timaeus222

I'll be posting any videos I make on FL Studio here. (If they're still processing, it won't be long) Feedback appreciated! Length: 11:20 Just me trying out a new synth called Serum by Xfer Records. The presets are pretty generic, but the synthesis engine is fantastic. How to use MIDI CC in FL Studio 11 Length: 03:37 Quick tutorial on how to use MIDI CC in FL Studio 11. I also demo a patch from my WIP soundbank for Zebra2. Length: 47:42 * Drum Sequencing Tricks for Tightness * Automate Any Possible MIDI CC with minimal effort * Notching/Peaking EQ * Watch Your Signal Chains * Reducing Automation Redundancy * Used too many effects? * Flexibility for Dynamics * Clearing up the Stereo Field ~ Pt 1 * Clearing up the Stereo Field ~ Pt 2 * Compensation EQ

What does it mean for this to be "for novices only", while having guidelines for a star signing up, if "no one other than the participating novices may help in any way [with mixing]"?

If it's fruitful discussion, what harm does it do? We (you) can get back to singing business, but tangents can be fun. Besides, that headphone thread is recommendations, not discussion of perception.

Now, you see, that's where personal standards come in. Ironically, while my standards are high, here's how I respond in the situation you're describing: I write something, mix it on my best headphones. I listen to it on store-brand skullcandies that should sound "not good" (not bad in particular, but average). Bassier than normal, plus a little resonance in the upper highs. I accept the fact that these skullcandies are bassier than normal below 100Hz and accept/ignore that very minor resonance, and I evaluate how much more bassy is it than I expect on earphones like those. If it's within my tolerance based on the new "scale", so to speak, I don't have a problem with it. In other words, I'm just going to quote myself, as that rather lengthy post, as Kristina called it, was rather insightful, IMO, and was surprisingly not fully internalized. So before you just say "Oh wow, these headphones I really love make my song sound great, and now these common headphones make them sound terrible! Now I have to majorly redo some production!", look back, evaluate what you can expect out of those bad headphones, and "convert to its new scale". Generally, you'll find that you were imposing your standards too seriously. Also, my standards are where they are 'cause Quantitative Analysis. 'nuff said.

Yeah, reverb is technically pretty tough. I've always been adhering to the advice from zircon to mix drier than you prefer, because headphones often have more reverb than the optimal amount (possibly to compensate and make them sound like a room). I ended up just getting the DT-880's and I heard a pretty large difference in the reverb amount in comparison to the Grados. I still liked the amount, but there was suddenly more clarity in everything I ever listened to. That's how big a difference it made.

Let's take it to church! (because I do that already )

I like my standards though. It's who I am. I can relax them for other people, but for me I like them where they are.

But I don't have a treated room. >_> That and time.

It's not that you'd be using your good headphones improperly if your mix doesn't sound good on bad headphones. Presuming that you're uber good at mixing already, it's that you'd be assuming that your good headphones are representative of many good quality audio systems' frequency responses. If there's no substantial evidence that that's the case (e.g. a reasonably flat frequency response graph) or you are unsure, you shouldn't just check on bad headphones, but also other ones that are nearly as good for some purpose or another. For example, my Grados are a great check for reverb amount and treble volume/gain, while my Beyers are a great check for low-mids and treble clarity but are drier than the Grados. Checking on just the bad ones is clearly not allowing you to hear exactly what you can hear on better ones, and the only purpose they could serve is to reveal the common listening experience (which is what you had said), not the ideal listening experience. If the ideal is good enough, any worse of a listening environment shouldn't impact the quality of the music enough that you wouldn't want to listen to it. Sometimes you just have to accept some of the flaws you hear on bad headphones, because maybe they're just that bad. You'll get that sense at the moment your ears become objective. It's not easy though, so don't stress over it.

Happy Birthday!

While it's possible, wouldn't it draw some attention away from the other tracks?

I can hear your production's improving. Some minor things: - The slap bass sounds simply low passed, and notching or mildly scooping the high frequencies of the guitar where you want the slap of the bass to come through would be a step up from a production mentality of low passing or high passing things you don't want to clash. Once you hear the particular quality of the sound that you want to come through coming through enough to sound distinct, it's good. - The guitar sounds high passed as well, perhaps above around 200Hz. Same kind of idea like with low passing on the slap bass, so you could scoop the low mids to bring out the bass. - This kind of genre calls for a punchier kick, but the snare kinda works (a little high pass-y, but it isn't buried). You can hear the kick, but there isn't much high end snap to it. - At 0:43, the strings could use more dramatic emphases on the first and fourth notes to make this feel more action-like. Gives it more life. - Arrangement-wise, this seems simplistic compared to how much you actually know about music theory. Use that knowledge!

Ultimately my opinion is that our source has too few sections to draw moods from (2; 1 main, 1 'climax').

I'm honestly not 100% happy with the direction of Kenta's and my Castlevania track. I dunno, we may continue it, but we may just try either picking a new source (maybe ) or adding more sources. The inspiration is just iffy with this one. Tempo's weird, I don't have a good organ sample, lots of metal on BadAss albums already, etc. Things are much better on the Vectorman remix.

Yeah, but I don't always do that. Also, it's definitely possible to upload an OC ReMix to youtube at maximum audio quality and practical loudness without audio artifacts (). Maybe it's not that way right now to discourage people from ripping off the video and just downloading the MP3 instead? (I didn't think it was uploaded at 128kbps, but for a long while I've heard a distinct difference in loudness between the video and the MP3, at least.)

Mesmerizing and enthralling. Gotta love it!

It used to be that clicking the lyrics tab on a ReMix with lyrics available doesn't stop the video preview and bring it back to the beginning, but keeps it playing. Can I request that it be the case again, so that we don't have to open a new browser tab to view the lyrics and hear the video at the same time?

Why isn't OCR called Overtly Collective ReMix?

I actually kinda liked the formant lead, though I thought a more open or more dynamically changing vowel would have sounded cooler. Maybe even a vocoder lead would have been sweet. That aside, I like this retro atmosphere, and there was some nice development throughout. The highlight for me was at 3:02 - 3:33.

The interpretation is strong with this one.

Shreddage II can be used in Kontakt Player 5.3. That's uh, one. Juggernaut: Kontakt Player 5.1 --- two. Archtop: Hollowbody Guitar - Kontakt Player 5.3 --- three. So ISW has three out of all the libraries in the world, at least.

Happy Chimpariffic Birthday! You've got a present comin' up!

Small thing, but I think the noise wave snare messies up the high end, and could be replaced with more of an industrial/acoustic snare to establish a grungier mood.

You first drew my interest at 1:16. Everything before that felt a little "too slow-burning". In general it was good at setting up the mood, but I felt like the melodic bells needed more ambience to create a more expansive, suspenseful atmosphere to draw me in. When things got going, it sounded industrial and glitchy. Sometimes I felt like the sequencing wasn't rigid by itself, but as a whole. EX: 2:25-2:32. That lead was also a bit too loud in comparison to everything else. When the soundscape gets more complex, some things are buried, like the kick, the bass at 2:42, etc. I loved that portion with the glitched brass at 3:11. If you get more of that kind of sound in there, you've got yourself some complextro. This has potential, but I really think this is an idea underdeveloped in production, waiting to be awesome.

There's a way to do that without fading the kick. You could just do a ping pong delay cymbal along with a snare roll and a kick to emphasize the start of the next measure, and then have a silent kick sidechained to the bass to keep that going as you already have now (send to the bass but not the master, and it'll just keep the bass pulsing). Kinda like .