OverClocked ReMix...

DarkCecil13 · #1 10-02-2002, 03:08 AM

Starblaze (Evan Pattison) ask me to post his latest mix on the boards for him. I know there's a massive queue right now, but it'll just be sent it anyway.

http://remix.overclocked.org/detailr...hp?mixerid=266

EDIT: We reencoded it at 128-160vbr and it sounds good and is much smaller, Get it from this link:

For all those who voted no due to the filesize bitrate problems, please revote. Thank you. -Pro

Saunders · #2 10-03-2002, 02:55 AM

I'm really getting into Evan's stuff. He's making some good shit now.

And I'm too sick and tired to jabber about what makes this mix good, so I'm just gonna vote and be done with it.

Vote: Yes (but only if we get a lower bitrate version)

(Note: I didn't just cast this vote offhandedly, I really listened to the song and I think it's good, I'm just too tired to go into details now.)

(Note #2: Read this.)

Protricity · #3 10-03-2002, 07:50 PM

ok, third time around, Im gonna give this song a ......

NO

I still think its too simple. It sounds nice, but these kinds of songs need to be longer because they really arent THAT involved..
Im sure it will get enough yesses regardless, but that is my true feeling.
The ending should have been expanded.

Quote:

Originally Posted by old review

Alright, at the close of this nepotism issue, I will let this song be the last to bypass the queue. I will also revoke my decision and Give it a fair listen:

wow, 256k on s 80k server, so no streaming :(

Ok, here we go
First off, Id like to mention that this is over the limit by 0.03megs. No biggy right? ACTUALLY, its encoded at 256kbps. There is NO REASON to encode it at 256KBPS. This is a waste of webspace, time, HD space, and even Mp3 player space (yup :D)

So Im already at the big NO with that problem. The only way this is getting a yes is if it is reencoded at something more reasonable like 128-192kbps... WHOA.. its already over

Too short, man.
Symphony was way too simple aswell.

Im gonna have to give this a NO based on these problems alone, and I do recommend a more reasonable bitrate in the future.

-Pro

Old Post:
I know plenty of people who have remixes that impressed the hell out of me still waiting in queue. They have been waiting for some time now.

I clearly expressed my belief in being fair with songs and queues, so I am gonna give a No to any song that goes here directly without the afore mentioned reasons.

(If anyone has a problem with this, let them voice their opinion, but not here. We have a disussion board for that)

Saunders · #4 10-06-2002, 04:41 AM

Come on guys, what's going on with this one?
Are we just gonna let it sit for a while and then vote on it or what?

orkybash · #5 10-06-2002, 06:08 AM

Heh, not quite... we're gonna forget about it until Saunders reminds us. :D

I think the damage has been done with this remix, and we might as well vote on it. So I will.

This remix is very impressive. I'm very fond of this grand, sweeping style of orchestration that is pulled off so well here. One problem I had was the remix sounded kinda muted to my ears, but I think I can let a little EQ problems slide with so good an arrangement. Another problem is the ending - I think this could have developed into something much longer (that sweeping orchestration style usually doesn't want to be confined to 3 minutes!)

Edit - changed my vote after it was pointed out that the filesize was above the limit. Now, I know we just posted a song that was above the filesize limit, but that one broke it because of length (and, as I recall, it was encoded at 128 kbps). There is no reason why this needs to be so big - 192 usually suffices, and if it doesn't then a reasonable VBR rate will. Both will sound fine and be under the limit.

Edit 2 - OK, there's a lower bitrate version now. Changing vote yet again.

YES

Protricity · #6 10-07-2002, 11:05 PM

I edited and redid my decision on this song

/\
||
||
||
||
||
/||\

EDIT: hmm... it seems the tail fell off my awesome arrow... Nothing is going right these days...

Antonio Pizza · #7 10-08-2002, 08:45 PM

Stupid Windows! I had my response typed then IE crashed and I lost it!

Condensed version: I like it, but no. Prot's right, it's over the limit (even if it is only .03). Lower your bitrate and I'll say yes. No, I don't care that I'm being an anal asshole (redundancy unintended).

This is an edit. This vote has been changed to "Yes".

orkybash · #8 10-08-2002, 11:45 PM

*checks song*

You guys are right! This is over the limit, and for no good reason (you DON'T need a bitrate that high... if other remixers can settle for 192, so can you!)

Changed vote above

Protricity · #9 10-09-2002, 05:40 AM

New File:

For all those who voted no due to the filesize bitrate problems, please revote. Thank you. -Pro

*Edited by Rob: I lost this file unfortunately. But it should be fairly simple to recreate.