dannthr

Nice job, I like your rock-stuff the best. You might want to be clear about the projects you show images from on your reel (for deomonstration purposes or not). Don't assume people will know if you've worked on Zelda or not.

The EQ touch-up gives it a little more edge, but I think that what is happening here is that the EQ sounds a little bit more appealing because it's bringing out elements of the sonic spectrum that the original composition neglects. Your composition, if you'll note, is strongest when you employ a fuller spectrum of sonic color during the parts with harp, you're engaging with a broader palette of frequencies and for that we can ignore the banal trudging of the same chord progression over and over and over again. However, instead of trying to steer you away from your use of this repetitive harmonic structure, I would think you would instead benefit from really STUDYING Jesper Kyd's score for Assassin's Creed 2--specifically Earth. It utilizes the same chord structure over and over and over, but in so doing plays on our expectations for the track as it unfolds--not to trick us--but rather to emphasize the excitement in the evolution of the music. Listen carefully to how Kyd plays with high and low frequencies, listen to how he plays with rhythm, listen to his drum production and how lower hits are used only as exclamation and higher drums are used to give the piece energy, each should be a separate listen through. Listen to how he colors his piece with instruments and vocals that either soften or harshen the piece, giving it a feel of slow evolution. Obviously, it is challenging for us to comment on a track that is MEANT for something we can't know about. I suppose this Furnace is a level in a game, that it's supposed to feel continuous and oppressive, you have that start, but now move us in your composition and make sure we never tire of hearing your track. Finally, just a slight erk, but your main drum rhythm is the same for THE TERMINATOR. Not sure if you wanted to reference the TERMINATOR, but there you go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DK1I3Y5g2zI&feature=related

Ah that's right, my girl just bought a Macbook Pro. The 15" or higher screened versions carry the i5s or i7s, I would definitely press to go to one of those. Though I understand how that's a fairly large leap in price from the smaller 13" or non-pro versions. Personally, I don't know how much you're spending on the SSD upgrade, but I would even suggest maybe chucking that and going with the 15" i5 or i7, upgrading the RAM, and loading to RAM for your samples rather than streaming from disk. Just a thought. I always thought it was annoying that laptops rarely came with a faster than 5400rpm HDD. Or just go with the 15" i5 or i7 and keep the RAM at 4 and stream off of an external drive.

Yeah. I do agree with the Core 2 Duo vs i3+ comment though.

Heh, I just upgraded my farm computer from 8GB to 16GB because I was capping out my system with some new orchestral templates. Though, admittedly, I've just started integrating Altiverb instances into my system as well.

And honestly, the best way to do it would be to put the samples that are most likely to be played/loaded at the same time on separate HDDs, but some libraries you just can't split up. My farm computer has six separate 10krpm HDDs, I've decided to put a type of library on each. So Brass on one, WWs on another, Strings on another, Choir on another, percussion on another, and etc stuff like guitar/ethnic inst/etc on another. Then I have two other HDDs, storage and OS on separate drives.

RAID tests show speed improvement for large randomly placed files. But samples are small, sequenced files. Not so small, however, that one would fit nicely inside a single memory block, no, it would be spread out over a few. The problem is that you will find yourself loading a single sample across multiple drives. It's a waste of drive time. You're better off spreading your libraries across multiple independent drives and loading multiple samples simultaneously rather than dedicating 2+ drives to loading a single sample at a time.

I agree with Jimmy, I refuse to buy VOP based on the fact that I feel like I can recognize it whever it's used. It's very opaque and that's not a good thing for my purposes. I think it sticks out to a distracting degree. The only PLAY library proper I have is Ministry of Rock--I like it, but I also like having a couple of rock oriented stuff in my library.

The articulations in Gold make it worth the difference. I'm trying to think of projects where I used Eastwest almost exclusively... I believe the whole Shopper Rush soundtrack from 2007 was completely EWQLSO Gold XP (the play version which is just called Gold is extensively updated with play features such as scripted legato/portamento): Shopper Rush Title Screen Shopper Rush Level Music And here's an excerpt of an old WIP I never finished: Sketch I have to dig deep for all EW Gold samples since I generally blend libraries together and I started updating my libraries pretty early on, but until I got LA Scoring Strings just last month, I was using EWQL Gold Strings for the last 3 years. It's a great starting point and the articulations you get in Gold will just give you the freedom to do a lot more than with just Silver. Here's one of the first mock-ups I did when I first got Gold: Concerning Hobbits It's where I started out, and I can't recommend it more--especially at the INSANE PRICING they have now-a-days.

Some (many) speakers just suck at bass definition. You might even want to try doubling the bass melody an octave higher and applying a high pass filter set fairly low to cut out some of the low, lows. Too low a frequency results in some messy rumble.

I would look for a shotgun mic for interviews, they tend to have a very good focused cardiod pattern.

http://ocremix.org/forums/showthread.php?t=29611 Cheers, mate.

