Originally Posted by Guitarhacker
Nicely done. Nothing wrong with the mix....it sounds good.
What I'd suggest, or maybe just something to think about, is condensing your projects down to under 4 minutes.... between 3 to 4 minutes. Without vocals, you really have to have interesting musical things going on to keep the listener interested. There's a lot of "space" in there that could be edited out to shorten it by half and still have a really nice instrumental. To me, the song really didn't start until about the 1:30 point when the really nice piano part started. You could have simply started with the piano after a very short.... 2 to 4 bars of intro....
Still good, but long.

Thanks for the response Guitarhacker, but your 2nd paragraph is really down to personal taste and artistic preference. Primarily I'm creating music for myself and then for close friends and family, plus I have nothing on sale, so I'm not after getting radio plays or whatever, so I'm generally not interested in keeping most if not everything short. I think it's Spotify sales persons who advise cutting out any creative intros and make everything start with a bang and keep it banging! I also prefer to listen to longer tracks, be they songs or instrumentals. Out of so far only 2 songs and over 30 instrumentals I've composed with BiaB, only 3 are under 4 minutes and 5:30ish is probably my average track time. Re your writing "Without vocals, you really have to have interesting musical things going on to keep the listener interested", firstly it really depends on the formula of a given piece - how it's structured and what the musician intends - so while in others of my shorter instrumentals there are a few solos (3-6), each one designed to build the dynamics (there are 4 in the much shorter "Aya Rocks" which you recently commented on), this piece and the equally long and simpler first version, just titled "Sophia Loves", are intended to slowly build as the track progresses. In "Sophia Loves" there's only one solo instrument, in this "V2" only 2, but shortening either piece by 25% or 33% - or even 50% - wouldn't make them better as the dynamics would be changed. Secondly, there are a few predominantly instrumental composers who post on this forum and while their tracks are mostly 3-4 minutes in length very often there's either only one key solo instrument or one which is given a break by a very short 2nd one somewhere in the middle; ie: they're not dynamically eventful, but I don't criticise them because they're how the composer intended them to be. Some are very atmospheric and some would make great soundtrack pieces, while others I just find flatline - though sometimes you just have to be in the right zone to appreciated them. As said, it ultimately comes down to personal artistic preference. I recall some time ago discussing this subject and regardless of genre it's all too easy to criticise a work based on personal preference. An example I gave before: if I was to create a piece like BS&T's "Blues Part II" I'm sure someone would write that I should have completely cut the opening organ solo. If I did something like Santana's live version of "Europa" from the "Moonflower" album someone would say I should have cut out the last 25% and let it fade out as it's too long by that point. I could give oodles of such possible examples. The above post is as I wrote in the blurb, "still my favourite instrumental for relaxed listening, particularly at the end of a playlist when I'm totally in the zone for it." It may not be as accomplished an arrangement and mix as my "Quan Yin" or the strings based "Deya Flows [BaRock]" (on my "Deya Flows" video), plus it's not as 'catchy' as many of my shorter pieces, but it's still my favourite to listen to when I'm in the zone for it. I wouldn't change anything about it at all.

Some favourite Waoist Adages:
#1: Play on the Way.
#13: Ask not for whom the flower blooms, it blooms for you.
#58: Bring consciousness to it.
#63: On the road to effortlessness, effort must be made.
#92: Be Love Now, the rest will come on its own.