djpretzel

@Liontamer can confirm but I think the "worst" that's happened is that some of our videos hit up against content match because they were licensed commercially elsewhere.

Which "uploads"? What are you referring to, exactly? It's not clear... submissions from albums that are approved & posted have always been presented alongside banner ads... do those count as uploads? Or by "uploads" are you specifically talking about videos? Would they be opting out of web ads, too? We've historically never offered that option. Would it just be YouTube, or any streaming service? What if it's a collab, and two artists disagree? I don't think this would be a per-submission thing, but rather a per-artist - you contact us, you opt out, we flag your profile accordingly.... but the other questions would need to be answered as well. Brandon, at this juncture I feel like you're either not reading anything @zircon writes, or not processing it, or trolling, or.... I don't know. Publishers would never give their carte blanche approval for anything & everything to do be done with their IP. That's not how lawyers think. If we asked most publishers whether fan art of ANY kind should exist, or rather CAN exist according to their official policy, the answer is going to be no. This is true regardless of whether we ran any ads at all, whether we sold any shirts, whether we were an individual or a collective, whether we are a 501c3 or not. You keep reiterating bizarre, outlandish points as if they made sense... "illegal music ring"? What, like a drug ring? Again, as @zircon has painstakingly laid out, YT ads are not fundamentally different from a legal perspective than web ads in terms of supporting the community. You seem to be consistently ignoring this point and/or avoiding engaging with it, and you keep beating the "illegal" drum when that particular drum hurts the ENTIRETY of fan art, from fan fiction, to fan arrangements, to fan illustrations, regardless of this specific topic pertaining to YT ads. I'd like to think it'll be around forever, and 501c3 status is part of laying that foundation - it's decoupled from me, personally, so that if I get hit by a meteor or just die of natural causes or become too feeble to meaningfully contribute, it's NOT a sole proprietorship LLC whose legal & fiscal governance rest solely with me. Here's a good link: http://info.legalzoom.com/money-dissolving-501c3-21769.html "When a 501(c)(3) dissolves, the organization must settle all outstanding liabilities and distribute any leftover funds according to the provision set in its charter." So 501c3 status will FORCE us to codify what happens if things needed to be shut down. Right now we've got no such policy, and even if we did, the accounts would still all be in my name, and it could be messy... 501c3 gives us a formal structure to build policies around that address this question and many others.

Neither do I, w/ regard to a plain language TL:DR; section that focuses on examples and what not.. if the actual substance/meaning were to change, then that wouldn't be retroactive, and managing the crossover point becomes logistically taxing, but just updating with practical examples & clarifications does seem fine. It's on the table more now than it's ever been in the past, and yes, we intend to proceed and make it happen this year. I've been looking at something like this website, which may make things cheaper for us. First things first, we need a FEIN. Some of these things take time just due to the paperwork involved, but it's long overdue and I'll be more comfortable with everything when it's done. Is this one of those things where you *want* to be banned?

