My Goodness you have improved as a writer and 'recorder'....a very interesting voice. Well put together and nicely engineered!

Is this a hit? Almost!

Some of the groupings of words are what we call in the business 'lumpy'...in other words they 'stick out' among all the lovely flowing synonistic, gorgeous, boy/girl, girl/boy conversational words....you have the art of the smooth 'don't notice the words' but notice the odd 'great phrase'...which is the art of Hit lyric writing...get a copy of 'From the Heart' by Another Level...probably the greatest example of this! [it's on the Notting Hill compilation]

The phrase 'From the Heart' is so gorgeous....and they repeat it and repeat it! There is no 'noticeable' repetitive phrase in 'For Your Love'.

In your track there is no phrase that sticks in your mind ten minutes after you listen to it for the first time. You have heard it a thousand times and have probably convinced yourself that there is. I have listened to it twice! That's the difference.

"Now I see your tender smile" is a very 'lumpy' phrase...because of the 'ta' of 'tender' ....it's the way it sits in the meter of the lyric...that may seem too technical...but if I was producing I wouldn't let that go by....

After all I have said to you? This is the sort of thing a top producer would pick up on. Yep...I'm listening again now...and the lyrics sound even more 'lumpy'.

The vocal arrangement isn't nearly complicated enough. Each track of harmony needs to be three tracked...in other words, four part harmony would be twelve tracks in all. Your harmonies are too simplistic and they are just straight harmonies with the lead vocal.....modern day vocal arrangement demands intertwining alternative lines [Destiny's Child?]. And they should crash in right from the first ten seconds....you saved the only bit of intertwining to the last chorus! TOO LATE!

Today, a good producer would have four separate vocal ideas intertwining in the last chorus. 'Survivor' has that at the moment. As do most top ten tracks. You have to make the track much busier...so it sounds 'produced', professional and glossy.

For instance, I am finishing off a 'Bachelors' track for Germany...it has two tracks of lead vocal...one single and one for two tracking when in harmony with the other voices, plus ad libs. Then five part intertwining lines from me..each tracked three times and treated with RSS to give two images of each voice, plus another set of my voices doing a different intertwining line...four part harmony/unison each three times...then six part girl vocal, each twice and treated with RSS.....how good is your arithmetic? Very quickly, I figure you will hear 81 vocals. It won't notice...but it adds that indefinable 'gloss' and the 'magic'. I call it 'making the track expensive sounding'. That's how 'Destiny's Child' get that mega expensive 'in yer face' vocal sound....

Esther, you are fast heading there....you are on the last furlong.

While on the vocals...the overall vocal sound is far too thin...stinks of an engineer's idea of reverb....a top producer would use at least three tracks of every voice plus RSS left right double imaging....CTF...'Compressed To F***'....that would sound almost 'dry' and would push the vocals out of the speakers and right up to your ears...YES?

That reverb treatment is so 'passe'. It just thins your voice and drags it back into the speakers.

The vocal neads to be much softer, wider, thicker...your voice would lend itself beautifully to a modern day treatment by a good producer.

You have got to start being aware that on a 'today' track you have to find, invent, acquire 'unheard' before sounds. Most of this is done by inventive producers, not by buying new equipment. A couple of good CD sample discs from 'Time and Space'...particularly the 'Vinylistic' series...would give an awesome flavour to your music. A Member sought my advice on buying a S950 Akai sampler on the Net...same one as I use, and Norman Cook....simple to use, quick and efficient...a great workhorse.

He finished up with the fully expanded S950 for £150....not a bad result.

Norman Cook works this way: he will grab six great 'in yer face' samples that just knock his ears off and then force himself to use them in a piece....a great technique and worth using...I do that a lot.

Finally....

When you listen to a track for the first time you have got to be left with the feeling that it has brought you on a journey...in other words it started great, had great content and then had a twist toward the end and finished in such a way that you wanted to hear it again imediately [that is why they have repeat buttons on CD players]....

Ask your self the question: did my 'For your Love' do that? I would say it 'almost'.

Esther, you have come so far...your music has improved dramatically...you are now at the stage you desparately need a method of judging 'pre-demos' so that you only spend money on creating 'sure fire' hit potential tracks. You must get all those bits of crticism above sorted before you get to a studio...it's too late once you start putting a track down properly.

The production only shows off a good hit potential track....it doesn't make it!

Wonderful progress! I'm impressed! You have a very commercial softness and wideness to the bottom of your range which you should exploit more. Think TLC.

Boy/Girl bands

Record Companies and Production Companies are constantly searching for the next 'new thing'.

The 'band' idea has been around for yonks and I'm sure you have read the reasons why in my Serious Writers Guild writings. There is no reason whatever why a 'twosome' cannot break through...it's all about giving the public [though the record company] something new, innovative, never been done before, and then working like heck to promote it.

