Gario

Members
  • Content count

    6,086
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    25

1 Follower

About Gario

  • Rank
    Judge
  • Birthday 06/17/1985

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Vagabond in the Southern California region

Artist Settings

  • Collaboration Status
    2. Maybe; Depends on Circumstances
  • Software - Digital Audio Workstation (DAW)
    Reason
  • Composition & Production Skills
    Arrangement & Orchestration
  • Instrumental & Vocal Skills (List)
    Piano
  • Instrumental & Vocal Skills (Other)
    Percussion

Contact Methods

  • Skype
    TheGreatGario
  • AIM
    TheGreatGario

Converted

  • Real Name
    Greg Nourse
  • Occupation
    Math teacher / Music Theorist / Construction Superviser / Electrical Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

4,529 profile views
  1. Whoopseedoodle is the best thing on the forums now, currently. Just saying.
  2. I don't see why MW considers this too liberal. 0:00 - 0:35 is a variation of the opening of Magus' theme, adding an arpeggio to the mix to keep it interesting. I can see where it's going from 0:35 - 1:04 (taking the melody, reharmonizing it, varying the rhythm, etc.), but that's definitely a more tenative connection to the source. The connection is stronger at the reprise at 2:29, since the lead punches through better at that point. Looking at the timestamps, this is how I would see it: 0:00 - 0:34 Magus (intro) 0:34 - 1:00 Magus (Section A, hard to hear though) 1:04 - 1:26 Magus (Section B ) 1:53 - 2:14 Lavos 2:28 - 2:38 Magus (Section A) 2:45 - 3:06 Magus (Section B ) For a 196s track we'd need roughly 98s of recognizable source, and I hear 108s (more like ~120s, if 0:34 - 1:00 is included) - enough source to get on OCR, in my book. The production does certainly have overcompression issues, though (especially where MW says - the bass and crash), and I feel the reverb between the instruments is a little inconsistently mixed (again, like the guitar in the beginning, like MW said). I'll also add that I feel the reverb is a bit too heavy on this one throughout. Lighten up on the reverb, and fix the overcompression and I'd be okay with this one. The arrangement is unconventional, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing - I thought it was cleverly arranged. NO
  3. I actually do like the arrangement on this one - the harmonizations are legitimately very interesting, and I feel the sax sample was handled well (with one or two exceptions). If the style was more RnB or hip hop where the fake string stabs make more sense I'd say they were alright, but for all intents and purposes this track should try to breath some more realism into its strings by giving them some more dynamics. The part writing for the instruments is pretty slick, though. As I said before, the sax is alright, but the slides on that sax are too extreme at 0:24 (and all parts similar). A slide into your note is fine, and you handle most of them like a champ, but honestly that wobble just sounds like it hits the wrong note. The section Larry hears as problematic (0:44) has to do with how precisely the slides line up - for one part it may make sense, but that may not apply to the backing instrument. When two instruments line up that perfectly it takes the realism down a notch. If I make two instruments accompany one another I more likely than not utilize two samplers or synths in order to be able to separate the envelopes, as necessary. I hear the copy pasta that Larry is mentioning, but I will note that there ARE faint backing elements that are different the second go around (like the xylophone coming in earlier, for example), but those differentiating elements are faint and nearly unnoticeable. We've heard the part that you play most prominently, either give some room in the mix for the elements that make it different come out more, or change up some of the copied elements to keep the listener interested. Love the bass work underneath, it does add a whole lot to the track as a whole. Yeah, lots to like about this, but the instrument realism and copy paste are noticeable issues with it. I did get a kick out of the harmonies and small changes you made from the source - lots of subtle love went into this. Hope to see the issues fixed up and have this resubmit at some point. NO
  4. I really like this arrangement, and I find it a shame that the FF3 project couldn't be completed on OCR. But I'll say it again, I REALLY like this arrangement.
  5. We are excite.
  6. May I add that I am actually interested in what you have in mind? Now you've got TheChargingRhino requesting Star Fox analyses, as well, so you have an audience.
  7. Haha, this is on the panel, as we speak. Here's my thoughts on it: EVAL-ish Batman first stage... Yeah, that's a great source. I'm surprised I haven't heard a straight metal arrangement of this yet, as it works wonders like this. Heavy, some real great licks and solos throughout and just does so many neat things with the source later, this track does an already great source justice. It does have a few areas that are rough around the edges. The bass is pretty oppressive in this, first and foremost. I can understand to a point, since it's a pretty iconic part of the source, but it really could've been mixed behind the lead guitar better than it is here. As it stands, it sonically gets in the way of the other instruments, such as the guitar (which sounds like it's being drown by the bass and drums). Looking at the waveform, there's also a bit of overcompression that occurs from time to time. It looks like there was a pass on the compressor at the end, as there's a lot of headroom, so you might consider releasing a version without that last pass on the compressor. It's loud enough, so there's really no need to compress it for volume, here The strings are not the best, but honestly they are not a huge focus at all in this. They rarely stand out, for better or worse; They could be better, but I don't think they bring down the track much at all. I really enjoy the arrangement, though; even before the soloing at 2:10, I'd argue it takes it in a pretty different direction from the source at 1:05. It slows it down, cuts it to half time and sounds more like a power ballade for Batman than the straight thrash the rest of the track presents. It's a really solid approach. The ending could've been better, but what's there isn't the worst. TL;DR: Mix the bass so it isn't nearly as oppressive, mix the guitar so it's a bit more prominent, tinker with the rest of your mix so that overcompression doesn't occur nearly as much and maybe see if you can give it a more definitive ending. It's a great arrangement, though, and there is a LOT going for it, but those mixing and production issues may hold it back a bit. It's a fairly strong arrangement, though, so it's not dead in the water, but fixing the production would make this soar through the panel.
  8. Oh, another note - reverb. Adding some sense of space for the horns will help considerably as far as making them more realistic. Considering how dry the live instruments are don't overdo it, but that can help a great deal glaze over the fact that they're samples if you sprinkle just enough reverb onto your brass.
  9. For what it's worth, I do like the changes that were applied; the chords fill the space well, and they flow rather well all things considered. I do have to say that this is very conservative in its use of the piano, though - that backing piano part follows the source pretty strictly, from what I can gather. The sound space is a little strange. Half of the piano sample is too dry and mechanical, and the other half (carrying the theme) is a little too wet. The choir is VERY wet, which makes the dry piano sound that much more out of place. If you're going to set up the sound as if it's being played in a particular space, be sure to make it consistent. Otherwise, it ends up sounding like the parts were all recorded in different rooms. The conservative nature of this, as well as the inconsistent reverb between instruments and mechanical instruments take this one below the bar. Interesting concept, though. NO
  10. I suppose a good question is what you'd like to know about it? The form of the track is pretty standard; Intro - AABBC : repeat. Chord structure for the A section is I-bIII-ivb-bVI-v6b, B is I-bIII-ivb-bVI-vb(-I) and the C section II#-v. There is an interesting tidbit for the A section in that the chords are mostly open, so whether they're major or minor is up for debate. Due to the harmonization of the B section, though, I argue that it's a major tonic with a good deal of primary mixture throughout (that's how you get the bIII-ivb-bVI-v6b combinations; in minor that'd just be III-iv-VI-v6), though I could see the argument that the B section opens up with a primary mixture I# chord instead of the rest of the track utilizing primary mixture. Intentional or not, that's ambiguous - there's a strong argument for both cases. There are no real cadences throughout the track, as there is never a motion V-I(or i); if you're a first year theory student you might find it interesting that a lot of modern music doesn't utilize the true V-I cadence (root on scale degree 5, raised 7th scale degree), instead opting for a v-I (lowered 7th) or bVII-I pseudo-cadence instead. The production is decent for the NES. It's no Follin track, but it does utilize nifty tricks like reverb to give it life. It's uses a staple KONAMI sound, which isn't surprising since ULTRA was a branch of Konami. I don't catch any particular themes of interest (like references to the Turtles theme, for example) - it just seems like a self-contained little tune. Well produced, but self contained. There's my theory contribution of 2017!
  11. EVAL Nah, Soundcloud works for here, though if you plan on submitting it either link the track to your e-mail or make the track downloadable in some form or another. I'm liking the style that you've got going here - Goat Ska works great for me. Definitely takes it to a different level, as far as tone goes, and I'm liking it. Great way to introduce yourself to OCR, that's for darn sure. Nice, solid guitar playing and tone, and the style is slick to boot. The brass sounds pretty fake and unbalanced, but once everything gets going it's less of an issue. I could go the easy route and say get some live players, but that's not always an option for people. You do get some life out of them by playing with the dynamics and articulations, but when they're exposed in the beginning the articulation makes them sound like they're honking. It doesn't sink the track, but it does sound strange. It's hard to give this anything other than a pass on the panel, though, even with the less human brass in the beginning. Welcome to OCR, by the way, and I'm hoping to see this get to the front page.
  12. Well, if all else fails there really isn't any harm in sending it off. Evals just give you an idea of how it'll do before you wait a few months to a year for the judges to get to it. At the very least the production quality was pretty good from what I heard - I just didn't compare to the source at all, so I can't make any promises there.
  13. 1. work-in-progress

