HoboKa

Not cool bro panel.

108 posts in this topic

2 hours ago, APZX said:

That there I feel brings into question a larger more overriding notion that is merely being glossed over here. You even mention a good example yourself, Trance versus Jazz. I'm a Trance head for the record. So, repetition in Trance is very much a thing, and is really a core tenet of the genre as a whole. However, if you go listen to Trance you'll find that it is actually less repetitive than you might think. The texture of the track is varied and modulated throughout. Someone who listens for chord changes and progressions is likely to be bored as a result of this. I think Trance is actually kind of a bad choice in this comparison and would instead choose Minimal as it is far more repetitious, or you could even throw Ambient in there. Even then those two genres have their own kind of movement to them that should be taken into consideration. To simply ignore this is missing a core principle of the genre at hand, and not looking at things from the appropriate perspective. Just my $0.02. 

I see what you mean, but you may be assuming here. Maybe you're not saying it directly towards me, but personally, I actually don't simply listen for chord changes and progressions (although those are two things I listen for), and I do listen for textural changes as a factor in deciding "is this too repetitive". Being a self-proclaimed sound design nerd, that is something I do all the time. So I'm aware that repetition in trance music, at least compositionally, is common (it's in the name!). But in comparing trance to jazz, what I'm saying is in the relative sense, i.e. that there is typically less compositional repetition (i.e. copy-paste of notes) in typical jazz, compared to typical trance. It's not to say that trance is "automatically boring, neeeext"; as music enthusiasts, we should be giving all genres a fair shake.

[I didn't want to pick something like ambient music, because I've written ambient music that isn't as repetitive as one might expect, and I didn't pick "minimal" music because (i) I don't think I've even heard of it, and (ii) now that I hear the genre name, it doesn't sound particularly descriptive (and thus I wouldn't choose that off the top of my head as a genre to classify something).]

-----

That clarification aside, yes, I do think the particular genre carries its own way of presenting structure, and that should be taken into account when evaluating, "is this too repetitive?". It shouldn't just be, "is this too repetitive for me?", but rather, "is this too repetitive for people who listen to that genre?". However, I do think that what you're saying is an ideal. In principle, it's what we would want to see on the Judges' panel, but I do think we should allow for those kinds of nitty gritty discussions to work themselves out (seeing as how each Judge may specialize in a given set of genres better than other genres, there will be debate at some point).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Gario said:

A fair point on that. For a while (beginning of this year, I think) it was being updated pretty regularly, but that's definitely slowed dow...

Holy shit, last updated in JUNE?! Jesus.

Okay, we should fix that like... right now. Sir_nutS was really on it for a while, but it seems to have stopped recently. I'm sure we'll update it soon. If not, I'll update it if necessary.

Speaking as a complete outsider (I have never submitted anything), that thread is the only window into the judging process and workflow that I'm aware of, and reading in that thread that one piece from 2015 and a number from 2016 haven't been evaluated yet is extremely disheartening when I think about considering a submission. I'm very happy to hear from Gario that that thread is not an accurate representation of the actual situation and that the backlog has and is being dealt with in a timely fashion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, APZX said:

That there I feel brings into question a larger more overriding notion that is merely being glossed over here. You even mention a good example yourself, Trance versus Jazz. I'm a Trance head for the record. So, repetition in Trance is very much a thing, and is really a core tenet of the genre as a whole. However, if you go listen to Trance you'll find that it is actually less repetitive than you might think. The texture of the track is varied and modulated throughout. Someone who listens for chord changes and progressions is likely to be bored as a result of this. I think Trance is actually kind of a bad choice in this comparison and would instead choose Minimal as it is far more repetitious, or you could even throw Ambient in there. Even then those two genres have their own kind of movement to them that should be taken into consideration. To simply ignore this is missing a core principle of the genre at hand, and not looking at things from the appropriate perspective. Just my $0.02. 

Aye, I remember that conversation we had.  After listening to a ton of trance songs, I agree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, timaeus222 said:

That clarification aside, yes, I do think the particular genre carries its own way of presenting structure, and that should be taken into account when evaluating, "is this too repetitive?". It shouldn't just be, "is this too repetitive for me?", but rather, "is this too repetitive for people who listen to that genre?". 

