Rozovian

Good advice for project directors: consolidate your data early and often.
I've been trying to find all the bios and track notes our remixers have sent us. I've got a good bunch of them, and I've yet to dig through ocr PMs and facebook messages. But if you're an artist on the project and you know you haven't sent us a bio and some thoughts on your track, please do so. Otherwise I have to make stuff up. For example:
HoboKa: "Malevolent Intent was written as a symphonic poem for three kazoos and a florist, with a solo originally intended for an actual elephant. It contrasts and compares Finnish grammar with the gradual day-night cycle implementation in the game. The remix has a very personal meaning for me, as it reflects my feelings about the number of syllables in my name. I think it's my best work from back then, that particular week when I finished it. I hope you enjoy it."
I hope no track notes or bios are in my aim convo history. I'd hate to have to go through all that as well.
Also: the Secret of Mana album is out! Go grab it now!

So long as there's transparency, I'm cool with it. Can we see some more specific numbers, like an end-of-the-year report on costs and revenue? How much is being paid out of pocket, how much does patreon cover, ads, other donations, other costs...

I'll provide my thoughts on this. I've been following the thread since it started, but as it concerns judging, I don't think my position as an evaluator (on vacation) is all that relevant. But I have some insight into what goes on in staff, and tend to get posted when I sub something. So here goes.
*Make the panel faster - my current perception, without access to the judges' forum, is that things have slowed down significantly. The number of completed decisions threads dropped quite low during October, and the Currently in the Judging Process thread hasn't been updated since summer. For the record, I subbed something this summer, so the apparent state of things bugs me a bit for that reason too. I think the panel needs more judges. The biggest objection seems to concern breaking ties, but that can be resolved by just deciding that after 6 votes and still no majority, it'd get a formal "resub" response. When a resub isn't possible (live recording with live recording issues, lost project files etc), then it could be decided by a tiebreaker vote from djp. But the small active team vs. large team of less active people objection is valid too. I think that's a question of work ethic and perceived need for one's own effort, but that's a different conversation.
*Scrutinize Yes votes - Not sure what can be done here. It would be nice to get some numbers on submissions vs. form rejections vs. NO vs. YES vs. direct posts, but that's numbers someone's gonna have to put together then. But that's not quite what's being asked for in this thread.
*Valid criticisms - Yes there are. And you don't know what's being discussed (or what members of staff are trying to discuss) in staff forums and staff discord. And OCR has taught us all that criticism is useful.
*Nice writeups - This has been addressed. For me, when I do an eval, I first want to listen to the remix (and source), and if I don't understand what's going on, why it sounds a particular way and have an issue with it, then I might look for an answer in the first post or elsewhere in the thread. I'm of the opinion that things have to _sound_ intentional. A bad speaker/lofi radio sound intro has to be obvious. A chiptune section can't just be a section with super-simple synthwork. Intent doesn't matter there, writeups don't matter - sound does.
Although it would be nice to see more people say what DAW and instruments they used. Were the really cool strings in a mix from a big, expensive strings library, or some free soundfont? Is that guitar live or shreddage or a piano soundfont with distortion on it?
*Lower the bar slightly - Nah. But I would like to see some a remix compo where people only use the instruments and effects that came with the DAW. That would show what the basic tools are actually capable of in the hands of experienced and skilled remixers, which would give the clueless newbs and strugglings forum veterans something to learn from. Better yet if these compo mixes are submitted and pass the bar, because then it's official - what's in the box is good enough. For that set of genres and sounds, at least.
*Reconsider links in rejections - Not likely. Remixer privacy is an issue. There was recently a case of a remixer who was upset that his name was included in the rejection. I can understand where he's coming from. So when it comes to rejected mixes floating around, I'd rather mine didn't. But there's always the option of telling the panel to leave the link in. This could be added to the submission information on the Submit page.
Alex, dude, chill. You've got a good conversation going here. Don't derail your own thread by rushing unfiltered thoughts into it.

