timaeus222

Hm... Yeah, aside from the snare, I'd say this is ready! Try getting a stronger snare than that, or boost it. To me, it unfortunately sounds kind of weak right now, but I think it's just too soft and needs to be louder. Really close!

On the first few seconds (strings) and at the 1:58 section (snares), I hear a little distortion. I don't know if you hear it, but you should fix that before submitting. For the snares, I don't think it's because they're overloading. It could be because of some other effect, but it sounds overloaded to me, as if there was some excessive bitcrushing. I really liked the shift to more electronica at 0:41. Pretty good transition there. 1:00 - Those toms... sweet. Pretty rich drums there. Sounds kind of like you've got some TR snares in there. Rich, but not quite there yet. I think you should look into compressing those drums... on purpose. I've just started using a new compressor recently called Density MKIII... it makes drums sound pretty awesome combined with some saturation effects. Get some more punch on the kick, mainly. You could apply it to all the percussion though. Do some parallel compression; half dry signal, half wet signal, something to that effect. It gives you a pretty cool combination of the original signal plus the new with extra "glue"/oomph. Aside from those comments, pretty cool track!

I have some small issues with this that unfortunately will have to wait: The snare is a bit too soft. I've taken a look at some professional guitar tracks and what you should do is make sure the snare is at about -1dB, but your whole track should be at about -0.7dB maximum altogether. Then, hard limit it to -1dB and normalize it to -0.2dB... three times (seriously, it seems like Sixto does that too; his tracks are borderline overload but they're compressed so well that it sounds just fine). xD Give that a shot and see how it sounds, and if you like it, and it wasn't approved, then it might help on the resub.

It feels like you have some bass compression and muddiness there. Try doing some compression work, and then lowering the reverb on the bass if you have any. Make sure the dry is at 100%. From the looks of the waveform, the majority of the song looks the same (even on soundcloud, where the waveform is "boosted" graphically), so surely something's up. That might give you more headroom to work with the kick and snare oomph, as well as the acoustic guitar volume. The solo at 0:13 could be re-recorded with more accuracy. Same with 1:49. The lead itself is fine at 0:13, but think the volume and dryness keep it from being awesome. And if you're a perfectionist, try crafting the E. Piano tone at 2:21 some more. The last thing is that the rhythm guitar could be softer, so lower the mix level on that by about 3% from its original.

Huge improvement! =D From here, I'd suggest working on the subtle quirks that make an arrangement engaging. i.e. nuances other people might not actually notice in the song that give expression to an instrument (like MIDI CC, ingenious sequencing, etc.), transitions that ensure the entire section is foreshadowing the next (melody rhythmic change-ups, snare rolls, reverse crashes, white noise sweeps, rim shots, and so on), etc. Things I'm noticing are: - The bass notes are repeating the same two pitches from 0:21 to 2:33 (which is a long time! xD). Try changing it up a little to give the feel you want, but also give the idea of a more complex structure. - 1:33 seems like a new section, but it doesn't sound too different from what came before it. Maybe you can change up the instruments so that even though you have a similar atmosphere, the instruments are different. ;D - 2:33 - this is very minor and not a big deal, but it would make more sense, just in my opinion, that the transition to 2:35 started at 2:32.5 instead of 2:33.5. It's sounding really good right now! The compression work made an awesome difference. =D

I think for the most part, it's very quiet, or at least, it would be quiet if the levels were balanced. e.g. 0:00 - 0:28, 0:53 - 1:52, which is about 1:30, or over half the song. It's worth looking into so you can add more elements and make it louder at some parts to give more of a progressive dynamic contrast. Basically, make sure each instrument is only as loud (in terms of amplitude, not relative volume) as you originally intended. If I were you, I'd put this hierarchy on your instruments: "Loudest" (anything below this) Square Lead (0:55, NOT the one at 1:52) Saw Lead (0:13), Square Lead (1:52, NOT the one at 0:55) Kick (0:27) Bass (0:27) White Noise sweeps (1:07 & other places) Pluck Arpeggio (beginning) Hi-Hats (beginning) "Softest" (anything above this) To do that, use a compressor. I'm sure your DAW has one. By the way, if I can identify every single instrument in your mix, that's a sign that you need more going on! ;D Basics of a sound compressor (not a technical compressor for audio files): - Similar to a limiter without the sidechaining capability. - Threshold is the upper limit to compress the instrument down towards. - Ratio is how heavy the compression is. - The compression knee can be Hard, Medium, Soft, or possibly "Vintage". Change to taste. Soft is best for light compression of elements you don't want to sound "overcompressed". - Gain is the dB boost. - Attack is how early the compression starts. - Release is how long the compression lasts. At 1:27, to make things simpler, I'd suggest switching the instrument playing the arp and the one playing the lead. If I'm correct, the instrument playing the lead at 1:27 was the same instrument playing the beginning arpeggio. Or, you could just clone that "arpeggio instrument" (pluck saw) and give it a different gain/boost in the compressor. Then you can just soften the lead's velocities there if it's velocity-sensitive. Actually, at 1:27, it would be a pretty good time to bring the energy back up as well. At 1:52, the square lead is a good volume because it could serve as a good breakdown section. Good luck!

