Rozovian
-
Posts
5,296 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
16
Content Type
Articles
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Rozovian
-
-
Brentalfloss, you annoying mofo, I can't listen to this without hearing them lyrics in my head.
Anyway...
Drums are pretty cool, just EQd to have this really loud muddy rumble in their lows. Always go for a balanced mix instead of one with the bass knob turned to 11.
The rest of the instrumentation ranges from mediocre and passable to unconvincing and horrible. Put some thought into your sound design, how it actually sounds (rather than what the instruments say they are), and you'll be making far better mixes in no-time.
-
Hey Bread, welcome to the workshop.
Bass sounds really uneven and broken up. While it could just be uneven playing, I think it's from mixing everything else so loud that the compressor on the output is cutting the bass into pieces.
Despite the compressor problems, it ends up sounding weak. There's a lot of excess lows and an unhealthy emphasis on the low mids you could get rid of. EQ separation can do a lot to clean up mixes. That should give you more room to mix this aggressive without destroying it in the process.
No link to source, and don't remember the source, so idk, idc.
Anyone who knows how I feel about voice clips can imagine what I think about the voice in the intro.
-
idunno, to me, humanization is about faking human performance by whatever means available. If there's a combined timing/velocity/detune/vibrato macro that turns stiff sequencing into hard forte and smooth piano according to the value of a single automated knob - that's humanization. If you spend hours on screwing with every midi attribute of a dozen separate violin solo patches - that's humanization. Humanization is making it more human, any means necessary.
But yeah, it's easy to overthink it, overdo it, get overwhelmed, or whatever. My advice is to just learn every tool in the box, and then just use the tools you need for the parts that need it. If an auto-quantize tool to a light swing rhythm makes your drums sound more human, it's humanization.
But for sustained strings specifically, the most important is that they swell and wane with the rest of the track. Think like a conductor. Humanize accordingly.
Also, humanization is not randomization. They're both opposites of mechanical sequencing, but in different directions. If that makes any sense.
-
Farscape SG-1, SGA, DS9.
-
Most of what I said makes sense if you're using the link I gave you to create m3u playlists and attempt to import them into iTunes. If not, ignore it.
While on this topic, iTunes seem to wanna sort ocr tracks with the new id3 tags into a single itunes media/music/compilations/http___ocremix.org (on mac). Once the entire ocr database is updated and ppl use files with the new tags, a script that does this could probably be added to Kieran's thing. Or ppl could just open the m3u files and search&replace all new lines with new line and whatever parts of the locator are needed.
idunno, Larry, Dave, Kieran, whoever.
-
tl;dr: genre stuff wasn't used before because genre snobs would then not listen to the many cool mixes that weren't in their preferred genre.
You could try to use this off-site resource to create playlists and work out of those. I gave it a quick try with an artist-sorted iTunes library, which didn't work. They playlist can be drag-n-dropped or otherwise imported into iTunes, but ends up empty.
The playlist file is just a list of the filenames for the tracks. Dunno how up to date it is, at what stage the tagging project is, if iTunes or more recent naming conventions screw with the filenames, or it can be conveniently converted to something that takes different music library organization schemes into account.
Or perhaps importing the m3u from a directory full of shortcuts to the files works?
-
I'm not sure what you mean. Or, I'm sure what you mean, but not that you understood what I meant. To get it posted on ocr, you'd need source in 50% of the remix, nevermind whether it's the same source melody throughout, or if every little part of the source is used. Just in case you weren't clear on that.
Repeated elements, sure. Repetitive... not necessarily. There's a lot you can do on top of those repeating elements. But that's semantics.
You should be able to work on those speakers, unless they're actually _bad_. Just compare your mixes with similar style pro mixes (that are actually well mixed). If your mixes don't have as much bass, add bass. Too much mids? Reduce mids. There's also all kinds of visual analyzers that you can use to gauge the music regardless of yoru speakers. I'm not pro enough to mix blind, I use two or three different analyzers at different stages of my mixes. I'm sure others mix like that too.
-
A long strings note at a constant level, constant timbre, constant pitch will sound fake. When the music swells, so should the strings, likewise when it wanes. While this can be done with volume, it's better to use the expression midi cc for that. When using volume, you typically change the volume of reverbs and other effects as well. This is not realistic. You'd want the change to exist as close to your imaginary performers as possible, before reverb and other effects. If Expression doesn't do anything, try other midi ccs, like the modulation wheel. Some patches/samplers may go for convenience over intended use. In any case, this is for the bigger dynamic movements that can happen during a long note.
