timaeus222

Jaco rocks the bass like a mofo. Not as a "main" instrument, but pretty major. zircon's done a Jazz Fusion OC ReMix like this, called "Ragol Weather".

My source pick will be Chrome Gadget from Sonic 3. EDIT: AND KNUCKLES. Can't forget the KNUCKLES. The KNUCKLES. The KNUCKLES.

Yes. I'll just pick one that generally fits nicely if possible. I don't want to pick something too hard for a "novice".

I'll sign up as a star again, but I'll wait on picking the Sonic source until a novice picks a Mario source.

Well, the first things that jump out at me is that the kick is too subtle (not enough frequencies above 100 Hz), the supersaw raises the cheese factor way up high (generic sound design), and the snare doesn't sound like it fits (it's too smack-y, and not tight). Also, based on the way the drums move, it doesn't really sound as much like a rave song as it sounds like... I guess an 80s... something-or-other. Doesn't really sound like anything in particular, actually; it's sending mixed messages. Is it supposed to get us dancing slowly and bobbing up and down, or jumping and raving? The basic drum rhythm is saying the former, and the supersaw is saying the latter. Where is your hi hat? Lastly, there's not that much going on in terms of partwriting. It just sounds like you have, like, 7 sounds. Supersaw, bass, 2 plucks, kick, snare, toms. Where's your chordal instrument while the supersaw is not there? Etc. So in a nutshell, the sound choices overall end up sounding too simple IMO. Mainly, I would say the issues are the drum rhythm choices (conflicts with intent), the sparseness of the soundscape (lacking chordal instrument and proper reverb), the weak kick (hard to hear), and the snare sticking out as an unsuitable tone. For me it's the sparseness and drums that are the biggest issues here. It sounds like you may be just starting, so I would recommend studying other music more closely and listening to at least what makes its soundscapes full. This is a good example of a full-sounding dance song. Notice how there's always at least something filling the soundscape enough, whether it's a chordal instrument (like a pad, rhodes, piano, rhythm guitar, etc.), or the lead instrument's reverb, or something else. Also, working more with reverb can really help you keep your instruments cohesive. This is a nice guide on digital reverb.

I really don't mind; we could just move on to the next one.

To be clear, I only took a cursory listen for the arrangement comparison. I don't think there is enough work on this yet to say where this will or could go in interpretation. Here's where you (Nyx) get to work on that.

Needs more than just additional vocals. Right now as I compare to the original, it's pretty close/conservative. As you make a longer arrangement, a soundscape as sparse as this one asks for both more compositional and textural development. Maybe some immersive pads, bells, and maybe ambient percussion could do.

Though I don't know them that well, 2:31 is one spot where it seems to me like you switch to a new source tune. Maybe you could look at it and make the transition more seamless. Other than that I think this is really cohesive arrangement-wise.

It's nice, but as it is, though the short length doesn't necessarily constitute a *NO*, one could argue that it's too short for the amount of development it has. At the moment that's probably the only issue here. So, maybe make it longer, into a more complete work.

Exactly. This. ^ If you definitely plan to make money on the cover or remix, it's recommended that you do obtain a license for it (even if it's not obvious to the observer whether or not you'll actually get money for it). That's why I'm hesitant to sell anything that isn't all mine. But, as djp implied, the OCR community works hard to ensure it's only doing legal things when it comes to distributing reinterpretations of video game OSTs.

Technically, yes. But some people who 'casually do covers and remixes' [of copyrighted music] might be saying, "well, I'll never be popular enough for the copyright holders to hear of me anyway, and hey, maybe they'll appreciate my advertising their pieces." Or something like that. Or they just aren't aware of copyright law. Or they have the mechanical license and didn't write it out explicitly. Hard to say.

To clarify, DjjD and djp, we need at least concept WIPs from you two, and Will and Sir J, we need WIP updates from you two. Feel inspired!

