timaeus222

I can't get enough of this.

You can always rely on PirateCrab for headbang-worthy metal. \m/

I'm surprised there are this few replies to this. It's important to know how to mix loudly, but well. What I do is mark down what frequency ranges are strongest in each instrument (depending on the number of instruments, it may be more or less manageable), and if they overlap, decide what you want to come through and scoop the EQ for the instrument you want to bring down. I always recommend that you EQ in the context of instruments playing together, and in that case, even if you scoop a frequency range, the net result may sound similar, although a single scooped instrument may be noticeably more hollow by itself. Also keep in mind that if you overlay 2 instruments, the overall amplitude will be additive to some extent, so two instruments peaking at about -3 dB won't necessarily stack to become exactly -3 dB again because not all of the overlap cancels out perfectly. Try adjusting instrument loudness in pairs, or in combinations of 3, like this. You can do this more easily with a spectroscope like the free s(M)exoscope. So basically, keep these things in mind: - Scoop out frequencies in an instrument that is mid-heavy, and do so in context with other instruments so that you don't drastically alter the overall heaviness of the collection of sound. - Look in a spectroscope that displays your waveform to see how your instruments' amplitudes stack together, and try adjusting instrument loudness in pairs.

I hardly ever comment twice like this, but I do think this will become a classic to return to in the future. It's up there with zircon's "The End" and Juan Medrano's "The Unholy Wars".

I love that I can hear the raw clicks on the woodwinds!

Phenomenal! I love me some good ol' dueling guitars. A true Hakštokian masterpiece.

I don't hear a lot of Big Band around here, but this is really jammin'!

This is sick! One of the gems from 2021 for sure!

[This is an automatically generated message] I've reviewed your remix and have returned it to Work-in-Progress status, indicating that I think there are some things you still need to work on. After you work on your track and feel that it's ready for submission to OCR, please change the prefix back to Ready for Review and someone will review it again. Good luck!

My first impression is that while this has some good ideas going on, it'll take more than 1 revision going forward. I'm hoping the examples at the end help inspire you to add new stuff to this. MOD REVIEW Arrangement (Melody, Harmonies, Structure, etc.) The overall arrangement doesn't feel complete to me because at 2:06, what you have so far has me expecting a newly-written breakdown section that brings down the energy and allows you to feature maybe another new lead instrument, or just lets us breathe after already hearing the melody many times earlier. Also, the current 'ending' has no lead-in that would indicate an ending is coming. Assume the listener has no idea where they are in the song, and the only way they know where they are is by the way you write. To indicate an ending here, you may want to slowly peel off layers of instruments until the song would end. Something else to consider is that 2:06 and on sounds very similar to 0:14 - 1:06, which is about half the song. Try to differentiate revisited sections, whether you put in a new lead instrument or introduce new harmonies, etc. Production (Sound Design, Panning, etc.) The panning is one of the first things that I noticed; the flute at 0:06 is nearly 100% panned to the left, not sure why. I usually restrain myself from panning anything 100% left or right, because it's awkward on headphones if I do. As rules of thumb: A melodic instrument should be somewhere close to the middle (0%/0% L/R) of the stereo field. A bass should also be centered, as should the kick and snare in a drumkit. Chordal instruments can be wider, as well as other background-like instruments. Then, when the drums and low arpeggio synth come in at 0:13 - 0:46, they are dry, sticking out compared to the background elements like the pads and other atmospheric sounds because they probably don't have any reverb (most importantly the snare, clap, and overhead parts of the drumkit like the shaker and any hi hats you might use, because they often provide songs with life), and as a result, they don't mesh with the atmospheric background elements at all, which have plenty of reverb and delay themselves. Also, the acoustic tone of the snare doesn't seem to fit whatever feel you're going for; you might see this kind of snare in jazz/funk music for example, but not really relaxing music like what this is coming off to be. What does sound good are the dulcimer around 0:30 and the piano around 0:46. Those have a good amount of reverb/delay processing to make the soundscape cohesive amongst the more washed-out instruments. They each have a wide frequency range of around 1000 ~ 10000 Hz, which is why they are good melodic sound choices in general. In fact, I think the pads are also well-selected. Summary Most importantly, arrangement feels incomplete at the moment. Consider a breakdown section that pulls in more interesting instruments that can personalize your approach. High priority: the last 30 seconds sound very similar to the first minute, so try to differentiate it, whether with new melodies or harmonies, etc. Low priority: adjust the panning so that it's not so extreme, following the above suggested rules of thumb, like bass/drums/melody being centered. Maybe medium priority: add reverb to the snare/shaker/etc and consider swapping out the snare sample so that it fits more in atmospheric/ambient music. Possible Inspiration Ice Cap Zone (DigiE) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64bBCd8MVp8 Ice Cap Zone (Joshua Morse) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-F3DHQCIcs Ice Cap Zone (WillRock) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyfDseBXOvc Ice Cap Zone (Big Giant Circles) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3jnPQsbuag END OF MOD REVIEW

