Rozovian

Cool arrangement, nice fitting the sources together. Some parts sound a bit empty (high lead and low backing often do that), and you could play more with the dynamics by changing up the hihats some more during the break parts (eg 2:52). Sound could use some work. Aside from being empty, it's pretty basic in how it's laid up. A designated lead, some backing, drums, bass. Some more interplay between backing and lead might make it feel less... idunno, newby? I don't think you'd really lose anything by scrapping the sound entirely and starting from just the arrangement. You could play with giving all tracks (except drums) the same instrument just to see how they work together. The times when the lead stands out mostly because it's two octaves above everything else might not be the best written parts. Common newb mistake, and it's not like I didn't get my first mix posted despite stupid high leads. Just worth mentioning. Starman fits in fine, tho it wouldn't hurt to signal that the chords are changing.

Hi new guy, welcome to ocr. Get us the remix separate from the source next time plz, and preferably as a downloadable so we can judge the quality of the file without having to consider any compression youtube does for the streaming. Next time, click Edit, then Go Advanced to change thread prefix. Bump the thread when you do so we don't miss it. I'll merge this with the previous thread. - Completely unknown source. That's cool. it's also pretty short, which might make it difficult to remix. The remix sounds messy right off the bat, long notes blending into each other. And then a set of reverb-heavy drums come and make it worse. The harpsichord breaks through the drums well, unfortunately it sounds robotic. Then I notice the bass tuning seems off. And now we're ten seconds into the mix. Intro, once through the source, then solo. The solo fits in well. End solo, begin another conservative take on the source, and a functional if clichéd ending. Feels like it ends a but abrupt, but that's probably because the lack of prior signaling that the track was approach an end. I've commented on a bunch of mixes lately that had the opposite problem with the endings, theirs just went on for too long as if they didn't know when to end or what to do at the end... you don't seem to know what to do with the rest of the mix. Sounds like something that'd fit well in a lot of old games (as in early nineties or older), with its limited set of samples, raw sound, limited polyphony and overall arrangement. Not ocr, tho. The sounds are far from good. The drums and harpsichord are ok, but the rest of the instrumentation is terrible. Maybe some of it could be used if mixed right, but I think it'd be easier to just use better instruments. The mixing is also not good. Every instrument encroaches on the space of other instruments, there's no foreground-background distinction, and sounds are just too loud for too long for a clear sound. Each of these can be solved by better use of eq, reverb, compression, and track levels. There's stuff in here that you could use, like the truncated take on the source at 0:57 and the solo writing. Then there's much that you shouldn't use. ARRANGEMENT / INTERPRETATION - Too conservative - sticks too close to the source PRODUCTION - Too loud - Low-quality samples - Unrealistic sequencing - Mixing is muddy (eg. too many sounds in the same range) STRUCTURE - Not enough changes in sounds (eg. static texture, not dynamic enough) - Too repetitive - Too short I doubt this would even make it to the judges' panel, and I have no doubt it'd get promptly rejected if it got that far. Listen to ocremixes and compare them to their sources to learn the arrangement and source-related criteria for getting posted. Likewise, improve your production skills through listening and comparing. Finding faults in other ppl's works makes it easier to hear the same faults in your own, then you jsut gotta learn to fix/avoid them. Not a bad start to your stay on ocr.

Really close. We can has details for making our own?

I like that sound. I want it too.

I noticed the sound seems to either randomly detune the note, or use some slow vibrato effect or lfo->pitch. A clue to the sound, just not that useful compared to any filter stuff. You can exclude the Dance, Electronica and High-Energy patches from Synth Poly, I just went over those and found maybe four that sound even remotely similar in timbre: propet xpad juno tides fat fizz face bite and pluck The patch browser is a bit clunky, but at least I can command-click to select multiple categories in a list. On Mac, obviously. Dunno what you've got. Might work to look through the Keyboards category, or even pick a similar-ish pad and shorten that. If the soundsource's attack is too long, just set the sample start a little further in. Amp envelope first, tho.

