HoboKa

Not cool bro panel.

108 posts in this topic

In my submits, I usually have a nice writeup about my intentions and choices for the track as well as my inspiration. Not sure if they take it into account, I just do it because I like to add that bit of retrospect. I hardly ever mention the samples I use, and I wouldn't expect any leeway or extra credits based on that. Feel free to try it, but I seriously doubt your samples are going to get you a NO. IANAJ, but it's very likely more in how you used them as well as some other things combined that give you a NO or a NO (resubmit). Maybe focus on improving yourself with these other things in stead in stead of hoping for leniency because of sample choice?

Anyway, we're sidestepping from the main discussion about judging, influx of new artists and whatnot. Maybe we should go back on said topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 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

I can't agree fully in this situation because this conversation is happening on a site that primarily remixes old-soundchip tunes and regularly features plenty of tracks that are retro throwbacks and bank on "nostalgia" to make up it. Tracks that don't feature higher-end samples or expert sequencing on older libraries wind up sounding like this unintentionally and can get NO'd. Do you not see this as then rejecting a track because of stated intentions and not whether or the track is in line with what the audience will enjoy and otherwise meets expectations? 

Quote

You probably _can_ do it with free samples and soundfonts

but you can't. There is this long-standing myth in music communities that shortcomings of samples, be they sound or missing articulations, can be overcome with skill. They cannot. You can still compose an excellent trailer track with free soundfonts, but you'll never get the sound quality.

EWQLSO can sound great with great sequencing to make up for its abysmal playability, but even then many aspects of it are (and always were) garbage compared to more recent offerings.

So if some noob is using the strings from Symphonic Orchestra because that's what they can afford, they must be held to a higher standard of skill to pass the panel then a different noob with CSS? 

If they get refused because they attempt a track that's beyond the scope of their tools, then that's their fault for overstepping some boundary, but Darkesword says we don't tell people to go out there and spend more money?

But your earlier posts insist this can all be avoided if the user with limited-capability samples just says something like "I was going for PS1 JRPG soundtracks" when the only real difference between that music and modern video game soundtracks is the increase in sound quality. If so, then whether that track will receive a favorable reaction from the judges comes down to what you say rather than what you've done.

I see this as hypocritical at worst, again because of my first point.

Share this post


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

In my submits, I usually have a nice writeup about my intentions and choices for the track as well as my inspiration. Not sure if they take it into account, I just do it because I like to add that bit of retrospect. I hardly ever mention the samples I use, and I wouldn't expect any leeway or extra credits based on that. Feel free to try it, but I seriously doubt your samples are going to get you a NO. IANAJ, but it's very likely more in how you used them as well as some other things combined that give you a NO or a NO (resubmit). Maybe focus on improving yourself with these other things in stead in stead of hoping for leniency because of sample choice?

Anyway, we're sidestepping from the main discussion about judging, influx of new artists and whatnot. Maybe we should go back on said topic.

Yeah I did kind of hijack that part, didn't I?  Right I'll repost it so it's fresh/relevent.

  • Make the panel faster.  (Heck maybe I'll try my hand at judge :D)
  • Scrutinize "Yes" votes a bit more thoroughly.   AKA: Make judge queue progress panel more visible and transparent (Jorito added)
  • There are indeed some valid criticisms toward OCR that don't necessarily stem from whiny-bitch, bitter rejects.  mew hew
  • Encourage people to have nice write-ups about their intentions and choices for their track and have the judges read and consider said write-ups; instead of ignoring them and casting them as garnish (not saying you guys DO that, but just as a caveat).
  • Re-evaluate the bar and see if some areas can be slackened ever so slightly.  Baby steps :D 

Anything else I missed?

 

Share this post


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

I can't agree fully in this situation because this conversation is happening on a site that primarily remixes old-soundchip tunes and regularly features plenty of tracks that are retro throwbacks and bank on "nostalgia" to make up it. Tracks that don't feature higher-end samples or expert sequencing on older libraries wind up sounding like this unintentionally and can get NO'd. Do you not see this as then rejecting a track because of stated intentions and not whether or the track is in line with what the audience will enjoy and otherwise meets expectations? 

but you can't. There is this long-standing myth in music communities that shortcomings of samples, be they sound or missing articulations, can be overcome with skill. They cannot. You can still compose an excellent trailer track with free soundfonts, but you'll never get the sound quality.

