Rozovian

Some people have to wait days for a reply, don't expect one within 12 hours. The sound is decent. I'm not fond of the stereo presence of the snare. The guitars be recorded again and panned opposite the existing ones, it'll give a greater stereo width to the track. Also, bring back the sound you had the first couple of seconds, it's a great sound and it'd spice up the track. It gets kind'a repetitive really soon. You need more lead, whether it's synth or guitar. It's at a good length, but it's very repetitive, so make more stuff happen, make the sound change a bit more. Those synth sections are nice, but you should throw in a really rude guitar solo somewhere. Also, comparing this to source reveals it might be too close to get on OCR. You could deviate a little further, a little more. Add a calm section, play a section twice as fast, put your own original spin on the melody and rhythm, do something different.

Use EQ to boost the mid lows of the bass range. You should hear it sound tougher and unchier when you get to the right place. I don't remember where it is for bass, and it probably varies somewhat with sample/synth and key, but kick and snare have theirs between 50 and 200Hz. Also, tweak the synth or sampler volume envelope. Short attack, short decay, sustain set to 50% or something, and release... relatively short. That'll give you a quicker bass sound. Shortening the actual notes might also be necessary, but I can't say. Then, experiment with compression and distortion. Too much distortion is gonna kill the punch, and there's a whole lot of ways you can make stuff sound worse by tweaking the compressor wrong. Someone else should probably help you with that.

Someone find me a midi of the source used! Anyway, this starts of sounding very newby with simple waveforms, but turns into a cool minimalist trance... thing. I'd say more if I had source to compare to, then I'll be more indepth too.

A quick short line of feedback: Too similar throughout, better use of non-drum isntruments than in your sd2 wip, too long unless you make it more interesting. Good luck with it.

Arrangement is lovely, and the sound is, to my casual listerener ears, fine. Arrangementwise, this could get on OCR, imo. But then... I think there's a couple of places where you've got notes out of the right key. 0:08, 0:13 (and something in the harp in bg before 0:17), 0:31, and 1:39. And make up your mind about the panning of the marimba or whatever that is. Doesn't fit the orchestral landscape to have a marimba on rails racing back and forth over the stage. As stated, lovely. Great job man.

Source is in 6/4, yours in 4/4. There's two kind of time signature changes, those giving a theme an unusual and interesting rhythm, and those that turn a theme into something more bland. I'm sorry man, this sounds like the latter to me. I don't have to hear much to tell you've done a great job, imo, when it comes to the drums, but even ther drums need some work in the ending where you're just cutting off one loop after another. I might cut back on some of the high frequencies, some of them are painful to hear. As for bass and everything else... The bass could use some more punch. Everything else needs to be more clearly separated from the bass and drums, especially the melody. I see no reason to cut back on source, there's more than enough room for it. It's at a good length, and it's got a nice sound. Some fixes, more creative use of the source (and more source overall), and it might get on OCR, imo.

This thread should get you somewhere.

Neskvartetten if you don't mind the live sound. JigginJonT has some jazz and jazz-ish pieces. Then there's Gypsy Jazz and Jazz Plumbe Trio, plus this personal favourite of mine.

Looking fine in Firefox on mac. Doesn't look as good in Safari. Dunno how many Safari users there are that visit OCR so I don't know if it'd be worth it to fix it unless it can be done easily. Here's how it looks to me.

The grey borders on the front page are a good idea, but they are a bit too dark to fit wit the rest of the page imo. The white areas aren't even on the bottom of the darker grey box, either. Making them even on the right side would help.

You're also having spambot problems? I found 15 accounts awaiting authorization this morning. Sucks to run a project when that's where the time goes. How are they getting past the CAPTCHA? Well, at least we don't get temporarily disabled.

