timaeus222

What computer speakers? Yeah, I think getting a good pair of headphones is a good place to start. I would recommend the Grado SR-60i. Just $80, and the second-most recent pair I own. I think it's better than a great deal of $200+ headphones, honestly (price doesn't really correlate with quality; I have $15 Skullcandy earbuds that sound fuller than $60 Sony headphones). