Rozovian

While it's a stylistic choice, I'd lose the noises. There's also a voice sample somewhere in the background that I'd get rid of. That's me, tho. This is a nice remix. Nice source track, nice remix. It gets pretty repetitive tho. Doing a longer reverse section wouldn't be bad, methinks. Before 2:40. The following sections become different enough when the drums are lost. Dualing pianos in slo-mo, is that a good idea? After 3 mins, you've got a right-panned piano. Would be interesting to hear a left-panned one play something too. And seriously, you can't end a track like this with a long single note, it sounds like a heart monitor of someone that just died. With the exception of macabre dark humor games, it's just too sad. It's a nice remix. Pleasant, soothing, nice.

I like this. It gets a little long, tho. Not even half way through, I feel like I've heard enough. It needs a hook. It's pretty, but not impressive. Something's weird about it, because the latter half just went by without me noticing. I suggest adding more piano action to vary the texture: play higher, play lower, play simpler, play more elaborate... I'd also consider adding cymbals and/or timpani for occasional punctuation. I'm a bit feverish, so my suggestions might be a little odd today. See what works.

The NEWER WiP. The NEW WiP. The old WiP. The older WiP. A midi. Just looking for general feedback.

FL=Fruity Loops, a digital audio workstation - the software you need to make music. Gollgagh, you brat, I'm 22.

If you have a good idea of how it could sound, why don't you download a 30-day trial version of FL or some otehr software and remix it yourself? The result may not be as awesome as if an OCR superstar would remix it, but chances are you'll have to wait a long time to get the track remixed otherwise.

I like the bass. Maybe it's just the kind of remix where the good parts just blend into the whole and the bad ones stand out. Seeing how loud and cool the bass is, I'm surprised it didn't stand out last listen. I guess I was listening to flaws, not music. Anyway, there's a thread about EQ in the ReMixing forum, see what you can learn there. My advice would be to avoid having two instruments in the same frequency range so they're competing, but since you're not trying to balance a dozen instruments, it shouldn't be a problem. A recorded guitar means it'll kick ass. if your friend is any good, I mean. I said empty execution. It sounds separated. A live guitar might cure that, but I recommend adding a riff or rhythm or something to play under the lead. Not too loud or dominant, but enough to even out the range and throw some more coolness into it. Don't get me wrong, occasional emptier sections are one way to vary the track, but most of the time, it's best to avoid separating sounds like that.

OCR doesn't seem to require the remixer to fill out the ID3 tags anymore, so if it's just for OCR, I guess you don't have to worry. Correct me if I'm wrong, anyone. Here's some links that might help you. #5 in a google search for "ID3 tags". Here's #2, ID3 homepage. And #1 was Wikipedia.

Probably Still Alive. Great track deserving a remix, but how can a remix make it any better?

lol @ gimgak's sig + Dr.Rod. Gimgak, are you trying to get of DOCTOR Rod by reviewing his WiP? Repetition, medley-itic instant transitions... First minute and a half seems like you're trying to find what you want to do with the track. Then again, you've got a nice stereo soundscape, good source, nice samples, cool backing melodies entering towards the middle of the track. From 1:40 and on, I like it. There's still repetition, and the strings need work, so does the overall panning, it feels like everything's a tad to the right, except the strings that sound more out of place when not conforming to this. So, more variation, blend sections together better, and see if you can cut out some length from the first minute and a half. The whole track is 4 minutes, and the repetition is gonna make if feel dull to listen to. Also, I'd add _some_ high EQ to the piano, or drop the lower range a bit. The piano bass seems to overpower the higher notes at times. This is a quite promising WiP, but it's not submittable yet.

Sounds good to me. Good luck!

The biggest newb flaws I'm hearing in this is medley-itis, tho someone who knows the source and/or isn't too lazy to look it up should check it. That's at least what it sounds like to me. Then there's the lack of a volume mix. There's some nice melodies here, but they're drowning. Too much going on at the same volume. Drop the volume on everything but what's important to that section. Blend the sections together more organically so you don't have to pause before getting into a new section. Use the instruments to blend sections instead of switching synths all the time. Nothing wrong with switching synths, but it too should be organic. Those are what I found. Hope it helps.

Can't you accomplish the same by just using pitch bend on some random synth? Better yet, use a synth envelope set to control the pitch.

What's wrong with the crashes and some other cymbal sounds? It sounds like you've added some weird reverb on it. Guitar needs reverb, tho. Especially when it's staccato solo, that sounds really dry and bad. Bass+guitar+drums, good recipe, empty execution. The drums are too complex for a fairly simple guitar melody, and everything seems to happen in two very distant ends of the frequency spectrum. I recommend adding something in the frequencies in between, another guitar maybe? The more intense area leading up to the ending is really cool. Guitars towards the end, just before the piano - they're weird. Not bad weird, they're interesting weird. There's some thoughts. I'm looking forward to seeing this on OCR, but there's still kinks to work out before then.

lol 10chars

Intro needs a more epic lead sound. Louder and more reverb, outdoor concert sound. 1:20, boring. Previous section too long. Then I hear you've added a background guitar. Sounds better, but is a little too quiet, imo. 2:35 Wash, rinse, repeat. This would be the place to use double-tempo drums, especially as the following section is so dang slow. Also, this has very much a mono-sound. Record another guitar exactly like the lead, and phard-pan them each in opposite directions. The more alike they are, the better sound you'll get. Nice solo at the end, but the mixing feels a bit unbalanced. Either let the solo be background or foreground, don't have it share space with the old melody. Ultimately, I gotta say this is boring. I'm sorry, that's just what I think. It needs more energy from somewhere, and my suggestion is using more intense drums. This by no means bad, but it's not interesting either. _That_ is the thing you should focus on, make it more interesting. Nice job so far.

