Vig
-
Posts
2,317 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Articles
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Vig
-
-
You've got some very interesting sound design ideas, but the writing is a bit clunky. For example the intro: I don't care how cool your sound is; if you've just got one voice playing whole notes, it's going to be boring.
The arrangement as a whole is a bit too sparsely written. Nice start tho.
NO
also: air horn? really?
-
My apologies, I was confused as to why it was fading out and back in during the preview, but it's because you are previewing different sections of the same song, right? That's cool. I almost thought it was multiple songs.
Nice work indeed!Yes, they are different sections of the same song. And thanks, I'm really glad you like it!
-
Grow some facial hair dude, it's all the rage.
Nice song, too! It's weird that it's a single and it fades out and back in. That's usually somethin' you see with multiple songs. o.o
I hope you're trolling, but it fades out and back in because it's a preview. The full version will be released in a couple weeks.
-
Thanks buddy, Much appreciated!
-
I know I've been in OCRemix hibernation for a looooong time, but I've hardly been idle. The next few weeks/months will see me releasing several new (and old but unreleased) tracks, starting with my contribution to the Deus Ex: Sonic Augmentation project.
In a baldfaced attempt to stimulate interest, awareness, promote synergy...shifting paradigm...ugh etc. And to get you wonderful people to follow me on soundcloud, twitter like me on facebook, all that self-promotional garbage that I hate, today I'm releasing a sneak peek of my new original track "Vectors," a video-game inspired/electronic thang which will become available shortly after my Deus Ex track is released.
So check out this preview, I hope it tingles your man/ladyparts.
EDIT: Please note! This is a 1-minute PREVIEW. Not the full version. The full version is 5:30 long, and will be released in a couple weeks. I promise the fades and cuts are just for the preview, and not for artistic reasons.
-
At home when producing I've got a pair of these BM5-A's. They sound clear and pleasant until you get down to about 100Hz at which point they are pretty boomy down to around 80Hz, though that probably has a lot to do with my room.
when it's late or I need to hear smoother bottom, I'll switch to headphones Sennheiser HD-650. They sound incredibly smooth. I seriously hate mixing on headphones though, cause the way I know the bottom is right is by feeling it, which you simply cannot do on headphones.
When It's time to mix I'll take it to the office
Where I really only use the Ausberger mains (paired with two ausberger 18" and two Danley subs). I'm pretty fortunate that I ended up in what is one of the best sounding rooms in LA. Incredibly crisp clean and accurate. The bottom is tight and present but not overwhelming. We were having issues for a while when hip-hop sessions would come in and launch the subs all the time, so we upped to 4 subs to distribute the load across more drivers and now that problem seems to be resolved.
-
The arrangement is pretty cool, but it's a bit of a stretch from the original. I'm hearing the source in the beginning and end, but most of the song only has the two-chord progression in common. The lead guitar is cool, but it's really more "inspired by" than "of" the source. I think you've got a lot of pieces in the right place, but with a source this short you've got to have more linking back to it than two power chords.
NO
-
I just want to pop in and remind anybody who is looking for advice in this thread that there are many ways to skin a cat, and no one method is right or wrong. For instance, when Avaris says
He does so with more authority than is really appropriate. Listen to everyone's ideas and try them out, but don't believe anyone who says their way is the right way.If you need more compression on the master then you're[sic] mixing is probably off.Also, Snapple knows his stuff, but be aware that -6dBFS RMS is what is technically referred to as "Holy Shit Loud." That's Skrillex loud. It may not be what you're going for.
-
That's awesome; I just tweeted about their crowdsource launch..Dude come to LA, I'm working with Zedd nonstop and enjoying the fact that it is always 68 and sunny. Actually been finishing a lot of my own projects lately too. What are you working on? We've got to collaborate on something!
EDIT: What is private message?
-
Just curious, shouldn't you guys title this thread OCR Childless Bachelors and Bachelorettes? That way you can find out where all the single (childless) ladies are at
Otherwise this will just be one big sausage fest 
Because I am in possession of a secret and ancient knowledge: if one seeks corporeal conjugation with females of the species, one's quest must inevitably lead him elsewhere from the OCRemix forums.
-
So the OCR Parents thread got me thinking: are there any single, male OCR users with no children? Am I the only one?
I am 26 years old and am currently not married. I also have never been married previously. To my knowledge I have no children, though there have been a couple occasions where things got a bit dicey.
Anyone else have a similar story? Someone should start a list! OneTwoThree NOT IT!
-
Okay this source isn't the most inspiring in the world. Listening for 3 seconds I'm relieved that you took it way away from where it started.
Your arrangement is very creative and groovy. Nice chord selection. However, i'm surprised that with your relatively sophisticated harmonic writing, you didn't bother changing the note in the melody that clashes with your reharmonization.
Your arrangement is cool, but the production and writing is a bit clunky Your rhythm section plays boring rhythms, which is a problem (see piano and vocal pad). You'e got to have more interesting rhythms.
