timaeus222

Hm. The stereo field is a bit weird on this. Is there any sort of stereo phase inversion or stereo widening on this? Your drums are nice and punchy, and I can hear them the whole time. The bells are a bit piercing though (kinda hurts my ears), and feel strange being so wide, and the snare and bells could have a bit of reverb to make them sit better in the soundscape. Nice breakdown at 2:18; came at about the right time IMO. I tend to write breakdown sections about halfway through a ReMix just instinctively. Overall, not bad. Could use a more fleshed-out soundscape to make it more interesting, but it's a good start.

Nice work! Has a neat old-school charm to it. I'm unfamiliar with the game, but it feels medieval to me.

Ah, well, I'm not trying to attack him; just giving him my perspective. *shrug* And yes, those were the best I've ever heard, really. I'm not just judging based on bass mixing, but clearly, that composer knows how to mix and master, and I did think that melody on "I am the Sentinel" was memorable. But seriously, come on, let's not go overboard here and call me a hypocrite. It doesn't do anything other than draw attention away from the fine job RoeTaka did here. /end

Well then your standards are a bit too high then, because I honestly thought those two were the best film-score music I've ever heard, and they are most certainly film-score quality. Really, the bass mixing there is just spot-on, whether it was for a "low-budget" film or not, and those songs wow me every time. RoeTaka's ReMix was great; didn't wow me, but I still thought it was great. I dunno, your posts here just came off as arrogant to me, and the way you put a paragraph of critique but less than a sentence of compliment just de-emphasized the compliment IMO.

Thes are some of my standards: https://soundcloud.com/stephen-anderson/unity https://soundcloud.com/stephen-anderson/i-am-the-sentinel-credits So my standards are quite high (I'm not saying I compose like that, but I do hear how good that is). I'm just evaluating specifically in terms of OCR's standards, which are actually lower. I feel like your standards are the real-life film-score-level standards, which the above two links would be; but OCR's standards aren't quite that high.

I disagree, I think the emotion is definitely there, and I don't hear any substantial flaws worth pointing out. The issues Neifion mentioned weren't really that noticeable. Even 2:50 sounded quite serviceable. This is great as-is. Keep dishing out the goodness.

I already talked about this: I never said your mix was clipping. I said that if you didn't use your limiter (or compressor, really, because they're very similar except a limiter is a high-Ratio compressor), there could potentially be clipping from your loud track volumes. In this case, the drums you have sound pushed down by the compressor in an unnatural way, and their transients are breaking up. And when you say you hear "interferences of the lower frequencies within the bass tracks", you're actually right there; it's happening, and it bothers me personally because it's obstructing the clarity you could have. As long as you learned something, and you can try to view it from the other person's perspective, it's okay.

I have no idea what you're talking about when you say it isn't overcompressed, because it still is, and the guitars are 100% fake, no doubt about it. Sorry, I'm not even referring to the electric piano. Only the electric guitars. If you want a comparison with a good Lufia 2 ReMix that is not overcompressed, and has realistic guitars... try listening to this one: https://soundcloud.com/zircon-1/searing-aggression-lufia-2-sinistral-battle-remix Pay attention to how the instruments do not get pushed down by the limiter in a way that makes them sound squashed. Also, the guitars actually sound realistic based on the variation in tone throughout the notes used, especially at 1:30 (yet, they are not real, which is special). Notice the difference between real and realistic. These guitars are not real, but they are realistic. Your guitars are not real, but are also not realistic. Honestly, you really should use a limiter, or else you're likely to have clipping, which is unconventional and painful. Because you used a compressor in the way you've used it here, you have overcompression due to your loud track volumes. It doesn't hurt someone's ears, but it hurts your track. Overall, no matter what you say, this is overcompressed and muddy. That's all I can hear here. --- Also, I'm 100% sure that your DAW can use VSTs. In fact, I already found that out. So, if you still want to try to get Kontakt Player 5 working so you can try out Shreddage II, you're only restricted by your willingness to figure out how to get it on there.

Yeahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh OPTIONS.

I had this one made a few weeks back. 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.

I think Jorito will be happy with having Bitwig Studio in there!

I read it just fine. He said he's slow to make songs, what with his delicious fares of fruit distracting him.

Why are the strings panned further left? They were fine before, position-wise (same with the harp, flute, and other breakdown section elements). And what happened with the strings EQ (especially at 1:05)? Somehow your strings got more resonant. Did you boost the midrange (800~1000 Hz specifically) on them? Like with the pan positioning, it was fine before; you often don't need to EQ orchestral instruments (if you could in real life, real orchestras would have experimented with that before ). I'm guessing your orchestral instruments came pre-panned, and maybe that's affecting your panning decisions. Also, the strings are still getting lost at 1:05 - 1:17. By boosting some of the brass' volume, the strings kinda got forgotten, I think. The clutter got a bit more overboosted at 2:26 - 3:11. You still have your previous version? I honestly think it was better before; less overboosted in the midrange and less cluttered. So far I think just the marimba got more audible. How are you making these mixing decisions? Are you listening to soloed tracks or mixing in context?