Subtle touches of vibrato and/or tremolo also remove some of the fakeness of it, tho an entire strings section would typically not do tremolo or vibrato in perfect sync (hence why you make it subtle, and use different patches for more overt tremolo/vibrato strings).
Some subtle filter modulation can also work, it'd suggest the strings are being played softer, bowed slower or something. All it really does is softly muffle the sound, which is a change in timbre - which can be useful. It's best used in conjunction with the changes in expression.
Note: subtle means you shouldn't notice it if you don't know it's there. Very subtle.
Remember that humanization isn't randomization. Think like a performer or a conductor. How would the music move? How should the sustains move?
Also, if you're not faking an orchestra, screw strings humanization. Just make it emotive, even if it's mechanical.
-
There's some pretty weird harmonies in there. Are you sure your instruments are tuned right? As in, the samples set to the right keys. The bass is especially weird, sometimes clashing, sometimes just moody. DUnno how much of it is deliberate.
Then this thing lacks humanization. It doens't sound performed, it sounds written. A good remix will have a sense of performance to it, timing, velocity, expression cc, all those things. A good hall reverb should then add some space to the performance, but the reverb alone won't do it.
3:15, your instruments don't sound good that high.
Too similar to the original for ocr, but a pretty cool take on the source. Also, welcome to ocr.
-
HDJS, don't use other ppl's wips to advertise your own. Not unless it's relevant (eg "I'm also remixing this source").
While I'm in this thread... Biggest problems here are sound design and repetition. Yes, repetition is a staple of the genre, but it's usually padded with some more advanced sound design and a lot of motion in the sounds. I'd avoid adding any length to this until I can make these 4 minutes (quite long already) sound more engaging. Automation and delays should help. I'd start inside the synths tho, their internal modulations offer a lot more to do than applying effects afterwards.
Are you aiming for ocr with this? It's a little too liberal for ocr atm. I mean, I can hear some vague connections to source in the 0:45 part, but I think it'd have to be a bit more overt to count on ocr. If it doesn't count, that's an 80-second part of source that wouldn't count, another 45 seconds from 2:22, ending it at 125s/240s, under the 50% minimum. If you're not aiming for ocr, you can just focus on having strong source usage wherever you want to and use as much original/liberal/whatever material in between.
I think you've got a good base here. A predictable, DJ-friendly structure, and that's not necessarily a bad thing. It's functional, and lets you focus on sound design, mixing, and writing smaller stuff. Do it well.
-
Easy no. Sorry.
About a third of the track is intro. That's not good. The second minute is a build-up, and the third is the payoff... which lacks impact due to the sound design. Which is really newby.
Nice use of the background melodies of the source. Tho they aren't quite dominant I think the arrangement has them there well enough for ocr. Source ok. Should be brought out more in the mix, but the mixing is another matter entirely.
In other words, this arrangement, while a bit awkward in its third minute lead rhythm and taking a very long time to get to the beef of the track, might be passable. There's stuff in the arrangement that may need adjusting after a proper sound design and mixing, but the rough structure is ok with me.
The sounds all sound straight out of the early 90's computer game music. That, in itself, isn't a bad thing, but they'd need to be mixed in better. Levels mixing seems to be ok, but the tracks still all sound raw and stacked on top of each other, not separated the way professional productions are. EQ and reverb where appropriate.
It's also waaaay too soft. Yes you should have dynamics. Yes you shouldn't squash things with excessive compression. Yes, you can start it soft. No, not this soft. If you do the above separation and giving the tracks their own space, their own area in the frequency range and all that, you could probably get this sounding ok with just some parallel compression on top of that.
That's not saying you shouldn't side-chain (if the sound calls for it) or do all the other things, where appropriate.
PRODUCTION
- Too loud
- Low-quality samples
- Drums have no energy
STRUCTURE
- Too repetitive - buildup is long and same-y
You may need to look to some more modern reference material for your sound. Grab remixes from the past few years and you should have a fair amount tracks to compare this to. Just find the ones with appropriate sound design, or mixing, or mood, or whatever, and compare those aspects. Learn from those.
No. (resub?)
-
Unnecessary low frequencies tend to add up and push the whole mix without really adding anything musically. Everything except bass and bass drum, possible also pad and any other low instruments, should be high-passed to get rid of these lows. Then, depending on the style, instruments can be side-chained to go soft whenever the bass drum hits - which keeps the max level lower. These two tricks get you a fair amount of level.
You can also automate track levels, eg making the powerful intro pad a lot softer when the drums kick in, or pushing that first lead into the background when the second ones comes in. Then there's parallel compression and a slew of other tricks that you can do, depending on the track you're working with. All of this is done before the track hits the output channel, where I usually only have limiter while mixing, and add a light multiband compressor and possibly some eq when the track is getting close to finished.
As for sharpness, this is just a case of having more higher frequencies. You can reduce the lows of your bass and raise its level instead. That makes it brighter. EQing individual sounds to be a bit brighter does a lot, but you also need to separate tracks from each other using EQ. That makes the whole mix more clear. Background-foreground separation also does a lot, and it all builds on the plain old levels mixing.
Another trick is to use multiband compression on a single instrument, to make sure its lower frequencies stay about the same while raising the higher ones. It's not something I usually do, but it's a good technique to know to use when you need it. Usually, I add a touch of overdrive or other distortion to instruments that are too dark, this raises their highs a bit. This sounds terrible when you overdo it, so... don't overdo it.
I talk about this stuff in my remixing guide, in my sig.
-
Most of Logic's built-in stuff, at least in LE8 which I still use, has some obvious velocity layer differences, and while that works well for sequenced piano - easier to hear the difference - it's far from ideal for actual recordings. There's an edit feature somewhere in the EXS24 interface that lets you screw with the samples themselves - which at least gives you an overview of the samples used. Find the piano with the most velocity layers, it should be the best... but I can't say if it's any good, I barely use Logic's pianos... and when I do, it's because I just need a quickly loading sketchpad-suited sound.
You can do a search of the judges' decisions, for "piano" and... idunno, "no"? It'll limit the results to decisions that mention pianos. Once you find the decision, use its name and the artist's name and google the two. See if it's been on dod or youtube or something.
-
...then use synths because you could make much more convincing sounds that way.
Convincing? That is so not the right word, but I agree that the supposedly real instrumentation aren't up to par, not when assuming they're supposed to sound real at least.
This whole track sounds very 90's computer game music. It's not an invalid style choice, and it's not like the original isn't like that, but when you're asking for a mod review you're asking if it'd get on ocr. The answer is no. Not because the sound design is very 90's vgm, but because the production also is.
I don't mind the fake guitars, the fairly simple synths and percussion, but I'd want it mixed to modern standards. This may require some edits to the sound design, eg adding a layer or two to the snare or widening some sounds. EQ and background/foreground separation usually helps, too.
The 2:40 chord choice doesn't quite fit (likewise its repeats). On a related note, that piano doesn't sound like it's recorded in an anechoic chamber, but it's still too short. Longer release and/or some delay/reverb might give it a little more tail.
Guitar 0:59 is too loud. Actually, it sounds really uneven. Happens not just in that part but elsewhere as well. Some compression to keep its levels under controlled might be a good idea.
As for the arrangement, length may be an issue, as might conservativeness. Repetition is the actual problem tho, not length. As for conservativeness, I'm not gonna learn the source and evaluate the remix soon enough for this review, so... idunno, might be too conservative, or just fine.
PRODUCTION
- Low-quality samples
- Unrealistic sequencing - not fooling anyone, go for fake or humanize
- Drums have no energy - they don't have to be in your face, but they do need a bit more bite than this... except hihat, which is plenty loud as is
- Mixing is muddy (eg. too many sounds in the same range) - separate your sounds
STRUCTURE
- Too repetitive - there's certainly worse out there, but at least the repeating cymbals hint at some fairly short and lazily looped drums, and not developing the groove much kind'a compounds the repetition problem
It's a nice groovy thing you've got here, but it's not ready for ocr yet.
-
Needs more timing edits.
Also not mixed well.
-
This is something of utmost concern to me, is that in real life the mix wouldn't actually be authentic. Are there any resources to help me calculate such things as throwing acoustic world instruments alongside western acoustic and/or electronics?
Wouldn't it actually be more authentic if done for real?
