•  Hi, again, Rick,

    A thoroughly cheerful piece, energetic, buoyant, nice instrumentation - and I envy your natural talent for rhythm, the drumming was prominent without being intrusive and the balance altogether was fine. You claim you haven't had an academic musical training but you manage to achieve good everything - balance, structure, phasing, instrumentation and a very good bass line. Straight into a DAW? That's no small achievement. 

    Paul McCartney proved to me long ago that you don't need all the academic stuff to write good music.  I went to music college but ditched it and for a hobby think I'm better off for that.

    Easy and happy to listen to.

    Cheers, - Dane


    • Dane,

      Thanks for those nice words about this piece. It was driven for the most part by the bass line. Sometimes you just get a bass line in your head and let it take off on a journey.

      Admittedly I've over identified with McCartney my entire life. This has worked for and against me. It's probably a good thing that my brief pursuit at wanting to portray McCartney in a Beatles tribute band, never really panned out. I identify with his musical style so much that I might have started thinking I was really him! *har har*

      As it turns out, I'm just me... wort's and all. I bet McCartney has no interest in calculus. So take that Paul, you and that brilliant melodic brain of yours!

      I love the guy but "I gotta be meeee, just gotta be meeee..."

      See, I told you my singing sucks.. i.e. it's not exactly like McCartney, that means it sucks. :)


      • I dare say Mr McCartney can differentiate money against time to get the rate of acceleration. Doesn't need dy/dx for that.

        He was a genius in his own way. Even if you take his great achievement (for me) with Sgt Pepper, variegated as the songs were, all are musically as good as it gets. No problem being influenced by him, just as I am by Gershwin and Pete Rugolo for my harmonies.

This reply was deleted.