That's not what he means. He's looking for specifications on how to create that sound, not where in a legacy soundbank to look. You're also assuming virtual instruments all comply with GM standards for soundbanks. I read that they're using the Alesis Micron for some synth sounds, which like its big brother should have a formant filter and a few other non-standard modules to build sounds from. The sound may well come from a single oscillator, just with a fair amount of modulations and effects. Can't say, tho. I'm not as sure they're using Omnisphere, but there's plenty of presets to look through there, and it's probably the synth I'd use to try to create something suitable anyway.

The closest I get is a waveform that lacks its 5th, 7th, 10th, and 12th harmonic, but it's far from the specifics. Not sure if that's the waveform they started with or if it's just a snapshot of it from the wave. The hard part is getting the modulations right, the filter, any interactions between multiple oscillators... You could ask the guy who posted on their blog about their keyboard gear.

Here, in R&C because I'm recruiting ppl to read, test, and evaluate it. It's a work in progress, but I think it's pretty comprehensive at this point. It's also written for ocr, so it covers a lot of ocr-relevant stuff that not many other guides and books do. I'm also a Logic user, btw. I've got Dance Music Manual as well, it's a good resource tho it's obviously focused on dance genres. I think it's best when you know your toolbox and mostly just need some clarification on what the tools actually do and some pointers on dance genres. It's all greek before then, and once you're past that point you'll only find occasional useful tidbits in it. No book or guide is a good substitute for experience, tho. Do stuff, get exp.

(not a full mod rev, just adding to what WIll said) Yeah, too loud, which means you can safely ease up on the compression and not worry about it getting too soft. I think the drums could be a little louder in the mix, so if you bring things down on in the output phase you can raise the drums a little. That should make them stand out a little better. I like it.

Now that I'm here, let's get an official voice on this stuff: It's mostly for those times when we're dealing with a source we've never heard before, or one that's significantly altered or otherwise liberally remixed. It helps to have the source pointed out to us, nobody says we must read and agree with the artist's source breakdown. The judges sometimes have trouble with this, too. And DusK is right, covers are fine, just don't make mark it mod review. That's not what mod review is for. ------- Anyway, I wanted to ask something: How do you guys feel the remix board works right now? Are the mod reviews accurate and to your satisfaction? Are ppl getting you good feedback, or are they rude and unhelpful? Do you have any ideas on how to improve the remix board? How would you do things if you were in charge? Or the TL;DR question: How's the remix board doing?

Man the intro is loud. It loses energy when the guitar comes in. I don't think that makes sense, dynamically. Source is ok. I know this mostly from older ocremixes. It's conservative, but I don't think it's too much so. There's some nice 80s stuff in here, the intro and break/midpart have some really 80s sounds in there. Never a bad thing. Kick might be a bit too low-heavy for this soundscape. Some of that fake brass could be less loud, it gets pretty annoying towards the end of the track. The long guitar notes seem to pad the track out a bit too much. Dunno if that's a big deal here, but if nothing else, it's worth keeping in mind for future mixes. You lose some dynamics and impact from not letting up before drum notes. Some creative side-chaining might help, tho you shouldn't make it really noticeable imo. There's parts, like the ending, where it makes sense to have a thicker, less dynamic soundscape, but in other parts it might be worth doing some creative compressing. just know that in this case, not doing it is better than overdoing it. PERFORMANCE (live recorded audio/MIDI parts) - Timing not tight enough - there's some melodies in the first part that could be tighter So close to avoiding the checklist. _SO_ close. Short and sweet, not much else to say. Dunno how your subbed version was, but this seems to be above the bar. Nice work, Li.