Sounds good, though I think it's coasting too much on the drum pattern. The whole thing just sounds like it's in one gear until the last 30 seconds, and it's just lacking dynamic contrast. If I skip along the track, every 15 seconds sounds the same. Needs something to break up the continuity a bit and bring the mind away from the autopilot drums. The bitcrush transitions aren't enough IMO.

Kinda wish it went more places, but after 3:00 it gets really good. I love that slap bass though.

Yep, I have a "0 warning points" label.

I just liked and then unliked your post. BECAUSE.

The problem with the guitar sample was that it lacked varying tones in each repeated note. So the way it's amplified, every repeated note sounds the same.

Janken... PAPER!

It does sound improved! It's not super realistic, and it sounds looped, but it's definitely one of the better free-soundfont orchestral remixes I've heard. As for the cymbal, I kinda wish you could have found some sort of cymbal roll to vary up the type of cymbal hits you have going on. That way it doesn't sound like the cymbalist is waltzing around playing like he/she was in a marching band. What if you just replaced the tom with an orchestral snare?

Well, right off the bat, the guitar just sounds tonally and notationally fake, quite literally like a computer is playing it. :/ The writing isn't bad, but the fake guitar is really bringing this down. It's kind of inherent in rock and metal that you need realistic guitars. They don't have to be super convincing, but they aren't up to snuff here IMO. You're hitting point #2 on this post: http://ocremix.org/community/topic/40776-mixing-what-am-i-missing/?p=785497 and points #4 and 8 in the last section of this post: http://ocremix.org/community/topic/25003-post-most-common-mixingmusic-problemsmistakes-you-see/?p=784385 Basically, you need to train your ear to pick out good sounds. I honestly think this is more of a writing issue than a mixing issue. This can't be mixed to sound like a convincing rock track because the specific samples chosen here are pre-distorted and lack round robins. An example of a normal rock track: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5nMWTR7wb0 If you compare the two, it should be noticeably different on the tonal realism.

Yeah, it's definitely better. I hear more cuts were made in the bass. The bass instrument is a little clearer. I kinda get a Pokemon Heroes feel from this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ld3JPWdt7JI). Maybe this can be a nice reference track for the mixing above 200 Hz. The brass is more lively than before, though the marimba and harp are getting buried. You need that detail work to shine through if you want this to sound clean. This will ask for a lot of skill to mix, for sure. If you want me to help you on this, I'm willing to accept the challenge. - This needs more attention to detail on the small stuff, like the buried marimba (it's okay before 0:31), and the 0:42 run thing with the... is that a buried harp? Hard to tell. - As I'm listening to this, the staccato strings sound better and less lofi than the other strings at 0:39 - 0:47. - 1:05 - 1:17 is just missing a brighter lead. Lots of stuff is indistinct there. What happened with the strings and the brass there? Dull articulations, perhaps? Needs brighter layers on the strings and brass. Listen for more sections like this with buried or dull instruments. - 1:40 and other places where the timpani tries to come through... it just muds up the soundscape. That's more of a writing issue than a mixing issue. Maybe you can omit a few bass notes before the breakdown at 1:41. It's not THAT bad, but it's a little bad. Also, I don't agree with Kristina there; it doesn't sound like an ending at all. There are clearly some swells on the strings to keep things going, and the drum fill worked (though the swell could be more obvious). - Good improvement on the breakdown section; I can hear the flute and brass are a little more highlighted in the update, and the partwriting is a bit more complex. - When Juan's guitar comes in at 2:21, there's a weird lack of upper treble. I know I said try cutting more often than boosting, but I meant in terms of stuff below the midrange. If you can hear the difference AND it sounds good, then sure. If you aren't sure, don't do it. I limit myself to doing only edits I can hear. It may seem self-explanatory, but some people have trouble with this. - Everything's brighter overall, which is great. I think some stuff was way cluttered in the climax in the previous version. That's kind of fixed now. The last ending note is fixed too. Overall, that was a nice update. There's a brighter feel overall to the EQ, and the partwriting came through a bit better. Could be even better though; I would focus on the places where the certain instruments or leads are not sticking out enough to be heard: 0:39 - 0:47 [strings, harp] 0:55 - 0:57 [marimba/xylophone] 1:05 - 1:17 [strings, staccato strings] 1:24 - 1:38 [marimba/xylophone] 2:26 - 3:11 [strings, brass, harp, marimba/xylophone] especially 1:05 - 1:17 and 2:26 - 3:11. You can hear Juan's guitar just fine, but all that stuff backing it at 2:26 - 3:11 is smearing together.

I'll sign up as a star again just 'cause.

There's muddiness in the bass from that... clicky percussion sound. What is that, a kick or tom drum or something? In general there's reverb washiness and bass muddiness overall, and kind of an overuse of the cymbal. Also, I don't hear any automation swells on the brass or strings. Everyone wants to play at a constant volume I suppose. It's unrealistic that way, though.

What does your bass guitar sound like by itself? It's still indistinct in the mix.