timaeus222

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.

It still needs some reSHAPEing and reFINEing until it's more efficient and well-ROUNDED.

If you're bored, by the way, that code kinda works (further down below).

Is it something like this? #include <iostream> // default #include <string> // strings using namespace std; int main() { // genre classifications std::string a = "Techno"; std::string b = "Possibly Techno"; std::string c = "Probably Not Techno (Maybe)"; // genre qualifications std::string primaryelem = "Initialize1"; std::string secondaryelem = "Initialize2"; int speshulcondition = 0; // initial state std::string conclusion = "No Genre Yet"; cout << "The current genre for this mix is: " << conclusion << endl; // qualifications input cout << "Enter a primary element you have in your remix: "; cin >> primaryelem; cout << "Enter a secondary element you have in your remix: "; cin >> secondaryelem; cout << "Did you copy and paste anything? 0 for no, 1 for yes: "; cin >> speshulcondition; // genre test if (primaryelem == "Boom" && secondaryelem == "Tiss" && speshulcondition == 1){ conclusion = a; } else if (primaryelem == "Boom" && secondaryelem == "Tiss" && speshulcondition == 0){ conclusion = b; } else if ((primaryelem != "Boom" or secondaryelem != "Tiss") && (speshulcondition == 1)){ conclusion = b; } else if ((primaryelem != "Boom" or secondaryelem != "Tiss") && (speshulcondition == 0)){ conclusion = c; } // genre evaluation cout << "The current genre for this mix is: " << conclusion << endl; } (By the way, this code works!) http://www.tutorialspoint.com/compile_cpp_online.php

NO! How on earth could you have forgotten TECHNOMANGA?! I'm leaving OCR.

Great dubstep wobbles! I think you've created for yourself a Tekken-meets-dance-floor kind of feel.

I actually do like searching for the right tone that I hear in my head. I know it won't always end up like it sounds in my head, but it usually ends up close for me, at least in terms of the overall mood, maybe rhythm, but definitely mood. Won't be quite matching. But that's how Art works; blind intuition next to "fixed" rules (which are more like objective conventions for how things are supposed to be, like paint in a painting) that eventually evolves into something that the artist loves based on how the conception keeps developing itself. The artist isn't necessarily the slave to it, but he loves what comes out and keeps it going. And yeah, context does matter. Of course. Without context, a sound is only good because of its tonal qualities or because it sounds cool in general, rather than how it enhances a piece overall. I wouldn't call tone a 'lie' though... it makes it sound bad to preemptively like a NEAT tone because of how neat it is and how it's just the way it is (). I think it's more like, something that is incomplete on its own and needs context for it to be fully realized as a tangible role in a musical piece. Or maybe he's actually saying that in his own definition of what a 'lie' is for him in this case (probably the case of a tone 'tricking' us into thinking it's good or bad but then potentially makes us feel drastically different about it in context).

What beer is that?

The brass overall (mostly the trumpet), the snare & cymbals, and the strings overall. But I wouldn't stop looking there. Keep sifting through.

Hate to say it, but there's some mechanical writing just all throughout. Good samples, but they need more detailed handling to make them shine more. Right now it sounds as if it's simply VGM and not a VGM remix. In other words, the instruments feel lifeless and lack the expression and punch of a more pronounced feel. The partwriting itself sounds good though. Needs more TLC on the humanization and layering overall. Try listening to these for ideas:

This is... weird. I do hear AA in there, and I do think that on arrangement standards it is passable, but for me it was a little too loud. Too boomy, too much distortion, especially in the beginning, and I thought the textures could have been more distinguishable and distinct in this amount of bass; you can make a dystopian remix with more varied textures (you'll hear one from me eventually...). Gets better as it goes on. I wish that Brent would do more of the style in his first accepted mix, though (Eternal Descent); more accessible, and I thought that showed a wider range of skills than he would seem to be letting on for somebody who JUST heard this particular ReMix. In short... I know you can top this!