Stating for the record, genre is taken into consideration when evaluating a track. Repetitiveness in a trance track would be handled differently than repetitiveness in a j-pop remix. I'd rather make that point clear than leave it to speculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, timaeus222 said:

though the standards are actually fairly low compared to so-called "modern production standards", as I think I've mentioned a few times befor

To be fair, this also depends on the genre and its respective legacy that determines what the "standard" is.

I would absolutely say that there is plenty of electronic music on OCR that could easily pass for radio-quality, but that's because even a lot of stock synths and drum machines actually sound pretty damn good and great 3rd party sample packs, reverb and synths relevant to the genre aren't very expensive.

Cinematic and Orchestral music? Not as much, because the capability and quality of the samples, percussion, and sound design is much more important and varies tremendously depending on developer and just about all of the ones worth their salt run regular $399+ USD per instrument family and I think it's a fair assessment that most remixers here don't have that. But good luck getting that same type of sound with nothing more than Garritan or Note Performer.

IMO, the genre with the highest ceiling for "production quality" is rock/metal. I've listened to and played so much of that music that I've realized probably about 80% of even the "pro" stuff doesn't "sound" as good as most pop music does. It really does depend on good live performances on the best instruments you can get your hands on, recording and "dialing in" each instrument is an art unto itself, etc. 

I always thought I heard "good" rock production, but really only a few bands/producers and even fewer home musicians ever hit that top 20% of what's really possible, in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

Cinematic and Orchestral music? Not as much, because the capability and quality of the samples, percussion, and sound design is much more important and varies tremendously depending on developer and just about all of the ones worth their salt run regular $399+ USD per instrument family and I think it's a fair assessment that most remixers here don't have that. But good luck getting that same type of sound with nothing more than Garritan or Note Performer.

 

THIS ^

Point I was trying to get across earlier in this thread too.  I'm not gonna drop 1K for E/W and that shit.  In fact, getting professional studio-quality VSTs like Atmosphere/Spectrosonics and (reliable piano VSTs) is still out of my affordable range and I'd take a gander and say there's likely a ton of other people with simular issues.  I'll have to make the plunge someday, but jesus!  Can we at least lower the expectations of orchestral quality for the bar?  That is bloody insane.  There's only so much masking, layering and automation you can do and still discover that the "realism"  factor is a demerit in the evaluation process.  I mean c'mooooon that's just <insert expletive>.  HULK SMASH! 

On the orchestral side of BS-kill-myself-land: I own Garritan GPO 4, Philarhmonic 1, SampleTank 2/3, NI Factory, a torrent load of soundfonts, Session Horns (which is mostly crap with the single articulations), Sonatina Orchestra, Mini_Dizi, Mini_Erhu, Alchemy (comes with some orch stuff) and...I think that gets the most of it.  Even with this expansive library I feel underwhelmingly adaptable for the panel, let alone a professional studio hahaha.  In Dark Souls terms, this is like trying to fight the Lord of Cinders with mid-tier gear that isn't upgraded.  Sure you can dodge roll a ton and probably come out on top eventually, but hoooo boy are your balls gonna be singed by the end of it (and this is w/out Solaire "Praise The Sun-Man's" help... AKA Sunny D) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, timaeus222 said:

I see what you mean, but you may be assuming here. Maybe you're not saying it directly towards me

I was not directing it at you per se, you just happened to say it ;) Written language is a bit fickle and forums are sometimes kind of hard to clearly state what you want to say without sounding like a twat sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HoboKa said:

THIS ^

Point I was trying to get across earlier in this thread too.  I'm not gonna drop 1K for E/W and that shit.  In fact, getting professional studio-quality VSTs like Atmosphere/Spectrosonics and (reliable piano VSTs) is still out of my affordable range and I'd take a gander and say there's likely a ton of other people with simular issues.  I'll have to make the plunge someday, but jesus!  Can we at least lower the expectations of orchestral quality for the bar?  That is bloody insane.  There's only so much masking, layering and automation you can do and still discover that the "realism"  factor is a demerit in the evaluation process.  I mean c'mooooon that's just <insert expletive>.  HULK SMASH! 