Well, since you use FL Studio, it makes things a whole lot easier. If you want, you can send me the FLP(s) and I'll tweak the EQ, levels, and so on to clean it up. From there, I think the changing samples can wait. It would end up solving most problems.

Hm... all I can really say for this is that your ideas seem like they would be better off in a much shorter song. See if you can condense this into about 3:30 - 4:00. It might seem less repetitive; the first two distinctly loud sections sound very similar.

The phaser lead at 0:54 is cool. 1:48 - WAT. 2:07 sounds like a pseudo-peaceful section with big beat drums. Maybe something more expressive would work there. Pitch-bend DX7 piano? o.o Just kidding. But you're welcome to try that. Hm... at 2:40 - 2:44, the non-drum instruments sound a little soft. I would have expected that section to be a transition. Maybe polish that a little? Pretty awesome, actually!

High energy from the start, even without the drums! Nice! Sweet analog filter at 0:18! =D It sounds like a sync lead would be a good patch audition at 0:24. xD

Great energy going on here! I haven't heard this in a while, but I liked 3:26's transition. Those toms have a kickin' tone. A lot of the sound design is very generic, but I did enjoy stuff like the sync envelope at 1:36 - 1:40 and the low passed pad at 2:26. In fact, I would have liked to hear that pad for a longer length of the breakdown.

Okay, here's a few things I noticed: Up until 0:50, the song doesn't feel like it should be at like -0.4dB; I expected about -0.8dB, to be honest, because of the things happening in the song. Try fixing the balances on your instruments. For example, the synth arpeggio at 0:58 is too loud. Try not to have things you intend to be softer be really loud. This should fix most of the issues. The kick you have right now is more of a dance-type of kick. Try to find a vinyl kick, as that's what I imagine would work here. It seems to me like your snare at 0:52 at 1:38 has too much reverb. I think you should start over on its reverb wet/dry mix. Start the dry and wet at 0, and slowly increase the wet until you get what you want. If you're mixing on headphones, mix it a bit drier than you'd prefer because people tend to mix in too much reverb on headphones. At 1:12, the clap-snare layer is fine how it is in terms of reverb, but try leading up to that section. Right now it's very sudden. Same with 1:38. Try something like a snare roll or a reverse cymbal. At 1:20 - 1:29, the same lead notes play twice. Try adding more variation on it so it doesn't sound repeated. Aside from that, that's not a very bad start at all. Keep it up!

I think the biggest issue now is the levels on your instruments. The rhythm guitars feel too loud and the lead is consequently subdued. Same with the synth leads; because the rhythm guitars are so loud, you can be tempted to boost the synth lead too, and in this case they got louder than the lead guitar, particularly at 2:06. Weird. At 2:30 when the piano comes in, the drums should already be lo-fied or softer, or whatever you intended on doing there with the drums. I'd suggest half-time there. Try checking out "The Skull Fortress" by Sixto Sounds at 0:26 for the idea of a "lo-fi" feel and at 2:02 for the idea of a half-time less-energy feel. Also, from the look of that waveform, even on soundcloud, it looks like things are not compressed properly. That section sounds a lot softer than it looks. Try to use a compressor to make each instrument have its own volume and that way the song will look how it sounds. When that happens, it should sound much better. The ideas themselves on the breakdown are fine otherwise. Fixing the levels is like 80% of your problems. The other 20% are the transitions and synth lead expressiveness. Not too bad so far!