Some of those note slices... rolls things, sound accidental, not deliberate. Hard to say which ones, but have a listen to that, and get rid of those that don't sound deliberate. Chord/key changes after 3 mins - good. Makes it less repetitive. Consider varying the soundscape a bit prior to that, it gets a little repetitive. Actually, you could drop the levels on the soundscaping a little, this feels more like a soundscape than a remix at times. Aside from that, I don't think I have anything else to say that'd be useful. Good luck with the track, man.

Very reliant on the beat and the looped background pad, which also makes it very repetitive. The first 40 seconds could be cut and it wouldn't make that much a difference to the track. You're also really low on the middle-middle high frquencies until 2:20. It makes it feel empty. It takes half the track before the bass comes in, that's not good either. As for source, I do hear and recognize it. The track is pretty minimalistic for mots of it's length. I'd like to hear more personalization in the melody. It currently sounds like you could replace the source with pretty much anything and it wouldn't change the track much. Repetitive, empty, and with the source not tied to the track properly. It's an interesting approach (with cool beat slicing) but you need to incorporate the source better. It sounds like you tried to stretch a single idea instead or bridging several ideas into a single track. I'd cut everything before 1:30, drop the bass until 1:50, and then work on building the track from there forth, perhaps by adding a similar sounding track from the game. There's some highlighted problems and suggestions for you. I wouldn't bother with this is I didn't think you'd be able to turn this around and make it so much better. Good luck with the track.

In case you haven't amde up your mind yet... Selection tools, shift-clicking individual notes... And Logic can, like I told zircon, be customized to carry the same tools as FL has by default, so you've got the pencil on the left mouse button and the eraser on the right. I don't know about the color-coordinating you mentioned, not whether it's real or not, or if it can be done in logic either. In Logic, tho, the strength (called velocity) of each note is displayed in the color of the note. FL might do the same, I don't know. Logic has channel faders. Ultimately, YES, then NO. They have different default instruments and different compatibility with plug-in formats, but they can both create great music, as should be evident from OCR's collection of tracks. I don't know if FL is easier than Logic. Both have a learning curve. Zephyr said it well: -- Most things in Logic is fully automatable. You can change time signature, tempo, channel settings, effect parameters... almost anything. The stuff about Logic being better suited for live recordings because "in FL everything is always easy to go back and edit" is a load of crap. Good thing Zephyr's not claiming to know both programs. As stated above, almost everything can be automated in Logic: volume, EQ settings, velocity, pitch bend, tempo, time signature, reverb mix, adsr... just about anything. This means you can go back and change just about anything. Just like Zephyr says you can in FL. -- Perhaps we should compile a feature list of the most popular DAWs. With feature list, I don't mean just a comparison of features, but also things like compatibility, OS, whether or not there's a trial version, to what extent it can be customized, number of effects, synths, and other stuff included, etc.

Tindeck.com for hosting. Welcome to ocr, and like OverCoat said, come post your works in the WIP forum. Hang around and listen to other ppl's works and read the feedback they get, you might learn something that way too. Don't be afraid to post your stuff, there are a lot of people with very different musical background and skill level there. Then there's the ocr FL subforum, for FL-specific questions; and the guides. I especially recommend zircon's compendium on remixing. And don't worry if you're just not getting it. Just try to learn something every time you read something or do something with FL.

You're aiming for rock, a little bit of metal I guess. This sounds a bit wannabe-ish as metal/rock/something. Sorry man. But look on the bright side, mon, I think this would work great as ska. The rhythm, pace, drum writing... Ska! Some fixes, and you'd be there. And OCR needs ska. Everyone does, mon. Source is clearly there, there's enough original stuff. Guitar playing is passable, and probably better than I'd do. Drums are light and lack the intensity they should have in something that's supposed to be heavy. If you'd go for my ska suggestion, you'd need to brighten the guitar, lose a little of the distortion but maybe add a little wah, add the typical upbeat rhythm guitar, make the bass more interesting (consider doing that anyway). You could go for a more reggae-sound in the calm middle section (ending at 2:50). Yeah, I've got no technical details to bother you with. Writing is good, production is unrefined, sound choices are inconsistant. You're half way there, too bad the second half is sometimes 90% of the work. Production needs work, you need to pick a genre, writing is fine (might need some minor fixes, but you'll have to find those yourself). Great job so far. Remember to take a backup in case whichever genre you pick doesn't work out.

