timaeus222

Duuuuuude. Happy birthday zircon, BlackPanther, and Anorax! PS: I just sent you a present, zircon! =D

Sounding much better. 0:50 is a little risky. EQ-wise it sounds good. I think you should lower the volume of the sounds used there about 0.2~0.6dB each though, at least until when you lower them it actually makes a difference. i.e. Let's say they peak at 0.6dB. If you lower them until they reach 0dB and you've had a soft knee limiter on the whole time, they should sound like they're at the same volume. Personally, I thought the first minute was much better than what came after. I think you should keep polishing what comes after until you're satisfied, because the first minute trumps the rest by a long shot. Ending is a bit weird though. Maybe you can use actual door knock samples.

Sounds great so far. It'd be even better if you vary the lead notes a little more at 0:33~1:02 since it feels like that section is really similar to what came before it. For some reason, the cellos/double basses at 1:02 sound more muddy than they were previously. Try checking the velocities and seeing if they're playing strongly enough, since I can barely hear any of that trebly attack (Try listening to to imitate cello/double bass articulations. Although the strings library used is LA Scoring Strings, you could just peak-boost the treble carefully and that should be pretty similar even with the hall reverb). I think it's a problem with the reverb being too much, but you can't really do anything about that internally, unfortunately. I guess you could do a little more EQ carving. High pass whatever doesn't ever play low enough to occupy those frequencies, and that could help a little. 1:33 is cluttered still; it sounds like the "only" way for the brass to come through is to do sforzando or some other strong attack sample. Let up some on the master compressor gain, or put in a volume control effect on the master after the compressor in the effects rack (Last year or so I used to think it didn't have a specific order, but it DOES!). That might give you room to be more flexible with the articulations. Boosting things too loudly is gonna squash the transients. Letting up even a little could help a good amount. The cymbal at 1:46 or so seems to have come a little early, maybe around a quarter of a second or so. Try to get it to line up with the first beat. The compression here is also making this feel too packed. I just think it could be the compression or just the velocities, but I'm leaning towards the compression, since the articulations sound fitting (aside from the brass sounding sforzando almost all the time). Overall, the balance is a whole lot better! The main issue is the master compression being too much, which leaves you having to use strong articulations on the brass just to have it be decently audible, but you shouldn't have to. Great work so far!

I agree that the piano should have come up a little bit more, but I'm not really a fan of the drum sequencing here; the rapid kicks are interfering with what the piano is doing. It's like mixing hip hop with solo piano. It even feels slightly bare at times. The pads are quite nice though, and the bells are neat. Nice triplet at 2:54. D'oh! Fade out! x( Oh well, great job anyways!

Dun worry, there was one. I just used that as an example of guitar+bass mixing. ----------- Hey Gar, you should make a copy of the project file, then try not high passing your guitars so much on the copy, and instead try dipping your guitars where your bass is. See how that changes the low end power. I'd high pass the guitars on a relatively gentle slope near 25Hz. Something kind of like this. I think the flute should be louder in volume (rather than velocity of course) by about 0.4~0.8dB. 0:21 is missing some low end to me. Could be that guitar high pass at 200Hz. You may just be overthinking things. You still want that guitar picking frequency for the "presence" to remain along with the bass bite. For some reason I'm not really hearing that kick at 0:35. I can barely feel it, so I don't think the click is really there yet. It's better at 1:36 oddly enough. Something's up. 1:40 glitching could be a tiny bit louder, maybe +0.2~0.4dB. Is this on a hard knee limiter? That could be why things aren't getting too loud that easily. Try letting up a bit on the look ahead setting. Just watch out for clipping, or tack on a soft knee limiter next in the chain to transparently catch peaks. I could feel a little bass at 3:24, but it's not really powerful. Getting there.

Lots of attention to detail here. Pretty fun and varied the whole time. Great job!

http://soundcloud.com/timaeus222/fun-with-granular-synthesis Some rather hilarious fun I had playing around with granular synthesis.

Taking a look at the pacing, I'm finding it pretty plodding. That's mainly because the first drone-like pad has a pretty static texture. Although there's other stuff happening around it, like anvils (with tape delay?), plucky portamento synths, filter envelope basses, etc., the pad itself doesn't keep my attention very well. I find the stop at 0:43 very strange. Sounds like an ending, then suddenly a guitar comes in. Same at 0:57, 1:10, 1:22, and 1:35. That messes with the pacing a whole bunch. 1:58 anvil is a tiny bit resonant or too high in treble. Based on arrangement, I don't believe this would pass, but the production is great, and the instrumentation is cohesive.