Alright then. Well, one piece of advice I can give is that you should try to make it seem like you're using only one kit, even if you're mixing kits. Try combining kits that could sound like they're one kit, then put them under the same reverb. The reverb would then have to be extremely mild; just enough to know it's barely there, so you believe the combined kits are in the same room. And if we look at the best lead/rhythm guitar libraries, I've ended up selecting these to use in the end: Strawberry Evolution Electric Guitar (Pretty good Rhythm, Awesome as Lead, $179.99) - http://www.orangetreesamples.com/evolution-electric-guitar-strawberry (Orangeholic is a really awesome demo) Impact Soundworks Shreddage X (Best Rhythm I've ever seen, $69) - http://shreddage.com/ (the Rock the Dragon demo is a really good demo) Note that you need Kontakt 4.2.4 (not Kontakt Player) or higher to use these (4.2.4 is a for-sure thing, since I have it and these libraries, but it could work for simply 4+), and Kontakt costs $500. Yeah, they cost money. That was kind of inevitable. If you don't want to spend money, then you should either ask someone to collaborate, or replace your instruments with something else, like a really good legato synth tone.

Just because it's how I am, I feel like 51 seconds is way too long of an intro with no sonic variance. I found myself skipping ahead to about 1:00. Definitely add something to evolve the track some more up to that point. I think I only heard one instrument and one or two sound effects that entire time. Overall, the track sounds the same throughout. Add some more arrangement ideas, and it'll be much better. Good start though.

Some suggestions (fantastic work so far, by the way): Overall, the bass is too loud in the low end. Try to get one that has about 3/4 the amplitude of the kick, is sidechained by the kick, and more treble fuzz. Whenever I want a specific bass sound, I almost always end up creating it myself. At 0:28, the pot clang feels too dry. It would be a good idea to process an entire percussion kit under one reverb instance to give the feel of just one kit being played, and not a combination of kits. I believe you were using only one kit, but it didn't feel like it. At 1:11 - 1:32, I think it would be great to change up the percussion rhythm just to deviate from your previous half-time rhythms. That way the song feels shorter but actually isn't. At 1:20, I find that distorted arpeggio tone ideal. Try getting the bass tone from beginning to 1:32 to sound like that. At 1:32, it feels like it leads into a breakdown, so change up the soundscape just to be creative. Think of a new combination of instruments that matches your previous and create a cohesive transition. At 1:52 - 2:06, it could be a breakdown, so try transitioning 1:32 - 1:51 to lead into that. Then, lead back up to something similar to 1:11, but with new percussion. 2:29 - 2:35 sounds like terraced dynamics to me. Try making it more gradual. 2:34 - 2:35 for a crescendo might be a bit too close. That's what I expected, but have the crescendo show up a bit earlier to give an earlier heads-up. In the 2:35 climax, the snare feels weak. Layer your snares and try to find a really powerful sound. Try not to stick to your one Damaged Drums kit. Also, the bell/steel drum-like (no, seriously) lead sounds like it has a lot of delay. Lower that by about 15%. The reverb is fine, but make sure you aren't reducing the dry mix on the reverb. Start it at 0 and adjust the wet first. 3:25 to the end sounds like good dynamics work to me. Nice work on that!

The only issues I had were some transitions, the weak snare, excessive low-end boosts in the rhythm guitars and the lack of expressiveness in the synth leads (simple sustains without vibrato or filters linked to an envelope). i.e. the "transition" at 2:47 from the acoustic breakdown back to the hard rock feel was very sudden IMO. Let me break it down: The snare was too soft. The tone is fine, but I didn't really hear as loud as a snare as I would expect from a song with hard rock sections. Immediately when the rhythm guitars came in, I heard a lot of low end muddiness. I still heard the kick, which is unusual when in the presence of that guitar muddiness, but I suppose that helps things. I was also somewhat disappointed when I heard the synth lead, because it could be so much better played in live, linking the modwheel to vibrato and recording the modwheel events to a MIDI so that the synth lead sections could be way more expressive. It was only sustains, and it felt like retrigger sustains, too. The 1:57 section with the synth lead was the most jarring. It felt like each note had pitchwheel edits up a half or whole step each time, which gets to be too much on each note for 6 seconds. It's not terrible, but the synth lead could really have been improved. Aside from that, this was a great remix. The piano itself sounds fantastic, and so do the acoustic guitars. Great electric lead guitar tone too. I'd say that overrides most of the issues mentioned above. Great debut, guys.