It then 'has to work'. If it doesn't work, and you believe in it, then work harder at it! You will have heard the phrase: "make your mind up very fast, change your mind very slow"

It's exactly the same with something you believe in and know to be what the public WANT.

I always fear writing a 'detailed' constructive crit of a recording and I don't do it very often...mainly because it is hard to bring over emotion and smiles in writing a crit. You are different...you don't get annoyed and you realise that I am here to help.

One line jumped out of your Email: "a reluctance on my part to be inventive for fear that I may go over the top."

There has never been an 'over the top' vocal arrangement yet! Trust me on that! Yet, most vocalists are terrified of being 'over the top'....Listen to that track, in the charts at the moment with Christine, Pink, Maya, Lil' ? 'Lady Mamalad'....that is 'wild'...so much going on vocally...about six different vocal ideas at once...is it over the top? I don't think do...and neither do the millions who are buying it!

And never listen to anyone who says: "It doesn't need it"

The biggest danger is too much instrumentation...but you have that 'nailed'. You understand that philosophy. Instruments fill up available sound energy space like mad...particularly bottom end energy. Thus the vocals get 'smaller' in perceived size....technical but correct! Vocals, on the other hand, are like a string section...the more strings, the fatter and wider the sound....similarly, vocal tracks do the same thing...make the vocal sound wide and fat.

You are correct about getting singers to do your work...I have found two things:

1) Always use 'pros'...amateur and professional does not mix. My motto is : "pay for everything, there are no free lunches in life."

2) Your own voice is best for your own song! With direction, obviously [Elton was originally a writer as was Neil Diamond, they became singers 'cos they couldn't get singers to interpret their songwriting as they wanted it].

A Pro will take direction, do what they are told..and get on with the job. An amateur will have every reason in the world for not getting it right PLUS a weak, un used voice...there is no substitute for a tough, worked, polished Pro voice...and it doesn't cost the earth! Amateurs will always have a party to go to, a boyfriend waiting and the inevitable first question: "what time will we be finished at?"

A top producer will realise quickly the interesting, attractive, good bits of your vocal talent and will draw that out of you...You cannot see those good points yourself...but he/she can! And very quickly. It saves studio time, gets a result that you didn't know was possible and mostly achieves a fifty times more commercial result than the performer ever could on their own [or with an engineer pretending to be a producer].

HOWEVER: Never waste your time and your valuable money on guys who 'claim' to be producers....ask the magic question: "How many Number Ones have you had?" The top guys will give you an accurate figure with no um's aw's, but's or maybe's.

The only variation of this is the current crop of great DJ's...but then the question is still valid...they should have white label success at very least. The added problem here is that 99% of those guys have a great feel for groove and modernity but ZILCH knowledge of putting the music together...and as for a vocal arrangement? They wouldn't have a clue.

I have used guys like that for mixing...and never had a good result!

Finally the "3 Days in the Studio" thing...

The VAT element helps guys who can take advantage of the VAT saving....the VAT proves to the I.R. that this is a legitimate business expense. The £650, thus becomes £650 plus 17.5% making it £763.75.

But I have never had one guy do it that way! Most guys pay in one lump from credit card and that is £600. The marvelous thing is that it is a genuine 'business expense' and therefore comes directly off your tax! So in reality it costs NOTHING!

All of 'The Serious Writers Guild' courses, books, manuals and bits and pieces are the same....come directly off tax...a legitimate business expense!

The 'Ultrafex' is one of those mystery units that no one knows anything about....I would think the reason they are not well known is for that fact...and thus they are available at a silly price. I had the older one and Sandy bought me the latest version for Christmas...probaly around £99, as you say...silly really.

They use a combination of phase shifting and extreme EQ. They also have a 'spatial' adjustment which pushes the sound out past the speakers , left and right in a remarkable way (even more pronounced than the RSS, which I use always for the vocal arrangement)

The newer Ultrafex addresses that problem I told you about of being too soft and round in the bottom...it has a 'tight bass' feature....I haven't done a serious mix since Christmas but I start week after next on a big project...so we'll see.

Of course, it can be used for recording onto hard disc etc. as well...in the way the 'boom box' used to be used.

The unique feature the Ultrafex has is the ability to define the stereo positioning in the spectrum, very precisely...as if by magic! You certainly know when it is switched on...also has a solo switch which allows you to hear exactly what you are adding to the track...all in all, a great bit of kit....and only gets sold by 'word of mouth'.

PS: I have always found that using their 'composer' range as an end of line sonic enhancer gives a very 'amateur' feel to the mix....impossible to stop that 'overload' thick sound.