Tensei

Well in that case it really depends on what you mean by 'commenting on it's quality', since what I'm really looking for is objective feedback in the vein of " You should tone down the reverb" or " That transition could be a bit smoother", not necessarily for comments like " I love the drum sequencing". But anyway, since it seems like the question in my previous post hasn't been asked before, I guess it's customary for you guys not to post your submissions in the WIP-forum for feedback, so I'll abide by that for now, at least until anyone else clears this up.

QFT I wouldn't do it any other way than this, otherwise your mix will either sound like an original with a vaguely similar tacked on extra melody, or like a bland midi-rip (In my experience at least)

Ooh I forgot to ask, are you allowed to post a mix you're planning to use for the contest in the WIP-forum?

Yeah I'm kinda signing in here for the first time, I saw this thread yesterday, and after listening to the song a few times I've found a pretty amazing way to arrange it, so I guess I'll be joining this contest =P

If anything like this would happen, it would most certainly have to be a collab to spread out the humongous amount of work that would have to be done on arranging it in a fashion that doesn't suffer from a typical medleyish sound. Just selecting the songs from all the games you named that are suitable to be used in the same mix would be a true nightmare.. I actually feel like doing this, but it's just so friggin ambitious , and I got so many other mixes and unfinished ideas I'm currently working on, it would take a long time before I would feel up to it.

Yes, version 3 sounds very good, the bass is clearly audible and version 4 probably has the best loud/clean ratio you'll get without using professional mastering. I still think version 3 sounds better than 4 though =) I'm just not that much of a fan of overcompression. Anyway, you're definitely getting there, maybe just polish it up a bit and PM a judge to ask if he can have a listen and tell you if it's up to OCR production standards yet. I'm not going to comment on the arrangement just yet, because I'm about to hit the sack, except saying that it's a bit repetitive. Expect some decent feedback tomorrow =p

Wow, it sounds SO MUCH better now, the hi-hats and cymbals sound crisp and everything, and you even got some nice dynamics going on because of the soft mastering. Now, let me ask you, why exactly do you need the volume to be close to professional level? Take this for example: Everyone is going to adjust their speakers to a pleasant volume, so it really doesn't matter that much how loud your mix is in the end. If I'm going to put a soft version and a loud version next to each other, then yes, the loud version will sound better, but if I listen to the soft version by itself, I'm still going to adjust the speakers to roughly the same volume I'd be hearing the loud version on, except the soft version will not be sounding like an overcompressed turd, and neither will there be noticable clipping/artifacts. And obviously the judges might make a remark about 'having mastered a bit too softly', but no way are they going to refuse a mix where the only 'issue' is having to increase their speaker volume a bit, as opposed to a mix with noticable clipping throughout. Edit: VVVVV Definitely do what Nutritious says, most of the issues you have left (muddiness etc.) can not be solved in the mastering stage, but you're going to have to dive into the individual tracks again. I suggest chopping off nearly all lower-end frequencies from the guitars so you can make your bass stand out a lot more. Also, a VERY minor high frequency boost should make your cymbals etc. a bit more sizzly to add some high-end frequencies and spread out the whole spectrum.

Still looking for NES-percussion? Cause this is pretty much the most awesome .NSF file I've ever heard, and it's from a certain totally overlooked NES-game. http://rapidshare.com/files/41909506/SILVERSU.NSF.html some kick-ass source material for remixing, if I may say so. =P

Okay, Arrangement is pretty cool, but yes, it's lacking severely in production. Take a good hard listen to the cymbals and hats, whenever the multiple guitars, bass and drums are going, they just sound absolutely VILE and grainy, which is one of the indicators of having mastered a bit too hot. I kinda had the same problem, so I made an example of how soft mastering can make a huge difference. Pay special attention how crisp the hi-hats sound in the remastered version compared to the original (the second part) http://www.tindeck.com/audio/my/qpol/Remastered--Original (Yes, I am hijacking your topic to post my own material =p) Now I know you got the whole " IT'S METAL, SO IT'S GOT TO BE LOUUUDDD" -thing going on, so I'm not going to suggest you turn the gain down just yet. I believe some clever use of a good multiband compressor should be able to solve your production issues. That, or if you want a simpler solution, check the levels on the different instruments by turning the master gain down at first, you should notice how (for example) the drums are still peaking, while the rest of the mix is noticably softer. Now because the drums would be already loud enough (again, just as an example), there's no need to increase the master gain again, because this would mean the drums would become totally squashed against the limiter, and that doesn't sound too pretty. Rather than that, it would be better to simply turn up the volume on everything BUT the drums, so the drums still have some breathing space. I believe the 'being squashed against the limiter' is the issue with the cymbals and hats. Sorry for the long read by the way =P