Submitted already? Aw, I would have suggested you layer that kick some more, because I can barely feel that thump. Some slight low passing on that 0:28 lead would have helped too. Great arrangement though. If the above turns out to be minor nitpicks for the j00js, then you should be fine.

The highs are just 10kHz+. Reverb is pretty basic, so you ought to get familiar with it and Delay.

I wonder how many times Larry laughed while trying to do his part.

Granular-like pads in the beginning really made this work.

These acoustic guitar soundfonts are pretty good. All of them are a little questionable in the higher notes. I forget where I found them though. You'll need to band stop the Maestro Velocity one at 82 Hz. Thankfully they all come dry. The harp may need a little dip at 260Hz.

I think I would have liked a little longer release setting on all the notes and some more progressive harmonies (like at 2:27), but other than that, it sounds pretty good. @Nutritious: I actually think 0:30 sounds a little bit like Chrono Cross's "Reminiscence".

I actually think the piano tone is just fine. Sometimes a piano can be EQ'd in a way that gives your song a sense of style. The only thing I'd say about it is that yes, the attack is a little harsh. The harp is a tiny bit quiet. Maybe by about 0.2~0.4dB. The 0:17 pizzicato cellos/double basses are too low-passed. There isn't much personality left in their characteristic attack. I'd agree that the reverb low cut could be raised a little more. The violins/violas are a little better, and could viably stay sustained like that if you use the legato keyswitches. It would be interesting if you used tremolo where applicable though, to build up tension a little, like at 0:33 or somewhere close to that... Wherever it is that you're "halfway" between 0:00 and 1:00. I know for sure that you have all the samples to do that, since you are definitely using EWQLSO Gold. It would be great if you could also add more movement to the notes you've written. 1:11 and similar spots needed that. 1:16 flute was a tiny bit buried, by about 0.1~0.3dB. 1:32 brass is very mechanical. It needs much more attention to the keyswitches you definitely have available. It's very obvious at 1:40. 1:42 cymbal could come earlier. There's a Cymbal sample that builds up a little more slowly, so try that and move it back about half a second. 1:45 could have a timpani roll for a transition. Brass coming next is also mechanical. Try looking at the Zorro theme for some ideas. It had a trumpet solo and some pretty extensive brass movement IIRC. Overall a little too much reverb going on. If you could reduce it by about 2~5% on everything (maybe you're stuck with those stage mics and that hall reverb, I dunno), that should make things a little clearer. Also, fix that tail at the end of the song. It cut off suddenly.

Thanks! If it's a sound effect, then it could be a little further away with a bit of reverb, and quieter. Sometimes cross-panning helps. ------------------------ Fade-in intro is OK. Could be better. Sitar sounds a little bit mechanical, especially at 0:23. Try to think of a phrasing for it. 0:26 effect is a bit lofi to me. Sounds like a bad quality sample rip or something. It has lots of bad frequencies that you could EQ out. I'm not entirely sure, but I felt like the kick and snare are a little wide at first. They should be center. 0:49 sound effect is too bassy but the kick isn't EQ'd to make room for it. Try dipping down in the mids a little until you hear the kick changing tone, and stop when you start to dislike the tone too much. Sub bass and kick tail are too loud and long respectively, so leads after 0:53 are buried, or the kick/bass get too much attention. 1:30 needs a better transition. I think 1:42 is too early to come back in. 1:30 is more interesting to me than the normal DnB sections, so you could have doubled the length of that breakdown to give yourself more time to buildup back to the DnB section. 2:07 already changed? That was fast. Again, no transition was here. I don't think the Massive square bass fits very well with the sitar. Maybe something more FM-like. since FM is closer to physical modeling than additive or subtractive synthesis. You could also change the kick here, as it doesn't fit well either. It's too boomy without much of a contributing thump. Hi Hat rhythm feels separate from the rest of the song IMO. Try to integrate it more with the other instruments. 2:33 has too much going on right now without much of an idea of what should get the most attention. I'd like the Sitar in front, as that seems like it should be leading. 2:44 has no leadin. 2:44 - 3:09 doesn't have much of a focus at the moment, like 2:33. The rest should be similar to figure out.

