My new band (prog acoustic rock stoner flamenco...)

Twistad · #1 04-25-2009, 10:46 PM

Hey,

My band recently decided to change direction with our music, so far we've written 4 songs and recorded 2 of them. I'd really like some comments on what you people like or dislike about our sound. We're still figuring out what our "sound" is but it's definitely the project that I'm the most proud of so far.

We put our first song on myspace yesterday, and have another one coming soon.

This is not a final mix, It's just something we wanted to get done to book shows. I recorded this into a DI with my PBass, I also do backvocals but the ones on the track are all from the singer. Btw, the lyrics are in french.

www.myspace.com/shekele

Thanks a lot!

dannster · #2 04-25-2009, 11:23 PM

You guys are definitely accomplished musicians. Very tight!

That one "song" though has about 25 songs in it. It's all over the map sometimes too much reverb then none. Way too cluttered and schizophrenic. But then what the hell do I know...ha.

Twistad · #3 04-26-2009, 09:28 AM

Thanks for your comment, this is the first song we wrote so it may not be as focused as our other songs, and I know our piano player often thinks we put too many sections into our songs so I get your comment.

But then most of us have listened to prog extensively so we're used to songs with many sections. As I see it, we've got 4 parts: the D jewish indian sounding intro, the verses, the psychedelic bridge and the end with the harmonized voices.

Is it a matter that you think the sections don't fit together or is it because you think there are too many?

Sorry for all the questions, I'm just very interested of what people think of our music. Btw, any other comments from other people would be greatly appreciated.

thanks again!

Dosed_Mind · #4 04-26-2009, 02:34 PM

Impressions after a single listen:
I've must admit that i find the acoustic and "folksy" element of it to be bit of a clash with the progressive vibe you guys seem to be going for. Putting some distortion on the guitar would for example make the staccato stuff at around 1:07 a lot more powerfull. Likewise could some reverb and echo effects, along with perhaps some spacy organ/piano chords make the phychedelic part, well, more psychedelic, but i do realize that these things are probably an integral part of your sound. Other than that, the transitions between the sections could use some work, especially the one around 1:12. I dont really have any problems with the number of sections, it is prog afterall

Overall quite nice, some good musical ideas and nice bass playing

dannster · #5 04-26-2009, 03:26 PM

Having lots of sections to a song is fine. I mean hell, I'm a huge Wildhearts fan and they have some might long opus'.
But, I think the cohesive elements to the parts don't work. It like you are blending genres(great) but only by have a part in each element. I think a song should have the same element or theme running throughout with some variations or parts of course.

I don't know if that rambling makes sense but thats basically how i see it. Going off of the one song you have up.

Another thing is it doesn't seem to invite the audience to participate. I didn't hear a chorus. Or maybe I did I don't know.
It slightly felt like you are playing "at" your audience and not "for" or "with" your audience. Make sense? Only my opinion and I could be wrong.

Cheers!!

Twistad · #6 04-26-2009, 03:47 PM

Thanks for the comments, I'll definitely think about all of this and discuss it with the rest of my band.

dannster · #7 04-26-2009, 04:09 PM

Cool. I think if you can meld your styles and come up with a cohesive sound you'll be on to something excellent!

dannster · #8 04-26-2009, 04:58 PM

I was out mowing my lawn and thought of a better way to make the point I'm trying to get across.
Using the title as an example.

Think of how a Flamenco Player would play stoner rock.
Not, putting a flamenco part in a stoner rock song.
Or an Acoustic Rock band would play Prog.
Rather than putting a Prog part in an acoustic rock song.

I think that better illustrates my point.
I'm just playing devil's advocate.

Afalex1 · #9 04-27-2009, 07:15 AM

I agree with the "too many parts idea". There are a lot of great individual elements to the song and all the different genres melded together take the listener on a bit of an adventure. But, none of it is really tied together to make that adventure smooth.

A prog/metal/classical band called Opeth has some great examples of this. Of course I am not talking about the super heavy thrash stuff they do either.

Where is the chorus? I think a Chorus is needed to give the listener an anchor to go back to after the odd verses and bridge sections. It will give the song more of a foundation.

Just my .02. I am not a pro musician either, just another local bass player. Take the advice as you see fit.

Twistad · #10 04-27-2009, 08:32 AM

Yeah, I'm pretty familiar with Opeth, I used to listen to them a lot and they're definitely an influence in my head as far as having many sections to a song with abrupt changes.

We don't have a chorus per se in the sense that we repeat something many times in the songs, but the final section is to me the catchy part that people can sing along to. In a sense, everything that comes before is a big build-up to that part, so I'm not sure about the idea of adding a chorus. I might get another song in there soon, and I'd be interested in having more of your comments on it if you people want.

Thanks again

Dosed_Mind · #11 04-28-2009, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Think of how a Flamenco Player would play stoner rock.
Not, putting a flamenco part in a stoner rock song.
Or an Acoustic Rock band would play Prog.
Rather than putting a Prog part in an acoustic rock song.

Thats quite an interesting thought. But couldnt "putting a flamenco part in a stoner rock song" be characterized as "how a stoner rock band would play flamenco", and thus making the part an interpretation of the flamenco genre by the band? I dunno i could be rambling.
But i do however agree that putting a part of a different genre in a song, just because you can, is more often than not quite pointless/stupid.

dannster · #12 04-28-2009, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dosed_Mind

Thats quite an interesting thought. But couldnt "putting a flamenco part in a stoner rock song" be characterized as "how a stoner rock band would play flamenco", and thus making the part an interpretation of the flamenco genre by the band? I dunno i could be rambling.
But i do however agree that putting a part of a different genre in a song, just because you can, is more often than not quite pointless/stupid.

You kind of answered your own question...haha. But yeah, its a fine edge of definition. There is a difference though in the 2 trains of thought. Seemed to me like like everybody wanted there shot to shine in the song. Serving themselves rather than the song.

I'm definitely rambling....