..Or when you threaten people who are trying to help you =P But anyway, Nicholestien, you SHOULD take a look at the arrangement, if you've tried just about everything in terms of EQing and Compression, and still get a cluttered result, maybe it's just best to scrap one or two tracks. Doesn't the saying go something like "Sometimes less is more"? Of course going crazy with polyphony is fun, when you're in the midi stage, but it's going to bite you back HARD when you get down to mixing, so sometimes you can do nothing else than to scrap some of the redundant melody lines.

Let me just say, wow. It's amazing how the mix already sounds pretty cool, but as soon as the exciter kicks in it just starts to totally kick ass, and when it leaves the mix suddenly starts to sound pretty lifeless in comparison. No wonder these things tend to get overused like hell in nearly every mastering chain. Anyway, more mad props for the work you've already done, it's simply amazing how much hidden potential Reason in fact has, and I can't wait to start using your devices =D

so THAT's what produces those sounds, hmm I guess I'll have to go find a theremin soundfont or something then =P thanks anyway

I was wondering if it's possible to get an effect similar to the vintage-sounding Sci-fi scream Protricity uses at 2:05 in his Zombies Ate My Neighbors Remix from any of the synths in Reason. Can anyone please point me in the right way?

Well a good piece of music can definitely be conveyed through means of simple General Midi, but it will never reach the potential it has without rendering it to an MP3. The key to understanding those equalizers and compressors is not thinking about them as necessary tools, but rather as effects to improve the quality of the sound, similarly to how you would put reverb on a track to give it a more organic feel. If you say that whenever you touch EQ or a compressor, it destroys your music, maybe you shouldn't use them at all in this context. It really depends on what genre of music you're writing. Generally any acoustic/ orchestral instruments can do with very loose compressing, or even without compression at all ( Since it flattens out the dynamics and makes it sound more mechanical), and usually EQ should be applied only very subtly, if at all. It's not like Mozart, Stravinsky, etc. etc. had access to multiband compressors and the like =D Now generally the hardest section of the EQing and Compressing thingy is the drum sequencing, and the way they blend in with the bass, so yes, you'll need to have a fair understanding of compression and EQ before you can make these two sound effectively without masking each other, but there's enough guides on the internet to point you in the right direction. As a bottom line, I'd say that if your mix seems to sound perfect already, there's no masking, no boomy bass, not too much sizzly treble and no overly loud parts, why compress and EQ at all then?

Well I didn't say it was off-key or anything, the whole thing is sequenced quite nicely. I think it's more of a subjective problem where the source song itself does not have a melody that's interesting enough to use =p

Ah what the heck, I'll do an in-depth commentary for ya. 0:00 - 1:23 Ah yes, the atmospheric intro is where it's at in the source-tune (IMO), so you should definitely capitalize on it. It's definitely evocative and atmospheric enough with the string pads and everything, but it's kind of incoherent, I think it needs a bit more structure 1:24 - 2:59 I think this whole part is very redundant, the whole soundscape seems to take a step back in comparison to the previous section. A 3-minute intro though? I know Trance is all about the build-up, but 3 minutes is way too long, IMO you could actually cut this whole part out. 3:01 - 4:15 Production-wise you're doing pretty good, and you've arranged the original quite skillfully, but it just doesn't work for me here. I admit, the source tune is hard to remix (speaking from experience here), but there's something in the chord progression that doesn't make it pleasant to listen to at all. The lack of a real lead, and the presence of the choral pads doesn't do much for a forward drive that's often needed to keep a trance song interesting. It also suffers from too much repetition, but IMO that's not so much the problem as the previous issues. 4:16 - 5:10 This transition feels extremely awkward, and "un-trancish" (though I'm not a trance listener myself). You shouldn't suddenly let everything come to a full stop, but maybe opt for some subdued bass or drum pattern to connect the loose ends. The section itself is moderately interesting because of the odd drum-pattern and the sfx, but it still doesn't do a whole lot for me. 5:17- End Seems basically like a copy+ paste of the third section, with maybe one additional drum pattern. It needs some lead or plucked arpeggio's or whatever, so you get that ultimate-conclusion-epic-feel where all instruments start playing together (or whatever =P) before the end of the track so you can get a suitable ending. Speaking of ending, this one really doesn't fit, it's way too sudden etc. As a conclusion; you obviously know your way around synthesizers, sfx and the like, what I'd suggest you do is listen to a track similar to what you're aiming for, and try to implement the model (intro - build-up - main thingy - bridge - outro- etc.) to your mix. Basically you got the loose sections done, now you have to fit them together in a working formula.

