Leaderboard

Ditto. Also, usually an artist has his/her own stylistic vision for a song, and that's totally ok. It's just not what OCR is looking for. It's been said several times throughout the thread but OCR is not the end-all of videogame remixes. In fact nowadays there are several ways to get your remixes out there regardless of stylistic vision or quality. Not that I want to send anybody away at all, but OCR has had a quality and stylistic definition for what is an OCRemix for years and if you want your remix to be an OCRemix it just has to abide by that. Regarding the bar, it hasn't changed in years and it's in a good place where it is, this is my opinion now and it was my opinion long before joining staff. As an example to why I believe so, I didn't know about the "big bad koopa dubstep" remix posted in the first page until today. That people reacted negatively to something they perceived was not up to OCR's quality is actually a great thing. That means that people expect quality from us, and having the "bar" where it is has created a standard that people expect when opening a link featuring an OCR song. Regarding judging speed/amount of judges, it's now a fact that more judges don't result on faster queue, on the contrary, when there has been a small team of people who have a good idea of where the bar sits, the queue moves faster. The queue has been faster than it's ever been in years now. Sadly, getting it faster is not as easy as saying it. This is voluntary work, that people do it out of love for what the site represents, but voluntary still, which means that we all have other responsibilities besides judging, and as such we can't possibly have all songs evaluated as soon as they hit our inbox. This will likely never happen on a system that has actual people reviewing the submitted work, nor here, nor anywhere else. The current pace of "1 week to 2 months" to get a mix evaluated is, in my opinion, as good as it can realistically get. Some remixes take longer because of split votes, because the judges are human and thus can't always agree on everything. This is also very unlikely to change. Scrutinizing YES votes even more than what we do now (we require 4 YES votes for a pass, only 3 for a NO) would make evaluation take even longer. Complete counter to what we want. I don't personally dismiss criticism on the process, and from what I see neither does the staff. Otherwise we wouldn't be here, reading this. On the whole PS1 era samples for a song etc, I think Gario summed up my views regarding this pretty well. Plus, we don't require anyone to go out of their way and get the most expensive libraries out there. Jorito already gave an example of his own, but I also can think of Rebecca Tripp, who I'm pretty sure doesn't have the most expensive libraries but manages to get on the front page quite consistently, with orchestral, folk and ambient remixes. Outside of the symphonic realm, you can make ocremixes with free stuff, this is a fact, as I have at least a couple remixes on the site made 100% with completely free tools. We really don't require perfect production at all. Regarding mixer's comments, like Gario I try to avoid them whenever possible because they get in the way of an unbiased evaluation. Same with the other judges' votes, I try to just scroll all the way down and read them after I've written at least my initial thoughts (but before hitting submit). Sometimes there's a good story behind the mix and I really appreciate that (this comes to mind) or the mixer's write up brings up some interesting points about how the track came to be or production techniques used, or the other judges have pointed out things that need more of my attention, etc. All good stuff, but whether the mixer spent a year manually crafting the congas out of cow leather or if his intention was to make the song sound like an authentic Adlib Soundcard track without actually using an Adlib Soundcard has no bearing on whether it meets the expectations of being an OCRemix or not. Not being an OCRemix doesn't automatically means it's bad or it's good, it's just not what OCR is looking for. On the transparency side I'd be fine with that once (if ever) the process gets more automated on the submission side. If at some point the process itself becomes something integrated properly with the website instead of being a manual process at all points (submission by email, separate upload, manual inboxing, manual creation of threads, etc.) At this point it's a bit too messy to open it up and have it make much sense, IMO. It'll honestly be a lot of clutter plus probably more work for a staff that's already pretty busy. Finally, I should really be working on the queue instead of writing a wall of text.

Way back, there was an FL-based compo with that specific format, i.e. only using what was out of the box. It resulted in one of my personal favorites here, Rellik's Zelda II mix, "Mirror and Transparent".

I'll provide my thoughts on this. I've been following the thread since it started, but as it concerns judging, I don't think my position as an evaluator (on vacation) is all that relevant. But I have some insight into what goes on in staff, and tend to get posted when I sub something. So here goes. *Make the panel faster - my current perception, without access to the judges' forum, is that things have slowed down significantly. The number of completed decisions threads dropped quite low during October, and the Currently in the Judging Process thread hasn't been updated since summer. For the record, I subbed something this summer, so the apparent state of things bugs me a bit for that reason too. I think the panel needs more judges. The biggest objection seems to concern breaking ties, but that can be resolved by just deciding that after 6 votes and still no majority, it'd get a formal "resub" response. When a resub isn't possible (live recording with live recording issues, lost project files etc), then it could be decided by a tiebreaker vote from djp. But the small active team vs. large team of less active people objection is valid too. I think that's a question of work ethic and perceived need for one's own effort, but that's a different conversation. *Scrutinize Yes votes - Not sure what can be done here. It would be nice to get some numbers on submissions vs. form rejections vs. NO vs. YES vs. direct posts, but that's numbers someone's gonna have to put together then. But that's not quite what's being asked for in this thread. *Valid criticisms - Yes there are. And you don't know what's being discussed (or what members of staff are trying to discuss) in staff forums and staff discord. And OCR has taught us all that criticism is useful. *Nice writeups - This has been addressed. For me, when I do an eval, I first want to listen to the remix (and source), and if I don't understand what's going on, why it sounds a particular way and have an issue with it, then I might look for an answer in the first post or elsewhere in the thread. I'm of the opinion that things have to _sound_ intentional. A bad speaker/lofi radio sound intro has to be obvious. A chiptune section can't just be a section with super-simple synthwork. Intent doesn't matter there, writeups don't matter - sound does. Although it would be nice to see more people say what DAW and instruments they used. Were the really cool strings in a mix from a big, expensive strings library, or some free soundfont? Is that guitar live or shreddage or a piano soundfont with distortion on it? *Lower the bar slightly - Nah. But I would like to see some a remix compo where people only use the instruments and effects that came with the DAW. That would show what the basic tools are actually capable of in the hands of experienced and skilled remixers, which would give the clueless newbs and strugglings forum veterans something to learn from. Better yet if these compo mixes are submitted and pass the bar, because then it's official - what's in the box is good enough. For that set of genres and sounds, at least. *Reconsider links in rejections - Not likely. Remixer privacy is an issue. There was recently a case of a remixer who was upset that his name was included in the rejection. I can understand where he's coming from. So when it comes to rejected mixes floating around, I'd rather mine didn't. But there's always the option of telling the panel to leave the link in. This could be added to the submission information on the Submit page. Alex, dude, chill. You've got a good conversation going here. Don't derail your own thread by rushing unfiltered thoughts into it.