On the orchestral side of BS-kill-myself-land: I own Garritan GPO 4, Philarhmonic 1, SampleTank 2/3, NI Factory, a torrent load of soundfonts, Session Horns (which is mostly crap with the single articulations), Sonatina Orchestra, Mini_Dizi, Mini_Erhu, Alchemy (comes with some orch stuff) and...I think that gets the most of it.  Even with this expansive library I feel underwhelmingly adaptable for the panel, let alone a professional studio hahaha.  In Dark Souls terms, this is like trying to fight the Lord of Cinders with mid-tier gear that isn't upgraded.  Sure you can dodge roll a ton and probably come out on top eventually, but hoooo boy are your balls gonna be singed by the end of it (and this is w/out Solaire "Praise The Sun-Man's" help... AKA Sunny D) 

Ever considered _not_ making _realistic_ orchestral stuff if you don't have the equipment to handle it? In Dark Souls it gets you killed, in OCR land you get NO'ed :P

Seriously, with the sample stuff you listed, you might get PS1 era level sounds, which can be good if you are doing this kind of retro vibe. And if you would do a track in that style, with those instruments, where clearly you choose it for stylistic purposes rather than try to be realistic, I don't think it would be a problem on the panel. But epic realistic orchestra? As you said, it's very hard with the stuff you listed, so why be a mad man about it and try anyway? Nobody is expecting you to buy expensive sample libs and software, just as much as nobody is telling you to make realistic orchestral music. Seems a bit like a self-inflicted pipe dream to me. I am also not gonna be like "all I have is a banana and a didgeridoo, but that will not stop me from making the most brütal metal known to man"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a part of music in general is making the most of what you have.  I have samples, I don't use them very much.  That's mainly because I don't write orchestral music anymore, and I'm not really interested in doing other things.  This is mainly because it's so frustrating that what I can produce with samples isn't as good as what I'm used to hearing performing in orchestras.  I hate sampled strings because for the most part soft note = weak mushy attack that can't be used in any context ever.  I'm primarily a jazz musician who loves big band stuff.  Samples are even worse for that.  So I'm going to do a lot of smaller stuff, ie horn only with electronic filters, or small horn ensembles plus rhythm section.  Of course I could go into electronic music and all those genres only using synth, but I'm not interested and can't be bothered to learn that beyond what I already know.  If I go into those genres I'm going to do it using the horn and effects.

Recently I submitted a track to a contest, an album, and the panel.  It got put through the panel in a week with a no, and upon reading the reviews, it got rejected because it was repetitive and the drums were plodding and too low quality (I disagree with the drums thing, I've heard much more robotic and plodding drums be accepted in the genre before in other places).  But then that opens up the idea that my taste and what sounds good to me is "wrong" since everybody but me seemed to complain about those everywhere I went.  Lost that contest, was somewhat lower than 15th place, my general reviews outside of OCR were basically "Um...nice...I guess...drums though?" Or "This was great!" without any suggestions as to what could improve. While everybody else in that contest got stuff like "Your mixing came a little short, although your use of (insert standard jazz instrument/cliche arranging technique) compensated for it well.  Maybe consider doing (insert new thing here) to liven up the thing."  It basically came out as "Yours was the best last place entry I've ever heard."

I was actually very happy with OCR's feedback because it was very specific in the problems I needed to fix to pass the panel.  I probably won't resubmit that track.  I got so excited that I made a track I thought was really high quality and a great statement of who I was as a musician.  It really was far from it and that excitement popped like a bubble when I was one of the few people who thought it was actually a good track.