Good to see this make it on the front page! Definitely one of the more involved/evolving remixes I've heard.

Sometimes lofi music can sound forced, but this isn't that. Enjoyable all the way through!

This reminds me of a final stage theme, in the style of Pokemon Super Mystery Dungeon. Awesome!

Ooh, love me some good ol' head-bangin' metal. Sick bass tone.

MOD REVIEW Honestly, I didn't have much to say, but let's see. Arrangement Seems to stick to the structure of the original for the most part, and is almost note-for-note the same on the piano and some of the choir. The main distinguishing features are the additional atmospheric elements and the elevation of sound quality. On the first listen, I do hear a good sense of progression, and a clear dynamic curve, so I think this does separate itself from the original enough, despite that. Mixing/Production Mostly very enjoyable. The only thing I'd say is at 2:38 - 2:43 you have some clipping due to the sub bass being dominated there. A suggestion I have is that the reversed sounds could take more advantage of the stereo field; they feel narrow, so maybe you could use some automation clips to pan them left and right. Overall I think this is actually really good already, and can just use a few final polishing touches. In terms of a stereo image, I think this would be good to compare to. END OF MOD REVIEW

I think the main things that come to mind are: - The melody at 0:44 is not in the same key as the chords, even though the chords are in the same key as the bass. The bass is in A minor, the chords are in A minor, and I think the melody is in Db minor, so there is a lot of clashing. - Beyond the different keys, there is a lot of frequency clashing in the low-midrange (100-300 Hz) at 1:20 - 2:04. Because of that, it sounds too chaotic and muddy. There are a few things that it would help you to work on: 1. Mixing using an EQ so that you can declutter frequency ranges that are occupied by multiple instruments at once. All you need to do is look at what instruments are occupying what frequency ranges, then decide what you want to be heard, and cut down overlapping frequency ranges until there is not nearly as much fighting. I don't know of a better example than this person's archived livestreams to learn how Parametric EQs work and how you can tell where to cut. 2. Expanding your sound palette. I didn't mention it because it wasn't the main issue, but it would be good to save up money to buy a good synthesizer plugin (like Zebra2, FM8, or Massive). I think for over 7 years I've just used Zebra2 as my main synth and it's given me the chance to practice with it and make or gather a very versatile set of sounds. What you've used in this song is just very simple-sounding imo. 3. Getting a basic grasp of music theory. Mainly, you should know what a key is (C minor? A# major? D minor?), how to recognize that two instruments are not playing in the same key, and how to identify what key a melody may belong to. Hopefully this video can help.

I don't think I have much to say here on the arrangement itself, but I will say I'm somewhat concerned that the degree you are incorporating Transatlanticism might give you issues with copyright. Maybe @Liontamer can check this out and see what he thinks. I'm pretty sure it isn't directly sampling the original, but it's closely emulating it while mashing it in. Besides that, I think the pacing is good for this context, and most of the production is already solid. Great guitar tones, and I'm not worried about them sounding unrealistic. --- I would just have a few things to say about the humanization or production. - The piano at the beginning is a bit stiff, so you can offset the start time of the chord notes a bit more to soften the attack. - The drums at 2:51 (mainly the snare) sound mechanical to me. It seems like the snare is about the same velocity the whole way through, and it sounds like one sample. I would at least lower every other note's velocity so that not every note is exactly the same. This is probably the biggest issue for me besides the potential for being too similar to a licensed song. - The part at 5:27 and on is pretty loud. Maybe it's because of the added rhythm guitars there, but the whole thing sounds collectively louder than what came before it for whatever reason. Try lowering the volume of the rhythm guitars for that section and try to match the loudness of what came right before, and that should do it. Not really a dealbreaker but I figured I'd mention it.

