Rozovian

Hey there, Welcome to the OCR workshop forums moderation team. Dude, albums are fine here. Yeah, ppl might want to focus on a single track and give feedback on that, but this forum is fine for albums. Where else would you put them? Only posted remixers get to post their releases in Community. Album releases, finished tracks, all that stuff is fine. The one song per thread rule was mainly to get more focused feedback on works in progress.

Name it? Stuart. Done. Sounds like an ooh choir sound, probably synthetic and from one of those iconic synths/samplers of the 80s. Check the low registers of any choir patches you've got, sampler or synth. You can probably get pretty close by finding an bunch of choir vowel sounds and pitching them down a lot. My guess is that it's an eh or ah, but because the formants shift when you pitch it down, it sounds like an ooh. You might be able to put together something similar with formant filters and things, but I think it'd be easier to work with samples for this.

I find there's little left to say that DS didn't already cover.

Yo Syllix, did you have any issues with plugins when you upgraded? I'm still on Logic 8, been meaning to update but a little concerned about compatibility with my older projects and the instruments I've used.

I have a remixing guide in my sig. It's intended for beginners, but you can look through it and see if there's some basic stuff you've missed, or read the more advanced stuff I've thrown in.

Updated first post. Guys... ...so close. This is getting exciting.

10chars stupid10chars

Understand what you're doing. If you don't understand what you're doing, mess with it and read stuff about it until you do. Understand what others are saying. Disagree all you want, but understand it anyway. Make something every day. If it sucks, that's fine. Dig it up later and figure out why it sucks. If it doesn't suck, figure out why. Understand music. Music isn't just theory, and isn't just sound design. Learn both. I have some reading material in my sig. Read that, or something else about how to do this stuff. Read stuff about making music.

That's not grounds for rejection. There are lots of remixes in similar styles, with similar instrumentation, and of the same source. You won't be rejected for remixing something that's been remixed before. Submission standards here.

- hihat is too loud - drum rhythms are jerky - track lacks mids - transitions are clunky - arrangement doesn't go anywhere How to solve: - hihat is too loud - reduce hihat levels - drum rhythms are jerky - that's okay in the intro and maybe in the break, but for the chorus and other driving parts, you should go for a simple, plain, straight rhythm instead. if you don't want that, start with it anyway, and then modify it. - track lacks mids - either eq the mid-range stuff so those parts are louder, or add something that adds mids. or both. just don't overdo it. - transitions are clunky - you can use crashes to start the chorus parts with, and reverse crashes to lead into them. you don't have to, but it's a simple trick for marking parts as new and big and dynamically important. it also helps to have a focused arrangement. - arrangement doesn't go anywhere - rIght now, it's something like intro->chorus->break->buildup->chorus->ending. it's a simple but fine progression, but the parts don't seem to lead into one another, they just end and the next one starts. make each part build into the next. figure out how to control the listeners' excitement level for each part. this is hard to put into words, but it's kind'a like telling a story with music. You've got good sounds and some decent parts in here, you just have to make sense of where they are and where they're going.

Don't exaggerate, Meteo. I only work 170 hours a week. Gonna change Pete's color, changing Jaka's when I get the wav. Why don't people send stuff to both of us?

Yeah, we try. We can try harder. Seriously though, I think it's something that's very much a result of staff, veterans and frequent posters being cool people, as well as an effect of the respect people have for the people who make the music here.

2.5 years is such a long time. I stand by what I think I said back whenever - once I'm done with sd3, I've got time to help out the other mana projects. We're currently four almost completed tracks from handing it over for eval, so it shouldn't take more than a couple of years. If this is still running when I'm available, I'll come and grab a track.