Once the drums come in, it would be cool to be hearing a way more complex synth, electric guitar, electric fiddle, something more organic than the simple synth used in the intro. Heh, chiptune arpeggio. Overall, it sounds promising, but probably needs to step up in terms of sound quality for most part. I have no problem with the chiptune content, but moderation is key. Simplifying or chippyfying the rest of the track to suit the simpler synths is stupid, since this would be awesome with high-quality sounds. Since I don't know the source, I'm just gonna say Taucer makes a good point. If he's right about the source.

Eh... This is interesting. You've bitcrushed the drums, you've killed the lead's high frequencies, and have mixed it to call more attention to the drums and the backing arrangement than the melody itself. You're using fairly simple synths much of the time. I'd like to hear this break out of the lo-fi after a minute or less. It could easily rock. Just by fixing levels, EQ, and removing the bitcrusher, you could reallly improve it. Especially if you know how to transition from one to the other. I'm feeling some sense of direction, and the arrangement is pretty neat. I can't get over the low-quality synths. They work as an intro, but for the rest of the track, the bitrate has got way too much headspace. Break out of lo-fi and rock on. This ain't bad, I like where this could be heading. Just needs some more time and work to get there.

Heavily distorted synths, each hard-panned in each direction; clutter from lack of mixing, very inconsistant sound, but not to the point that it's bad. Pausing for drum-only breaks before going to the next source theme makes it sound very medley-itic. Without looking up the source, I'd guess you've stitched together some MIDI with drumloops. There's a nice progression, and I hear how this could turn out pretty nice, but it needs work. If you're sticking with the synthy soundscape, you should at least focus on using them consistently. Pan stuff less and worry more about their volume and how they work together. I noticed a lot of clashing notes and melodies, so fix those. Go for a more consistant synth sound, ie use the same synths instead of switching to new ones every time you get to a new source. And while on the topic of sources, blend them together better. A lot of the synths you're using don't really contribute with m uch more than clutter, the bass and some of the backing synths need replacing. Take a backup before doing any changes, tho. This isn't bad, but it's not cohesive either. The soundscape is a mess and the arrangement is newby. I applaud the motivation, and wish you luck. This needs loads more work, but nice job so far.

Aww... You've removed the explosive intro. 0:20 or 0:31 should explode into the track. Putting a bitcrusher or crappy EQ on the 0:20-0:31 section could solve that, or just by adding a little pause before 0:20. Otherwise, it's as awesome as we've come to expect from you. Little more I can say. It's varied despite repeating a seemingly short source, it's got loads of attutude throughout. I've got no complaints, besides the lack of an explosive entrance. Okay maybe one more complaint: The synth in the very end sounds cheesy. It is awesome, and I'm not surprised.

It takes a little too long before it opens, the sound effects segment is a bit too long and the synth "power-up" doesn't mesh well with the soft section that follows. The melody is also a bit tough to make out in the bg organ pad, consider automating a sharper attack/release when the bg organ pad plays solo. I don't think it's ocr material, but it sounds cool enough to worth doing anyway. Besides, you can always chop up the final piece and submit each theme separately. Overall, I think it'll turn out enjoyable.

Looks like you didn't change the file name to something that works on the net. I can't download it. Kill all spaces and punctuation and other symbols that can screw it up, and use a shorter name.

Honestly, I think it isn't worth it. While meshing the two sources together works quite well, that's the only significant innovation. They're both over-remixed tracks, so without some really stunning... thing, it's not worth it. At least not for OCR.

A cool track, I gotta admit. While not a big fan of chiptunes, I do enjoy hearing the occasional piece based on a limited chip. I doubt you'll get it on ocr, but it's a cool track, so thanks for sharing. Needs an ending tho. Actually, if you can put enough direction in this, you might have a shot at getting it on ocr. As you need an anding anyway, it's worth a shot, ain't it?

v5: Good sound upgrade and mixfix. It's a bit hard to grasp what's intro and what isn't. Overall, there's a really weird lack of direction at times. Direction is difficult unless you've planned the progression from the beginning, or if you're really lucky. 1:24, the stab doesn't sound good, it's like the high range has been cut off and it's all too dry. Give it some more release time, drop decay or sustain level if it becomes a too long sound. At 2:20 it's starting to sound like the ending, at least from how cluttered it is. Kill the clutter, see what tracks you doin't need there. At 3:12, the clutter fades, but 'til then, unclutter, unclutter, unclutter! While you've successfully stretched the source material without looping the same section over and over, you've still managed to make it kind'a repetitive, and disorienting your listeners. This listener at least. You could have ended it around 2:40 or something, and didn't. Where are you heading with this track? Take a step back and look at it like looking on a map, and ask: where do you start from, where are you heading, what will you see on the way? Summed up: Sound is okay, arrangment is okay, direction is lacking. Now comes the hard part: chopping up your baby, moving parts around, and throwing away the stuff you don't need. (don't forget to take a backup)

Big question. I'll help with the first part of it. Synths are a combination of different simple waves and some effects. These effects and waves can be controlled by different parameters. The ADSR envelope is one of those, it controls the volume. Imagine a sine wave and a triangle wave. Sine is soft, triangle is sharp. Imagine an ADSR that controls the mix between these: it starts with the triangle wave, but fades into the sine wave. That's essentially what you have here. Essentially. That's when the effect is a "mix". Other effects can be cutoff, volume, pitch, resonance, overdrive, pan, etc.. Effects can also be controlled by an LFO (low frequency oscillator, by modulation) instead of envelope, or controlled by both. Depending on the synths you use, you may or may not be able to do this. With a number of effects controlled by different parameters, you can come up with loads of different sounds. Google is your friend, google synthesis, synth tutorial, synth manual, see what you can coem up with. Good luck!