I'll provide my thoughts on this. I've been following the thread since it started, but as it concerns judging, I don't think my position as an evaluator (on vacation) is all that relevant. But I have some insight into what goes on in staff, and tend to get posted when I sub something. So here goes.
*Make the panel faster - my current perception, without access to the judges' forum, is that things have slowed down significantly. The number of completed decisions threads dropped quite low during October, and the Currently in the Judging Process thread hasn't been updated since summer. For the record, I subbed something this summer, so the apparent state of things bugs me a bit for that reason too. I think the panel needs more judges. The biggest objection seems to concern breaking ties, but that can be resolved by just deciding that after 6 votes and still no majority, it'd get a formal "resub" response. When a resub isn't possible (live recording with live recording issues, lost project files etc), then it could be decided by a tiebreaker vote from djp. But the small active team vs. large team of less active people objection is valid too. I think that's a question of work ethic and perceived need for one's own effort, but that's a different conversation.
*Scrutinize Yes votes - Not sure what can be done here. It would be nice to get some numbers on submissions vs. form rejections vs. NO vs. YES vs. direct posts, but that's numbers someone's gonna have to put together then. But that's not quite what's being asked for in this thread.
*Valid criticisms - Yes there are. And you don't know what's being discussed (or what members of staff are trying to discuss) in staff forums and staff discord. And OCR has taught us all that criticism is useful.
*Nice writeups - This has been addressed. For me, when I do an eval, I first want to listen to the remix (and source), and if I don't understand what's going on, why it sounds a particular way and have an issue with it, then I might look for an answer in the first post or elsewhere in the thread. I'm of the opinion that things have to _sound_ intentional. A bad speaker/lofi radio sound intro has to be obvious. A chiptune section can't just be a section with super-simple synthwork. Intent doesn't matter there, writeups don't matter - sound does.
Although it would be nice to see more people say what DAW and instruments they used. Were the really cool strings in a mix from a big, expensive strings library, or some free soundfont? Is that guitar live or shreddage or a piano soundfont with distortion on it?
*Lower the bar slightly - Nah. But I would like to see some a remix compo where people only use the instruments and effects that came with the DAW. That would show what the basic tools are actually capable of in the hands of experienced and skilled remixers, which would give the clueless newbs and strugglings forum veterans something to learn from. Better yet if these compo mixes are submitted and pass the bar, because then it's official - what's in the box is good enough. For that set of genres and sounds, at least.
*Reconsider links in rejections - Not likely. Remixer privacy is an issue. There was recently a case of a remixer who was upset that his name was included in the rejection. I can understand where he's coming from. So when it comes to rejected mixes floating around, I'd rather mine didn't. But there's always the option of telling the panel to leave the link in. This could be added to the submission information on the Submit page.
Alex, dude, chill. You've got a good conversation going here. Don't derail your own thread by rushing unfiltered thoughts into it.