EWQLSO can sound great with great sequencing to make up for its abysmal playability, but even then many aspects of it are (and always were) garbage compared to more recent offerings.

So if some noob is using the strings from Symphonic Orchestra because that's what they can afford, they must be held to a higher standard of skill to pass the panel then a different noob with CSS? 

If they get refused because they attempt a track that's beyond the scope of their tools, then that's their fault for overstepping some boundary, but Darkesword says we don't tell people to go out there and spend more money?

But your earlier posts insist this can all be avoided if the user with limited-capability samples just says something like "I was going for PS1 JRPG soundtracks" when the only real difference between that music and modern video game soundtracks is the increase in sound quality. If so, then whether that track will receive a favorable reaction from the judges comes down to what you say rather than what you've done.

I see this as hypocritical at worst, again because of my first point.

I am a noob with Symphonic Orchestra. I did a trailer style track a few years back (http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR03226) and none of the judges nagged me about poor sample quality. Might be an incident, I don't know. I agree that it is incredibly hard to get good sound quality with free soundfonts (I know I can't, but I am also not stupid enough to try). My whole point is that, in stead of going "boohoo, they NO'ed me" and putting it all on the other party, also take a step back and try to look at yourself and your work objectively and see if the feedback has some merit in stead of feeling all agitated and offended about it. Anyway, let's just agree to disagree on this one.

14 minutes ago, HoboKa said:

Yeah I did kind of hijack that part, didn't I?  Right I'll repost it so it's fresh/relevent.

  • Make the panel faster.  (Heck maybe I'll try my hand at judge :D)
  • 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.  mew hew
  • Encourage people to have nice write-ups about their intentions and choices for their track and have the judges read and consider said write-ups; instead of ignoring them and casting them as garnish (not saying you guys DO that, but just as a caveat).
  • Re-evaluate the bar and see if some areas can be slackened ever so slightly.  Baby steps :D 
  • Read what AngelCityOutlaw has to say thoroughly because she (I'm assuming is a she** correct me if wrong) seems more coherent than me and has deeper insight into the inner workings of OCR - I'm much too emotional and have a hard time deciphering logic vs. emotion.  Sorry if that is too much blowing smoke up your ass there Angel, but it is what it is lol

Anything else I missed?

I assume that the "scrutinize YES votes more thoroughly" is about the incident with the Big Bad Koopa dubstep remix? I am not sure if it's something that has happened more often these past years to warrant such a step or if it was an incident that happened only once 6 (!) years ago.

Other than that, it seems a good list to talk about. A summary of bullet 3 would help. I would like to add a 'Make judge queue progress panel more visible and transparent' to it as well, myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the risk of pissing everybody off, the whole reason we're having this discussion is because people tend to take this place way too seriously.

I think that some of the more dedicated users and staff subconsciously (or not) see OCR as this bastion of quality VGM remixes and to enter its halls, one must claw their way to the top through rejection and feedback from the community until at last, you're "worthy" of the OCR name and you get that mixpost on their front page of everything and the integrity of the community depends on upholding this standard of quality. It kinda does feel that way when you get there at first.

In reality, most people just know this as that place with a bunch of cool VGM remixes on YouTube and torrents. You just managed to shape your project into something that more or less fits the philosophy of the site and the particular judges it went before liked it. If people like a track, that's great; if they don't, they'll just skip over it and check out the next one. 

Sure, there's got to be a limit on how lo-fi you can go, but all I'm saying is this site's site is still standing from approving "Koopa Dubstep" — it will still be standing if the track in the OP were Yes'd, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PS: The troll is ME, not you Angel - don't mistake me on that.  Love ya bro/sister???

9 hours ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

If they get refused because they attempt a track that's beyond the scope of their tools, then that's their fault for overstepping some boundary, but Darkesword says we don't tell people to go out there and spend more money?

But your earlier posts insist this can all be avoided if the user with limited-capability samples just says something like "I was going for PS1 JRPG soundtracks" when the only real difference between that music and modern video game soundtracks is the increase in sound quality. If so, then whether that track will receive a favorable reaction from the judges comes down to what you say rather than what you've done.

 

For some reason this reminds me of the 'Lootbox' system in Free-to-Play games

Suuuuure.  You can do as good as the other players if you put in the hours and time...but you can get ahead by buying this dandy, shiny LEWTS! 