I've been meaning to actually complete a remix--I've started a few and then some matter of life or business interrupts the process and the roll of inspiration that brought me to the original idea is *poof* gone! So, here's hoping! Tejing requested this piece be remixed and I had an idea, so I kinda went with it. (Something starting out with some Hisaishi influence and going from there.) Also a good excuse to test-drive my new strings. At the current version, I'm feeling it's around 30% done, so quite a ways to go, but I thought I'd post for some initial feedback. Prisoners of Destiny Cheers, EDIT: Updated link, added on a bit of where I was planning to go. There's a cpu click near the end of this version, I know it's there, it won't be in the final (just have to track down the cpu inefficiency at that area) EDIT 2: Fixed the click

Already working on it...

I happily used Windows XP x64 for my farm machine for years before switching to Windows 7 x64. The reason for the switch was that ultimately, people don't support the Windows XP 64bit platform as much as they support Windows 7 64bit. It's just going to be easier to find hardware drivers for Win 7 x64 over Win XP x64. No trouble switching though and my new farm machine gets incredible performance.

Yes it does, an iLok, which you might already have.

Hey man, I have both and if I had to pick one, I'd pick the original one: Kontakt. I picked Kontakt for my first farm machine back in 2006 over Gigasamples and I'm gald I did. Back then, all the EWQL libraries were on Kontakt, so was VSL. Now, there are more Kontakt libraries available, with a greater diversity of options, than EWQL has in their whole PLAY library. Both EW and VSL moved on to their own proprietary sampler formats, and when they moved out of Kontakt, the Kontakt selection blossomed to include AAA level strings from Audiobro, epic over the top percussion, woodwinds, and vocal libraries from Tonehammer, Cinesamples, and Westgate Studios. Kontakt is still my number one choice. However, I have had success in running both Kontakt standalone and PLAY standalone on a single machine. I've also heard reliable rumors that the latest version of PLAY in beta testing now will be able to be used in VSL's Vienna Ensemble Pro mixing software, which is fantastic news as VEPro can also use Kontakt AND VSL's VSTis together. Meaning, with Vienna Ensemble Pro, you can have it all, all at once, in a single mix, playing nicely together. But if I had to pick one: Kontakt. (Sorry EW, I love EW tons, but Kontakt just still offers more in the long run)

What I don't understand is why it is considered a mystery. Here's an exercise: Write a melody, then take the whole melody, and find the note that is used the most. Add that note on the bottom, as a bass note during the entire melody, when does it sound nice? bad? sad? happy? etc... The harmony is INSIDE the melody. It's there, it's just waiting for you to bring it out, emphasize it, move it around, etc.

There is no need to overcomplicate Harmony, that's exactly my frustration with why a beginner is afraid to create it. Your brain is the generator, your ear is the quality assurance. Just flippin' write the music. Physics does not enter the arena when I write. Period. There's no need to bring it up. If it sounds good, it's good, if it doesn't, it's not. It's people like you, IBBIAZ, who not only misunderstand the quote their commenting on, but make harmony seem like it's something more than extra notes that make the composition sound better. I can describe semiology and the origin of letters, but it's not going to make you a better writer. Just write. For god's sake just freaking write.

Hm, for once I agree with Yoozer. I guess, what I don't understand, is the mystery behind harmony. It sounds good or it don't. It does what you want it to or it doesn't. If you try something out and it sounds like poop, change it. Take your melody, as an exercise, add a note to accompany your melody, just one note, is there a point where it feels like you should change the note? Change it. Play around. You are your own chord generator--there's nothing to figure out. Just do it. When you start out, you're probably going to be a bit boring, there will be harmonies that you're more comfortable with, when you feel adventurous, you'll branch out--that's life.

Easy there John Cage. Producer/Arranger not Composer. Riding a Segway makes you go, but don't confuse it with Running or Exercise.

From my perspective, it's unnecessary. If you can't write music without using it, then you can't write music. To me, it's a basic foundational skill. Something to think about here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIZGvp0fMJY Cheers,

I agree, but with the condition that it be deliberate 100%. I went to see Chuck Pahlaniuk once and he was talking about when he was first trying to get published, he was shopping his books around to publishers and the feedback was always the same: Too dark, too disturbing, etc, etc. So one day he couldn't take it anymore and decided that the next time he got that feedback, he'd go and revise it to be MORE dark, MORE disturbing, so that, at the very least, if they didn't buy his book, at least they'd have nightmares about it later on! When he did that, though, he sold his first book: Fight Club. But when you really take a look at what he did, he turned his weakness or failings into a strength. So if you feel like if a particular instrument doesn't sound real enough, don't see its lack of realism as a weakness, instead look at it as a strength of the instrument. And take it all the way!

Remember that the recording quality availble for sound-on-disc technology in 1925 was pretty limiting sonically. I would not recommend using a recording from 1925 as a point of reference for producing music today--aboslutely not. There are a lot of performance details that are masked by the limits of recording technology then and these elements are crucial for the ear to determine a natural performance. BUT, I do whole-heartedly recommend that as producers and MIDI programmers we constantly reference REAL and recent recordings of actual instruments. That disconnect from what we're trying to achieve and what an instrument actually sounds like is VERY important to always keep in mind.

I don't know what you're trying to achieve, but mixing is a matter of preference and effect--what are you going for?