Viperactive does this on purpose, there's a whole movement around process everything upstream and just have the final chain be a 0db ceiling hardclip

Congrats George your work inspires me!

Guido these are good and I'm gonna come in mean instead of nice. TRACK 1: First kick should have a shorter tail, rings out too far in the intro. Has 2.5 distinct intros and the second one is so much busier (as is the whole track) that it made the first intro misleading. It has a high level of complexity and doesn’t sit with the ideas, long, and then changes suddenly to a different thing, so I don't get time to figure out how to fit my ears and body into that complexity and work with it. Until you let the quieter drums run through the call and response at around 1:55 I can’t dance. Because whenever I start to, you change it on me. Too much use of drop-out. Way too much use of drop out, it interrupts me instead of making me go “oh shiiiii”. I do get that you went so far it's kind of the point of the track.. The fast house section is cool, unexpected but fit in so well I wondered if I failed to notice it was 4/floor before (it wasn't lol). The 3:39 is where it sounded like you ran out of ideas, but 3:49 breathes some life back, but the next at 4:00 is stale again Even though I know the central idea is the two ways the bass calls and responses, 0:37 and 1:00, I kind of don’t know what the central vibe is. It’s like, you have the call and response, and you’re just cycling the different. My favorite parts are 1:49 and 2:36. But neither let me keep dancing! In track 2, the 3:19 section is sick for the first half. I mean really sick. Track 1 is cleaner, hits better more interesting ideas. But track 2 is coherently, never too busy compositionally, and let’s me keep grooving, which makes it the winner. I would enjoy a simplified version of your music where you reduced the micro variations in the sections, and just played between my favorite parts. Because the good is really good and I'll be sure to keep checking out everything you post.

@Owen Palmer it's true. Both directions! Sometimes we reject some cool because it's new and only listened once or twice. Maybe if I listen 4 or 5 times I'll change my mind on some critiques. But those were my first thoughts.

I like it. It reminds me of how people mistake novelty for innovation, when raising the bar for excellence in an existing lane often takes considerable innovation. Playing an hour of same genre tracks only sucks if you sucked at it. Genre doesn't make something interesting. Juxtaposing genres isn't "keeping it fresh" any more than it's "killing the vibe". Either way 100% it depends. A friend of man played a "last set" after running a party for a few years and moving away. He was in the zone. Somehow, somehow, he was hot slamming in his best house tracks every 3 minutes trying to squeeze them all in at the end. It was so fucking good. Every song was genrewise THE SAME. But we were tuned in and he was turned up, crowd spontaneously cheering each new track because it was PERFECT. Brilliant selections. Meanwhile Floating Points, Skrillex, Todd Terje, Carl Craig... all might hit you with a sudden and complete genre switches at just the right moment, and it's glorious. But doing it because you're anxious your crowd might get bored because of the genre itself is unmedicated childhood ADHD thinking and I speak that truth from experience.