OCR doesn't have a vested interest in adopting such a corporate strategy... ummm ... right??  Sorry for insinuating such a paranoid conspiracy theory.  But LOL, just think, Zircon, DjP and Co. have signed deals with VST developers/partners to encourage people to pay to win (AKA buy their shit!!!) - all them other scrubs who don't pay are cast aside and laughed at.  Because they are losers - thereby making them feel insecure and inclined to BUY DAT LOOT

But as a Reality Dose: DS pointed out that isn't really the case

And I can cooberate his good word, since we've seen other stuff being posted that isn't super-god-sound-library crap-cola.  This is going off the beaten path a-la "Not Cool Bro Panel" hence why I posted it here for some lol's.   Ahhh...I'm an asshole.  Sorry T_T

NOT INTO THE PIT IT BURNS.......very sneaky Mr. mystery <3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a good writeup and I think it frames things nicely from a listener's perspective too. Nowadays, VGM remixes and covers are a more common thing than they used to be, and I am not sure how listeners do perceive a song from OCR versus a track from, say, Materia Collective. Do they mind, do they care, or do they just like to listen to a nice remix and are they not too bothered with the remixing criteria OCR upholds? Production quality is a bit different IMO, because there is like a common lowest threshold if I am to judge it by e.g. Materia Collective or random (popular) VGM artists on Youtube.

Do I take OCR (too) seriously? Perhaps, but I also used it as a motivator to improve myself, and having this decent threshold helped stimulate me to do so. Maybe that's not for everybody because not everybody is as crazy as I am, but your point on listener perception is a valid one, because I also do this because there's other people besides myself who enjoy what I do.

I am not sure what the common issues with the current bar are. Maybe it would be interesting to have a look at the more recent NO'ed tracks and see what the common patterns are. Makes it also less anecdotal and personal if you go beyond just fussing about your own NO'ed track.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NVm - retracted - still relevant.  My bad.   Jorito that is a wicked-sick MGS remix.  And yes Angel, we do take this site too seriously lol.  But I run a competition here, so I kind of DO have a horse in this race still.  Much as I dislike playing devil's advocate too much.  Well, I'm at least not pissed off Angel.  I can't speak for the rest, but they're probably chill.

@Jorito I'm probably joining Materia Collective soon, assuming I get that invite.  I'll see if the bar there is any at all different - something to consider though.

I put the List in the OP post of postiness. 

EDIT

Jorito stated: "I am not sure what the common issues with the current bar are. Maybe it would be interesting to have a look at the more recent NO'ed tracks and see what the common patterns are. Makes it also less anecdotal and personal if you go beyond just fussing about your own NO'ed track."

Yeah, I do that quite often, but it's hard to get much context out of it, since they don't provide a link to the remix in question and I've got to manually ask the remixer out of hand and/or track down the mix within Workshop, provided it's even there.  Though it pains me to bring THAT subject up again, considering it already had a lengthy discussion.  Maybe it's worth putting into the list?  Yes.  Yes it is.  Talking to self.

 

So key things we'd like to have addressed

  • Make the panel faster.  (Heck maybe I'll try my hand at judge :D)
  • Scrutinize "Yes" votes a bit more thoroughly.   AKA: Make judge queue progress panel more visible and transparent (Jorito added)
  • There are indeed some valid criticisms toward OCR that don't necessarily stem from whiny-bitch, bitter rejects.  mew hew
  • Encourage people to have nice write-ups about their intentions and choices for their track and have the judges read and consider said write-ups; instead of ignoring them and casting them as garnish (not saying you guys DO that, but just as a caveat).
  • Re-evaluate the bar and see if some areas can be slackened ever so slightly.  Baby steps :D 
  • Reconsider putting links to the panel decision-page-thing in the event of a NO.

Anything else I missed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bustling with activity, on here. I'm not going to make as long a response, but I'll drop a few more thoughts in here on the more fresh items.

- The judgment process won't go faster with more judges. It sounds counter-intuitive, but the items where it takes time (split yes/no votes) take much longer when there are more people. Nine judges could have a track max out at nine votes (4/5 split), while in a crazy case thirteen judges could require thirteen votes (a 6/7 split!). If anything, judge replacement would be the route to go, but that is not something I'll discuss on a public forum. :)

- On artist intention, I'm going to be honest: I avoid reading them when possible. They're great to have, and wonderful for Dave's write-ups, but it's bad to have something other than the music itself influence a judge's evaluation. It's harsh, but if quality control was affected by what an artist said or the experience level of a submitter then it would bring down the quality of what was posted on OCR.