Having two tracks that have been approved, and one that has been rejected, I think the panel is decently fair and when they do say now they always have justification for their answer.  OCR isn't the end of the road for music, but I think having these standards have made me more critical in my listening to my own work.  It's like the world in a way.  Everybody likes my stuff, suddenly I get a client who likes it differently.  Am I going to bitch and complain that the client that is paying me has bad taste or am I going to get the job done to satisfy the client?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Jorito said:

Ever considered _not_ making _realistic_ orchestral stuff if you don't have the equipment to handle it? In Dark Souls it gets you killed, in OCR land you get NO'ed :P

Seriously, with the sample stuff you listed, you might get PS1 era level sounds, which can be good if you are doing this kind of retro vibe. And if you would do a track in that style, with those instruments, where clearly you choose it for stylistic purposes rather than try to be realistic, I don't think it would be a problem on the panel. But epic realistic orchestra? As you said, it's very hard with the stuff you listed, so why be a mad man about it and try anyway? Nobody is expecting you to buy expensive sample libs and software, just as much as nobody is telling you to make realistic orchestral music. Seems a bit like a self-inflicted pipe dream to me. I am also not gonna be like "all I have is a banana and a didgeridoo, but that will not stop me from making the most brütal metal known to man"...

The issue that you then face though is a matter of deciding context wherever it suits you.

You can create an awesome composition with those PS1-era sounds, in an "epic orchestra" style, but obviously fail to achieve the actual sound of modern movies and games. If you say to the panel "well, it's supposed to sound like a PS1 game", that could be the difference between a YES and a NO, even if it you really did intend for it to sound like 2017 Harry Gregson-Williams and instead got 1994 Uematsu.

Those old samples may not sound real, but still sound good. Here's an example of Sibelius' Note Performer add-on.

 

I, for one, think that's great even if not ultra-real.

Which is why I say that the context here doesn't really matter. If it sounds like a PS1 game like the above, but it's still a great piece, most people will listen to that remix (of VGM) and think that it sounds like a video-game soundtrack. Again, I doubt this will turn most listeners off. I just don't think that it ever makes sense to reject a piece for not sounding "realistic" in a community based on remixing music that didn't sound real at all. 

If the only advice that a track can really be given is "it needs better samples", you're really just saying "you need to spend more money" and I don't see why anyone would do that for the sake of a hobby and getting YES'd by a panel of judges so you can get posted on a website.

Myself? It doesn't matter to me if OCR took a hardline "it must sound like the best" stance, but I also don't think there is any real harm accepting something on production so long as the samples aren't completely terrible and are in line with either modern video game soundtracks or retro throwbacks — not everyone can get the former, but the latter can be achieved by everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've posted so much music made with free and cheap samples. We don't ever really ask people to spend money to achieve a better sound.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DarkeSword said:

We've posted so much music made with free and cheap samples. We don't ever really ask people to spend money to achieve a better sound.

Quoted for truth...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DarkeSword said:

We've posted so much music made with free and cheap samples. We don't ever really ask people to spend money to achieve a better sound.

Right, but no one said you didn't.

The point Jorito raises is:

16 hours ago, Jorito said:

Ever considered _not_ making _realistic_ orchestral stuff if you don't have the equipment to handle it? In Dark Souls it gets you killed, in OCR land you get NO'ed

 

16 hours ago, Jorito said:

with the sample stuff you listed, you might get PS1 era level sounds, which can be good if you are doing this kind of retro vibe. And if you would do a track in that style, with those instruments, where clearly you choose it for stylistic purposes rather than try to be realistic, I don't think it would be a problem on the panel.

In my experience, what he's saying here is true.

A few years back, I had a remix rejected because the orchestral parts were made with admittedly crap samples (all I really had at the time). 

If I had said it was supposed to sound like a PS1 game, would the judges have been bothered by it? Perhaps not, and if not, then if a mix were to be rejected primarily on the basis of the sequencing sounding phony, then in many cases you're ostensibly telling the user that they need to invest in more capable sounds (realistic sequencing is pretty easy with most modern libraries) as attaining the necessary realism with what they currently have may not be possible. Meanwhile, in another mix stated to be in vain of old "orchestra" scores, noticeably fake sequencing would not be considered a problem because of the context.

My point, is that if retro-style tracks with intentionally phony sounds are acceptable and mixes like this are popular, then unintentionally phony sounding ones should be acceptable too if the piece is still good — I just don't see the harm in it, personally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

Right, but no one said you didn't.

The point Jorito raises is:

 

In my experience, what he's saying here is true.

A few years back, I had a remix rejected because the orchestral parts were made with admittedly crap samples (all I really had at the time). 