That metal pipe (or whatever) effect you've got doing rhythm stuff might be a little excessively prominent. Transition into the breakdown part didn't feel entirely smooth, but I don't think it's a big deal. If the source is in the green now, the track should be too. Cool stuff. btw, my self-inflicted torture track from a few years back, if you're interested

Not sure why you're talking about mastering when the track's biggest problems is arrangement. I'm not really getting what you're going for with the track, either. Easy NO, sorry. What can you do? A lot, differently. Here's some of what I would do. It might help to get a different perspective on how your parts fit together (and which ones don't): The hihat is too loud. Its rhythm is jerky which works for an intro or a break, but not for the chorus. The whole track seems to be EQd to lose some mids, which makes it sound emptier than it really is. You could improve the intro by fixing the hihat level and making sure there's more mids, either with EQ or by adding some mid-range thing. An easy trick for intros, breaks and verses is to have a very velocity-sensitive pad, play long notes and just up the velocity every few bars. It creates a sense of movement, builds anticipation for the next part, and contributes to transitioning between parts. That's the next thing, transitions. You have some. They don't all work that well. The first, into the first chorus, sort of works. I get the idea behind it, but it's really just a drop and then a rather empty chorus starts. Start off the chorus with a crash or something to accentuate the new parts. If if it's a soft crash in the background, it helps. Like the intro, the chorus lacks mids. Worse still if it's not intentional, the chorus lacks bass. Also, the hihat rhythm does not work here. You have piano, hihat, snare, bass drum, synth lead, synth bell, and possibly a synth pad under it all. The piano works ok, but I wouldn't use it with a main chorus. We might have different idea of what to do with the chorus, so don't just blindly follow my suggestions. The chorus should have drive. To get drive, you need a strong, forward-driving rhythm on hihat and snare (bass drum is fine) so I would suggest replacing what you've got with a standard hihat on off-beat, snare on every other kick type super-simple rhythm, and mess with that until I had something more itneresting that doesn't jerkily stagger the track's rhythm; you can't stop the chorus on the last bar, let the synth play something there, too (except when you want that chorus to end on a downer note); add a nice rhythmic bass (or for a softer chorus, bass pad or just long notes) and maybe also the rhythmic pad that follows the first chorus. Coming out of the chorus, you can break the track right there, you can go into your jerky rhythm, or you can keep the drive the chorus had to ease people out of it. RIght now, you drop out the bass drum and go straight into a build-up mode that builds a bit and then gets stuck on that energy level. For a build-up, you typically want it to keep getting higher and higher and build towards the chorus or whatever part that follows. I would either do a hard break, dropping out almost everything and then slowly starting to add elements during a long buildup; or keep the rhythm for a verse-type part, after which I can go back into a chorus or do a big break and build-up. For dance, you want to have the bass drum running for most of the track, only dropping out for effect in build-ups or other special parts. Your choice of sound, the sound design, is overall okay. There are some very good chocies in here, and then there are choices that might work if they weren't too loud (which instrument in particular might I be talking about? ). The piano and the synths blend well together, and I don't think any of your sounds in this track is actually bad in any way. You just gotta find their place and use them right. You have some good ideas, and you experiment with stuff like the off-beat snare and odd hihat rhythm, leaving out the bass from the chorus and having parts where the kick drops out. That's good. You're just not using those ideas effectively, and instead end up with some weird transitioning parts that listeners struggle to place in a dynamic structure. I think you haven't quite grasped structure and momentum in music. It'll come. Listen to some predictable stupid simple dance and figure out how they can have that momentum in spite of their simplicity. Consider rhythm, length of parts, dynamics, structure, sequence... consider everything. Keep at it.

Intro gives me a strong Cave Story vibe. Cool. I'm digging the sound. It's retro but very strong. Once the track gets going, it seems to settle into a very safe, cover-ish structure. That's a shame, you could be messing up the source in so many interesting ways. It's a shame, but I don't think it's a problem. Again, the sound is pretty awesome. The break in the middle has some really sweet ring modulation-like sound to it. Nice. I think the break was more intense than the subsequent passage, though. Could be those background water sounds or just noise sweeps or whatever they are. You might want to look into that before subbing. Because this is subbable. Approach 4:00, you have a nice, appropriately messed up source. I'm happy. I'm normally against the use of sound effects in music, but the retro fx fit right in with the retro sound here, and they're used discretely enough to not be a problem*. Nice work. (* Except the very last one; it goes from more complex sounds to an 8-bit death fx. I'd automate a bitcrusher to bring the sound quality down to the same level for a smoother transition. I'd do something. It's jarring. It's annoying. It bothers me. ME!)