Nice bass. Starts off kind'a simple/weak/weird, but not intolerably so. The delay is a bit strong on that first instrument, but that's a nitpick. That first melody is too loud when it makes its appearance at 2:50, tho. The lack of definition in the kick applies. It could have more highs or mids, some more click to it. There's some amount of noticeable compression, but I don't know how much is tolerable in dubstep. Reducing regular compression/side-chaining and using a multiband compressor on the output should alleviate the compression issue, but it'll likely take some work to set it up to not screw with the frequency balance... but you're lacking mids a bit, so screwing with the frequency balance might actually be a good thing. Just take a backup before you do anything drastic so you can go back. I keep hearing source bits all over the place. For most of the track, I'd say source usage is fine, tho for some reason I can't place that first melody. it's like a variant of the UP A-part ostinato, shifted by a note and otherwise altered a bit as well, but... I'm not quite convinced. Still, I'd say this is ok, source-wise. Had to check for myself, amb, I'm a mod, I'd be remiss if I didn't. There's a few transitions that seem a bit awkward. While there's some aimlessness throughout the track the whole thing seems to just run out of ideas at 2:38 and then kind'a just go on without really knowing what to do until almost a minute later when it starts dropping tracks out. A more thought-out ending is one of the bigger improvements you could do to this track imo. PRODUCTION - Overcompressed (pumping/no dynamics) STRUCTURE - Lacks coherence overall (no "flow") - some parts, some transitions, weak ending Production isn't far from the acceptance bar, and the arrangement doesn't need much to pass, imo anyway. Almost avoided the entire checklist, too. Nice work.

Nothing wrong with that, but if you're not gonna sub it, don't make it mod review. This goes for everyone. (I'm changing this to finished.)

Nice bg stuff in the intro. Repetition is a problem tho, there's a lot that can be done, both with the drums and with the other elements, to alleviate that. Nothing says you need all 5 minutes, either, you could easily chop out stuff around the 2-minute mark, also in the last minute. Why does the 3:00 part seem overcompressed when the rest doesn't? That fake guitar thing sounds terrible. It's mixed in ok, but it's sound and writing just doesn't sound like a guitar. Ending of the mix seems to be just dropping one track after another. Seems lazy, but it'd be more tolerable if the track had a good finale, a good final high point after which stuff could start dropping out. Now you've only got that terrible fake guitar there. Good first post. Welcome to ocr.

Welcome to ocr. I was expecting something terrible from a "my first remix", youtube link, and stars in the name. I was pleasantly surprised. It might work better at half the length, tho, cuz the drum rhythms are pretty repetitive, as is the simple synth stuff. It's not that they don't work, it's just that they get old fast. Can't say for sure on my laptop speakers, but there seems to be some compression problems here. Some repetition, compression and basic synth sound concerns aside, this is a cool track.

Dunno how much I can help with performance since I'm barely at a one-handed level of piano proficiency. I've worked with this source before, so I know it well enough. Source and arrangement stuff is fine imo. Sticking to the chord structure of the original is conservative, but there's plenty of interpretation in the performance and rhythms. I like it. Not being on my regular setup, I don't dare make any definitive statements about the production, but it seems like the main thing would be to make sure the dynamics are under control, possibly add lows (but I'm on laptop speakers so I have no clue about the lows). For a track to stack up well against tracks on ocr you should probably compare its levels and dynamics to recent piano tracks on ocr and make sure yours doesn't get much softer or much louder. Here's one.

This is still on mod review. Are you considering subbing this version?* If not, change it back to wip or finished. *) I suggest you don't, imo it's an easy no for repetition, basic synths, conservative-ness and lack of direction.

I just keep hearing over those examples. I'm on the wrong side of the pond and don't have live shows, but I think it's an interesting opportunity. Why not just do what this guy did and dance, tape it, put it on the net, and see what that'll lead to? It'll at least let ppl see what you can actually do, and you'll have to dance eventually if you wanna collab. (btw, this is technically a "skill x available" thread, but it's a far cry from the "hai guys composur availablz" so idc)

Can't say without testing and not gonna to that at 2 am, but here's a thought on adding punch: Compressor. Set threshold and ratio so you compress the bass at least 4dB. Set attack to 200ms or so, release to 10ms or something else short. Depending on how your compressor behaves, you may have to specify that it should track peak level, not rms. Logic's built-in standard mode let me select which of these it tracks. Its other modes includes Opto, which would be my second choice - tho I'm not an expert on compressor modes and types and whatnot. This will remodel the dynamics of the sound, making sure each separate enough note has a 200ms decay to 4dB (or whatever you set) below its max level. Dunno whether it'll go better before or after the other two effects. I don't think it's position in regards to the EQ matters much, but it should be more dynamic after the overdrive (its amplitude/volume changing more between attack and sustain), and provide a brighter attack if placed before the overdrive (louder attack sent into the overdrive, which means more distortion on the attack, which means more harmonics, which means brighter and more clear attack). And nothing says you can't use two compressors.