If I had said it was supposed to sound like a PS1 game, would the judges have been bothered by it? Perhaps not, and if not, then if a mix were to be rejected primarily on the basis of the sequencing sounding phony, then in many cases you're ostensibly telling the user that they need to invest in more capable sounds (realistic sequencing is pretty easy with most modern libraries) as attaining the necessary realism with what they currently have may not be possible. Meanwhile, in another mix stated to be in vain of old "orchestra" scores, noticeably fake sequencing would not be considered a problem because of the context.

My point, is that if retro-style tracks with intentionally phony sounds are acceptable and mixes like this are popular, then unintentionally phony sounding ones should be acceptable too if the piece is still good — I just don't see the harm in it, personally.

"Crap" samples, PS1-quality etc are one branch of the shitty tree that needs addressing.  But as for key samples...another bugbear of mine need's consideration too!  You're doing god's work AngelCityOutlaw :3

*ahem*

Some people have the ability to play essentially like robots (Usa is one example), because they are doing their best (and are actually achieving) perfection to such a degree it's practically unnoticeable.  Kind of a loose end, here but hopefully the next paragraph ties it off, so bear with me...

Stiff piano notes shouldn't be what kills a mix, especially after taking extreme measures to get the most out of the samples, sounding like there IS "human error" - it's because the sample itself isn't capable of altering or creating different articulations or noticeable velocity queues.   Maybe I'm better off not making any effort to humanize piano samples, and just alter the master-tempo to speed/slow them down.  Or not touch it up at all and just say "yeah, it's meant to sound PS1"   /emo time

Sorry for edits, tried to be more coherent. 

Appending another major thought/idea!!

What if the mixer in question TELLS the judges what sample libraries they are using, so that the judges can then lower or heighten expectations on what the soundquality should be, after putting aforementioned thing into consideration.  If the user is using East/West and its peers, then yeah, heighten it.  If they're using soundfonts... you get the gist :P and YES Darkesword, I did see your comment regarding that OCR has indeed passed lower quality stuff, but I don't see that rule hardly ever applying to ME, so I'm going by my anecdotals here.  So bear with me and try to see it from my PoV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HoboKa said:

What if the mixer in question TELLS the judges what sample libraries they are using, so that the judges can then lower or heighten expectations on what the soundquality should be, after putting aforementioned thing into consideration.  If the user is using East/West and its peers, then yeah, heighten it.  If they're using soundfonts... you get the gist :P and YES Darkesword, I did see your comment regarding that OCR has indeed passed lower quality stuff, but I don't see that rule hardly ever applying to ME, so I'm going by my anecdotals here.  So bear with me and try to see it from my PoV.

I feel this is a relevant example.

Not personally a fan of the arrangement myself; I like Alex's other remixes better, but every judge commented on or alluded to being impressed with Hollywood sound of it.

Fair enough. Alex has a pretty good setup worth thousands. I know he has Metropolis Ark, Olmpyus (?) choir, cinematic strings, lots of percussion libraries, has received some of Keep Forest's stuff like Evolution Atlantica for free, etc. So, we know he has no shortage of great sounds to work with.

I wonder if, in the last 3 - 5 years or so, there are any remixes in this trailer-music style that were made with something like cheap or free soundfonts and were approved? Perhaps it's not a totally fair challenge since I doubt they get a whole lot of trailer-music submissions, but the point stands.

Still, I have my doubts the panel would have passed this track if it were arranged with soundfonts or sibelius.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

I feel this is a relevant example.

Not personally a fan of the arrangement myself; I like Alex's other remixes better, but every judge commented on or alluded to being impressed with Hollywood sound of it.

Fair enough. Alex has a pretty good setup worth thousands. I know he has Metropolis Ark, Olmpyus (?) choir, cinematic strings, lots of percussion libraries, has received some of Keep Forest's stuff like Evolution Atlantica for free, etc. So, we know he has no shortage of great sounds to work with.

I wonder if, in the last 3 - 5 years or so, there are any remixes in this trailer-music style that were made with something like cheap or free soundfonts and were approved? Perhaps it's not a totally fair challenge since I doubt they get a whole lot of trailer-music submissions, but the point stands.