I'll provide my thoughts on this. I've been following the thread since it started, but as it concerns judging, I don't think my position as an evaluator (on vacation) is all that relevant. But I have some insight into what goes on in staff, and tend to get posted when I sub something. So here goes.
*Make the panel faster - my current perception, without access to the judges' forum, is that things have slowed down significantly. The number of completed decisions threads dropped quite low during October, and the Currently in the Judging Process thread hasn't been updated since summer. For the record, I subbed something this summer, so the apparent state of things bugs me a bit for that reason too. I think the panel needs more judges. The biggest objection seems to concern breaking ties, but that can be resolved by just deciding that after 6 votes and still no majority, it'd get a formal "resub" response. When a resub isn't possible (live recording with live recording issues, lost project files etc), then it could be decided by a tiebreaker vote from djp. But the small active team vs. large team of less active people objection is valid too. I think that's a question of work ethic and perceived need for one's own effort, but that's a different conversation.
*Scrutinize Yes votes - Not sure what can be done here. It would be nice to get some numbers on submissions vs. form rejections vs. NO vs. YES vs. direct posts, but that's numbers someone's gonna have to put together then. But that's not quite what's being asked for in this thread.
*Valid criticisms - Yes there are. And you don't know what's being discussed (or what members of staff are trying to discuss) in staff forums and staff discord. And OCR has taught us all that criticism is useful.
*Nice writeups - This has been addressed. For me, when I do an eval, I first want to listen to the remix (and source), and if I don't understand what's going on, why it sounds a particular way and have an issue with it, then I might look for an answer in the first post or elsewhere in the thread. I'm of the opinion that things have to _sound_ intentional. A bad speaker/lofi radio sound intro has to be obvious. A chiptune section can't just be a section with super-simple synthwork. Intent doesn't matter there, writeups don't matter - sound does.
Although it would be nice to see more people say what DAW and instruments they used. Were the really cool strings in a mix from a big, expensive strings library, or some free soundfont? Is that guitar live or shreddage or a piano soundfont with distortion on it?
*Lower the bar slightly - Nah. But I would like to see some a remix compo where people only use the instruments and effects that came with the DAW. That would show what the basic tools are actually capable of in the hands of experienced and skilled remixers, which would give the clueless newbs and strugglings forum veterans something to learn from. Better yet if these compo mixes are submitted and pass the bar, because then it's official - what's in the box is good enough. For that set of genres and sounds, at least.
*Reconsider links in rejections - Not likely. Remixer privacy is an issue. There was recently a case of a remixer who was upset that his name was included in the rejection. I can understand where he's coming from. So when it comes to rejected mixes floating around, I'd rather mine didn't. But there's always the option of telling the panel to leave the link in. This could be added to the submission information on the Submit page.
Alex, dude, chill. You've got a good conversation going here. Don't derail your own thread by rushing unfiltered thoughts into it.

First, let's not confuse the terms evaluation and judging. Judging requires at least three people voting, and takes a lot longer, because those works are final when released. Eval usually takes one overworked and underappreciated person, concerns works in progress (that are considered finished for the time being, when eval is used correctly), and is at most indicative of how the judges might vote, never a guarantee.
Second, by all means, discuss judging, discuss eval. Identify problems, suggest solutions. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one concerned about that stuff. Can't speak for the judges, but when it comes to eval, I think I'm allowed to say we've started a conversation about improving it.

First, let's not confuse the terms evaluation and judging. Judging requires at least three people voting, and takes a lot longer, because those works are final when released. Eval usually takes one overworked and underappreciated person, concerns works in progress (that are considered finished for the time being, when eval is used correctly), and is at most indicative of how the judges might vote, never a guarantee.
Second, by all means, discuss judging, discuss eval. Identify problems, suggest solutions. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one concerned about that stuff. Can't speak for the judges, but when it comes to eval, I think I'm allowed to say we've started a conversation about improving it.

First, let's not confuse the terms evaluation and judging. Judging requires at least three people voting, and takes a lot longer, because those works are final when released. Eval usually takes one overworked and underappreciated person, concerns works in progress (that are considered finished for the time being, when eval is used correctly), and is at most indicative of how the judges might vote, never a guarantee.
Second, by all means, discuss judging, discuss eval. Identify problems, suggest solutions. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one concerned about that stuff. Can't speak for the judges, but when it comes to eval, I think I'm allowed to say we've started a conversation about improving it.

@Gario, in his own words in a remix thread in the workshop:
How horrible.
It got me wondering what methods and procedures the judges use when judging. Do you use the resub tag, when, when not, why, why not? When do you say conditional and when do you say resub? What are your dealbreakers? What if there are random fart noises in the middle of an otherwise excellent track?
Larry has his stopwatching and 50% standard for assessing source content. What else do you guys have?
Similar to our meet the evaluators, can we have a meet the judges thread?

Unfortunately I don't remember the procedure. Shouldn't be that hard to install just the plugin on your laptop, and then move the samples to a folder on the external and load them from there. If other solutions fail, using symbolic links should work.
Starting Omnisphere without the drive connected, or with the library folders moved, gets you no library of sounds when you open Omnisphere. That's it.

Unfortunately I don't remember the procedure. Shouldn't be that hard to install just the plugin on your laptop, and then move the samples to a folder on the external and load them from there. If other solutions fail, using symbolic links should work.
Starting Omnisphere without the drive connected, or with the library folders moved, gets you no library of sounds when you open Omnisphere. That's it.

Haha, this is wonderful. I think you should make a whole track out of it. It's okay to make short tracks too. The shortest tracks on ocr are around 2 minutes long.
edit: actually, they're less than a minute long, but I don't think that's enough for a decent arrangement of anything but the shortest sources these days. The shortest track with a track number higher than 1000 is Protodome's Luvdisc track at 1:45. Still less than 2 minutes.

@Gario, in his own words in a remix thread in the workshop:
How horrible.
It got me wondering what methods and procedures the judges use when judging. Do you use the resub tag, when, when not, why, why not? When do you say conditional and when do you say resub? What are your dealbreakers? What if there are random fart noises in the middle of an otherwise excellent track?
Larry has his stopwatching and 50% standard for assessing source content. What else do you guys have?
Similar to our meet the evaluators, can we have a meet the judges thread?

eval:
Minimalistic intro. Then the eighties kick in. Cool.
The sound design could use a bit of work, maybe using different drums and an additional layer of pads for the intro. The less there is going on, the more you have to pay attention to the sound design and expression of the instrumentation. Sound design is much less of a concern in the busier parts of the mix.
The mixing could use some work. The whole track sounds a bit dark and muffled, even on my speakers which I know hype the highs a bit. Giving the bass and leads a bit more of their (individual) higher frequencies should help. Just don't overdo it. There are moments where the pads dive deep into the lows, seemingly arbitrarily (eg 2:25). Get your lows under control.
It's an interesting take on the source, no complaints about source usage. The arrangement overall works well, but it  lacks signalling and punctuation. Eg at 1:00 the track stops and goes into a breakdown. Nothing to signal it or accentuate it (in this case, signalling would probably work better than accentuating, punctuating the change). Same at 1:53, where the only signalling is two tom hits. It could use more, and start earlier, and cover more of the instrumentation. How to do this is a matter of taste, as there are a lot of techniques to use for punctuating and signalling change.
It's a chill piece. I like it. But it needs some work before it's ready to eb subbed. Some mixing and a few arrangement edits are probably necessary. I think those are the critical issues. Cool stuff.

@Gario, in his own words in a remix thread in the workshop:
How horrible.
It got me wondering what methods and procedures the judges use when judging. Do you use the resub tag, when, when not, why, why not? When do you say conditional and when do you say resub? What are your dealbreakers? What if there are random fart noises in the middle of an otherwise excellent track?
Larry has his stopwatching and 50% standard for assessing source content. What else do you guys have?
Similar to our meet the evaluators, can we have a meet the judges thread?

@Gario, in his own words in a remix thread in the workshop:
How horrible.
It got me wondering what methods and procedures the judges use when judging. Do you use the resub tag, when, when not, why, why not? When do you say conditional and when do you say resub? What are your dealbreakers? What if there are random fart noises in the middle of an otherwise excellent track?
Larry has his stopwatching and 50% standard for assessing source content. What else do you guys have?
Similar to our meet the evaluators, can we have a meet the judges thread?

@Gario, in his own words in a remix thread in the workshop:
How horrible.
It got me wondering what methods and procedures the judges use when judging. Do you use the resub tag, when, when not, why, why not? When do you say conditional and when do you say resub? What are your dealbreakers? What if there are random fart noises in the middle of an otherwise excellent track?
Larry has his stopwatching and 50% standard for assessing source content. What else do you guys have?
Similar to our meet the evaluators, can we have a meet the judges thread?