Alright, I think I'm caught up on the thread. I want to respond to the above comment from @Garde first because I've already apologized, and while apologies are nice, the simple fact that I made one at all DOES indicate that I agree that this could potentially have been handled better... ideally, our "experiment" would have been shorter, and we would have stuck with the original plan to make an announcement after the first week, kick off a discussion, and time that to coincide with 501c3 filing status and/or updated artist pages, where we hope to emphasize artist promotion more. Filing for 501c3 means having at least SOME of your ducks in a row, and while @Chimpazilla put some materials together that I've reviewed, most of my OCR time these days is consumed with posting mixes, coordinating albums, and trying to work on several different projects to improve the site, all at the same time. I'm not going to lie, being a father of two has affected the time I can devote to OCR, but I'm still doing everything I can. We were always intending to discuss this with artists BEFORE enabling the back catalog, and I want to emphasize this... the number of videos on our channel with ads enabled right now is less than half a percent of the total videos. That's not an explanation for not telling anyone about the experiment (which is more about observing the effects in a normal context), but it does hopefully support & make clear that our intention was to wait for this conversation to take place BEFORE enabling 99.5% of the rest of the videos. It might FEEL like back-pedaling... I get that, I do... but if you think about this point, and actually believe we were never going to tell anyone, then why have we NOT yet enabled ads on 99.5% of the videos? Okay, I did want to clear that up, because at least on the surface it's a legit point. Now, the current concerns seem to break down along these lines, with the following explanations: This isn't right, because OCR staff shouldn't make money off the mixes. We don't; our 2007 content policy stipulates how funds will be used (site operation and promotion), and banner ads have been in place for over a decade. Artists should have been informed prior to ANY videos being enabled with ads. We apologize for this being a surprise, but we DID want to observe the impact of ads for a small percentage of mixes in a neutral setting before discussing this with artists and then, eventually, enable it for 99.5% of the rest of the videos... we also wanted to time that discussion/announcement with 501c3 filing, which in retrospect has delayed things for too long. YouTube ads are different from website ads because they feel different, play before the actual music, are embedded, etc. A video ad IS different from a website ad in terms of the medium, but the end result is often the same. Having to "skip" an ad CAN feel more intrusive - which is exactly why we wanted to monitor the impact with a "test batch"...our observations have been that very few noticed or were adversely affected by this change. It's worth noting that we do not enable "unskippable" ads, and NEVER will. They are Satan. We've also never enabled certain types of website ads that are more obnoxious - "pop-unders" and full-page timed skippable things.... uhh, because we hate them. YouTube ads aren't covered by the current content policy, or it's not clear. When we worked with artists back in 2007 on our content policy, we very intentionally tried to make it "future-proof" by using flexible language, where it made sense. Regarding ads, we used the phrase "advertisements presented in the context of submitted material" - I personally feel that is clear enough to convey that we were NOT just talking about banner ads on websites, that it meant ads could be presented before, after, alongside mixes in a video, on a stream, or on whatever technology the future throws our way - VR, 3D, augmented reality, whatever. Who wants a policy that's out of date every time a new & relevant technology comes out? Nevertheless, it has been proposed that the content policy should be modified to clarify this point. This would not be a modification of substance/meaning, simply one of enhancing the clarity with real-world examples. I think this could definitely make sense. YouTube ads expose OCR and/or artists to additional legal risk. First off, you should know that I've poured tens of thousands hours into OCR and will thus always seek to protect it. I do appreciate the concern, but I don't appreciate the idea that I would somehow intentionally pursue a reckless course of action just to enhance revenue potential to support site operations. As @zircon has repeatedly indicated, YouTube makes it very easy for IP owners to assert their rights without going through traditional legal channels, and this happens quite often. OCR should be more transparent about how it handles its finances. The best thing we can do right now is get the 501c3 ball rolling. As many have pointed out, a 501c3 organization can still be corrupt, can still compensate its employees, etc. - simply having this status doesn't mean we couldn't be the evil, maniacally deceptive people that @Brandon Strader suspects But it's a good faith step in the right direction, it will involve something kinda-sorta like an audit to attain, and it will lay a foundation for decoupling OCR from, well.... me. Right now we're a sole proprietorship LLC, and while all OCR funds are kept in separate accounts, those are still MY accounts, and it all ends up on MY taxes. Attaining this status may actually be rather expensive for us, so when people ask what on earth we could possibly need a budget surplus for, this type of thing is a great example. It's also worth mentioning that while most of the cost is upfront, there is also a cost associated with MAINTAINING 501c3 status from year to year. I think that covers everything. If people feel the above six points are incomplete, I'll be updating this post with anything additional that isn't covered.

The content policy DOES mention advertisements. It does not mention the specific medium or form those advertisements would take... presumably, if enough people feel that it isn't intuitive that the policy as written covers YouTube ads, we could explicitly include that? Not just on this forum - we monitored YouTube comments as well, and saw nothing there or on social media or elsewhere... if there was a better way of observing naturally how YouTube ads would be received and how they would impact the user experience, I'm unaware of it. "it's for the good of the site" isn't an explanation that can "run its course" - it's the ONLY explanation we've ever had, and the only one we ever WILL have. It doesn't expire just because we've said it a lot, and we've said it a lot because it remains true. I'm definitely getting that you feel a line has been crossed, but I'm not seeing how the justification for revenue generation for the site would ever change or expire...

