. Their execution, though, gets hindered by trying to do too many ideas in each piece.

If you ever want to collaborate off-board on something odd, by the way, feel free to drop me a line.
duncan_beattie
.
permalink   Tue, Mar 14, 2006 @ 2:17 PM
hmm…
Not too much to say on this one, I can see what you are getting at and as an audio sketch it works, but dosen’t stand as a finished piece.
As far as the above argument (or rather polite debate) regarding dissonance; I have always been a believer in polytonality and in this piece it works to an extent but the number of disperate voices intrude over tonal relationships and it simply sounds devoid of intent. In short dissonance only works if it sounds intentional and I’m afraid that there are points, especially with the Krishinda Singing parts where it dosent.
However thanks for using sampling my strings, which I felt worked better on the last section of the track.

hmm…
more to say than I thought :p

dbt