Interesting question, I've been analyzing this a lot myself lately. I've started in mixing in a lot of different ways, but generally I just start to spontaneously 'rewriting' the song I want to do in my midi sequencer. This way it often happens that because I haven't set the rhythm correctly, or put in a wrong note, the melody is altered, and sometimes it comes out sounding better. Also I generally don't bother with finding out the backing chords or the drum patterns down to every hi-hat, but rather I put my own beats and added instrumentation under the melody. Of course, there are a ton of other ways, you could just import the midi and add harmonic, melodic and rhythmic content until you get something good (I don't like this method at all though), or you could start writing your own music, and suddenly think " Hey, that melody from song X in game Y would sound totally awesome over this" Generally, I like the hit/miss factor in remixing, and while I have a very decent understanding of musical theory, I find it much more entertaining to just play along with what I have on my guitar, and "accidentally" find out a really cool chord progression, rather than thinking " Wow, if I put an IV-V-III progression under this, it will sound totally awesome"

I would LOVE to have a decent (Harmonic) Exciter in Reason, so I'm wishing you the best of luck on your project, and I hope it will turn out the way you want.

YES! I love this source song, I love this game, and your remix definitely does justice to the source theme. Production sounds very decent, as far as I can tell ( Don't have my good headphones here). Arrangement-wise, this is an amazing way to handle a trance remix, the instrumental changes in the latter half definitely do a lot to add variety (I especially digged the Green Moon bongo's/conga's/whatever that kicked in somewhere half-way =D). I honestly can't think of any serious criticism at all, it's amazing you can hold a listener's attention this well while you're actually just repeating the same melody over and over, it doesn't get intrusive at all, though you might want to consider changing-up the melody at some point, or maybe switch keys, but that's just a suggestion, I like it a lot as is.

I've started re-arranging it once more (because I'm a stupid perfectionist), and this is what I've come up with, I'm pretty content with the first 2/3, but I'm still not really happy with the way I've handled the half-time drum/harpsichord cadenza, so maybe I'll redo that once more. http://midishrine.com/midi/15964.mid By the way, this host has some issues with instrument changes and volume levels in the midi, so only use it if you really can't stand putfile, otherwise putfile is the most obvious choice for listening. http://media.putfile.com/Bloody-Tears-Yet-Again Hope you like it

While an interesting concept, I don't think many people will be phased by the fact that it was made in a video-game, it's just kinda gimmicky. Generally, I just listen if the music is any good, without thinking about the production methods, because, honestly, I could care less about that. I don't know the source material, so I can't say if this is a midi rip or something, but the production is obviously sub-par to say the least, and I generally think it's a bit too repetitive to warrant a place on OCR.

Well I figured out Reason has the POTENTIAL for a multi-band compressor, you have to link up multiple compressors with multiple vocoders and separate each band, etc. etc. takes a bit too long to explain, but it's possible, and I will be using it =p Reason is perfectly capable of loading up soundfonts, all you have to do is open it with an NN-XT sampler, easy as pie =D Well about this mix, I've been working on some other things (mainly for projects), but I'll return to work on it as soon as possible, this wip will not die =)

I've posted this in the project forums, but I'm reposting it here so it will get noticed quicker, it's about the HUGE collab we've got going on for the arrangement of Awakening. If you haven't yet heard it, go check it out in the project forums, I've gotten a decent amount of work done.

I don't know if there's been a question about this topic before, but I'm pretty curious about your thoughts on adding a master reverb to your mastering chain. Yes, I know the general consensus says " More Reverb = BAD", but I've read in some guides that a medium studio plate style reverb, or a small acoustic room style reverb, combined with a low wet-dry ratio can help make the whole mix 'wash together', and give it the necessary 'shine'. I haven't really extensively tried it out myself, but does anyone else have thoughts to share on this subject?

Thanks a lot! I'll definitely check out your version, but I kind of made an improvised compressor myself (4 Mclass compressors+ 4 Vocoders)