Good question & points. At this point in time we have a "budget surplus", but we do anticipate that filing for the 501c3 could be costly - I spoke with Nick from MAGFest, and they had actual counsel, and it took a good long while & cost five figures. I'm hoping we can do something faster & more streamlined and thus (hopefully much!) cheaper, but it's those types of things that are "operational" but only come up once in awhile. Beyond keeping the site functional, we really want to improve it AND the videos themselves, and we've been working on both, so our definition of "operational" includes improvements & striving towards goals, not JUST keeping the wheels turning. The ads on the website ARE attached to the music in the sense that Google has the power to personalize them based on page content, which is exactly what they do with videos as well, but I hear you... it's a subjective thing, I don't think it's inherent, I think it's perceptual, but I see where you're coming from. This might be the biggest problem - the perception that YouTube ads are somehow functionally different in terms of how the revenue would be utilized. I don't know... it's not accurate, but I agree that this perception might exist.

I think perhaps some people draw a strong line between web ads & YouTube ads, but I'm waiting to hear why that is - it definitely deserves to be talked about, and I'm going to apologize in advance to any artists who feel we should have informed them first BEFORE even testing the waters. We see these ads as equivalent to the existing web ads, as being preferable to them, and as not representing a change in our existing policy, and we wanted a "dry run" & to measure their impact as scientifically as possible. I'm interested in where this thread goes, and eager to answer any questions. Depending on the outcome, an official announcement will be made & sent out to artists in case folks don't monitor the forums. Some quick points: @Brandon Strader's right in that we started testing this on June 13th of this year Since that date, $130.99 in ad revenue was generated from ALL YouTube ads combined, a portion of which goes to our channel network This is considerably less than what web ads USED to make, but ever since we tweaked them to get rid of obnoxious & irrelevant content, web ads have tanked... so this is more than they ARE making at present. It's worth noting that it took two months for anyone to really notice... in my mind this is a successful experiment JUST in terms of gauging the impact to the average viewer/listener. Ads have NOT yet been enabled for the 3000+ video back catalog - we are waiting to do that based on the outcome of this conversation and after an official announcement. At that point the ad $$$ would obviously be more, but it won't be one video, or even one artist's videos, making a huge contribution to that - it's the aggregate. We were also hoping to time that announcement with a parallel announcement of filing for 501c3 status and debuting new artist pages which do a better job of promoting the artist than our current layout. So, why would we do this at all when the Patreon is completely covering the site's operating costs, with SURPLUS? An extremely fair question. To be honest, I hate managing the money side of OCR, I didn't sign up for this, and it's not something I derive joy in even contemplating. For the 501c3 I'm hoping someone on staff can take on the role of treasurer so I can free myself of it. Nevertheless, answers to the above question: I'm an IT guy. I have backups for my backups. I don't like having a single point of failure, and without a meaningful form of ad revenue, the site's existence would rest solely with Patreon. Membership in a YT network has other benefits... increased reach, an extra level of protection from content matches, etc. Mainly, at least for me, I saw that our web ads completely tanked after we tweaked them to exclude annoying/irrelevant content. I don't think Google's ad model for websites is as good as their model for videos. I'd love to remove most if not all Google ads from this site, and only feature completely relevant stuff like Super Audio Cart, OverClocked Records, and also use that space to promote our existing/upcoming albums. It absolutely is; our content policy still applies, and always will. For the 501c3 filing, there would be additional clarity required surrounding what specifically counts as an operational or promotional cost, tying our hands a bit further, in addition to more specific IRS documentation requirements.

