Rozovian

A wav will typically be about ten times the size of a decent mp3 of same length, so yeah, it's bigger, and bigger still if it's 24 bit or a higher sample rate. In your case, I'd guess you're dealing with a 24 bit wav, which is a little excessive. Bring it down to 16 bit and you should have a more manageable size, tho it'll still be around 10*mp3.

Most of you guys say master when you mean finalize. As for the question, yeah, mixing, unless you consider sound design to be separate from mixing. In this case, consider starting by building an intense bass and then shaping the other instruments around that. Get your intense bass and then make it work with the kick, snare and lead. once you're there, the rest should be just a question of not making anything else so loud that it interferes with those, and you should have your intense bass right there. That's not to say there aren't things you can do in finalizing the track that'll add to it, but you definitely won't make it intense by taking a meh bess and expecting a multiband compressor on the whole mix to turn it intense. Bass-y, sure (at a cost of eg dynamics), but intense? Nope.

Haven't yet listened to it. Work eats up a lot of my time (mostly because of the commuting), and I'm spending a little more time gaming to unwind. Blaine's track has gone from quite newby to really cool sounding, I'm just gonna give him some final edits, if necessary. I haven't gone anywhere, it's just that I tend to process things slower now that I have less time. PMs on ocr and emails work fine, ppl. Facebook and Skype aren't as reliable, I'm barely on AIM or irc anymore, and I haven't ever received anything by carrier pigeon. That preview thing is probably gonna get somewhere next week. No work for a week! Just throw together a preview vid and finally show you guys what we've got. Also, I might get Frenzy a few steps closer to done then. And it's not like there's a lot of tracks left. Guys and gals. realistically, a month and it could be done and handed over for release evals. That'd be awesome. Also, remixers, sign the consent form if you haven't, send us a short bio, some notes about the track... and if you want, an improved, updated version of the track if you're not happy with it. There's still time.

With my meandering concoctions (some ppl try to call them arrangements), it's usually for the better that I don't cover arrangement too much, but it's clearly something I should improve on. We're all learning here.

Quoted with emphasis. btw Larry, if you're cool with the quality of the avatars I've put together, I could gather and eval all the avatars ppl have suggested and pass on the ones that I think are up to par. It's not a high priority, but it's one of those things I usually have some spare time and energy for.

As convenient as built-in arpeggiators are, you can do pretty much the same thing with just plenty of notes in some interesting rhythm on any synth. A few hints: - make sure the synth responds to different velocities, eg with changes in filter or waveform; and vary your notes' velocity - start off with short attack, short release notes, and experiment from there on, maybe a longer attack on either amplitude or filter fits the sound you're looking for - legato / a bit of glide/portamento can be just as cool as clean and distinct notes - use chords where appropriate, either in sequence in a one-note-at-a-time arpeggio, or as what ends up as a sustained chord with a lot of rhythmic changes to timbre and level - you can also use the modulation wheel and other midi cc as well as effect automation to change the sound, eg in a build-up to a chorus or when going into a softer part - if you aggressively filter out the frequencies of the sound, you can get a fair amount of variation just by writing an arpeggio melody spanning several octaves - you have more control of your arpeggio when you write it yourself, in that you can control how often each note is used, and when; maybe the root of the chord isn't that important - some DAWs come with their own arpeggiators that you can route your midi through - random notes quantized and adjusted to the appropriate scale can make for really interesting and inspiring rhythms and melodies Unfortunately, I have no synth suggestions with built-in arpeggiators.

If it can make sound, it can make music. The rest is just a matter of how, how well, how conveniently. While it's completely possible to write audio in notepad, I think LMMS is a better tool. That said, workflow, built-in tools and techniques, plug-in support, interface, and so many other things factor into what makes any music software good. TL;DR: Use it if you want to. If it becomes too limiting, use something else.

Imma shoot you an email with some art stuff.

You can always unfinish it, like I do with my tracks, occasionally. Just need to screw with my drums a bit and I think mine is done.

Is your bass drum panned? Don't do that unless you're imitating a band. Woodwinds are mechanical and sometimes waay too loud. Track is messy. It takes a minute, but then I start hearing things reminiscent of the source. A lot seems to be original writing on top of the source's bassline. Other instruments also have really silly loudness problems, being way louder than the rest of the track. Balance the track better. Guitar towards the end - guess if it too is too loud. This kind of orchestra/electronic hybrid seems like it'd work well if the instruments were just balanced better, and more human (where applicable). I count around 2 and a half minute of source. Either I'm missing something or there's too much original writing here. You know what's source and what's not, so you know if I'm right or wrong. More source, more human orchestral stuff, more balance. Let's see where it is after that. Good luck.

