timaeus222

This is so weird. I love the harmonies, but the rhythm is so odd. It's half swing, half normal, almost sounding sloppy, but I was fine with it later on.

Uplifting and well-thought-out rendition of a classic theme. Oh, and I think Josh's guitar is at 2:54.

It's not the point. It's only a heads-up in case someone was hoping for good default samples, so they won't be surprised. meustrus, FluidR3 is worth getting as a soundfont resource. Happens to have the best harp I've ever used.

I agree with Nostalvania. The dissonance doesn't sound intentional, at least after 2:42. The chord at 2:36 was fine. The other ones are like someone mashed some notes on the piano with the palm of their hand. Also, the TR-808/909 drums you're using fit more of an Electro or Hip Hop context.

I remember this. Jordan Rudess was playing around with it in his studio. Or should I say, one of his studios.

What's happenin' after June 10?

Oh, just do it. >_> Doesn't need to be exact by any means. It just has to be recognizable.

This is my favorite feature in FL, TBH. Really helps you write harmonies and have the context on what octaves you're using. I actually like the automation clips. You can route one automation clip to many knobs/faders/etc., if you want to condense the number of automation clips you use. The Make Unique function definitely helps with workflow. You can continuously modify off a previously edited pattern. I probably use automation clips over half the time I write music. Probably 80% of my pattern clips are usually automation clips, and they're all practical. Anytime you want to use MIDI CC, if you don't want to try to find the parameter you're looking for, you can just tweak a knob/fader/etc. and then select a "Last Tweaked" or "Next To Last Tweaked" parameter to work with it, even if you can't easily find it in the parameter list. You're not going to get good sounds by default, so you'll definitely need to get external VST's and VSTi's to get a good sound out of FL, but it generally won't cost over a thousand dollars to get "your sound" if you practice a lot and can work well with what you have. If you're going to try any free plugins first, Variety of Sound is a great company to download from. I especially like their delay and compression plugins. As for soundfonts, http://soundfonts.darkesword.com/ is a nice initial resource. I actually primarily use one $200 VSTi (Zebra2) and a few inexpensive sample libraries for Kontakt, so it's entirely possible to operate under a thousand dollars and write music you and others will like.

3) He means transferring from a piano roll sequence back to a step sequencer, and possibly the other way.

Seems like it'll be in 2015 at least; the last deadline for remixes/WAVs is December 2014.

Assuming he's doing the traditional kind, it sounds like a lot of stretched, retriggered, gated, and delayed drum breaks at 160~192 BPM. Basically, Venetian Snares is using granulated and/or stuttered drum breaks at high tempos. You can do that with dBlue Glitch (with some occasional automation clips, like on the Grain Width in a Delay, for example). v1.3 is free, and v2.0.2 is $59.95 (I did a little demo of v2.0.2 ).Probably not as hard as Neurofunk or Dubstep (here it's Metalstep, technically) because they both generally ask for particularly aggressive and/or detailed timbres in the basses, but harder than some (not all) DnB, sure. The really dedicated kind of DnB, like (technically Ambient+Dubstep+DnB), is actually quite hard because, well, if I want to put it in a straightforward way, it kinda falls flat with a half-decent bass patch, but it hits you in the right spot with a great bass patch.So in short, yeah, it could be pretty hard, but there's harder stuff out there.

Read the OCR FAQ. It's in there.

Oh, you mean like what I'm doing for BadAss V3? Mission accomplished.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it's a recommendation to stop people from flooding the inbox like you thought. Believe it or not, there *are* a whole bunch of ReMixes getting submitted, and more than people looking in from the outside may think. The back catalog is huge. There's at least half a year's worth of submissions not evaluated yet. Liontamer talked about this on one of the OCR Talkbacks (whichever one that was). If people have resubs, I believe they should still leave time between submissions out of etiquette.

Way to go, bro!

lol, yeah, that's a good thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jazz_band Maybe this? I would think you already looked at this though.

Simple answer, but it'll take years to master. Layering. Gotta have the ear to pick out sounds in your head and decide what you can layer to get a wall of sound. Then you have to be able to mix it cleanly. Try watching this.

Work dat sucka to death!

This is really loud. Like, mainstream-dubstep-loud. So yeah, try toning it down about 4 dB on the mastering. The lead at 0:55 is actually very grating on the treble. The bass at 1:24 is grating too. It's just "wham, holddddddddddd" and it's missing motion in the filters and FM. To some people (and no offense intended), it will sound annoying. That timbre could be more accessible if it has more motion and is accompanied by several other different-enough basses with dynamic filter modulation to keep the textures diverse. Oh yeah, and I don't hear any source usage in the dubstep portion at all, but OCR asks for substantial amounts. The lead at 3:11 is also very grating on the treble like at 0:55. 3:24-4:40 is almost exactly a copy-paste of 1:08-2:55, to the extent that it can be perceived that way due to that bass. Lastly, just for perspective, I like dubstep if it's done well. I'm fine with listening to stuff like this: http://soundcloud.com/zircon-1/augment http://soundcloud.com/isworks/shreddage-2-nuclear-dubstep-by http://soundcloud.com/isworks/juggernaut-darkness-ft-shreddage2 Maybe you can use these as a few references for loudness. They are all consistent with each other. The dubstep in those pieces is refined, IMO.

I made a post on this a while back: http://ocremix.org/forums/showpost.php?p=935202&postcount=443

So... who are you? Why are you the one to judge the competition? Why is it okay to use YouTube? What is the deadline even for? Why is this a competition? And uh... who are you? ._.

If you feel like you've waited a while, just PM one of the mods. He/she'll get the memo.

The intro piano sounds narrow and lofi. The many note rolls all in a row like that actually make it sound more fake because people don't typically play in that way. Same with anywhere the e. piano plays like that. The drum fade-in is also strange, IMO. Compared to all the other instruments, the piano sounds more low-quality in EQ and velocity layers (which it doesn't seem to have), almost to the extent of a honky-tonk piano. Same with the bass and saxophone. The drums are alright, though they could use more compression to put them more upfront. Also, the pad you have throughout is really quiet compared to everything else, and it's barely audible. Increasing the volume on it may help glue the instruments together and make things sound less disjointed. The saxophone sounds very fake, and is quite evident at 1:31 and 3:06. The low note has degradation to the timbre that comes from drastically dropping the pitch of a note. The fast arpeggios are also very indicative. Consider finding someone to record live sax for you. Overall this is a good remix that suffers from sample quality issues and unrealistic sequencing with certain soundfonts. I like the arrangement, but a piece of this kind needs a live touch to it.

Yeah, sounds too liberal. Maybe it's about 40% source. Other than that, I think there could be a more dynamic bass in the second half. It gets repetitive with only two or three basses playing. For example: https://app.box.com/s/lp57fesk2kcd88jlvbv2