Nah, I'm just disappointed. When you claim things, you raise people's expectations. So you should know what it means when you claim certain things about your own work, like "this is epic", and "this is absolutely beautiful". I would rather he said "here's an update, and here's what I did to it: *cue list*"; leaving people to make their own impressions by themselves, IMO, is how it ought to be. Vig said this in... another way. http://ocremix.org/forums/showpost.php?p=27583&postcount=7

You set me up for this... "epic", "absolutely beautiful", "professional" remix, and then I get... mechanical, sparse, and lifeless. There's again, 0 expression on anything here. Why? There's no semblance of any of the things you said in here. Literally everything's quantized completely to the grid, and just unrealistic (the original is more realistic at least due to the nice layering...). My suggestion to you last time was to refine it and make the arrangement less repetitive, and you go and make it longer and more repetitive. I don't get it. Sorry, but what you think you're pulling off is not even close to what you say. Any critiques I have are basically the ones I had last time: - Too copy-pasted, too repetitive. - Too MIDI-ripped. - Everything's too rigid... even the synth bass, like before. - Nothing has expression... flow... it's like every 'performer' is doing the robot while performing. And not doing much of the 'performing' as a result.

I really want to see this finished.

Hah, that's much simpler than the one I posted 2 pages ago.

killer studio chops Pretend I'm bleck

No, then yes. You do get the benefit of a fresh take on the synthesis of a sound each time you start from scratch. There was a time when I synthesized four quite different basses from the same essential steps that I ended up memorizing as I made them, just changing one or two steps. I find that pretty much every time I sit down and synthesize something, I don't make the exact same thing each time. And if I do, then I try again. But I only do this to see what can come out of the synth. I think learning synth design can help train your ear to detect otherwise subtle production issues or nuances. If I didn't learn how to use Zebra2, I doubt I would be as keen to detecting resonances as I am today. And, it also helps you to recognize what other people may have done in their sound design (or preset editing)---whether it's synth-based... or physical modeling... or something else---so you can distinguish what they did in their overall layering, or even their production in general.

If it makes you feel any better, the guitars in here were spliced to save Chris the time of continually recording to get the perfect takes. http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR02939

This is a very fresh re-imagining of a classic theme. You really personalized it, despite the original's flow already being really good. Keep it up!

That was done REALLY well, then. I honestly can't tell it's spliced, and I'm VERY picky. What you said about the hand percussion just sounds like a set of samples could have been recorded and spliced for sequencing like regular downloadable drum samples, and it would have been pretty similar. I'd call that like creating your own drum sample pack for immediate use, and I think that's actually a good skill to have for any do-it-yourself kind of person (chopping and editing samples for personal use).

I think if it realizes your artistic vision, and it doesn't sound artificial, then it's fine (speeding up parts can literally distort the timbre in an odd way, but that aside, it may sound impossible in the extremes, of course). If you definitely don't plan to actually play it live, I wouldn't place any real obligation to learn it precisely or well enough to play it live (unless you want to randomly sit down and jam to it for fun every now and then, but that's your choice). Honestly, I don't even play guitar well enough to play half of what I sequence in electric rhythm and lead guitar, but I can imagine someone of average or intermediate skill playing it and it tends to be feasible. I'm not ashamed of just knowing how to theoretically play it well but literally play it slowly. As long as it sounds feasible and realistic, I would be okay with it. But I also think you shouldn't have it so there's so much splicing that it's not even really an effort anymore. If you find yourself splicing more than you're playing, maybe then it'll help to learn the part for a longer time so that at least you can feel accomplished in what you've learned to play. Whatever happens, if you feel like you accomplished something worthwhile, I'd say it's worth keeping up the work on what you're writing. After all, the 'supreme rule' of art is to make yourself happy through your work.

No. It doesn't matter whether you make a sound from scratch or modify from a preset. If a preset sounds close to what you want or you can envision it becoming what you want, then go use it. If you want to personalize your music and have your own style, then having your own custom sounds helps, but it's not all you need. You need to bring other new things to the table, like your own melodic contours and interpretations, your own structures if possible... go beyond simply making the new sounds. If they were 'cop-outs', then I wouldn't want to sell Zebra soundbanks.