Oh shoot, forgot to give some disclosure here: As far as this convo is concerned, I'm speaking strictly on when I do mod reviews and judgments, here, who's sole purpose is to direct people on how to get posted on OCR. I give other feedback on tracks that I listen to, as well, since often getting posted isn't the goal. Kind of a dick move to tell someone that they need better samples to get posted when they just wanted to show their stuff to people, or publish it elsewhere where such requirements don't exist. I don't want to give the wrong idea on here; if I'm not careful people will be scared to show me their stuff because they'll think I'm gonna look at it forever in the eyes of OCR standards, lol. Nope, I just critique like that when it's my job to do so. Might explain Hoboka's concern about me earlier, too.

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.

Yessir. Just gotta start poopin out remixes now

Frankly, it is kind of a crapshoot. It isn't like in mixing where you can make a very good mix just using the bundled with the DAW. However, with synths or samples you've unfortunately gotta spend $$$. It kind of sucks to say it, but it is the truth. I mean I don't do orchestral music because I find the libraries 1 - Too Big 2 - Too Expensive and 3 - Too complicated. And this is coming from a guy who loves modular synths with more knobs than you can throw a stick at. But that doesn't mean everyone should be all synths all the time. I enjoy listening to well crafted orchestral takes on songs, and I like using real strings from time to time myself, but then again I kind of obfuscate them in my tracks because I just want the hint of realism and their additional qualities rather than having them as my main focus. But I do have some quite nice soundfont pianos because there a couple of good ones that are free. The best probably being the Salamander Grand Piano. But I digress. If you recognize their intent then I do feel it is probably best to let them know that with their current tools they're unlikely to achieve what they want or are going for. This isn't really a disservice, but frankly a truth. Sure it is a bit cold, but what are you to do? I mean you don't have to come out and be a total downer when you say it. A lot about how you'd approach the situation is really just how you say it. At least that is what I've found.

Exactly Which is why I still say that the initial talking point is the most practical compromise that would result in a mixpost. Lo-fi tracks, regardless of intent, are either acceptable or not — full stop. The part I bolded of your quote is also good, IMO, but really is just a more constructive and polite way of saying "make it like this instead". All depends on how badly the person wants to be OCR-approved, I suppose.

IMO, networking is less about "who you know" and more about "who knows you". I can't be bothered to find it atm, but some years ago I saw a forum post written by Laura Shigihara (Plants Vs. Zombies composer) where she said that the trouble with networking is that it causes you to see people as a means to an end and most people can pick up on that. Meeting people means little to them; your work is what matters. So the takeaway from her post was essentially that word of mouth is more important than actually meeting people after a pretty short while. Every successful composer out there who is repeatedly scoring worthwhile games, films and TV shows doesn't actually have to go to every developer conference and stuff. What happens is that they meet enough people in local scenes so that everyone knows "he/she is the composer" and if they do a project and it (or at least the music) turns some heads, because those are the heads who may call them when they're looking for a composer for their project. Do well enough and maybe an agency who frequently works with big names in entertainment will pick you up. I learned it myself: I only had to attend nearby conferences and such a few times before all the regulars knew me as "the music guy" and if they're interested in having me do something, they'll call and if they like what I do they'll hopefully tell their friends. The same goes with referrals from other musicians and sound people. The lesson to be learned here is that networking is important for getting your foot in the door, but once you do...do the best fucking job you can, because it's important that people notice.

Despite the mad man rave you do here, I do have to admit that said remix ain't bad. Wasn't feeling the ending, but that would be the biggest remark I'd have. Whether or not it's deemed postable is ultimately up to the judges, because that's how this community works, take it or leave it. While I do agree that this whole eval process (and the time it takes) can be daunting for newcomers, it also guarantees a good base level, and -if you're patient enough to wait for it- the feedback is usually (meant) constructive and you can use it to learn and grow as a musician. At least, that's how I always approached it. Sure, I don't always agree with the evals I get (especially if it ain't positive :P), but in stead of getting butthurt I just keep in mind that these are just opinions of people that are good at critical listening and that they mean well. Using this thread for a _constructive_ discussion on judge/eval improvements would be interesting tho. My pet peeve is that eval takes a looong time and happens somewhat in a black box (I'm looking at you, 'Currently in eval' thread), both things that are tough sells in this age of instant gratification. $0.02.

tactics is probably my favorite, personally, especially the war of the lions remake. it's arguably one of the best mobile tactics games you can play.

You really need to stop making assumptions like this.