- On the topic of "If we told you it was supposed to be like a PS1 style track and not realistic orchestra" in a write-up, it shouldn't be relevant in theory (if the judges are any good at their job :P). Here's why: if you're writing something in the style of PS1 soundtracks, you'd have to really dedicate the arrangement (or part of the arrangement) to sounding like it was on a tracker with decent quality samples. If you make alterations in order to make the samples sound more realistic you've failed in making it a PS1 style arrangement, but if it's not realistic enough you also fail at making it sound like an actual performance. If you go for one thing rarely can you pass it off as another - the uncanny valley of "almost good enough" sounds worse than going all out in one direction or another. If you're not yet able to sound realistic with your tools, it's far better to sound stylistically fake with what you've got.

Jorito's motto of "If you don't have the tools then don't make that kind of music" is where I sit. Darkesword said we've posted tracks using free soundfont samples, and he's right - it's not impossible to get something posted with free samples. AngelCityOutlaw said the trailer style arrangement is impossible without major bucks invested in equipment, and he's absolutely right - if you try with free samples it will likely fall in that uncanny valley that'll make it just sound not right. No one is forcing anyone to make epic trailor music without the proper tools; it's why you see so much synth music from me personally and relatively little orchestral or metal music, even though I'm an orchestra lover and a bit of a metal head.

- On putting in links on the judges decisions, it's a matter of privacy; it's better for the judges to remove information and let the artist decide for themselves if they want to make it public than it is to assume they want to have everyone hear their rejection and cause uproar when someone DIDN'T want that. There is a cool workaround, though, that I used for some time before getting posted (and will continue to do so in the future): if you specify that you want the link to remain upon rejection, OCR will let the link remain.

For example: This old chestnut.

I would in fact love to see more people do this, since it certainly would be helpful.

Keepin' myself involved in this thread, go me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Gario said:

Bustling with activity, on here. I'm not going to make as long a response, but I'll drop a few more thoughts in here on the more fresh items.

- The judgment process won't go faster with more judges. It sounds counter-intuitive, but the items where it takes time (split yes/no votes) take much longer when there are more people. Nine judges could have a track max out at nine votes (4/5 split), while in a crazy case thirteen judges could require thirteen votes (a 6/7 split!). If anything, judge replacement would be the route to go, but that is not something I'll discuss on a public forum. :)

- On artist intention, I'm going to be honest: I avoid reading them when possible. They're great to have, and wonderful for Dave's write-ups, but it's bad to have something other than the music itself influence a judge's evaluation. It's harsh, but if quality control was affected by what an artist said or the experience level of a submitter then it would bring down the quality of what was posted on OCR.

- On the topic of "If we told you it was supposed to be like a PS1 style track and not realistic orchestra" in a write-up, it shouldn't be relevant in theory (if the judges are any good at their job :P). Here's why: if you're writing something in the style of PS1 soundtracks, you'd have to really dedicate the arrangement (or part of the arrangement) to sounding like it was on a tracker with decent quality samples. If you make alterations in order to make the samples sound more realistic you've failed in making it a PS1 style arrangement, but if it's not realistic enough you also fail at making it sound like an actual performance. If you go for one thing rarely can you pass it off as another - the uncanny valley of "almost good enough" sounds worse than going all out in one direction or another. If you're not yet able to sound realistic with your tools, it's far better to sound stylistically fake with what you've got.

Jorito's motto of "If you don't have the tools then don't make that kind of music" is where I sit. Darkesword said we've posted tracks using free soundfont samples, and he's right - it's not impossible to get something posted with free samples. AngelCityOutlaw said the trailer style arrangement is impossible without major bucks invested in equipment, and he's absolutely right - if you try with free samples it will likely fall in that uncanny valley that'll make it just sound not right. No one is forcing anyone to make epic trailor music without the proper tools; it's why you see so much synth music from me personally and relatively little orchestral or metal music, even though I'm an orchestra lover and a bit of a metal head.

- On putting in links on the judges decisions, it's a matter of privacy; it's better for the judges to remove information and let the artist decide for themselves if they want to make it public than it is to assume they want to have everyone hear their rejection and cause uproar when someone DIDN'T want that. There is a cool workaround, though, that I used for some time before getting posted (and will continue to do so in the future): if you specify that you want the link to remain upon rejection, OCR will let the link remain.

For example: This old chestnut.

