Liontamer

12/13 on VGMdb's just a placeholder. Our schedule is ASAP.

Every hosted mix on the mirrors we have will be replaced with the updated tags. ...Durr? Yes. Durr. Nah, I decided to be a dick and not correct any information, i.e.: No worries.

I was meh on it, but then again, I'm not a fan of the 80s cheese that is "Power of Love."

Relatively soon...ish. (aka no immediate ETA, but coming along)

We have lyrics for "Darkness Dawning," I'm pretty sure. I also need lyrics for analoq's Doom mix: http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR01098/

Yeah, that's weird. Is that something having to do with your preferences that your WMP changes your filenames?

Lesson: Don't try sarcasm on the web!

Just noting, the artwork size wasn't uninformed. It's the smallest size necessary: http://ocremix.org/forums/showthread.php?p=493843&postcount=10 I have no idea what you think is going on with the track # being included in the tags, but I think you're inferring the wrong things. Or you could load both sets of files into your players, sort them by title or artist, and then line things up so you can copy your old rating into the new file. Or just relisten to everything (my biased recommendation). Maybe djp will explain his rationale behind the art and why he now hates orange (obviously). Good luck there, rebel.

You guessed right. Of course, you could have saved yourself the trouble via the first post.

YES! It's too much. This is the interweb. If you don't quickly and directly give someone what they're looking for, then they'll move onto something else. Hence our URL in the album tag in every ReMix.

See, you answered your own question! In any case, we've heard people suggest not to use ocremix.org as the album name, and we've never listened. It's worked out great for us!

Nice work!

Dayum!

Necro'ed for further discussion. Spotify's come up a lot, but we'd have to jump through a lot of hoops to get listed there.

My pockets are bursting with (Monopoly) money!

1. "Is" is a verb and is capitalized in proper titles. That was a mistake of mine I caught a ways back. So the thread title is right, and the DB will be corrected when we re-release the individual mixes. 2. Fixed. 3. Fixed in January '09. The updated files will have this fixed, no worries.

There will not be any errors, because I am perfect! In any case, it seems like a headache, BUT I'll think about it.

Well, the BPM results are certainly informative, but based on what I've seen and staff feedback, we're not going to go whole hog and include BPM data in the MP3s. If we knew it was 99% accurate, we would. But what I've found from running BPM Analyzer can be useful for the genre/moods/instrumentation tagging system in the database as far as broadly hitting what are uptempo or downtempo mixes.

Running everything through BPM Analyzer today to see if I can get a complete BPM list for all of the ReMixes. http://download.cnet.com/MixMeister-BPM-Analyzer/3000-2169_4-10290906.html From what I can tell, the prog is generally accurate, but it has its flaws as far as determining BPM, like giving slow songs a fast #, when it should halve the #. Anyway, giving it a whirl to see how it is. I may even make a Google Doc spreadsheet to share and troubleshoot with.

Thanks for bringing that up. Neither djp or I could find where it says / is an ID3 standard for separating artists. Either way Windows Media Player is a poor program for sorting music in the first place (it isn't even intuitive how to show disc #), so it's at least OK if we don't cater to that standard. Same with RealPlayer as Brad referenced. All of that aside, / just isn't in common or trending enough usage to bother using it. It's the same reason we don't use OGG. OGG is good, but doesn't have enough support. If anything else comes up that would in fact be successful addressing this issue, definitely let us know. JUST FYI, I've basically looked at iTunes/iPod and Winamp as the two standard MP3 players. If there's any other broad-use robust MP3 player I should look at, lemme know.

I did have fun seeing those typos, but hopefully they'll get fixed soon. I had fun replying to a hater just now. Apparently all the music you guys are making is crap, and you're just adding drums. I wish I'd taken all that into account before YESing those all of those mixes! Lockdown 3, it's coming!

This was a criticism that I thought was pulled back from what it should have been. The piano sound was MIDI-riffic and stilted to the point where it should not have been approved. I've heard Bladiator present much, much better execution with this same type of palette, and this just doesn't present anything arrangement or performance wise that overcomes such weak sound quality. I hate to sound like I'm shitting on the whole package, because that's clearly not the case, and again, there's no doubt we've passed many mixes with flaws. Nonetheless, the request should have made to have this resampled before it was posted. The sound's not up to par compared with other mixes that have had weaker samples. NO (refine/resubmit)

Just listening to this as I was going through approvals and was surprised this passed given the production. The recording sounded distant AND significantly lossy. Distant is fine, but the lossyness really hurt this and made it sound like there was no warmth. I also thought the left hand sounded rigid in a few spots. The performance should have been tighter, but nothing sounded egregious as much as somewhat lacking in flow. Once things picked up at 3:00, the performance totally clicked, which was great to hear. Once things got a bit more delicate at 3:42, those slight timing issues were back; again, nothing terrible, but sometimes sluggish enough to break the implied flow/tempo of the piece. Overall, I thought this was borderline. If the performance was tight OR the recording was pristine, I could get behind this as something with a lopsided strength, because we've certainly passed other mixes like that. But I though this was just under the bar, mainly because of the very lossy production. I realize one could argue that the overall mood behind the song somehow justifies the lossiness of the sound, but I think the negatives of the production go beyond that. Could we please get a WAV of this and have someone remaster this? I think this song would be all the better for it. Let's try that before posting it, because I'd like to see this posted in some form, just not as it sounds right now. NO (borderline)

Nice work! Brandon in particular really showed a lot of growth as an artist on this, really putting together some polished tracks. And original composer props, FTW.

lol get it ducks. Dave wanted me to submit this so here you go, dunno why I didn't submit it like 3 years ago when I made it?!?! hope you like it brosefs ---------------------------------------------------------------- - "Olein Cavern"I thought the drums from :21 were pretty weak. The snare wasn't awful quality, but the drum writing was too plodding and wasn't the right fit. Thank God they dropped at 1:23 and you started getting more creative with the Eastern writing. Then as soon as I typed that, the drums came back at 1:39 for basically the rest of the track. Even listening to the original, which has a core beat, the drum-style sound used for it alternated between a louder, shorter hit and a longer, softer hit. This doesn't even have that. Texturally, this was pretty basic, and I thought the boring snare and plain-jane synths didn't add up to a solid, cohesive sound. Even though this is an older track, if you were still willing to come back to it and add a bit more substance to it, I'd love to hear it. But as is, it's just not developed enough or locking together enough. This is a solid base though. NO (resubmit)