timaeus222

I like the little changes you made (drum fills, hi hat sequencing [possibly], ending piano, etc.). I still find the key change to the ending piano kind of awkward, but it's not a big deal. Yeah, this sounds good, man.

That crackling may be sound latency. Are you using a super old computer or a very RAM-costly soundcard?

Tibetn Bowl.sf2 is cool for whoever wants to do an ethnic remix. So far I've found Dulcimer.sf2, Nylon Guitar.sf2, Piccolo.sf2, Santoor.sf2, Tibetn Bowl.sf2, and Vibraphone.sf2 to be good with reverb.

This sounds better than before. I think the piano could use some minor tweaks in the velocities to widen the dynamic range a bit more. For example, at 3:20, the half-step trill could have the second note be lower in velocity. In general the notes written are good, but those minor tweaks could help them be more expressive. The drums seem a bit distant, but that's okay. The snare and toms could come through a little more though, to give more impact in the heavier sections for more dynamic contrast. i.e. 2:28 - 3:04. It seems like sometimes you wanted it louder and it didn't get loud enough. Overall, this was enjoyable, but more rhythmic and harmonic variations to the piano part and more velocity humanization would do this more justice. I get what you're going for in certain parts, but the mixing and some of the velocity work just doesn't convey that fully yet, IMO.

Hm, Piccolo.sf2 isn't too bad. If you treat it with some fitting reverb and automate the volume, it can sound like this: https://app.box.com/s/5g2trgj4jvk9ebo09daj You can tell it's fake from the lack of round robins and articulations, but it's not quite as noticeable as the dry one, eh? The things you can do with soundfonts...

Weird scenario here, but I just found this website that is hosting this HUGE list of free, downloadable soundfonts. I wonder if people here can test them on their own time and pick out what they like, 'cause I haven't tried any of these before, and neither have many people here. http://beats.codenamehippie.com/samples/SoundFrontz/

That was an awesome review. Gosh, I wish every one was like that.

Yeah, I did mean the modern ones that we don't consider good aren't necessarily going to be good if forced to a limited sound palette. They could be good, though, if they actually are musically adept.

The problem with that is that then the composer would have to rewrite much of what they just wrote in order to adapt to the new instrumentation. I think it may be easier just to write with the intended instruments and just think about the musicality they want to incorporate and do it carefully. It's not that writing with restricted timbres forces creativity; it only emphasizes it. Anyone can write a track with various C64/Genesis/NES/etc timbres that just isn't good--it takes musical skill to write a nuanced one. Also, forcing that might actually limit composers' creativities. How would we know if they are actually musically talented, or if they are just inspired by special instrument timbres that they love? What if those inspiring timbres were chiptunes? What if they weren't? If they were stripped of inspiring sounds, they'd really have to work hard to make something good. For all we know, bad modern composers may just be coincidentally born cursed with oodles of writer's block err day without inspiration to guide them, and earlier composers were just that good.

I sang for 6 years in regular choir in middle school through high school, and in jazz choir for a year. I've gotten and seen people lectured on breath control and pitch quite a bit, so we're in good hands so far! ;D

You know, you could just PM someone instead of stating the statistics and how you seem to be getting ignored. Ultimately, we want to help you, but not if we don't know who you are.

I think it's well-explained. Looks good to me!