[This is an automatically generated message] I've reviewed your remix and have set it to Completed status, indicating that your remix has been reviewed. If you feel like you still need to work on your track and want more feedback, you can change the prefix back to Work-in-Progress and we'll go through the review process again. If you decide to submit your track, please change the prefix to Submitted after sending your email. Thank you!

MOD REVIEW As far as the length goes, it's maybe okay. We've had really short ReMixes posted before, but they had to be sufficiently evolving and feel complete despite the length, and they also needed significant personalization that distinguishes from the original. The original was mostly piano and guitar, and you at least transformed it to piano and an orchestra, so I think that idea should be enough in terms of the written arrangement. Generic mixing remarks: - I like the tone of the piano in a vacuum, but at the start it seems to clash with the pizzicato bass you have a bit further in at 0:23. Try raising the lower bound of the reverb's Damping range to be above 200 Hz. Basically, this should decrease the amount of reverb that is applying to the bass frequencies of the piano (not the same as high passing the piano sound itself). That should let the low pizzicato breathe a bit more. At the same time, you may want to slightly decrease the reverb on the low pizzicato to increase the clarity between the two. Also worth high passing the piano around 40 Hz just to remove any unnecessary sub bass frequencies. - There is actually a bit too much reverb going on overall in the high strings, so it's hard to distinguish the notes starting at 0:45. It also accidentally hides any lack of humanization that we'll talk about below. Despite the "instant playability" that Spitfire promises, you will still have to do some manual work to make them sound more realistic. Sequencing remarks: There are a few things you'll want to humanize some more. - The strings that come in at 0:45, as well as the oboe at 1:05 and the flute at 1:22 are behind because the articulations you are using are slow (a long Attack envelope). The piano is giving you the beat. Try shifting them about 0.15 secs to the right, and they should line up a bit better with the beat. - The notes on the strings are bleeding together. It sounds kind of like what they would do right out of the box without any MIDI CC because there isn't a smooth transition between notes like you would hear if they played legato, portamento, etc.; instead they just mush together. I think the "Performance legato" patches would do the job best here, but you'll have to use MIDI CC #11 to add some expression and make those legato lines evolve as the note plays so that it sounds more humanized. It'll take time to understand, but it's needed for this to sound realistic, especially on a 2 minute ReMix. Check this out if you haven't already. Minor remarks: The ending is quite loud compared to the rest. I would say to lower the velocities on the strings at 1:38 and on, and that should match the loudness of what came right before it. Adjust the piano velocities accordingly too after 1:38 if needed. --- Overall, I think the major things to look out for are: - Too much reverb on the strings, which bleeds the notes together. Piano has a bit too much low end on the reverb, so it clashes with the low pizzicato. - Strings, oboe, and flute are behind/late. They also lack MIDI CC expression and a legato feel that should be there on a melodic sequence. - Ending is loud compared to what came immediately before it, so lowering the strings' velocities there should help smooth it out. I think as far as being conservative, it might be just personalized enough mainly because the original used guitar and you used an orchestra. This being a very short ReMix could hurt you though, but that being said, short ReMixes have been approved a few times before, so it's not impossible to see another. END OF MOD REVIEW