Great start though, and nice job sprucing up a pretty uninteresting source.
NO
-
As far as piano mixes go, this definitely one of the more complete and well-conceived. The arrangements are thoughtful and creative, and the overall progression of the track sounds like you thought about it rather than just noodling for a few minutes.
Well done.
YES
-
Sonically very smooth. Nice production. I think your melodic adaptation of the source to 6/8 is a bit clunky. The melody sounds choppy, like you just shoehorned it into the new time signature. That said, the groove is fairly cool, and you do a good job of keeping the track fresh.
YES
-
Very vibey. Not crazy about the tone of the guitars. lots of 2-3kHz making it really shrill. Going back, this is very similar to the source in arrangement. Same tempo, same key, same structure. Your drop is pretty cool though. Nice bass. You do add a lot to the texture with the strings.
This track is pretty good, but for an arrangement this conservative to pass it's got to be over-the-top crazy good in execution. I think you should just elaborate a bit more on the arrangement. It's a close call, but a bit too conservative for me.
NO
-
The artist sent me this version after I told him my critiques. To be honest I don't hear any difference, but here it is.
-
This is a slightly tougher call than it should be.
The intro is fantastic, but the weakest part of it is the only part that bears any relationship to the original; that being the piano melody. The atmosphere is wonderful, but the piano is bland in sound and writing. It's also an extremely long time before the source comes in.
This is a consistent issue throughout. the groove and atmosphere are fantastic, but the actual interpretation of the original is bland and almost clunky. Particularly again at the 4:45 mark. The piano is just so weak, and the strings are playing whole note tonics.
I love your groove and synths, but you've got to do a little more to make the source fit in aesthetically.
NO
-
Cool interpretation, occasionally iffy performance, really sub-par mixing.
I love the rhythmic interpretation.
The bass is consistently flat.
The mix is extremely muddy. Lots of guitar wash, not a lot of drums. The mix is pumping terribly. You've got to back off that bus compressor.
NO
-
I'm not sure what the kids are saying these days, but I like EDM. The problem is that many young producers use "techno" as their excuse for repetitive lazy writing.
This track suffers from that to an extent, but it's not too bad. The drums in particular are extremely repetitive. I love the conga/tabla you use, but your kick is absolutely unacceptable for this genre. It's barely audible. The hat is very repetitive. something you hear in all good techno music is a lot of dynamic instrumentation and drum parts.
You've got some great melodic writing here, but the rhythm section is for the most part a copy & paste job.
NO
-
Very sleek. Great snare. The drums are too repetitive, as is the writing in general. Just about every section has a few too many 4-bar repetitions. It would be great if you added more details within each section as it repeats to keep things interesting.
The intro and outro are pretty weak, mainly because they are rhythmically boring. The samples attack slowly and the rhythms are such that it sounds like you wrote for one piano rather than multiple string parts.
I'm torn, because the body of this track is very slick and groovy, but I'm feeling like the writing is a bit too repetitive, and it feels like there's not much of a structure, each section more or less similar to the others, save the intro, outro, and bridge.
I think I may be nitpicking too much. It's a good track.
YES
-
Very straightforward compositional arrangement, with definitive increase in vibe. Some moments are great, like the slow section comes out of nowhere and is quite effective. Other things like the turbo-time drums and excessive glitch edits are pretty gimmicky, and somewhat clumsy. I also don't see the point of the Bruce Lee sample.
I could go either way, but I'm leaning
NO
-
Wow. Your writing is really lovely, and your sound choice is excellent. This track has great atmosphere, and you change up the composition of the original subtly but effectively.
There are some mixing and sequencing issues that keep this track from reaching its full potential. The piano tends to sit on top of the pads a bit too much, and then the strings sit on top of the piano too much. For instance, at 2:30 the piano comes in and is way louder than the pads, which sounds inappropriate. The piano could use a bit more reverb.
The individual sections and instruments are really well written and sound great, but the track generally speaking lacks transitions.
There are also a couple places where a part has one or two not incorrect but poorly chosen notes, or the piano is mechanically sequenced.
I'm going to give this a YES because I think it's great, and the issues I have aren't huge, but if you happened to address those issues that would be awesome.
-
This mix is quite muddy. Lots of midrange, not a lot of anything else. The arrangement needs a lot more motion. Way too repetitive. The drums, the rhythm section, all are way too repetitive. You've got to mix up your writing.
NO
-
Very cool, tense writing in the intro, though the strings are too dry.
WHAAAAT...Was not expecting that. I'd complain that the snare isn't bright enough and the drums need more reverb, but who cares.
YES
OCR02826 - *YES* Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 'Requiem for a Damaged Spirit'
in Judges Decisions
Posted
Hey very nice job interpreting a very short source. Very creative.
The problem with this track partly comes from the shortness of the source. It doesn't really feel like it has any direction. It feels like a 4-minute vamp. There's no clear structure. There's a lot of noodling going on, an I'm waiting for a strong melody and a B section, neither of which ever happen.
NO