Intro is pretty much the same as source, with a neat mallet with original writing. Arrangement overall is pretty much as source, but there's some cool additional writing, interesting sound choices, but an overall monotonous, repetitive sound. Here are some things you could do about that: new chord progression, different pace for the melodies, play the chords differently (e.g. arpeggio), change the key signature... When the trance-like section comes in, a really distorted melody starts playing. It has at least two flaws. One, the sound it really painful, it's like some frequency was boosted to the extreme, so dampen whatever frequency's doing that, and if you'ev cut higher frequencies, don't. Two, some of the time, the strings are occupying about the same frequency, especially when it plays after the drums come in - it gets pushed into the soundscape, it's not a lead. The tremolo strings sample doesn't sound good since the tremolo changes rate with the pitch of the sample. If you'd have several tremolo strings samples, you could layer them on top of each other to even it out, but they'd have to be different. It's a nice start, but aside from the additional instruments, there's not much original content here. You should cut the source apart, analyse it, and see what ideas arise from that. You need to make this your own, and you need to avoid making it repeat the same thing the same way with the only change being additional instruments. More variations, more change, more dynamics, make it interesting. From what I hear, you've got what it takes. Good luck!

You misunderstood. My bad. You assign a tool to each mouse button. I shouldn't have said "right-clicking with the eraser", I should have said "right clicking - when the eraser is set to the right mouse button" or something like that. Logic's eraser tool isn't any different from how you're describing FL's. Pencil+eraser, that's how you'd set the button behaviors in Logic 8. By default, it's pointer+a selection tool, but it's easily customized. Next time you use Logic, you'll be able to customize the mouse button behavior to suit your workflow. I use the pointer to select, move, and resize notes, and the pencil to create new ones. Like I said before, I don't need a separate eraser tool, I just select and press delete. That's how I do it, and I only need to change tools when changing note velocity. Using escape to change tools isn't very time-consuming anyway.

In Logic, you can do something similar to pattern-based sequencing, using loops instead of patterns. Looped MIDI regions. I don't know to what extent FL can use shorter measures, odd time signatures, and stuff, or playing stuff in different time signatures simultaneously, but Logic has no problem with that. The eraser tool - which can be customly set to be the right-click behavior - lets you wither click on a note to delete it, or select a bunch of notes and then click on them to delete. You'd prefer working with pencil+eraser, whereas I work with pointer+pencil. Pressing delete (aka backspace) to delete notes selected with the pointer (dragged or shift-clicked) becomes as intuitive as right-clicking with the eraser. It's just a question of how you prefer to work. Anything you're used to is faster. While a quick look around the MIDI settings and piano roll menus didn't reveal any way of shortening the playing of input notes to the duration of the click, I did find what avaris was talking about, shutting off the sound of notes being moved, resized, or input. That could be useful (green button sayin "out" in a pic of a MIDI plug, top left of editor) for me. It's utlimately up to whatever you are / wanna get used to.

Smenelian seems to be needing Logic 8. Logic 8 has some degree of customization, you can customize the left- and right-click behavior. By default, left-click is for moving and resizing notes and regions (or loops), and the right-click is a multiple selection tool. I've changed the right-click to be create new regions/notes instead, since I can select with the left-click tool anyway. Left-click and right-click then select (and modify) and create notes/regions respectively, pretty much as you needed. Deleting notes is done via backspace, tho you can customize that to happen on right-click too if you prefer that. On a laptop, the command button lets me change between the two buttons, it gets intuitive after a litle while, especially since I was familiar with GarageBand. WHen you do need to change tools, pressing escape will open the tool menu where your cursor is at. EternalWrath, if you're getting a relatively recent Mac that you can run Windows on, try out FL. If you get GarageBand with it, try that out too (on the Mac side, obviously). GB is an oversimplified version of Logic 8, at least in terms of interface and features, but it should at least let you be more familiar with it. Then it's just a matter of preference and requirements. -- As for the confusion of notes from multiple regions in the same view... Double-clicking on the background is gonna display all notes. Looped regions' notes are only displayed first, the notes aren't repeated. In Logic 8, selecting multiple regions displays all notes in those regions. Double-clicking the background does the same thing as in Logic 7 afaik. It's useful when you know what you're doing, but I understand it's frustrating if it happens by accident. There might be some keystroke that does this too.