Seriously tho, anybody know a good resource on how loud different instruments get?
Aside from electronic instruments, I mean, for reasons that should be obvious.
-
There's also the fact that we're not competing with what the game publishers themselves primarily sell, namely games. We just do music. Perhaps we're not on their radar. Perhaps they feel we're doing them a favor promoting their games through the music.
Fangames sometimes get shut down, but it seems like fanart and fanmusic isn't seen as a threat. A bad fan game getting big could hurt the image of a game publisher/developer, while art and music are more peripheral to that issue. There's also the legal issue. Shutting down unlicensed games is a way of protecting their brand. You can get a license for covers/arrangements and sell them. Licensing services of the kind that exist for music doesn't exist for games.
Then there's fanfiction, which is usually left alone, and fanfilms, which sometimes get shut down. It's probably legal maneuvering to make sure they can shut down competing work that uses their characters and world. For films and games. If ppl were publishing fanfiction in book forms in book stores (online and irl), you bet book publishers would take issue with it.
tl;dr: We're not competing with the games, so they leave us alone. afaik, they like fanworks.
(I'm using the term fanmusic just became it looks right next to fanart and fangames etc...)
-
When it comes to what you're doing, Schil, I'd be careful about how I put my name on those tracks. It's one thing to pay homage to them in an otherwise original track or to arrange them to the extent ocr requires, it's another to move some things around in a midi. Changing chords and spending 30 minutes on a midi (that somebody else transcribed, btw) is far from what I'd dare put my name on. Still, I have no idea how these tracks end up sounding. Maybe they're substantially arranged. Maybe they sound more "inspired by" than "remixed". Idunno.
-
As I'm sure you know, a loud piano note will sound brighter and harder than a soft one. When we're talking about dynamics (in terms of arrangement and performance, not mixing), we aren't so much concerned with the levels but rather with whether the instruments sound loud or soft.
If you played this on a keyboard, you may have been playing mostly in the loud end of its velocity range. Your DAW may have a tool for stretching the velocity range of your notes, making the softer ones much softer and keeping the loud ones loud. It could also be a lack of velocity sensitivity in the instruments themselves, but I doubt the higher-end stuff you seem to be using would be this stiff if given notes with a good velocity range.
When you need to soften a part, go edit the midi. Adjusting the track levels won't change the sound, it'll just sound artificial like that 1:51 levels jump. When you make the notes softer, the instruments respond with softer, less bright sounds. This is a more natural difference between soft and loud than just turning the volume down.
There's also a possibility you have some auto-quantizing going on (or that you've quantized it yourself).
-
No source link, no source feedback.
Also, Finished, Finished_v2, Finished_v3? You're becoming me. That can't be good for you.
Starts off okay... 6 minutes? Oh boy. Well, that explains the slow intro build-up. 1:18 I hear the compressor working. That's not good. At 2:15, the side-chaining works while the beat is steady, but once you hit a fill where the bass drum relents or changes rhythm, the whole thing falls apart.
The sound design is a bit minimal but it works.
The track is too long. While 4 minutes went by okay, I'm getting tired of the track and it's not doing anything interesting enough to hold my interest for another two. What comes in around 4:25 now feels like an attempt to keep it interesting for a little longer rather than a natural direction of the track.
Hey, a redeeming groove in the last minute. Bitcrushed delay/fade. nice.
It's still to long, I would cut some some stuff from the middle of the track to avoid wearing ppl out with it.ARRANGEMENT / INTERPRETATION
- No clue. SOURCE LINK!
PRODUCTION
- Overcompressed (pumping/no dynamics)
STRUCTURE
- Too repetitive
Looks pretty good, I'm only hitting two of the checklist items. Granted, there may be a too conservative/liberal item I couldn't check because I R LAZY and U NO PROVIDE SOURCE LINK. Also, those two checked items... they're pretty big concerns.
It's in NO-land atm. Aside from the source, which I'm not commenting on because there was no source link, this could be pushed into YES-land.
-
Too loud. Sounds like the hihat is especially loud, there's a hiss in them that stands out a bit too much, even on my setup which typically has me mixing the highs too loud. Piano is also probably too loud.
Something weird happens at 1:51... and it seems like everything ends up better mixed at that point (except the hihat, see above). Aside from that jump in dynamics, this things sticks to the same eergy level throughout the track, which makes it feel more repetitive than it is.