I would in fact love to see more people do this, since it certainly would be helpful.

Keepin' myself involved in this thread, go me.

Poor Gario.  Am I smelling a bit of Stockholm Syndrome from you??  Do I need to come bail you out man?  This doesn't sound like the awesome guy I once knew ='(  ...Also, you shouldn't have to feel afraid to use symphonic/rock samples in this community; that actually makes me feel very sad.  Because in a way, you're telling me that you're willfully cutting off a small part of yourself just to please others.  That's kinda depressing =( 

*AHEM* Less emotional time: basically, the general consensus here is "It isn't a perfect system, but it's the best we've got" is pretty much what I'm reading into here.  

Point 1 was answered adequately and I lack the means to pursue that end further.

2 & 3 didn't sit nearly as well with me, but again, I don't have too much material or insight to add there, so I unfortunately have to skip them.  Not saying that they should be put away and forgotten, but there it is.  

But point #4... "stylistically fake" is the only option for those with poor tools eh?  That sounds very, very subjective... and lends itself to many inconsistencies.  But I think I get what you mean, seeing as my BoF2 Deathevn remix passed and my "fake sounding" strings managed to escape the NO (Thanks for the YES, there btw :D).  But good god, I spent months...months on that.  Meanwhile, some super-decked-out asshole spends 4 days and maybe 2 more to finalize the mix and BAM he's in.  KAAHHHNNNN!!!!

Point #5 I guess that's one way to see it; but I say screw the privacy part - remixers are already putting themselves out there to be judged - there isn't much salt left to put on that wound; assuming they even feel wounded in the first place.  No, what I think needs to be done is that the community should be moderated on how they treat the remixer after said rejection when he/she goes to complain or ask questions; for example if some troll goes, "Hehehe, F***ing noob you deserved a NO, go kill yourself" - then OCR probably should know how to handle that situation.  I mean for christ's sake, I got bullied by the big 3 and no one said squat about that horseshit (granted, I did sort of give them lots of ammunition to use against me; still it was pretty sadistic).  I just find it hilarious that OCR is worried about keeping remixer's mixes a secret (unless otherwise stated) - when all this other crap was permitted to happen as people waxed their elitism complexes all over the place.  Ahhh...what delicious irony!  At least OCR is being consistent with its inconsistency - like my mental state!!  Hey, me and OCR got something in common there!  HAH!  Kill me now. 

 

 

Share this post


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

- On putting in links on the judges decisions, it's a matter of privacy; it's better for the judges to remove information and let the artist decide for themselves if they want to make it public than it is to assume they want to have everyone hear their rejection and cause uproar when someone DIDN'T want that. There is a cool workaround, though, that I used for some time before getting posted (and will continue to do so in the future): if you specify that you want the link to remain upon rejection, OCR will let the link remain.

For example: This old chestnut.

I would in fact love to see more people do this, since it certainly would be helpful.

I wouldn't mind to keep my link included for rejected links. Not at all! It's just that I didn't know/forgot to add it explicitly to every submit I do. I would love to have a setting in my profile somewhere (a checkbox that says "YES, leave links to my tracks in my submits even if they get rejected" so I can set it once and it can be used from there on. I am totally cool with sharing these links, heck, for every track I do, I usually have like 10 different work-in-progress versions before declaring it done, and I share those in-between versions sometimes for feedback and if it's interesting I wouldn't even mind sharing those to a bigger group.

On the sample quality thing: a few weeks back I did a pure chiptune track with samples from SAC PC (so lo-fi by design) and submitted that to the panel. Not sure how it will fare in the panel and it might be too far out for OCR, we'll see. But earlier this week I also stumbled upon a video on Youtube with pure Amiga MOD file music and thought it'd be interested to give that kind of lo-fi sound (just 4-8 sample channels, about 500kB of samples) a shot too. In both cases I'm pretty sure the intent will come across well without anyone having to read any added notes ;)

Share this post


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

Poor Gario.  Am I smelling a bit of Stockholm Syndrome from you??  Do I need to come bail you out man?  This doesn't sound like the awesome guy I once knew ='(  ...Also, you shouldn't have to feel afraid to use symphonic/rock samples in this community; that actually makes me feel very sad.  Because in a way, you're telling me that you're willfully cutting off a small part of yourself just to please others.  That's kinda depressing =(

[...]