The piano sounds very rigid and, it's playing a simple melody for the first part of the track. When it starts playing chords, it gets better, especially with the little melody you repeat between chords. As for the solo in the end, raise the volume and drop the velocity, you're having really hard notes. You might want to do that some other places too. It's kind'a similar to the source, you could change more to make it more than a sound upgrade with some minor changes and a synth solo on top of the track. The synth, by the way, feels a bit too loud and sharp, you could bring it down a bit. The drums are really repetitive, and some simpler drumming would fit the track, with a section more like what you've got _occasionally_. Also, panning drums hard left is very rarely a good idea. The pad you've used is good. The sound reminds me, as a former GB user, of Summoner's Love, and you might learn something about GB from This Feeling too, despite your track being much less frantic. The pad is good, imo, but if it's a preset you should do something to make it your own. Subtle changes, nothing big. The individual instrument tracks don't seem to mesh well, rhythmically. Some bits fit together, some don't, the drums being a good example, and tho the panning might exaggerate that, it's worth looking into. I'd say this is a good start, but you'd have to do more to get it on OCR. It's unbalanced, raw (as in unrefined), and needs to be less repetitive. Some EQ and leveling would be a good start, but you will need to work on the arrangement and sequencing too. Don't get me wrong, it's enjoyable already, but it can be better.

This probably belongs in Help & Newbies. Anyway, I think your problem is that you've only downloaded the bittorrent file. You need a torrent app to download the actual music, the torrent file is how the software finds the music. I dunno what software is the best, but here's the most obvious choice. If that's not the problem, let us know. As for burning it to a CD, or several (once you've actually got the music), iTunes can do that. Dunno what your best choice is, but iTunes should work.

Unless I missed writing something down, Harvest November is free. Gonna use the tabla there?

I remember this source. Cool. As for the arrangement, it gets a little repetitive. You've got the repeated part loudest, and only the quieter background chords change. Separate them with EQ and raise the level of the changing stuff. Also, the panning is a little weird, you've got the acoustic guitar dead in the center, and everything melodic happening around it. It gets unbalanced at times. Not sure what I would do to fix that. It should also be tighter, it seems to meander around the tempo of the drums a little. The sound is a little sparse, tho the drums and the lack of bass might be the culprits there. I'm really no fan of those drum samples, especially the ride or hihat, whatever you've used. Too long. Also, consider using a strings pad or something to even out the soundscape at times. For a relaxing track, maybe more than with aggressive ones, you need a balanced soundscape, both in frequencies and panning. However, this does sound like it could be great, but it needs to be tighter, more balanced, and more alive.

A very different feel than the source, but I recognize the source in the wip, so it's all good. The pad might be a bit too heavy on the low range, it makes the whole piece a little muddy. It doesn't bother the melody, being loud and clear, and far up in the frequency range, but it makes the lower range a little muddy imo. The higher range, on the other hand, feels a bit empty, but I think that's more of a matter of personal taste. Overall, I think it's a little too repetitive, but then again, it's relaxing enough for that not to matter. To me anyway. Soundscape is good, bass interesting, and progression nice. I don't like the hihats you've used, one of the samples is too ticky, another too long. A solo on the gliding high-range background instrument would be cool, even if it was a short one. The instrument plays in the end of the break near the end. I like it.