MOD REVIEW Well, sort of. It's more train-of-thought than I'd like, but it should get the points across. - The right-panned guitar starting at 0:08 is piercing around 2700 Hz, but also sounds alike to the left-panned guitar, just with added flanger-like effects. Part of me wants you to try replacing both lead guitars here with synth leads to add a sense of progression when you transition at 0:26 into the heavier section where guitars are more justified. (The guitars make more sense at 0:42 - 1:06, although the piercing nature of the right-panned guitar there also stands.) - At 0:26, there is a very piercing left-panned synth lead (just low pass it above around 11000 Hz), because it has a metallic quality to it above 13000 Hz. Same at 1:27. - At 1:27 - 1:42, which is similar to 0:26 - 0:42, you're definitely putting too many high-frequency instruments in the same spot. Consider that you're probably just using too many instruments there, and take the time to decide what you want to lead, what is arpeggiating, what is doing rhythm, what is doing bass. Think about the question, "if someone were to attempt to recreate this by ear, how feasible would it be?", then adjust accordingly so that you can distinguish most of the notes and what is playing what. - At 1:42 - 2:06, consider again that you could replace the two lead guitars here with synth leads (preferably two different ones from each other), to add meaningful variation across sections. No matter how much I like guitar, this is too much guitar noodling in these first 2 minutes. - I do like how 2:06 - 3:06 sounds. That should be the kind of feel you shoot for. - Within 3:06 - 3:48, the church bell sounds off-tune (maybe sharp). You could just use a tubular bell soundfont and it would probably fit the role better. Also, you could probably remove the church bell sound by the time you get to 3:48. At that point, 3:48 - 4:10, it doesn't add to the soundscape, but just puts another sound in the background, basically adding extra clutter and, at the moment, extra dissonance. Also, the guitar coming in at 3:24 - 3:48 is nice, but I would suggest maybe starting out with full chokes, leading up to lighter palm mutes to add more of a sense of progression. - For 4:43, I'd say you don't need the hits there; it sounds like you were about to finish the ReMix there, then you decided "oh hey, let's add more", and then proceeded to add more without changing how that transitions. Without those hits, you could let the guitar chord ring out from earlier, which should lead more smoothly into the harpsichord. - Around 5:38, maybe refine that transition a bit more to be less sudden. Could just add a double kick hit plus a snare beforehand, instead of immediately slamming the listener. - 6:16 - 6:40, same remark as for 1:42 - 2:06. - 6:52, similar remark as at 4:43; it sounds like it's done, but then you added more. So try simply making that part seem like it's about to end, but not like it's already ended, because you have the last bit right afterwards. - And last bit at 7:04, maybe just take off the lead guitar there and have the rhythm guitar end it. Just something to consider. --- Overall... Main concerns: - Overused guitars to do lead parts when synth leads could do them (which leads to this being tiring to listen to over time). A good mix between synth-driven sections and guitar-driven sections will be the key to this really working. - You have multiple sections with drastically different dynamics but lacking progression between them (making this seem longer than it is, other than it already being 7 minutes). You basically have step-ladder dynamics, rather than a dynamic curve. Other concerns: - You often have too many instruments playing at once, in the higher registers especially. - Smooth out some of your transitions (considering this is a medley, this is still important), and some select parts that sound like endings but aren't actually supposed to be endings. Here are some recommended references to listen to that I feel match what you are going for, and/or have been approved before. SSH (a bit lower quality than I'd like, but it's the only video with this specific version I can find) - ocremix (HeavenWraith): END OF MOD REVIEW

Yoooo, a jazz musician doing metal? Sign me up! The shift at 1:42 - 1:45 is actually really cool. You put a chord progression there that you wouldn't expect from your typical metal artist, but there also wasn't enough distortion to deter from doing that kind of thing, so it actually worked! The only thing I wish you did is let the last chord ring out for longer.

MOD REVIEW Arrangement/Structure The arrangement is fairly short, but it does keep me engaged for MOST of the way through. I think it could benefit from the below suggestions on making the instruments sound less mechanical / more humanized. It's fun to listen to, just gotta make it feel less repetitive one way or another, even though it's inherently part of the Polka style. Otherwise, I think it's an enjoyable transformation of the originals into a new, effective style. As far as reminding me of Polka but still sounding like DKC2, it does that job. Production/Sequencing When I consider the production, I'm keeping in mind that this made it on OCR: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7NlqGwYVUk One thing I'd be concerned about is the repetitive nature of the drums, because the snare sounds pretty much the same on each hit, and the drum pattern is very simple. I know that drumming style is in the style of polka, but maybe vary the velocities more so that not every hit is the same intensity. Maybe even slightly vary the sample choice on every other hit to add a bit more human element to this. Also, I'd say you can add a touch more reverb to the oboe, accordion, and trombone/french horn. Not that much more, just enough to help move everything back in the mix so that it sounds less upfront/dry, and actually also more humanized (bonus!). As a result of adding this reverb, it would then also help to make the reverb on the snare a bit narrower (simply decrease the simulated room size) to compensate for adding reverb to surrounding instruments. Overall I would say to continue working on making adjustments to the drum sequencing to make it less mechanical, and add that slight bit of reverb to the oboe+accordion+trombone, etc. to make them sit better in the mix (narrowing the snare reverb a bit to compensate). We've gotten Polka on the site a few times before, and this isn't too far off. END OF MOD REVIEW

Yeah, give it a go. If anything it'll be enjoyable.

This is making me go back and resume playing Plants vs. Zombies 2.

No worries man. I don't have to dislike something if it doesn't meet the bar.