Still, I have my doubts the panel would have passed this track if it were arranged with soundfonts or sibelius.

Indeed.  Fully agree with you on that Angel.  You won't find something like this (the video URL stated below) being passed anymore and I think it's a shame.  Because there is a ton of focus on detail and little nuances that help give it that emotional, epic orchestral feel.  Like if it feels dated; I don't think it's worth throwing into the dustbin (which explains WHY this particular track is still not removed from OCR's official library).  Seems kinda counter-intuitive to the idea of appreciating VG music in my (exasperatingly) humble opinion.

 

So the biggest takeaway (and other stuff that I forget or was too anxious to mention earlier) here that every single OCR inner circle, cultist (sorry for the d-bag hyperboles here).  Is 1) make OCR more accessible to the filthy unwashed masses.  2) follow Gario's example and get that panel running faster.  3) Have someone else, whom DjP trusts very much to finalize the YES posts.  4) Stop trying to brush this under the rug like it isn't a serious issue - I've talked to many OCR veterans and former members and they've at LEAST echo'd with me on issues # 2, 3 and 4. 

Massive edits again.  I'm trying to bundle thoughts into something cohesive.  Bear with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, HoboKa said:

I'm trying to bundle thoughts into something cohesive

• "Lo-fi" mixes are either acceptable or they aren't, regardless of intention; if people on YouTube hate "fake" stuff, the fact that it's intentionally fake isn't going to change their minds.

• Make the panel faster / relay more up-to-date information 

• Scrutinize "YES" votes a bit more thoroughly.

• There are indeed some valid criticisms toward OCR that don't necessarily stem from whiny-bitch, bitter rejects.

I think that's it?

Like I say, doesn't affect me if things change or not, but I can support change regardless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

• "Lo-fi" mixes are either acceptable or they aren't, regardless of intention; if people on YouTube hate "fake" stuff, the fact that it's intentionally fake isn't going to change their minds.

• Make the panel faster / relay more up-to-date information 

• Scrutinize "YES" votes a bit more thoroughly.

• There are indeed some valid criticisms toward OCR that don't necessarily stem from whiny-bitch, bitter rejects.

I think that's it?

Like I say, doesn't affect me if things change or not, but I can support change regardless.

Thanks for throwing me under the bus.  The website's traffic is withering away and you're basically saying, "Yeah let's tow the line, but I won't complain if HoboKa's or other people's feedback do actually engender some meaningful change, but fuck HoboKa, he's a cunt."  That hurt quite a bit man.  It's shit like this that pretty much deflates any chance at conversations here.

EDIT) Deleted the absolute-ism butt-hurt statement there.  Probably reacted too hard to that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, HoboKa said:

Thanks for throwing me under the bus.  The website's traffic is withering away and you're basically saying, "Yeah let's tow the line, but I won't complain if HoboKa's or other people's feedback do actually engender some meaningful change, but fuck HoboKa, he's a cunt."  That hurt quite a bit man. 

How is this at all throwing you under any sort of bus?

It doesn't affect me because I don't submit stuff to OCR anymore; I can't really be emotionally invested in the debate. This conversation is literally the most activity I've had on OCR in years.

But, I can agree with the points that have been raised and think the community would benefit from such changes being implemented.

EDIT: Perhaps you mean the last part of my bullet points?

What I mean by that is that yeah...I've definitely seen valid points dismissed as the ravings of bitter rejects over the years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

How is this at all throwing you under any sort of bus?

It doesn't affect me because I don't submit stuff to OCR anymore; I can't really be emotionally invested in the debate. This conversation is literally the most activity I've had on OCR in years.

But, I can agree with the points that have been raised and think the community would benefit from such changes being implemented.

EDIT: Perhaps you mean the last part of my bullet points?

What I mean by that is that yeah...I've definitely seen valid points dismissed as the ravings of bitter rejects over the years. 

Yeah.  I guess I missed the context there.  And now I need to stop throwing MYSELF under the bus.  Statement retracted, we're still on talking terms.  :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, HoboKa said:

Yeah.  I guess I missed the context there.  Probably am waxing my inferiority complex too hard.  Sorry about that.