I need to brush up on my CT sources before giving this a closer listen. There's stuff I recognize as being CT, stuff I recognize as being familiar and... stuff I have no idea what they are. My first impression of this track is that it's a bit bright... except the muffled kick. I'll give you a mod review later, unless someone beats me to it (and perhaps even then).

Nah, I think all you need is some more varied drum writing and some length cut out. If you were going for a hard-hitting sound, you were really doing it wrong , but what you've got here is far from bad. If you're gonna work on other stuff, you might as well sub this to get the judges' feedback on it.

Here's my process... I think. Solo the kick and bass and make them work together. Figure out whether the kick or the bass should be the lowest of the two, and give that one a bit of a boost around 80Hz and a cut around 160Hz, do the opposite to the other. Use compression and sidechaining to get more impact or whatever else. Get the kick and bass to play well together. Then start bringing in the other tracks, cutting out the lows they don't need, and sidechaining those that do need lows (like low riffs or pads). The snare might be the trickiest here, as it'll either need to dodge the kick or to have an impact of its own. It will have lows you can safely cut, but it'll lose impact if you take out too much. If you have a good waveform viewer to keep track of peaks, use it early in this process to know how your instruments interact. Seeing how loud the transient is, how much the sidechaining actually pushes the bass out of the way etc helps a lot. I often use some light multiband compression on my tracks, something I usually add fairly late in the process just to keep each band from getting too loud on its own. It also serves as an output EQ, for some final balancing of the track. While the other bands are typically only gently compressed, the lows often have a much higher compression ratio. This lets me have a lot more bass without worrying about the really bassy parts getting too loud. This might not be the wisest approach, so use with caution. - As for your example, I'd sweep around in the lows, trying to find a good frequency range to boost... and boost that. With a bass this low, I'd probably use overdrive or something to make sure the low notes have some loud harmonics to work with. Overdrive before EQ, here. I'd also give it a boost somewhere further up, in some empty niche in the mix, just to make sure there's some higher harmonics there for ppl to hear what note the bass actually plays. It's not a great bass sound, I don't know if I'd use this sample/synth patch. I typically use synths where Ive got more control over their sound. That way, I can make it really velocity-sensitive, eg so the filter opens more on loud notes but the amplitude (volume) is the same... if I want it to be. Again, that attack ADSR thing I mentioned in the other thread could come in useful here. That, plus overdrive, plus EQ, plus compression is what I think I'd do if I had to work with this sound.

That's fine. If you change your mind, grab something. Decision Bell is a great source, but if you're not feeling it, it'll be tricky to work with. Tried to come up with something for it myself, didn't. Any takers? Sorry, I've just been busy, I got it.

You can't. When you're a posted remixer, you can request one. Until then, you'll have to get by using one in the gallery.

Yeah, doing stuff means you'll have to put whatever notions of what to do with stuff into practice. My process for teaching/learning/whatever is to alternate between studying and experimenting. What I wrote serves as study, now experiment with those things. The go back to studying. Then back to experimenting. This means you'll be more familiar with the theory when you enter the practical stuff, and likewise when you return to theory. When there's something you don't get, google it, read about it. When there's something you don't know what it does - do something with it. Thank me later, if any of that actually helps. Stuff goes fast when you've done it a few times in a few different ways. I've failed my way into knowing this stuff. So will you, if you try. With midi you're limited to the samples you've got (can't change mic position, type etc), but you've also got more control over them in ways you don't with a real instrument. You can apply filters to boost specific parts of each note's spectrum (each note is made up of a lot of frequencies). For example, you could put a light bandpass filter over the notes and make the harmonics (higher frequencies in sync with the fundamental) a few octaves above the note you press stand out - making those frequencies clearer and making it easier to distinguish what notes are actually played. That can also help with mud.