I like "everything but country"

pic related?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tNKuygiRTE

>>70556694
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQs6RkzNlLY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4WiyxXpyZc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoz0gaSBkgY

>>70556708
slide guitar and piano were very good. it feels like every other part was created by someone who was only good at slide guitar and piano and sucked at everything else.

>>70556718
everything about this song was cheap sounding. though the instrumentation choice was okay i suppose.

File: artworks-000176775620-kr7914-t500x500.jpg (42KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 500x500px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KF0jtwzQyQ

>>70556729
i love this song. i'm listening to this too long now. i still like born to be wild better (especially the mastering on the easy rider soundtrack).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NR6XKFaPCxg

>>70556738
Drones are floating fedoras. i'm not as offended by autotune when it is used as shamelessly as it is in this song. still i hope i never hear this again.

>>70556794
uncreative and repetitive. still tolerable. glad it's only a little over 4 minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHpILmumvvc let's roll buddy

>>70556694
https://beastjesusmanila(.)bandcamp.com/album/eros-obfuscate
sorry, it's not available on youtube.

>>70556837
is this song nothing but choruses? i dislike all the environment sounds in this video and the inclusion of way too many credits at the end.

the music was generally well produced, but still forgettable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rns0NwVxcYA

>>70556896
flashes of erik satie? overuse of high pitches strings (mandolin?) - still enjoyed the dark overtones.

>>70556708
Akiko Yano is some good shit

https://youtu.be/c8qrwON1-zE

Intro is a lil long

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H39Q02EkNNA

>>70556906

had potential. sounded too much like acoustic instruments being played on a midi keyboard. the composer needs to make some friends who play real instruments.

File: 0008156826_10.jpg (154KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1200x1200px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkIn4bHp6Pc

>>70556940
instrumental part needed to be more distorted and non-sensical to match the vocal vibe.

good on xerxes for keeping this song to 80 seconds. the point was made and the song ended.

https://youtu.be/o5fGgi1W8WY

>>70557014
metallica's classical influences really come through in this one. i generally dig it.

middle section goes on a a minute or two too long.

fade out is the weakest way to end a song. so points are lost for that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYVR59Z4Lsk

>>70557022

good rhymes. too many rhymes.

too repetitive in the beat.

good writing... boring/uncreative instrumentally speaking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=112J5juWSGs

>>70557052

very nice. reminds me of song of cosiner's stuff. nice simple instrumentation and all well used. would have liked to hear a central them to gather around, but my favorite song so far.

>>70557131
oboe synth?

not enough variation in instruments, dynamics, articulation, or general feel.

had potential, but it never went anywhere cool.

>>70557175
what year is this?

overcompensating for lack of a deep voice by manipulating the pitch?

I enjoyed this... pretty good rapping skills too. but I feel like I'm listening to a 45 at 33 rpm.

>>70557205

effect of the saxes in right vs left mix was cool... for 20 seconds.

vocals need to be louder in the mix.

too much staccato... needed more variance in articulation.

where the fuck is bass?

File: love-songs-part-two-crop.jpg (139KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 500x500px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBJrGIMJfEI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEaEtNj5bTY

>>70557399

so much potential.

interesting chords, but lacked depth. horrible digi-bells sound was chosen.

honky tonk/chorus piano didn't work well at all.

song really redeemed itself around 4:35. very nice ending.

one of the top 5 songs in this thread

>>70557431
i assume this was posted as a joke. the accent works surprisingly well for the rapping verses.

singing is absolutely horrid.

>>70557324
it's from 95

https://youtu.be/m4z2czWxstQ

>>70557514
well basically yes.. but they actually make pretty good rap :D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlLyr1sKlaU

File: artworks-000137753860-wa3zhn-t500x500.jpg (73KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 500x500px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgggJFU7H4c

>>70557659
man the section at 2:10 really gave me flashbacks to Zappa.

electric guitar player really got screwed in the mix.

enjoyed the variation in beats between the beginning, middle, and end.

dislike the fact it fades out at the end.

>>70556849
>Drones are floating fedoras

the fuck are you talking about

>>70557672

if this wasn't made within 2 years of 1986, it should be burned and deleted from the internet entirely.

i suppose i found the inclusion of the high part of the vocals kinda charming at 2:23 onward.

this is shit.

>>70557514
but there is also some old finnish rock for you!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGCviZAdxeY

>>70557750
the video fucktard

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cozGZtMbdE0

>>70557912

too much god damn hiss... but good on the artist for recording real instruments. and a mostly well balance arrangement.

didn't build up into anything cool. needs more bass..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJxwPoL5uFk

>>70556694
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKp30C3MwVk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMoExtjpOHc

>>70558030
not available in your country.

>>70558058

i feel like you have posted multiple times. this is tryhard triphop.

>>70556694
>inb4 you loved it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C49NPmqEwK0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQ4llAw0Xlw

>>70558246
is this an arrangement of a children's song?

there isn't any depth to comment on.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4y5v8jE05Ng

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HleDk85ym2I

>>70558248
lots sonically missing from the instrumentation.

missing an enjoyable theme.

percussive sounds and effects were well done. the artist should focus on those and find someone else do the instrumental parts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=At5zStFtQEY

>>70558363

too ethnic to be appreciated anywhere but mexican restaurants.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqLtXE_54Q8

>>70558418

generally well done. well recorded. nice harmonies.

cool variations in tempo - especially given the lack of percussion.

too much focus on general effect and not enough on instrumental depth and melody.

>>70557844
i know ffs, but that's still one of the most retarded assessments of anything that i've ever read

stop thinking your opinions matter, because they're shit

>>70558463
really reminds of social studies - which is a good thing.

very limited frequency range.

>>70556694
https://youtu.be/8DtGUEwsb4s

>>70558789
interesting samples... too bad they didn't do anything noteworthy with them.

not bad necessarily, just not groovable or memorable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARjDT52rnzQ

>>70559028
were the voice parts recorded on an embedded laptop mic?

background works well as a background for just about anything. but it's wasted here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=entA8KBBCRw&ab_channel=GrigorijArlt

https://youtu.be/9D50AOG2lrQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvcXhuE_cIk
feat. mysterious music video that I can't find any info about online

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZD71JeX4Vk0

https://youtube.com/watch?v=5-FYC6Yo7J4

File: 1458016319014.gif (410KB, 221x196px) Image search: [Google]

410KB, 221x196px

>>70556694
>all that steel reserve
my stomach hurts just looking at that

>>70556694
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEUv00GV7zA

>>70556694

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dOHS2jsP_0

Neo Blues stuff.

>>70556694
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XW8yofuGao

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGYTk8OOiXk

>>70556694
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATRsO3wI_pg

>>70556694
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om7IBJf7-fc