But point #4... "stylistically fake" is the only option for those with poor tools eh?  That sounds very, very subjective... and lends itself to many inconsistencies.  But I think I get what you mean, seeing as my BoF2 Deathevn remix passed and my "fake sounding" strings managed to escape the NO (Thanks for the YES, there btw :D).  But good god, I spent months...months on that.  Meanwhile, some super-decked-out asshole spends 4 days and maybe 2 more to finalize the mix and BAM he's in.  KAAHHHNNNN!!!!

Point #5 I guess that's one way to see it; but I say screw the privacy part - remixers are already putting themselves out there to be judged - there isn't much salt left to put on that wound; assuming they even feel wounded in the first place.  No, what I think needs to be done is that the community should be moderated on how they treat the remixer after said rejection when he/she goes to complain or ask questions; for example if some troll goes, "Hehehe, F***ing noob you deserved a NO, go kill yourself" - then OCR probably should know how to handle that situation.  I mean for christ's sake, I got bullied by the big 3 and no one said squat about that horseshit (granted, I did sort of give them lots of ammunition to use against me; still it was pretty sadistic).  I just find it hilarious that OCR is worried about keeping remixer's mixes a secret (unless otherwise stated) - when all this other crap was permitted to happen as people waxed their elitism complexes all over the place.  Ahhh...what delicious irony!  At least OCR is being consistent with its inconsistency - like my mental state!!  Hey, me and OCR got something in common there!  HAH!  Kill me now. 

 

 

You might be going insane here. #RealityCheck

- FWIW, I'm not afraid to use orchestral instruments in my music. Just because I'm not totally confident in what I can do with them, and just because I don't usually write orchestral music, doesn't mean I should discourage myself from using those instruments. In fact, I use them anyway, for the sake of learning how to use them...

- Furthermore, if you have "poor tools" as you say, you don't have to shoot for "stylistically fake". That's not the point; the point is to do the best you can with what you have, meaning you can make something stylistically realistic with so-called "poor tools".

- Remixer's privacy is more important than you think... It's important to have the rejection up for people to see, so that the public can know that the Judges aren't just some black box group of people who put up mixposts and hide all the rejections. In fact, if they did that, aspiring composers won't have examples of possible critique to be on the lookout for in their own mixes. However, the Judges don't want to offend those who got NOed, so the least they can do is omit the link to the submission by default unless requested otherwise by the remixer him/herself. I DO think that's fair...

Share this post


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

...Also, you shouldn't have to feel afraid to use symphonic/rock samples in this community; that actually makes me feel very sad.  Because in a way, you're telling me that you're willfully cutting off a small part of yourself just to please others.  That's kinda depressing =( 

I don't write purely symphonic/orchestral music because my computer is so terrible that my program shuts down when I try (it's a very poor computer nowadays) and I don't play guitar well enough to make metal music. I'm not withholding these genres for other's sake - I made this choice because I recognize these current limits. Being unable to make certain music due to what you have access to is a part of life for us poor peoples.

Share this post


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

I don't write purely symphonic/orchestral music because my computer is so terrible that my program shuts down when I try (it's a very poor computer nowadays) and I don't play guitar well enough to make metal music. I'm not withholding these genres for other's sake - I made this choice because I recognize these current limits. Being unable to make certain music due to what you have access to is a part of life for us poor peoples.

Oh.  That is perfectly reasonable.  Shoulda framed it more-so that way.  Guess so.  EDIT) Still, methinks that OCR can lower the bar like 10%. 

 

 

1 hour ago, timaeus222 said:

You might be going insane here. #RealityCheck

- FWIW, I'm not afraid to use orchestral instruments in my music. Just because I'm not totally confident in what I can do with them, and just because I don't usually write orchestral music, doesn't mean I should discourage myself from using those instruments. In fact, I use them anyway, for the sake of learning how to use them...

- Furthermore, if you have "poor tools" as you say, you don't have to shoot for "stylistically fake". That's not the point; the point is to do the best you can with what you have, meaning you can make something stylistically realistic with so-called "poor tools".

- Remixer's privacy is more important than you think... It's important to have the rejection up for people to see, so that the public can know that the Judges aren't just some black box group of people who put up mixposts and hide all the rejections. In fact, if they did that, aspiring composers won't have examples of possible critique to be on the lookout for in their own mixes. However, the Judges don't want to offend those who got NOed, so the least they can do is omit the link to the submission by default unless requested otherwise by the remixer him/herself. I DO think that's fair...