I personally think too much going on is not actually that bad. It's a result of a tough thing done not so well. You sure can have a lot going on, but it has to be controlled such that the most important instrument attracts the most attention without trying too hard (i.e. being too loud), and the supporting roles are placed in the stereo field to sound like backup. Any "extra" instruments for filler might not be very obvious at first listen, but should still be audible to the extent of every single note's harmonic contribution (not necessarily the note itself). An example of that is here: http://box.com/s/ic8oespzk5pn43upc6ef @ 2:40 (not the final version though), where there's two leads harmonizing, a background sine wave, Shreddage Bass, a nifty arp (called "Nifty Arp" ;D You can hear that better in the final submitted version), and glitched drums. Of course, you don't have to pack it nearly that much in a remix. I just did that because I like music that "gives you new stuff" every few listens. The two leads are panned 20 left and 20 right respectively, the sine wave is panned center but far away with reverb, the arp is panned to the back of the listener's head while also having stereo ping pong delay for a wide pan, the bass is panned center, and the rest of the drums are just panned center too. tl;dr: Don't pan everything center if it doesn't make sense in the center. Center is for bass, kick/snare, and lead, mostly.

Just listen to real instruments playing, and imitate how they sound. i.e. Fast passages could be true legato or staccato flute, or spiccato strings with varying velocities, etc. He/she has the same intention as jnWake, basically.

The harmonies are well-planned. I like how the flute goes into focus at 0:52 while the piano goes into the background a little. It's not overdone. 1:19 sounds a little weird harmonically though. You went from a diminished chord with an A base to a first inversion m7 chord with a G base. It could sound right, but I think you should try bringing that D# down to a D just to hear how it sounds before going with either one. 1:28 is where it gets iffy. The drums are a bit quiet. Yeah, in an orchestra they're farthest away, but even so, they're slightly too quiet, mainly the cymbal (most evident at 3:21). Also, the kick rhythm is a bit awkward in this musical style. It makes the drums feel separate from the song overall. I've never seen an acoustic drumkit in an orchestra before. It could still work, but the drums should be a tad less buried, and leaning less towards a dramatic rock style, as it doesn't seem like the rest of the instrumentation conveys that. 2:02 needs more stereo separation and more EQ work on that guitar. I could barely hear the strums. 4:25 was a bit strange to me, and again, that makes this less of a traditional orchestral song. The limiter might also be pushed a bit too much. You can really hear that at 4:46. Think of it this way: Can you give this song to anyone in the entire world who has the same materials you have and as much experience as needed to recompose this song from scratch, leave them alone to do it, and trust that they'll succeed without much hassle? If you can say yes, then the mixing is good enough. Right now, it's about 85% there.

Zebra2 by a long shot. It's a do-all-be-all mega-synth.

Well, it's not that I didn't get it. I just didn't say anything about it. You've got the idea though, and it mainly just needs better samples.

This one is pretty interesting. I might remix in the future (The has more distinct background notes).The first 4 seconds sound like the Zorro theme at about 0:15 . Is it acceptable to have a section in the remix that is either purposefully or accidentally written in a way that sounds like the Zorro theme? What if the instruments are different from the orchestral combination in the Zorro theme? For example, a Duduk instead of a violin/viola section, but the brass section and cello/double bass section are still as they are.

Doom Castle sounds like it would be cleaner with better stereo separation. Try panning creatively and using delay creatively to pan. 1:45 needs it, for example. Walking Through the Woods was starting with a sine wave, but for some reason I couldn't hear that afterwards. Sine waves are supposed to be easy to mix, so there's something wrong here. Maybe it's too crowded. You could try adjusting octaves. 0:57 lead stuck out too much as dry and static. See if you can do some modulation, like vibrato or tonal shifts using LFOs. Crystal Kingdom sounds alright for what samples you used, but of course you know that it's really fake-sounding.

Well, that's actually not entirely true; I've tried low passing to 18~19.6kHz before on iZotope Stutter Edit, and it made the effects' treble much cleaner at all volumes. Usually it can be too piercing at even ~150% volume, and I like my songs to sound consistent at many volumes.

Interesting. I usually just do a high shelf above 4kHz and then a mild low pass at ~18-20kHz. Is there any reason you seem to like doing the peak boost more?