Rozovian

Members
  • Content count

    5,147
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

About Rozovian

  • Rank
    Workshop Evaluator, Songs of Light and Darkness Director
  • Birthday 10/25/1985

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Finland

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://rozovian.wordpress.com/
  • AIM
    Rozovian

Converted

  • Biography
    Dude with beard. Makes music sometimes. Short on pronouns.
  • Real Name
    Ad G

Artist Settings

  • Collaboration Status
    2. Maybe; Depends on Circumstances
  • Software - Digital Audio Workstation (DAW)
    Logic
  • Software - Preferred Plugins/Libraries
    Pianoteq, Omnisphere, FM8
  • Composition & Production Skills
    Arrangement & Orchestration
    Synthesis & Sound Design
  1. The timing of the instrumentation and the performance in the intro don't seem quite lined up. You're occasionally not hitting the notes quite right in pitch either, 1:40 being a prime example of this. Consider re-recording some of the lines, or pitch correcting them artificially. I like the vocals. You've got a nice voice and I can't hear anything wrong with how it's recorded. You might want to pair the intensity of the instrumentation and the vocal performance better. 2:25 you hit the vocals with a performance much more intense than the instrumentation. The instruments are sweet and soft, which is not how your vocals sound. But hey, cool stuff, keep working on it.
  2. Interesting sound choices. Would be cool to hear this with a vocalist. I wouldn't fade in the bass. That seems like an odd choice. Maybe use a weaker bass and bring in the proper bass eg at 0:17. Alternatively, you can start it off with the bass groove properly loud. You already signal the start of the track proper with the break pre 0:17, so I can imagine either suggestion working.
  3. I like the instrumentation. This sounds like driving music. Cool stuff.
  4. 3. completed

    Haha, this is wonderful. I think you should make a whole track out of it. It's okay to make short tracks too. The shortest tracks on ocr are around 2 minutes long.
  5. 3. completed