Whoops, misunderstood the context there.  Sorry.  I do disagree with removing links though.  Considering the other shit that went down back in the day, that stuff is childsplay.  Most remixers, even me, have thick enough skin to allow the links to remain - an assumption I feel comfortable with making, at any rate :)

And yeah.  The bitterness is bleeding through a bit here, hence the crassness, but I AM TRYING MY BEST to be logical!

EDIT) removed the double post.  Sorry about that DS.

Also, henceforth I'm fine with OCR providing links to my NO's.  Didn't realize we had that option.  Color me informed!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to specify that in your submission email. We don’t keep track of blanket “always keep my links in” requests.

Also don’t post threads titled #trolololo. You’ve been here for years, you should know better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, DarkeSword said:

You have to specify that in your submission email. We don’t keep track of blanket “always keep my links in” requests.

Also don’t post threads titled #trolololo. You’ve been here for years, you should know better. 

But I have to signify that I'm intentionally being a twat somehow... :( But I guess I see your side.  I'll try and tone it down.  And okay on the former. 

Share this post


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

No one is forcing anyone to make epic trailor music without the proper tools; it's why you see so much synth music from me personally and relatively little orchestral or metal music, even though I'm an orchestra lover and a bit of a metal head.

Perhaps then, the community needs to make more of a preemptive strike on submissions?

I seem to recall Darkesword or maybe Dave saying a while back that despite decreased activity on OCR actual, there are still plenty of submissions.

Now, somebody stop me if I'm wrong, but most new people submitting just learned of this through the YouTube or social media platforms? Someone may hear that mix from 2009 that Hoboka linked to, or the "meh" strings in "Attack of The Drones" and then when their mix gets rejected on the basis of sequencing/realism, they're going to be a bit puzzled and I doubt that most people read judges decisions unless it's for their own stuff.

So, perhaps in workshop and in j00jment, if someone is going for an epic trailer tune with GPO and 90s Roland patches, instead of giving them feedback as to how to make that track sound like Thomas Bergersen (which they obviously won't be able to do) we should instead steer them in the direction of making a really killer 90s JRPG soundtrack?

You know, like turning a bad tattoo into a good one instead of removal and a complete do-over. 

fail-pikachu-tattoo-cover-up-lindsay-bak

Share this post


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

Perhaps then, the community needs to make more of a preemptive strike on submissions?

I seem to recall Darkesword or maybe Dave saying a while back that despite decreased activity on OCR actual, there are still plenty of submissions.

Now, somebody stop me if I'm wrong, but most new people submitting just learned of this through the YouTube or social media platforms? Someone may hear that mix from 2009 that Hoboka linked to, or the "meh" strings in "Attack of The Drones" and then when their mix gets rejected on the basis of sequencing/realism, they're going to be a bit puzzled and I doubt that most people read judges decisions unless it's for their own stuff.

So, perhaps in workshop and in j00jment, if someone is going for an epic trailer tune with GPO and 90s Roland patches, instead of giving them feedback as to how to make that track sound like Thomas Bergersen (which they obviously won't be able to do) we should instead steer them in the direction of making a really killer 90s JRPG soundtrack?

You know, like turning a bad tattoo into a good one instead of removal and a complete do-over. 

fail-pikachu-tattoo-cover-up-lindsay-bak

http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR01222

^ This song.  I deleted the link in previous post b/c I was unsure if it's still considered postable and thus my argument would've been on shaky ground.  Still, if this track ISN'T still postable quality, I say this is close to the metric I'd like to see for the bar. 

Nice tattoo btw.  It looks wayyy phat.  Dope. Whatever you young'uns say these days...back in my day..hurrr

Share this post


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

So, perhaps in workshop and in j00jment, if someone is going for an epic trailer tune with GPO and 90s Roland patches, instead of giving them feedback as to how to make that track sound like Thomas Bergersen (which they obviously won't be able to do) we should instead steer them in the direction of making a really killer 90s JRPG soundtrack?

You know, like turning a bad tattoo into a good one instead of removal and a complete do-over. 

I agree 100% on that. I personally try to avoid telling people to use better samples when eval'ing and judging and instead focus on how to use the sample they have to get the most out of it, but perhaps I can try harder on that front.

Share this post


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

I agree 100% on that. I personally try to avoid telling people to use better samples when eval'ing and judging and instead focus on how to use the sample they have to get the most out of it, but perhaps I can try harder on that front.