Given that you're looking to add vocals, an eval now would be incomplete. But with that in mind, here's an eval of what you've got so far.
eval:
The snare doesn't quite seem like the right fit for the sound. It stands out in a weird way. You might want to experiment with a few different drum sounds to find a better fit.
I like the dynamics of the arrangement. Those little breaks are just great. The dynamics of the audio not so much. Careful with how you compress the output.
Random vocal clip. Pet peeve of mine. But it also doesn't seem to fit. I get the idea of prefacing the dubstep breakdown with a voice clip. But the transition into the clip's part doesn't work imo.
There's some weird chord stuff happening in the 2:37 part. I get that the source has some cool key changes and key-breaking chord sequences (and not always good ones, imo), but the ones in that part stand out as particularly awkward. The ones from 2:48 and on are cool though. I like the sound design, but there might be some odd overtone in one of the instruments used here that's adding to the chord troubles I'm hearing. See if you can identify something like that.
The dubstep breakdowns are cool. I don't think I could do that any better myself. I'm looking forward to hearing them with vocals in there. They both end rather disappointingly, though. Transitions, dude. Do them well, and the whole track flows so much better. That applies to the changes to key as well, eg 1:09, 1:38, 2:37, 2:42, 3:23, 4:42. I'm wondering if transposing those parts stuff might help, or if the problem is best solved by other means.
The sound design overall is good, with occasional exception I think will be swapped for vocals. But not all of them. There's that one mono creaking synth in the intro and ending (cool but doesn't fit, might be better if stereo spread). There's the backing to voice clips. And there's the snare, though by now I'm not finding nearly as distracting. And there's some mixing things that could be better, but it's difficult to pinpoint those with the placeholder saw in stead of the final vocals there. I can tell you the lead melody in the last chorus part is too loud. But I'd want to hear the vocals in there before going after any other parts.
Source is handled creatively, and is dominant.
It has issues, some bigger than others. It's pretty cool, and I really want to hear this with vocals. But as it's not yet ready for ocr, placeholder saw and all, I'll tell you it's not yet ready for ocr. 

So, judging by the title, this year we're making a single remix?

So, judging by the title, this year we're making a single remix?

We're not doing this for every artist's approval. We're just doing this for the ones who're concerned and available. PMs to everyone here, emails if we have them. And they have whatever time it takes to get the other things in order, minus whatever Usa needs for any revisions.

We're not doing this for every artist's approval. We're just doing this for the ones who're concerned and available. PMs to everyone here, emails if we have them. And they have whatever time it takes to get the other things in order, minus whatever Usa needs for any revisions.

We're not doing this for every artist's approval. We're just doing this for the ones who're concerned and available. PMs to everyone here, emails if we have them. And they have whatever time it takes to get the other things in order, minus whatever Usa needs for any revisions.

Not sure what I'd do in this situation. Maybe I'd give a single word response: "no". Maybe I'd explain I don't have time to do every request, even if it was of my favorite sources. Maybe I'd direct him to my remixing guide, teach a man to fish, teach a fish to remix and all that. Maybe I'd tell him I'd never remix that game if he bothers me again.
Not sure.

I'll do it here, so it'll be useful to more ppl.
Parallel compression is when you mix a signal with a compressed copy of it. You can do any kind of parallel processing, but if there are any phase shifts or delays, these will cause phase issues. Some effects are all about these phase issues (phaser being the obvious example), but they're usually not something you want.
A compressor without any filters or delays doesn't cause phase issues, so you can mix its output with the original signal without any problems. Unlike regular compression, this mixed result will not have that same squashed or pumping sound, even if you compress it really hard (depending on the mix ratio). you can use multiple compressors in sequence too.
This is often done on a bus that's mixed in with the main signal. But it's so much easier when you can just turn a single knob in an effect you're using anyway.
As for the rest of the signal chain, I'll probably have an EQ in there, and it'll end with a limiter and some monitoring, but the key element of the chain is probably the multiband compressor. It lets me control how much space the lows get to take up. It's like a dynamics-sensitive EQ. I usually don't put any of the other output effects on (except the limiter) until I have the sound design and most of the arrangement in place, because I don't want to use the end of the chain to correct things I should correct earlier. If I can easily solve something with a touch of level automation, I do that rather than make the multiband compressor work overtime.