Droplets sfx is too loud. ...then to the 6/8 rhythm of the track. Yay! Superbirght and loud hihat. Loud bass drum, which makes the otherwise soft track kind'a weird. its especially jarring during the piano section. The rest of the drums sound like you've filtered out not just lows but also their mids. Snares usually need some mids. None of the other instruments seem to contribute any mids, so consider adding something to fill that range. 3:19 transition is a bit hard. It's not breaking the track, but it could be better. Your voice synth stuff are also really bright and shrill. Careful with your highs. Ending works well. Frequency balance is your biggest problem with the track. The pacing of each part of the arrangement could be better as well, which should make the track flow a little better. Source is there, no problem there. Needs work, but in a pretty good place to build form.

Really loud. Especially loud high-end percussion and other high stuff. Tone that stuff down a bit. Piano is a bit soft compared to the electronic instrumentation. One minute in, source is obvious. Some weird harmonies behind it. I hear references and use of the source's backing elsewhere in the track, so it should be in the clear source-wise. Ending feels a bit lame. Not so much the fade, but that nothing else changed during the ending. You just drop to a solo and fade once the solo is over. Feels a bit cheap. Too loud stuff, and with some other minor mixing problems. Weird harmonies. Boring ending. Otherwise it works quite well. A bit too much saturation and other loudening. Balance it better and you should have a pretty good shot at the site here. Cool stuff.

Dude, avoid uploading wavs just for crits. Kick seems a little bassy when you've already got a strong bass. The rest of the drums are too weak by comparison. Decide which way you wanna go - bassy kick or bassy bass, and adjust accordingly. You know what? The drums are too weak, period. Everything else is louder. When that epiano is louder than your drums, in what sounds like a metal hybrid, something's wrong with the mix. Grab some recent metal tracks from ocr and compare. Even if you can't make yours as loud as they are, you can make yours as balanced. Just going by other ppl's comments and your own, biased ears can easily lead to a really weird mix. Compare. The sound design is really nice. The ending could be a little bigger, and maybe those synthy strings aren't the best to end it on. They work fine for most of the track, but they fall flat when exposed like that. The writing all feels cohesive and like it's based on source, tho someone more familiar with the source can probably say for sure. Arrangement is nice and varied. In other words, the mix is the problem. Can't find anything but tiny nitpicks that'd be wrong with the arrangement and sound design. So just mix it better and it should be in the clear.

So apparently, the Water source is by Mendelssohn, or so a YT commenter says. It's a really fun arrangement. Lots of fun sound design there as well. Guitar is a bit loud in the mix, and if you drop that, you might have to drop the drums a bit too. Can't come up with a lot of issues on the production side of things, but the arrangement feels a bit like a medley, and I'm not that familiar with the sources so I can only ay that they're there, not how well they're really used together. Feels like a medley tho. Structurally sound, but source-wise a bit too much like a medley. Source A, source B, source A source C, etc, that kind of thing. I don't mind the last note's lack of bass, it sounds deliberate imo. So if this gets rejected, it's on the basis of the source usage, imo. The rest sounds good. Nice work, really fun track.

Man this track is gritty. Couldn't make sense of the Joker source, but the HC source is there. If there's something this track will fail on, it's probably source, cuz the rest sounds pretty good. Also, there's a voice clip fairly early on that doesn't bother me. What has the world come to? More voice acting later on, and it's pretty good, but I don't don't like ppl talking in my music. That's me tho. Transition at 4:56 felt a bit weird, but the rest of the track flows well. I can't think of anything left to do besides a quick comparison with gritty tracks already on ocr to check that your levels are about right. I'd say it's subbable. It's always a little hard to judge gritty, noisy tracks with their inherent noise and distortion, but unless I've really missed something, this is postable. Nice work.