We were testing the waters, getting an idea of how it would work, the different settings involved, how obtrusive it would be, etc. We did legitimately want to see whether people would notice, and when. The community definitely deserves to know and provide input, and if a majority (or potentially a plurality) of artists are uncomfortable with it, we can reassess, but I'll lay out the general thinking below and you can see what you think. We can use this thread to discuss; just need to keep things civil & productive. This is not civil or productive; I'm confused why you're still registered and taking the time to chime in, if you're so convinced that the music is mediocre, which is kind of an insult to all artists contributing to this thread, either way... So this is surprising to me, because the way we see it, ads on videos are not materially different from ads on the website, all of which go directly towards funding the site. Nothing has changed, policy-wise. From http://ocremix.org/info/Content_Policy This remains 100% true; the only difference is that the ads are on YouTube instead of the website. We'd like to minimize or even eliminate ads on the website in favor of YouTube, primarily because they're more annoying, less relevant, affect layout/usability, and don't accomplish much. Based on @bLiNd's reaction, and perhaps others, it seems like people are drawing a major distinction between YouTube ads and ads on this website, and that's what this conversation needs to focus on, because from a policy perspective, again, nothing has changed - any $$$ goes towards operation & promotion, and the net effect is just that ads are offloaded from the site and onto videos, where we feel they make a bit more sense. No unskippable ads, FYI. There are other benefits to being a partner channel, including enhanced reach and protection from instant takedowns, that seem to make this a smart move for us, but nothing is concrete - let's talk it through, but let's focus on the core question: how is this different from the status quo?

Otakon 2016 August 12-14, Baltimore MD Come join us on Friday, August 12th, from 8:15 PM - 9:15 PM in Panel 6 (Hilton Key 7,9,10) @Arrow, @DarkeSword, @djpretzel will be there!

Yup, little bit of history. It's taken time to fully crystallize, but the real intent was to prevent stuff where lack of consideration for panning, soundscape, mixing, mastering, etc. was written off as "just part of the genre" and a whole suite of decisions mooted as a result, which we didn't want. Namely, at the time (perhaps still?) people were taking 16-bit SNES sources and "demaking" them into NES versions that were, in addition to not being particularly interpretive from an arrangement perspective, not indicative of what chiptune as a genre is capable of. That's more or less what I meant about "straight" chiptunes, but the phrasing wasn't as clear as it could & should have been.

What became commonly misinterpreted as "OCR doesn't allow chiptunes!" really just boiled down to our looking for a level of complexity in ALL submissions - including chiptune-oriented mixes - that goes beyond what are commonly referred to as "demakes" - where a 16-bit or newer song is converted almost verbatim to chip textures. In addition to not passing arrangement muster, these types of conversions often (not always!) don't really employ the full range of capabilities of the chip(s) being utilized, and defer a lot of decisions about panning, modulation, texture, DSP, etc. to default values. We need submissions to illustrate creativity AND decision-making in arrangement AND production, more or less. The latter is entirely possible within a primarily chiptune paradigm, as previous featured mixes have illustrated and as this mix illustrates as well. No issues.

Good stuff, Amy! Picked it up, ditto @OA on "Second Chances" - in particular dig the vocal backing harmony parts throughout.

VERY unlikely this is an issue with SAC (99% sure it's not), as opposed to an issue with Kontakt/Kontakt Player. Some links that might be helpful: https://www.native-instruments.com/en/support/knowledge-base/show/1153/one-of-my-kontakt-libraries-keeps-disappearing-from-the-library-tab/ https://www.native-instruments.com/forum/threads/kontakt-library-disappearing.191795/ https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=376258

This is a largely semantic misunderstanding between y'all... it's the difference between an assertion that cannot be disproven *now,* with current tools & technology, or at least has not been disproven *yet*, as compared to an assertion that is framed as being inherently unfalsifiable, independent of ANY obtainable knowledge, e.g. "we are living in an undetectable computer simulation." or "purple is prettier than blue"... or "women make better leaders than men"... the last example being unfalsifiable due to the subjectivity (better how?) of the language employed, which I believe was the original complaint in this case... And yet, religion

Moving to "Site Issues & Feedback" since we've now been on IPS 4.X for a good bit.... THANKS to everyone who chimed in with issues, and we can still use this thread for the same purpose, just doesn't need to be pinned in community anymore!