Oh great, voice clips. Whiny lead, empty soundscape, excessive bass. This is off to a great start. Some source is there, both in the bass in the intro, and in the whiny lead later on. But that's about it. I might be missing something, but I'm not sold on the source usage. I guess the two-note backings and the bass are referencing the harmony, but backing chords tend to not count as source unless they're very distinct. To me, these sound more like compatible chords than necessarily source-based. You have material for a really cool intro and break, but there's no substance, no beef in the track. The source doesn't seem to be the dominant element of the arrangement either, that's the bass. Naturally, you can make bass-heavy mixes where the bass is just a cool element and not particularly based on source, but in this case, there's just too little other stuff that ties the track to the source. The processing on the voice clips is interesting, but I think they're too loud. I also don't like voice clips in general, but that's a more subjective crit than anything else. I'd say no. Needs more beef and more sauce... source.

Not a straight cover, it's a medley. Which, like straight covers, isn't quite what ocremix is about. I'm guessing this would be rejected for that before other arrangement, sound, or other considerations. It's length is a contributing factor, but I guess that's because your method seems to be to transition into new sources. it flows fairly well, and the choice of sources, or how they're used, makes for a compelling structure. But it's still stupidly long, making it difficult to analyze for people coming from tracks that average at a quarter of its length. I did notice it was a bit sample-y in the beginning. I'm not sure to what extent I just tuned that out, and to what extent you improved over the course of the track, but it was noticeable. Either because of the intro or for other reasons, it never fooled me into thinking it was real, but it's close enough for that to not be particularly detracting. I imagine this would sit comfortably next to stuff by Jeremy Robson, Nutritious, Archangel, and a bunch of other orchestral remixers on ocr. I don't know the sources well enough, and as it's a stupidly long track with a stupid amount of sources, I'm not even gonna try to analyze that whole aspect of it. Someone with a better grasp of how to analyze long tracks, and with a better grasp of the source would do a better job at that anyway. By your own admission, it's a cover (which means it's a medley), so it wouldn't get past the panel anyway. Feel free to sub it anyway. I could be wrong, the judges might have some better feedback for you, and it could clarify some stuff on cover-medleys. Quite enjoyable, difficult to analyze, medley.

A history of vgm show? Start from the super early stuff like Space Invaders and talk about the tech, technical milestones, influential composers and soundtracks, that stuff. How did we get from four beeps to live orchestra?

I use loops from time to time, and always want to do something to make them my own. My Eye of the Storm mix uses some of Logic's own loops. The problem with loops is that other music people might recognize the loop and judge you for it. And even if they never do, you're doing it for them jsut by thinking they might. So mangle the loops if you're worried about having elements that sound like something someone else has used, or if it sounds lazy, or for whatever reason. The aforementioned EOTS has the lows completely filtered out of the drum loops I used, and I create more motion in the loop by automating some other filter things. If you want to use loops but are concerned about sounding like someone else, just mangle your loops if they're too recognizable.

- Vary velocities to make a groove - Swing note timings slightly to make a groove - Make a groove

Give me the logs and screenshots, I'll look into it. I'm gonna close this thread next time I see it if there isn't any music in it. This is the place for works in progress, not for complaining about #ocrwip (that can be discussed here instead.). edit: I just deleted two posts because they contributed nothing of value. Don't make things worse, guys. Thread closed. If you want to reopen it, neurogen, let me know. Also get me those logs, I want to see what happened, whether you're misreading the #ocremix or #ocrwip community or if that community consists of asshats.

Hah, made it with half a minute to spare (in my time zone). Thanks folks.