All this and lower the bar by 10% and I'm happy.  :):):)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bar is not a quantitative measurement. You can't "lower it by 10%."

We're generally happy with where the bar is. It's been in the same place for many, many years now. It's probably not going to change.

Share this post


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

The bar is not a quantitative measurement. You can't "lower it by 10%."

We're generally happy with where the bar is. It's been in the same place for many, many years now. It's probably not going to change.

Well the quantitative measurement part is correct, I'll concede :)

Share this post


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

I agree 100% on that. I personally try to avoid telling people to use better samples when eval'ing and judging and instead focus on how to use the sample they have to get the most out of it, but perhaps I can try harder on that front.

As can we all

9 hours ago, Gario said:

I don't write purely symphonic/orchestral music because my computer is so terrible that my program shuts down when I try (it's a very poor computer nowadays) and I don't play guitar well enough to make metal music. I'm not withholding these genres for other's sake - I made this choice because I recognize these current limits. Being unable to make certain music due to what you have access to is a part of life for us poor peoples.

I know what you mean.

I was a "Jack of all trades" type, but the problem was is that it's really expensive to get all the instruments or good virtual instruments to do a lot of different genres and there is a lot of esoteric knowledge involved in producing any kind of music. As such, I cheaped out on a lot of things and never spent enough time trying to get really good at anything in particular and I definitely paid for it...I'm also just never satisfied with my guitar sound and my passion for the instrument and metal music has died out, so I just play guitar for fun now and only occasionally feel like listening to rock.

I spent the last year and some change working on improving my skills with composing contrapuntally, orchestration, cinematic sound design and buying quality libraries. As of one month ago, I at last have a template that I'm really happy with and it can easily play anything I throw at it and it sounds great. 

I may not be able to compose every genre of music, but what I can do I have a lot of fun with and always feel inspired to compose more and while those VSTis may have made my wallet cry, it really is awesome not having to surrender so many musical ideas to the mercy of mediocre samples. 

Share this post


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

As can we all

I know what you mean.

I was a "Jack of all trades" type, but the problem was is that it's really expensive to get all the instruments or good virtual instruments to do a lot of different genres and there is a lot of esoteric knowledge involved in producing any kind of music. As such, I cheaped out on a lot of things and never spent enough time trying to get really good at anything in particular and I definitely paid for it...I'm also just never satisfied with my guitar sound and my passion for the instrument and metal music has died out, so I just play guitar for fun now and only occasionally feel like listening to rock.

I spent the last year and some change working on improving my skills with composing contrapuntally, orchestration, cinematic sound design and buying quality libraries. As of one month ago, I at last have a template that I'm really happy with and it can easily play anything I throw at it and it sounds great. 

I may not be able to compose every genre of music, but what I can do I have a lot of fun with and always feel inspired to compose more and while those VSTis may have made my wallet cry, it really is awesome not having to surrender so many musical ideas to the mercy of mediocre samples. 

One of these days I'm gonna have to break my wallet's heart too.  And at least this whinge post has revived some of the forum activity.  Too bad no one here is willing to come halfway.  edit) minus those who've PM'd me support and added said word herein. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/5/2017 at 1:40 PM, AngelCityOutlaw said:

So, perhaps in workshop and in j00jment, if someone is going for an epic trailer tune with GPO and 90s Roland patches, instead of giving them feedback as to how to make that track sound like Thomas Bergersen (which they obviously won't be able to do) we should instead steer them in the direction of making a really killer 90s JRPG soundtrack?

You know, like turning a bad tattoo into a good one instead of removal and a complete do-over.

I've already quoted this once, but I've got more thoughts on it after sitting on it for a day.

Yes, I do my best to avoid telling people to "get better samples" in their music, but one does need to be careful not to step on the intention of the artist, either. On the one hand it sucks to be told "You can't make it without forkin' the money!", but on the flip side people don't like being told "You can't do something with the tools you've got, but perhaps this different idea you didn't envision would work", either; most people don't like being told how to compose something. There does come a point where you do either need to pay or have some solid musician connections to achieve your artistic vision, unfortunately, so I'd be doing people no favors to pretend otherwise.

More or less just thinking aloud on here, but telling people what they should be composing is definitely overstepping my bounds, too, though in a different way than telling them they need to spend money does. Curious what a good compromise is for something like this - perhaps acknowledging you understand what they want to achieve, explain what would be necessary and give an alternative if the necessary method proves out of reach?

Food for thought.

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