Necro-bump? Well, kinda... saw this on my Facebook feed and thought it did a damn good job of handling some of the topics we've discussed here, WITHOUT stumbling into the same obvious, tired traps that Anita and others do:

This one's helped along a bit by some nice modulation/sequencing on the leads. - djp --- --- Greetings, OCR Judges! This is actually a revisit of a previous arrangement I did a few years back. I've learned a bit more about music production, and though the arrangement was solid enough to warrant a redo. The structure is mostly the same, but it was reconstructed from scratch using the feedback from the panel and the knowledge I've picked up since then. Hope you all enjoy! Game arranged: Mega Man Battle Network 4 Song arranged: Battle Pressure (AKA the tournament battle theme). Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33CR9ab8RCs Arrangement Title: Program Advance OCR Name: Skyline Drop Real Name: Ike Elele User ID: 22951

Note: mix title is a play on source so I GUESS it would fly. Production seems solid, arrangement might be too conservative? -djp Eternal Legend Michael T. Healy Guilty Gear Isuka Drunkard Does Make Wise ReMix Drunkard Does Make Wise Remarks England Stage Theme Music I have been covering Video Game/Anime/random songs under the Eternal Legend moniker for a few years now. It's a fun process taking songs that I love, rearranging the parts, reworking the drums/guitar/bass/keyboards/effects, and intensifying them to my style. ProgPower Metal! I like to keep them as true as possible meaning no tangents where you may not even remember what you were listening to, due to a long solo or something that completely disrupts the flow of the song. That doesn't mean that I don't throw an Easter Egg in into a song here and there to catch people off guard. I'll also add some guitar fills, rearrange/improvise a solo, and so forth. I like to keep the song progressing. Eternal Legend is taken from a Ninja Gaiden Mission Phase. Please let me know if there's anything wrong with this submission. Hope you guys enjoy this even if not accepted. Thanks

Well, this is certainly different... there are parts, like the intro, that don't inspire confidence, but then there are some pretty cool percussive things going on further in... see what you think. -djp --- Contact Information Remixer name : VisiOn Real name : Charles Rheault Website : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCBseldaXOVqBa-S7pQFLzbg Name of the game :Donkey Kong Country Name of the remix: Nueva Selva Name of the original Song: Aquatic Ambiance Additional information about game including composer, system, etc. : David Wise is the original composer of most of the Donkey Kong series soundtrack and joined Rare in 1985. He quit the company in 2009 since he said he didn't see any more opportunities to make memorable video game music like he did in the past. He is known for his atmospheric style which can be heard in titles such as Aquatic Ambiance from DKC or even Mine Theme from DKC 2 (Donkey Kong Country 2). Rare was the video game company that released Donkey Kong Coyntry on the SNES inNovember 20, 1995. Link to the original soundtrack, Aquatic Ambiance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAPpVplHiD I've always been a DonkeyKong fan: I would the game characters and I had the game on my Game Boy Advance SP. I remember I always loved the music of the levels, I remember having goosebumps as I was jumping over a Zinger (the bees) and listening to the epic Donkey Kong OST. The DK series have always inspired me to discover new passions and to go on adventures. Behind the name: Nueva Selva, It means New Jungle in spanish, I was just look for another way to say ''New Jungle'' since that wasn't original. So my friend google translate helped me for that. If you look at the Music Video I made for this song, you will see that Donkey Kong is on a quest to bring back life to his jungle and to find a new place to live. Donkey Kong is the guardian of the light and the life and this is why the jungle is in black and white while he is slowly becoming colored again. Also, Nueva Selva makes me think of an adventure where there is a new place to discover and the Donkey Kong games are all a big adventure. Why remixing video game music? Video game music is such an amazing thing; when you play a videogame, you're living a virtual reality and that new reality is given a sountrack. Real life dosen't have a musical soundtrack and that's what makes the virtual reality of a game like DKcountry an upgrade from our reality. Imagine if everywhere you went, there was not only a physical world to feel, to see, an olfactory world to smell, a sonic world to hear the noises of nature, but also a musical world where every location has it's own music. This song is an orchestral ambient song was made in Fl studio with Kontakt, Battery and synthesized sounds I made myself as well as a few sound effects I designed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAPpVplHiD

Seemed solid on first listen. -djp --- Hello, I would be very grateful if you would consider my song for evaluation. I have attached a file and have a download link, just in case.Download Link: Remixer name: SoaralotReal name: Nick HowardEmail address: website: https://www.youtube.com/user/SoaralotMusicuser id: 33428Song information:Length: 6:52Game Arranged: Final Fantasy XName of Arrangement: The Mountain's RoarName of Individual song(s) arranged: People of the North Pole (A.k.a. Mt. Gagazet's Theme)Thank you for your time and consideration.

Remix: GROAN ver.T7 Source(s): Groan [Gouki theme type-2] and Akuma Theme SSFII Remixer Name:Rukunetsu Email Addy: Website: http://youtube.com/Rukunetsu User ID: 39313 Game: Street Fighter Zero/Alpha 3 (Arcade/Console) Name of Arrangement: Groan ver.T7 (Gouki/Akuma Concept) Name of Original Song: Groan Original Composer(s): akayuki Iwai, Yuki Iwai, Isao Abe, Hideki Okugawa, & Tetsuya Shibata A remix of Groan done in a style that would fit within the Tekken world, being that 'ol Gouki's making an appearance in Fated Retribution. Tried to retain that ominous feel of the original but add more an electronic/updated sound to it...while mixing in just a TOUCH of his original theme from SSFII.

Pretty cool concept/arrangement... seemed like it clipped at one point, may not develop enough... - djp --- My ReMixer name: TCHLE My real name: Eric Fausto My website: https://ericfausto.bandcamp.com/ My userid: 33391 This is my first submission to OCR! Hope you like it ^-^ It is a mashup of "Moog City" (Minecraft) and "Zelda's Lullaby" I named it "Moog Lullaby" One day my brother woke up with these two songs playing over each other, but with Zelda's Lullaby in 4/4 time to fit over Moog City's background. I actually did most of it on a notation software called Notion, for some of it I used an iOS app called Figure, and I mixed it together on Audacity. If not accepted, feedback would be greatly appreciated!

Contact Details: ReMixer name: Gray Fox Gaming Real name: Gray Fox Email address: Website: www.youtube.com/c/GrayFoxキツネ灰色 userid 33361 Submission Information Name of game(s) arranged : Metal Gear Name of arrangement : Opera Lady Name of individual song(s) arranged :Red Alert Additional information about game : Released on the MSX system in 1983. Composed by produced by Iku Mizutani, Shigehiro Takenouchi and Motoaki Furukawa Link to the original soundtrack : https://youtu.be/6YQm2M-v4l0 I wanted to give the original 8 bit tunes a new flair. I decided to give it a slower theatrical wild west feel with an opera lady harmonizing to the tune. (Hence the name of the remix)

Would need a different title. - djp --- Dear friends, first of all let me introduce myself. My name is Galih Lintang Satuhu, i`m from Surabaya, Indonesia This is my first time try to submit a remix soundtrack from video game. Hope it won`t disappoint you guys. This is a remix from video game OST Breath of FIre IV "Thousand WInds", or "Thousand WIngs" in another title, which originally composed by Yoshino Aoki. This remis is originally made by myself, (Galih), using FL Studio to create it. This song has set in 192kbps and 16-bit. If there`s some decay in my sutff, hope you won`t be disappointed cause this is my first time. Thanks for your time Sincerely

Rel. conservative but some changes, would need new title. - djp --- Remixer Name: Ithirial Real Name: Brian Edwards Website: https://soundcloud.com/ithirial Userid: 33362 Arrangement: Dragonborn Theme (Metal cover) from TESV: Skyrim Original composer: Jeremy Soule I know everyone and their grandmothers have made a metal cover of Skyrim's theme by now but my arrangement, although changing very little from the original source, has a rhythmic difference which stands out from the standard "power metal" type drum pattern so many are keen to add. My favorite part especially is the slight change I made from around the one-minute mark 3/4 to 4/4. Sounds like Stormcloaks on the march!