term 2 assessment marksdoc7

BA Songwriting / BA Music Production Module: Songwriting 2 Academic Year: 13/14 Assessment: 1 (Small Arrangement)

All marks are provisional pending internal moderation and external examination [email protected]

Name: Daniel Cepeda-Gonzalez Discipline: Production Student No: 63455

Criteria Excellent Good Acceptable Needs Work Under Standard

Arrangement & Orchestration /

Musicality & Creativity /

Score Elements /

Presentation /

Tutor: Matt Calvert

Comments:

In terms of your concept for the arrangement, I’m not sure how successfully the strong funk-inspired parts (guitar and drums) work with the more legato, almost plaintive piano and string (mainly cello) parts, which incidentally could be varied even a little over the course of the track. Absence of bass guitar or similar to lock in with the drum groove is also a curious omission. Long cello notes aren’t doing much for that groove other than drag it down a bit. If you were to use disco as a reference, which took elements of funk and used similar instrumentation, you can see where string writing is often more dramatic, animated, melodic, and most importantly, features very rhythmic phrasing and space. Here, the strings generally are taking up a lot of space – it was very samey throughout. I don’t know if it was just that in the audio submission there was a sense that the vocal line, guitar riff and strings are all competing to be heard. Try to make space for the vocal, and add in what you think are the most essential parts. Looking at the violin and viola parts, at times it looks as if they were both written for a section of 2 instruments per part. This defeats the purpose of this assessment. A huge let-down is the ending – I’m baffled – does it repeat? Where does the guitar solo go? Where does the song end?!! The fact that you have simply written “Guitar Solo” with no indication of chord symbols, number of bars (or ANYTHING), and no representation on the audio track is pure laziness to meet the 2:00 minimum. All we have to help is that there is a Start Repeat Bar at bar 1. What would anyone reading this be thinking? The score however at least looks good. The drum part could be re-written neater with no semi-quaver rests in the main patterns. We hear a shaker from bar 3 but don’t see anything on the score? Mark: 50

BA Music Production Module: M&AP2 Academic Year: 13/14 Assessment: 1



Tutor: Ciaran Robinson

Mixing & Audio Production A1 WEIGHTING: 100%

Grade descriptors:

• Mix Aesthetic i.e. appropriateness of mixing approach vs. song structure and genre, overall mix quality, sonic fullness, balance of sonic image, 3D depth and stereo image etc.

• Creative Application; use of routing and stems (if applicable), side-chain techniques.

• Audio Manipulation e.g. sample replacement, time stretch • Audio Editing Techniques e.g. fades, • Data management e.g. file type, zip folder

Feedback: Intro guitar and the bass sounds very boomy. Vocals are too far back in the mix, and get lost amongst everything else. I quite like the thin EQ on the vocals, but it would have worked much better as an effect for just a small section of the song.

Overall Mark: 52

BA Music Production Module: MfMI1 Academic Year: 13/14 Assessment: 1



Tutor: Richard Lightman

Sound design and Foley for “Cut1” WEIGHTING: 100%

Feedback: 1 Effectiveness of the Sound Design and Foley in the two films. The Rescue: The ocean sound dominated this soundtrack and obscured any subtleties or story lines. The helicopter needed more attention given to the use of eq and panning to provide the impression of movement. The sfx started right at the front of the film and ‘banged in’. There should have been a 500ms gap after the picture starts to acclimatise the viewer to audio. Universe: This sound design was more effective than your work on the Rescue as you took a more musical approach. There were elements of the hit points that were not entirely addressed and although on the whole this track worked to support the feel of the film, more could have been achieved through cartooning some of the scenes. The blue balls worked well as did the explosion. It would have been good to provide a sonic signifier for the end title. 2 Production values applied to the work; evidence of skill in audio

manipulation, mixing and mastering. There is good evidence of manipulation of synthesis but more work is needed in addressing Foley. 3 Attention in detail to elements in the visual - hit points, fx, support of visual

narrative, overall timing. There is some attention to the detail but more concentration on the support of the narrative is required here. 4 Presentation of the media. The files were presented correctly and played out as required.

Overall Mark: 54

BA Songwriting / BA Music Production Module: Songwriting 2 Academic Year: 13/14 Assessment: 2 (Term 2 Song & Supporting Statement)


Name: Daniel Cepeda-Gonzalez

Discipline: Production Student No: 63455

Criteria Excellent Good Acceptable Needs Work Under Standard

Creative Approach /

Tonal Phrases /

Melodic Placement /

Harmonic and Melodic Interplay /

Structural Form, Variety & Resolution /

Rhythmic Structure /

Tutor: Becky Jones

Comments:

I enjoyed this. The vocal is too low in the mix to hear the vocal, but musically I found it pleasant for the most part. The arrangement could make more room for the vocal melody – it’s quite layered throughout.

Mark: 60

term 2 assessment marksdoc7

Documents