Harmony

Members
  • Content Count

    1,080
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Harmony

  1. Thanks for the thoughtful review. I've heard a few people make assumptions about what the first sounds on the track are and since no one has guessed correctly, I'll clarify here. Those are acoustic guitar pinch-harmonics. Everything was recorded live, so no patches except for the drums, which were patches that were played live. I think that's an important point because in recording/mixing for this I tried to give the listener a bit of the sense of the actual jam session at Doug's house that eventually spawned this track. Good times, and I'm glad at least parts of it were appreciated.
  2. Yes, clearly if you used a piece of the source for the whole song, you have a song that explicitly references the source throughout. Not sure what you're getting at by stating that.There are 2 main synths in the original on melody and he simply separated them instead of playing them simultaneously. I suppose your argument is that the sections I mentioned reference what you'd call a harmony and not a main lead, but I'd disagree that the secondary synth is somehow less important the the main. The usage is blatantly obvious to me and immediately recognizable. Granted I love the source and have remixed it before, but the statements "hardly any source" or that it's "hardly recognizable" are highly overstated and in the case of the former, demonstrably false.
  3. Just saw this reply in my e-mail, read the text and thought "What noob posted this suggestion to start a counter-thread!?". I shoulda known.
  4. :rollseyes: @ PoDExactly - and really there's tons of source here. Larry, I think you missed that the synth at 0:44-1:08 is a reference to the legato synth that comes in with the main melody at 0:03 in the source. The reference is even more clear when it's made again with the EP between 2:06-2:23.
  5. This is the other "stick to your bones" track on the album for me (other is Bubble Junkie). Like Swifthom said, you just wanna tap along and smile when the bridge comes funkily marching in around 1:30. Groovetastic!
  6. Yeah man, love when the first track (first "full length track") knocks it out of the park! Great work guys
  7. LOVE this track. On an album full of winners, this one sticks with me even more than the rest. The build to the climax at 3:12 and the stuttered modified beat that drives this track home in the final few seconds is worth a few listens all by itself!
  8. Larry, you make one more Toyota Disco and I'm musically bested. But by God I'm gonna outlive you if it's the last thing I do!...and it will be Thanks for the birthday love my OCR peoplez!!! OMG, I'm graduating this year which means I can finally have time to get back to *gasp* music!
  9. Mmmm, old-skool remix style. This is packed full of nostalgia for me both because I played Mario Kart *almost* as much as I played Secret of Mana as a kid (still do on occasion), and because these sort of clean simple remixes are the types of songs that dominated the scene when I first started finding VGmixes through Napster. Nice work Amy, especially on the guitar!
  10. dizzzzam! Even on my little ear buds here at work this track is THICK! Loving it, man. Loving it.
  11. Production value out the wazoo (wherever that is). Love the samples that serve as snares; unique yet they work with the intentionally lo-fi vibe. Lyrically awesome, as expected. Nice work all around, Navi!
  12. Wooowww, this is sexy -- bravo. I need to see an extended edition performed live!
  13. Clean, simple, raw. I likes And totally agreed with your music/education comments DJP. SouthWestern College Afro-Cuban Jazz Ensemble 4eva!
  14. Beautiful! This piece is full of an amazing dynamic tension that carries me effortlessly through themes and tempo changes. And the orchestration is incredibly detailed. I'm not an orchestral guy myself so I find it a little difficult to accurately judge how difficult and time consuming something like this is to put together, but bravo bravo bravo on making it sound as though you spent a year working on this There is a BIG smile on my face right now, and my favorite music is the kind that does that to me on the first listen
  15. Coolness. On the first listening it was a nice experience to just feel the Secret of Mana vibe rather than hearing overt themes. Second go though, I really enjoyed the creative ReMixing of the themes. Nice work.
  16. All of M-Audio's newer stuff works: Profire 610, Profire 410, FastTrack Ultra, FastTrack Pro, etc.
  17. And further proof that we're actually recording... ...jamming awesomeness ensues at 2:05
  18. I have a 14" composite Remo with their Skyndeep head on it. VERY ringy, as composite drums are, but that's why I bought it. If you like an earthier sound with fewer overtones that's easier to mix, go with a wood body.

  19. As soon as I get some tights and a green tunic, it's on like donkey kong playing pong.
  20. This is lame. Techno is so much better than electronica, but it's not an option? Major oversight DJP. Glad to see jazz is represented though.
  21. Sorry Brandon Strader, but the name Brandon is already in use. Try Brandon01023 Brand9491 Brand0m Thanks everyone, and happy birthday Jill! Have a musical day
  22. You didn't mention what bit depth you're currently using. First don't confuse sample rate and bit depth. Sample rate (for example 44,100 Hz) is the number of times per second that your device records a "piece" of audio. Bit rate (for example 24 bits) tells you how accurately your computer or audio device can playback/record each of those thousands of pieces of audio. 44,100 is a LOT of pieces of audio per second, and without getting into details, that's about the limit of what the human ear can hear. Once you get into higher sample rates (for example 96,000 Hz) it's physically more than your brain can process. So the audio benefits of super high recording rates are questionable. One potential advantage is in downsampling or time stretching audio. If you record at a high sample rate, the programs that downsample (for instance if you want to record to a CD which is at 44,100 Hz) and the programs that timestretch audio will have a lot more info to work with and can produce better results (especially with time stretching). Bit depth is a little more subtle in how it affects your audio, but unlike going from 44,100 Hz to 96,000 Hz where it's physically questionable whether humans can hear the difference, there is certainly a difference between 16bit audio and 24bit audio. The most important benefit of 24bit audio imo is the increased recording headroom it gives you. More bits means you can record more subtle changes in the audio, and at 16bits you're gonna miss some stuff. "Missing stuff" here would result in digital clipping and that's bad. Also, the greater ability to record subtle changes in audio means that your device can better tell the difference between actual audio and random noise. Layman's terms: you get a lower noise floor and more headroom with higher bit depths. So bottom line, I usually record at 24bit/44,100Hz if it's a general project. If I'm feeling special I record at 24bit/48,000Hz to eek the last little bit of humanly perceptible audio out of my source.