The source is used well here. I only really know it from previous remixes of it, but the lead was easy to pick out just from those. After checking the source I find that you've used other parts of the source well, so source-wise, I'm cool with this. If you take away the genre adaptation you'd have something that might be too conservative. You don't really change much, you just move it around and put it to a different backing. I think it works.
There's something vanilla about the sound, but I can't put my finger on what exactly that is. Perhaps you need to separate the instruments more, using both the background-foreground placement and EQ separation. Perhaps.
I'm also a bit concerned about the sequencing, it's written well but it seems to lack humanization. The organ obviously can't have velocity-sensitivity, but the bass seems really mechanical, like a robot was playing it. Piano and drums have some amount of mechanical sequencing as well. The piano sound doesn't seem very dynamic, sounds like you were playing with a hammer, a lot of the notes seem to be at a really high velocity.
PRODUCTION
- Too loud - levels mixing could use some work, which should leave this track a little softer and more dynamic
- Unrealistic sequencing - mechanical
- Overcompressed (pumping/no dynamics) - needs more dynamics and less arbitrary volume jumps
- Mixing is muddy (eg. too many sounds in the same range) - possible issue
STRUCTURE
- Not enough changes in sounds (eg. static texture, not dynamic enough) - dynamics, rhythm and instrumentation
- Too repetitive - a consequence of the lack of changes has the recurring parts making the track seem more repetitive
- Abrupt ending - could be signaled better, but not a big deal
I think it's in NO, RESUB territory, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around your track. Perhaps another mod could verify and clarify what I haven't.
-
Late mod review, sorry it took so long.
Guitar comes in a little too late, drums are really loud compared to the first guitar and keyboard, not sure about the crash-heavy drum writing in a long like this, gets repetitive while staying on the same chord like this. Also a few guitar timing problems towards the end.
OA does this style, so have a look at his tracks. Cool idea, nice sound, but it's stuck on that one same musical idea. With something else to do, playing on a different chord, harmonic variations, whatever, you could easily make this a sweet little ocr-bound track.
With a source this short, you'd have to be creative with it, do more than just play it over and over with some melodic changes. It's a really sweet track (and having something like this on the sd3 sleep jingle would be great, wink wink shameless invite).
ARRANGEMENT / INTERPRETATION
- Too conservative - sticks too close to the source - easily solved with some harmonic variation or something else to break from the repetition, which is a bigger issue
PRODUCTION
- Too loud - some instruments compared to others
PERFORMANCE (live recorded audio/MIDI parts)
- Timing not tight enough - occasionally
STRUCTURE
- Not enough changes in sounds (eg. static texture, not dynamic enough) - not a big deal, but worth pointing out
- Too repetitive - everything plays over the same loop
-
First, consider my suggestions in this thread: to screw with Omnisphere's settings. Dunno how FL renders, but as the playback has problems while the render doesn't, it could just be that Omnisphere isn't keeping up when playing live, but can hog processor and memory to provide good renders.
If that doesn't help, use a level meter and a waveform monitor at each step of the effects chain. Do it live so you hear the distortion when it's there. If nothing else, you'll have eliminated Omnisphere and the effects as causes for this clipping.
It could also be something in FL's playback. iirc the playback can be different from the output. Someone that actually uses FL might know more about that.
-
Sounds more like you've got the wrong settings for Omnisphere. Go to its System pane and screw with the streaming and memory settings. There's iirc some instructions in the manual about how to find the rights settings for your setup.
-
What a week irl, too much stuff to deal with. rBrn and Dj Mokram, you're probably waiting for feedback. It's coming.
Underground Zone & Dragon Road (Sonic the Hedgehog)
in Post Your Game ReMixes!
Posted
Dat bass drum.
Transition a third into the track is the first thing that really bothers, it's sudden and leads to a part with some weird harmonies. The bass in the break seems to play in a different mode than the melody. Some weird harmonies and changes in scale/mode after the break, some that work, some that don't. Leads are pretty soft, but they're also quite bright, so while you should probably raise their level some, you should be really careful with how you do that.
Starts well, ends well. The bass drum is unsensibly loud, yet you've managed to write around it quite well. You could drop it a few dB and still have it loud, tho.
Arrangement/source crits if you take it to mod rev. I'm lazy.