    Excellent intro. I can hear the Kraid reference in there. The sound choices are largely excellent as well, though I'm a little disappointed at the simplicity of the 2:12 melody synth. I agree about the listener fatigue issues LoA brought up. You might want to have the break sooner in the track, drop out more of the rhythm elements and make use of the break for drama. I know I've played around with breaks in my mixes, especially my older ones (Braincooler might be the best example with its almost 1 minute long single bass note). See what might inspire you.
  6. @Gario, in his own words in a remix thread in the workshop: How horrible. It got me wondering what methods and procedures the judges use when judging. Do you use the resub tag, when, when not, why, why not? When do you say conditional and when do you say resub? What are your dealbreakers? What if there are random fart noises in the middle of an otherwise excellent track? Larry has his stopwatching and 50% standard for assessing source content. What else do you guys have? Similar to our meet the evaluators, can we have a meet the judges thread?
  7. Not an eval. I'll leave that to @Gario or @Wiesty. Just posting to drop you a suggestion: use reference tracks. Well mixed tracks in a similar style, from ocr or elsewhere. Figure out if yours is similar enough in frequency balance, loudness, proximity/distance, stereo balance, and everything else that matters. Also, it still sounds rather 80s. That's not a bad thing.
  8. Why is this so familiar... oh! This one! One of my recent favorites. And apparently that's the only Sonic Colors source remixed on the site. eval: Voice thing is super annoying. Personal pet peeve. Do what that feedback what you will. Mixing needs work. It's obvious from the first kick and snare appearance, but the other elements need work as well. Your kick is very exposed, and it stands out from the mix. The snare lacks impact because it's high-passed, and can't stand on its own. It's okay when it coincides with the kick, but on its own it's too weak. Getting those elements strong enough on their own is difficult. I had to abandon an idea for one my own current mixes because I couldn't get it right. Hopefully you'll have an easier time figuring it out. The hihat rhythms are rather loud, and there are times when they don't fit the pacing of the other elements. Like at 0:34. The hihat rhythm suggested something high-tempo. That's not what happened. But the hihats are still pretending that's what's going on. From 1:01 it's better, but I'd still look into alternative rhythms for them here. While on the subject of drum writing, the drum fill you use it not very good, and when you repeat it rather often it just makes it worse. Sound design is otherwise fairly good, the choice of sounds works well. It's eclectic, but that's not a problem. It draws from the source in that regard, and I like some of the instrument choices you've made here that set it apart from the source. That somewhat chiptune-y lead, for example. A bit excessive and inconsistent use of reverb and other effects. 1:29 marks a huge difference in sound. I get the change in dynamics, but the whole sound changes to something much drier than before. It's rather jarring. You might want to use a different set of drums for those parts, too. The arrangement seems to be a 1:1 copy of the source. Too conservative for ocr. There's some changes to the dynamics and sound which always happens when you adapt a source to your own instrumentation, and some differences in drum rhythms and obviously instrumentation, but I don't think that's enough. Study some posted remixes of sources you know well, and pick them apart, figure out what they did to make them different. Some will be largely unchanged in arrangement but get a completely different mood going, others will mix in original solos or play the original on an original groove, others still will disintegrate the original and put the pieces together in a completely different way. There are many ways to make the arrangement your own. And if you want to make it an OCReMix, that's what you have to do. The end cuts off abruptly. It shouldn't. It's a great practice track for mixing and sound design, and the end result is fairly pleasant to listen to. Nice work. There are issues, though, and the one that is the main obstacle to getting this posted on ocr is that the arrangement is essentially unchanged from the original. As a cover or source remake, it's fine. But that's not what ocr posts.
  9. eval: "I tried to sample the beat" - Yeah no. You can't sample anything from Square-Enix for something to be posted on ocr. We've got a deal with SE that, as I understand it, prohibits us from posting remixes with audio assets straight from their games. You'd have to recreate those elements yourself if you want this on ocr. There's some weird harmonies happening here. Either you've misheard which key the original is in and the clashes stem from your elements clashing with the sampled elements, or you need to read up on harmony and key and stuff. Listen more closely to find the elements that sound out of place, harmonically. I'm hearing clashes at 0:50, 1:02, and 2:29, and the parts that repeat those things. Learn to recognize and avoid this. The structure is really difficult to hear. I have no idea where in the arrangement I am at a given point. Two tricks I've found that helps with this is signalling and punctuating. Signalling is when you use something to indicate that a part is nearing its end, and the most obvious example is a long reverse cymbal in electronic music. Punctuation is when you end a part and start a new one with a big hit, such as a regular big cymbal, like a crash. There's a lot of ways to signal and punctuate. Even in my own meandering and messy arrangements, the parts are made distinct through signalling and punctuation. I'll reserve comment on source usage until after you've removed/replaced the directly sampled elements. This would get a NO, OVERRIDE currently. Sorry dude. Cool source. The arrangement might still work, provided it's cleaned up and more clear to the listener.
  10. eval: Starts off quite conservative. As far as arrangement goes, I'm gonna have to figure out if this is just a genre adaptation with new instruments or something more ocr-oriented in terms of arrangement. That's always difficult to tell. I think it's in the clear, but we won't know until it's been through the panel. The piano sounds mechanical and not well mixed into the track. The levels are fine, but you might want to look into stuff like EQ and reverb to give it its own place in the mix. Some of the synths are also rather mechanical, but given that they're synth it's less of an issue. Still an issue though. Some of the guitar melodies sound fake. I'm not too concerned about that, but hide it better, or embrace it and take advantage of it. I like the ending, or endings, but I wonder how intentional that whole thing is. If it's intentional, see if you can make that more obvious. If it isn't intentional... uh, make it? It's pretty cool. Sequencing and mixing issues, but other than that it sounds okay. Cool source, cool stuff.
  11. eval: The woodwind at 1:20 has a couple of notes that stand out, listen for the little jumps in intensity, up or down but especially up. You might want to clean up the velocities around there. You might want to fiddle a bit with the EQ around 2:15 and on, since the guitar arpeggio is brighter and more clear than the woodwind, making it unclear which element is in focus. The ears are drawn to the louder, brighter, clearer element, and when that seems to be one that's intended to be in the background, it gets confusing. I'm a little concerned about some resonant frequencies during the busy section in the second half, but I know my speaker setup hypes the highs a bit, so it might just be that. Test it out on a couple of different listening setups (eg pro audio monitors, phone, earphones, headphones, car, computer speakers) to see if that part needs some EQ trimming or if it's just my setup. There's also some rather prominent lows, even in the soft sections. I get that it's intentional, but it's a little loud at times, and I wonder how balanced it is. That's another reason to check it on multiple listening setups, and on different listening levels. I've realized with my own work that it can sound fine on one setup and not so fine on another. It's quite dynamic. This makes it an annoying track to listen to on low listening levels, but very rewarding to listen to on higher volume. Consider whether you want to raise the level of the softer sections. Maybe you should. Maybe it's fine. I can keep finding little annoyances to nitpick, and can tell you my personal preferences, but I don't think you need another eval on this. Any issues this still has are minor and/or subjective. And it's quite enjoyable regardless. Nice work.
  12. wip