I actually agree with the "catchiness" in that it seems to be a popular opinion, but I would call that mostly an effect of effective melodic contour. Instrumentation of course also plays a role, but I think that role is smaller than that of the melodic contour because if it wasn't, no one who hated chiptunes would like soundtracks for Genesis, NES, GBC, etc. Older soundtracks had less resources than modern soundtracks, so there was more emphasis on arrangement back then than now. The lower the quality of the instruments, the better the arrangement has to be to make up for that, so composers for those older games composed more carefully such that the melodies were memorable, able to be reinterpreted in many ways, and simplistic yet completely fitting. Therefore, if a person says they "can't remix a source tune" (e.g. "don't think they can") because "it's too good", assuming the VGM in question is well-mixed, they're either 1) not confident they can deconstruct it, 2) not actually able to deconstruct it well enough to satisfy their needs, 3) it's actually too complex for anyone to deconstruct, 4) the arrangement is so specific to the instrumentation that it just wouldn't sound right in other instrumentation without a bunch of reworking of parts, or 5) they like it too much to do anything with it. I think possibility 4 is the most common objectively and possibility 5 is most common on the surface if surveying people, but those are just educated guesses. However, that means there's at least one person out there who can, so it wouldn't be out of the question to try remixing whatever source tune you're thinking of, as long as you feel "right" doing it. In other words, the textural complexity isn't unlimited, and all VGM is able to be remixed by someone who has gotten comfortable enough with remixing in the particular style that comes to their mind. For example, I would consider this a "fully-fledged, imagined piece", and I would never have thought of remixing it (as in it never came to mind until recently) until I somehow got the inspiration to start at one point, but right now I'm pretty far into writing a remix incorporating that, this, and (and I'm definitely going to finish it! ). I consider it difficult to deconstruct the chords in the first track (possibility 2) and a select few parts of the bass line in the second track (possibility 2) because you just have to be able to hear harmonies with relative certainty to examine those two in detail. Fact is, I really loved all three tracks opinion-wise as well as production-wise, so I guess I don't fit possibility 5.

I'm not biased against them, and I think they're pretty solid in context.

This is a beast of a remix. =D

I don't do neurofunk, but I've done Dubstep and Drum & Bass, and their combination is what I think this sounds like. The snare you have sounds vaguely acoustic. Stylistically I think it works OK, but I think some transient shaping would help you get more accurate to the drum conventions of the genre (glued snare, punchy kick). The kick can also be stronger via parallel compression and transient shaping. As for the bass, it seems stylistically fine, but the harmonics are weak relative to a particular reference neurofunk track. The sub bass is an OK choice, but personally I would prefer just synthesizing a bass that already has sub frequencies---in particular, I like distorting a particular quality of FM oscillator sine wave output as my "sub bass" frequencies. It feels richer and more present than simple sine wave sub basses. I could collaborate if you'd like. Here's an example of an FM bass I did. =)

Hm... I think the swung arp at 1:28 is a little bit behind/late in its rhythm, and the drums can be a little more prominent; in particular, the kick and the snare, but more so the kick than the snare. Everything else is great! Cool synth solo. =) I don't hear the mistimed note.

Sometimes the VGM is just too layered to dissect. e.g. the sound design melds so well that it's hard to distinguish what's playing what. It's not an issue of no available MIDI for me---I stopped using MIDIs over a year ago---it's more about the notes that can be distinctly pulled out of the source tune. For example, with the Vampire Variations II album, I picked a hell of a source called Dancing in Phantasmal Hell (get it?). It was... heh... difficult to interpret, to say the least. I'm surprised it's even cohesive enough nearing its loop point, but anyways... The original track was fully orchestral, and I had to find a "downgraded" version which I presumed was somewhere out there, because I just couldn't distinguish all the notes as it was. Original Synthy Version Clearly, you can hear the notes in the synthy version more easily, and that's the one I chose to reference while remixing. The orchestral version was more convoluted to me, especially after 0:14.

Nice and simple, I like it. Maybe the side of the gym leader can have a non-solid-color background? e.g. an actual landscape-esque background. Maybe you could even use map graphics from the actual game?

Nice! For your second Logic track, it's a great start!

They use gmail, so I think the messages are compounded into one string of messages. Should be fine if you sent it within the same month (one time I reworded a remix writeup 6 months later and it got delayed from judging until Kristina and I clarified it was sent way back when ).

Wait, so you didn't use Logic Pro? A normal DAW would be really helpful in letting you rearrange material. =)

Well, 0:29 and 0:37 would be some of the bassiest parts in this. I think 0:59 - 1:12 are more controlled, and sections like that are great! And yeah, OC ReMixes should have recognizable source since this community is catered to honor video game music, and 50% is a guideline. If you have 51%, it's borderline OK, but I would recommend higher than 60% just to be safe.

sounds like club music lol