No worries. Like I said, my resting bitch face transposes to text and it causes people to go from zero to knifefight. 

I've learned to live with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AngelCityOutlaw said:

No worries. Like I said, my resting bitch face translates to text and it causes people to go from zero to knifefight. 

I've learned to live with it.

Same.  Understand how that goes.  All good. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

• "Lo-fi" mixes are either acceptable or they aren't, regardless of intention; if people on YouTube hate "fake" stuff, the fact that it's intentionally fake isn't going to change their minds.

• Make the panel faster / relay more up-to-date information 

• Scrutinize "YES" votes a bit more thoroughly.

• There are indeed some valid criticisms toward OCR that don't necessarily stem from whiny-bitch, bitter rejects.

I think that's it?

Like I say, doesn't affect me if things change or not, but I can support change regardless.

ALRIGHT so let's all ignore my myopic reaction and get this debate back on the rails.  AngelCityOutlaw is right.  This pretty much covers what I was trying to convey.  Please look into this DjP and other big-wigs :D ^^^^

Oh wait.  I disagree with point 1.

Was trying to say that... Depending on the Synth Library suite, scale down the bar - or scale it up if it's obviously made by modern Studio-Quality VSTs etc.

So yeah.  These are all points worth investigating.  I cannot stress the importance enough to do so!  GET TO THE CHOPPA! *Arnold Schwarzenegger sounds*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

I feel this is a relevant example.

Not personally a fan of the arrangement myself; I like Alex's other remixes better, but every judge commented on or alluded to being impressed with Hollywood sound of it.

Fair enough. Alex has a pretty good setup worth thousands. I know he has Metropolis Ark, Olmpyus (?) choir, cinematic strings, lots of percussion libraries, has received some of Keep Forest's stuff like Evolution Atlantica for free, etc. So, we know he has no shortage of great sounds to work with.

I wonder if, in the last 3 - 5 years or so, there are any remixes in this trailer-music style that were made with something like cheap or free soundfonts and were approved? Perhaps it's not a totally fair challenge since I doubt they get a whole lot of trailer-music submissions, but the point stands.

Still, I have my doubts the panel would have passed this track if it were arranged with soundfonts or sibelius.

Just wanted to point out that if you want to do a trailer-style track, that goes with certain expectations from both listeners (and hence staff). With regards to sounds used, structure, arrangement and whatnot. Since any trailer music you hear tries to be pretty realistic, your track would stand out like a sore thumb when you use soundfonts or sibelius and don't try to achieve a similar realistic sound. You probably _can_ do it with free samples and soundfonts, but it means you need to work a lot harder on it and more skill than the out-of-the-box experience you get with current sample libs. Again, the right tools for the right job. If you don't have the tools, ask yourself really hard if you can do a good job. Maybe you should pick another style/genre that works better with what you have.

Yes, I am not a fan of people complaining they got rejected because they made a poor genre choice up front and couldn't get it to work and meet general expectations. Now, maybe I should go find my poorest PS1 level samples and try to make a PS1 style track and submit it to see if my assumption is actually valid :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jorito said:

Just wanted to point out that if you want to do a trailer-style track, that goes with certain expectations from both listeners (and hence staff). With regards to sounds used, structure, arrangement and whatnot. Since any trailer music you hear tries to be pretty realistic, your track would stand out like a sore thumb when you use soundfonts or sibelius and don't try to achieve a similar realistic sound. You probably _can_ do it with free samples and soundfonts, but it means you need to work a lot harder on it and more skill than the out-of-the-box experience you get with current sample libs. Again, the right tools for the right job. If you don't have the tools, ask yourself really hard if you can do a good job. Maybe you should pick another style/genre that works better with what you have.

Yes, I am not a fan of people complaining they got rejected because they made a poor genre choice up front and couldn't get it to work and meet general expectations. Now, maybe I should go find my poorest PS1 level samples and try to make a PS1 style track and submit it to see if my assumption is actually valid :P

Yeah, I guess stating INTENTION first would help.  But it's also wise to state what the samples used were too.  Might and/or should grant some leeway.  Within reason, at least.  Like more than what's granted now - even a 10% difference is a difference I'd relish.  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now