Here's the original song, sound comes in at about 0:57.

Here's my remake attempt (not the best tbh).

What's missing, how would you guys approach this sound?

What do you guys know about Ethan's sound design?

edit: I thought I should maybe include a few more details. Here's a comparison between the same sections of each on a spectrum analyzer:


There are some areas in the upper mids (or highs?) that have more harmonic content in the original (right side). What could be the cause of this? Obviously the sound has somewhat of a different character, I'd like to hear what you guys think the sound's quality is based on.

How does it work?

I know it's only available to read online, but why? Can it be converted to pdf? Does it include videos? How is the book organized?

I already PM'd ninth parallel about this, but I wanna know what you guys think.

Right now the Finished Tracks and WIP sections have the most posts, but least amount of replies. It's pretty much just a bunch of people posting their tracks and waiting for replies. Not super conducive to discussion. Why don't we update the description here to make it so that every person who posts a track has to leave feedback for 2 or 3 others? That way the board doesn't get all saturated with dead posts, and people have an incentive to leave feedback. The person posting the track would link to their feedback as proof on their own post. Posts that don't get deleted. The r/edmproduction feedback threads on Reddit kinda work this way and the outcome is mostly positive.

I think it's a simple fix, as the forum layout stays the same. All that changes is the description on the introduction to that board.

---

I've seen the same things popping up frequently, so I've decided to update this post to provide a more thorough outline of what I'm suggesting:

---

Things wrong with the "Finished Tracks" and "WIPs" sections:

• More people posting tracks for feedback than people posting feedback
• Therefore, many posts with very little if any responses
• People posting tracks for review without contributing anywhere else in the forum (post count <10)
• Some feedback that people leave isn't exactly relevant to the needs of the person posting (e.g. getting feedback for mixing when you're really looking for advice on your sound design or composition)
  
• Some feedback isn't of very good quality (e.g. "sick track! I love that snare at 0:30!"), often because other people don't know exactly what to listen for or what to leave feedback on

What I'm suggesting

• People post feedback to at least 2 tracks before posting their own
• People link to said feedback on their own tracks
• On their post, people specify what they would like to receive feedback on
• The stickies on the "Finished Tracks" and "WIPs" sections be updated with these rules.
• No one leave feedback to those who don't follow the rules, and maybe report them to the mods so their posts get deleted

Why this could work:

• Would greatly reduce spam
• Would increase amount of feedback
• Could potentially increase quality of feedback

We've already established that there are more people posting music than feedback. We've also established that some people leave crappy feedback. If there are two feedback posts for every song post, then we'd have double the amount feedback than tracks in the section. That's a good thing.

Also, if people are required to leave feedback before asking for feedback, then we'd get way less one-timers who come to the forum to post their track and then leave. They don't contribute anything, and I think it's fair they don't receive feedback.

Now, a person posting a track could just leave shitty feedback on two tracks or not all and just claim they did, but the fact that they're required to link back to this feedback in a way prevents this. I think it makes sense to think that if you're going to ask for reviews and show the reviews you've left, you'd want to be linking to the kind of reviews you'd want to be getting. Kinda like how presenting your resume for getting a good job doesn't require you showing just that you have done something, but that you did that something and you did it well. It's not something I can say for certain, but I think it's a fair assumption.

Another issue is not knowing what to leave feedback on. There are so many qualities of a track to comment on, leaving feedback might be discouraging because of this. Having the person posting a track specify what they want to receive feedback on makes it a lot easier to leave good feedback. If a person wants feedback on their sound design and says so, then you know what to look out for. This doesn't necessarily mean that you could only leave feedback on their sound design, any feedback helps. It's just a whole lot easier to leave good feedback when you know what to look for.

Some other things that have come up:

Point Systems
I maintain that point systems are a bad idea. If something is automated it can be easily abused. For example, if we need 3 points to post a track of our own and get a point for every feedback post we make on that section, then we could easily rack up as many points as we want by leaving a bunch of "sick drop bro" types of feedback, that don't really contribute anything. Like I said before, having to link back to the feedback you left may encourage better feedback.

Also, I think that if we want to encourage the idea of community and mutual helpfulness that this forum was based on, then we should rely more on the community to uphold its values rather some fancy coding, no? That's why I'm trying my best to base to this suggestion around everyone helping each other and not a cold, automated system that can be easily abused.

But I don't know a whole lot about music or its technicalities, how can I leave good feedback?
I mentioned before that you don't have to stick to what the person is asking for when leaving feedback (though it helps). I've also said that:

In the last track I posted I asked the forum to get feedback on my sound design and arrangement, as well as how the track made them feel. If you don't have whole lot of experience with music, then at the very least you're a human with emotions. Emotional feedback is probably just as important as any technical feedback. As long as you're sincere and openly show that you're trying to give quality feedback, I don't think there should be a problem.

Hopefully I've explained myself thoroughly enough. I acknowledge that this system isn't perfect, but so far it's the best I've seen. I encourage criticism, but if you're going to say that something's bad, don't just leave it at that. Provide an alternative and explain why it's better. You're not contributing by just saying "oh that wouldn't work" and leaving it at that.

Here's an example of what an ideal post would look like.

Thanks

So Mat says that mastering isn't just throwing a couple of effects on the master channel. Now I'm asking, why not?  If mastering is just the final step in the process of getting a track to sound club/radio ready by processing a render of that track, why can't that just be done in the master bus of that track's project file?

I want to know what makes mastering an entire process in itself and not just slapping Maximus on the master bus. I still maintain that I could get something sounding nice and loud by just loading effects onto the master, but what would those effects be? What are things to take into consideration? What are the steps in what would be a considered a professional mastering job?