    EVAL Ah, Undertale, a personal favorite soundtrack of mine. Let's see where you took it. I'm tasting some electronica, and there are some very nice vocal synths in there (wub wub WA wA), and you handle those excellently. The arrangement plays pretty straight, though - a little TOO straight. It leans on the 'Too Conservative' side of things, with the wubs being close to the only thing that isn't simply an enhancement of the source. The piano, when present, is incredibly mechanical. If you're going to incorporate instruments like that, dynamics can help a great deal in making it sound more human. For piano in particular it's a good idea to emulate the sustain as well, as that is something that makes the piano unique. As it stands, the piano is flat and less like a human played it and more like notes were plugged into a sampler. The sound design is a bit hit-or-miss on this one. I again commend your wubby and ya-ya synths (I forget the name of them off the top), but the overuse of saw and square throughout drags this down considerably. I don't have an issue with saws and squares personally (I mean, look at my music for crying out loud), but if you're going to use them it's important to utilize them in a manner that makes them interesting and flavorful, and not just to fill the space and hit the notes. See if there is anything that you can do with your sound design to make it dynamic and interesting, or take what you have and justify its use by really pushing what makes square and saw synths unique. The percussion is pretty bland, and overall is tough to hear in the mix. The bass simply hits the beat 95% of the time, and the snare is virtually impossible to hear (and if there is anything else going on outside the periodic crash I can't hear it). The drum track really needs more attention paid to it so that it doesn't sound like it's droning, and the mix needs to be overhauled to bring it to the front. If I saw this on the panel this is what I'd tell you to improve: drums, piano realism, sound design and make the arrangement a little less conservative. There are some good ideas to build off of, though, in some of your more complex synths and SFX, but it isn't there yet as far as submission goes. Best of luck!
  14. It's holding two of my favorite personal mixes hostage, too. I feel you so hard.
  15. ReMixer name: AdamSnyderBand Real Name: Adam Snyder Userid: 33761 Game arranged: Chrono Trigger Name of Arrangement: "Cape and a Cup of Coffee" Individual songs arranged: "Magus's Theme", "Lavos's Theme" Comments: Recorded this as a challenge, and my brother said I should upload it.