    For some bizarre reason, Tindeck's music player doesn't load. Not in Safari, not in Firefox. Link directly to the file or use a different host, like box or dropbox.
  13. My ears can't do another eval right now. So this is a bump for the others, or so I can more easily find it.
  14. I'm gonna be lazy with my typing and just randomly copypaste whatever judges and posters in this thread have said that I think applies. eval: Pick 3-4 instruments that you want to be your focal point in your track and mix those together and then add the others as support around those. The track is really top heavy. I find the mix too bright. Sections like 1:50 get too lost in the noise and distortion (and are a bit resonant as well), and the lead basically disappears in the mix most of the time. The key to writing particularly atmospheric drum & bass is control over your reverb. And yes please fix the ending. (Specifically the pops at the very end. Make sure your tracks end cleanly. This means listening not just in your DAW, but to the audio render as well. I've been having weird distortions in my renders that don't appear in the DAW. While I've solved it for the track I was having it in, I'm still not sure exactly what caused it. You never know what the output sounds like until it's actually outputted. So do have a listen to your track once it's bounced to audio.) I do really like this track. Lively and lots of energy. You've got some lovely purposeful distortion/bitcrushing. This track has some really nice energy behind it, and it never lets up. The textures and synths you use work great against the drum and bass style you've got going, and I'm loving every bit of it. The drums are nice and meaty, too, so great work on the style and presentation. (/lazy copypaste) Nice sound design, nice adaptation, nice energy. You've made a track that makes me smile hearing it. So if you get this posted, you're in the same category as The Cynic Project as far as I'm concerned. But the mixing is still too bright and as a result ends up sounding so much more heavily compressed. Chill. Trade a dB or two of loudness for a good clean sound. Ease up on reverb to reduce clutter. Do some more cleaning work on it. I think this is still in resub territory. Needs a bit more work. But man, what a cool track this is. Nice work.
  15. 1. work-in-progress

    Given that you're looking to add vocals, an eval now would be incomplete. But with that in mind, here's an eval of what you've got so far. eval: The snare doesn't quite seem like the right fit for the sound. It stands out in a weird way. You might want to experiment with a few different drum sounds to find a better fit. I like the dynamics of the arrangement. Those little breaks are just great. The dynamics of the audio not so much. Careful with how you compress the output. Random vocal clip. Pet peeve of mine. But it also doesn't seem to fit. I get the idea of prefacing the dubstep breakdown with a voice clip. But the transition into the clip's part doesn't work imo. There's some weird chord stuff happening in the 2:37 part. I get that the source has some cool key changes and key-breaking chord sequences (and not always good ones, imo), but the ones in that part stand out as particularly awkward. The ones from 2:48 and on are cool though. I like the sound design, but there might be some odd overtone in one of the instruments used here that's adding to the chord troubles I'm hearing. See if you can identify something like that. The dubstep breakdowns are cool. I don't think I could do that any better myself. I'm looking forward to hearing them with vocals in there. They both end rather disappointingly, though. Transitions, dude. Do them well, and the whole track flows so much better. That applies to the changes to key as well, eg 1:09, 1:38, 2:37, 2:42, 3:23, 4:42. I'm wondering if transposing those parts stuff might help, or if the problem is best solved by other means. The sound design overall is good, with occasional exception I think will be swapped for vocals. But not all of them. There's that one mono creaking synth in the intro and ending (cool but doesn't fit, might be better if stereo spread). There's the backing to voice clips. And there's the snare, though by now I'm not finding nearly as distracting. And there's some mixing things that could be better, but it's difficult to pinpoint those with the placeholder saw in stead of the final vocals there. I can tell you the lead melody in the last chorus part is too loud. But I'd want to hear the vocals in there before going after any other parts. Source is handled creatively, and is dominant. It has issues, some bigger than others. It's pretty cool, and I really want to hear this with vocals. But as it's not yet ready for ocr, placeholder saw and all, I'll tell you it's not yet ready for ocr.