Act 1: Effects you have going on like at 2:11 are nice. That signaled the upcoming guitar for me. At 2:52, the guitar is fully exposed, so it would have to be really amazing to work there. Keep that in mind. Act 2: The ideas you have there are just fine. It's just the samples, balance, and EQ you need to improve. The arrangement works, for me at least. Both: It sounds like you're using FL Slayer or something. If you're going to want something with that tone, go for a synth plugin that you can learn to use and customize your own sounds. Then you can create a lead tone you want that is more obviously a synth lead and is trying less to be a guitar. No offense, but common electric guitar VSTi's aren't that good. Go for sample libraries or the real thing. It sounds like the kick is at least loud enough. Now see if you can find a good sample that isn't so heavy in the lows. You want one that is heavy enough in the lows to know it's there, but not so overpowering that it blocks out the bass, and it should also have a little high end so it can be heard. The snare sample sounds like a really old-school Roland-TR snare. Some of those are really nice, but aren't fitting for this genre. Those are more for Electro tracks. Try going for more of a rock snare.

I have some interesting ideas. You should include Wily Stage 2 in there. I've tried mixing Stage 1 and 2 before, and it seems to work well. I think the cymbals are interfering with the balance and are creating issues with muddiness. It sounds like the main reason for that issue for now. The saw wave that comes in when the time slider hits the left edge of the "a" in "Favourite" feels subdued. It sounds like it's the one playing the "lead" (kind of staccato, and feels more like a filler than the melody) at that point, so I think you either create a new lead or widen its EQ. When the time slider hits the left side of the "r" in "Favourite", The saw wave and guitar are playing the same notes. Try making the saw wave play harmonies, or even taking it out of that section and playing harmonies with another lead guitar track. If you want to keep that synth lead, definitely add vibrato with a modwheel input.

You might want to check the bass on your mix. I think it's too high. Also, sidechain your bass with your kick. I'm kind of hearing the kick, but not really. Considering it's for a game, everything else sounds fine.

Very small mistakes, but I love the harmonies you have going on! I agree with ProtoDome: the change to a major key halfway through is awesome! Yeah, don't lift your hands at the end so quickly. Just let it fade out naturally. You don't need much more reverb, but instead, try for more of an expansive room feel. You have the right reverb. Just give it the feel of a (really good-sounding) auditorium. You should get ArtsAcoustic Reverb if you don't have it.

Here is the updated version. New things done to the arrangement, stronger drums as compared to the rest of the instruments, and other miscellaneous edits. I do have a question: What do you mean by the fact that you have a "softer listening volume" and "louder listening volume"? Did you just pick two numbers to remember for your computer's master volume setting and use each while mixing? EDIT: I think the bass at 1:34 - 1:51 is too loud. Just something I thought I noticed. It's a different patch from what I used earlier, btw. https://www.box.com/s/eh9avztkmfx8vutdzjkx - V3.5 https://www.box.com/s/9dd9bgudok0163c1jdbq - V3.1 https://www.box.com/s/56z9dxmfxunrmikontgo - V3 https://www.box.com/s/37d1v1usjn1meiyrtf61 - V2.9 https://www.box.com/s/2ca7cd69192e4e8ccb43 - V2.8 https://www.box.com/s/3b0f7355c2e35291d612 - V2.7 https://www.box.com/s/4d5394ecc48204411b1a - V2.6 https://www.box.com/s/dcab54cace89d8bfbbbd - V2.5 https://www.box.com/s/8744fdd33600fecf3187 - V2 https://www.box.com/s/a292f4b302116d4bf027 - V1 (Bumped twice)

Maybe instead of turning it into a medley, you could just make a new arrangement and create a longer song out of a short source. It's usually a good exercise to see if you can make a longer remix than its source.

Alright, and now that I'm home, I'll check out the song. That sounds really awesome. It's a bit short, though. If you're just intending on showing us, then it's great on its own!

For future reference, an explicit forum sticky says, "one topic per song, one song per topic"... in the title. And just to clarify if you read Rozovian's post: I believe he meant "multiple tracks are allowed if and only if they are a compilation such as an EP or an album. Multiple unrelated tracks don't count."