Dat bass. Obvious source at 0:35. 1:28 micro-break seems a bit superfluous and doesn't gel with the rhythm. It's the kind of thing that usually works later in the mix. There are some weaker instances of this around the 2 min mark, not as annoying, not as dramatic either. I would experiment with this thing and figure out where it's most effective and most useful and use it once or twice like that. It's got loads of groove, but the arrangement is pretty much just alternating between sources. Source A with groove, source B with groove, source A with groove... Structurally and dynamically it doesn't feel like it ever starts. It stays in intro mode until 0:30... but that too feels like it's in intro mode, as does 0:48, 1:02 feels like a chorus, but it's as if we missed out on when the track actually got started, like there's a verse missing. Also, one minute intro to a 3 minute track? The only issues that really stand out are arrangement issues. You've got a strong concept here, the sound design and production as well as the groove. Just make sense of how the track moves and you should be fine. Source usage seems to be somewhat medley-itic, so a little more blending of the source, more overlap and interplay and it should make more sense, source-wise. Then again, I'm no expert on Sonic soundtracks, so I could be wrong about that. In any case, it's a solid concept, just needs a bit more work on the arrangement end of things. If you wanna keep it short, you gotta make the initial build-up faster so the 0:48 part feels like the verse rather than a chorus. Just adding the snare there can do a lot. If you wanna make it longer, insert parts in between to bridge the parts. Groove on.

Hi and welcome. Surely no-one would make fun of your name. If you want feedback on your works, drop by the remix board. Good luck with your mixes on the panel. Welcome everyone else, too.

Depends on how you're gonna remix it. The compositions from way back are public domain. A random recorded performance probably isn't. So you can midi rip them all you want, but you can't sample orchestral recordings unless they're waaay old. (thanks a lot, copyright mafia)

Hard to grasp the rhythm before the heavily reverbed backing stuff comes in. Bass might be a tad too loud. I'd give it a longer decay, lower sustain and slightly longer release. The mix feels weird when the bass drops out between notes. 2:05, clashing. That whole part has some strange harmonies overall, but most of it just sounds weird, not wrong. There's some occasional timing issues. Yeah, they add realism. Yeah, they can still do that even with some timing edits. 1:42, 1:55, 2:10 stand out, but there's probably a few others. Sounds design is really cool, but there's some cleanup left to do before I'd be happy with it. I would... -try to reduce that occasional super-bright piercing thing in the flute -likewise the sustained synth in the 0:30 part -definitely do something about the fm synth at 0:54; it's a great sound but it's too shrill here. either reduce the fm strength or eq it. i'd start with the former. -1:32 could use some slightly softer or less bass-y pads, since the bass needs a little more room in that part of the track It's a bit on the repetitive side, but it works imo. It's a little hard to get a good grip of the arrangement, but it feels like the same track throughout, and does seem to have an intro-main-break-main2 structure to it. Source is there, and imo interpreted enough. There's some nitpicky things I'd be bothered by if I made it and it got posted. This sounds like it could get posted, just make sure to file off the shrill edges and clashes and stuff before subbing. Nice work.

Okay so... Yeah. I can hear the sources, and they fit well together. Terra's theme ties it together beginning-end somewhat. Not sure it has enough focus, but my tracks tend to be meandering messes and they get posted. Then again, I tend to stick to one or two sources. I foresee two potential issues: medley-itis and non-vgm source. This is primarily a take of Carol of the Bells imo, with a lot of vgm sources integrated into it. Since Terra's theme is used the most, it'd make sense to say this is primarily an arrangement of that, but that's not quite true, is it? With the primary source being non-vgm, and the vgm sources making appearances rather than any one of them being a substantial part of the arrangement, I don't think this is ocr material. But sub it anyway. I can be wrong. I hope I'm wrong. This is a really cool arrangement.

Imma jump in here to say performance and production aren't the same thing, but they're both ways to show the skill of a composer or arranger. We have computers now so we can make up for a lack of performance skill, just like someone playing an acoustic instrument doesn't have to think about production. Except the parts that apply to live performance, thatis. (also yes, subjective is what ppl think and feel, objective is what something really is)

if they sound human enough, repetition isn't that big a problem within a part, but if they're the same for the whole track you've got a problem. Make sure to vary them according to the dynamics of the track. Don't be afraid to make really minimal parts with just one or two notes, if the track calls for it. Also, don't think your additional percussion has to blindly follow the track's dynamics, a soft section can have a lot of it to make up for a lack of other drums, while a really intense section might get too busy with too much going on.

On the copyright thing - whenever a work in fixed in some form - notation, audio - the copyright is yours. Registering the copyright is another matter. That said, I kind'a share your misgivings about sharing wips, both of them, the latter more than the former these days.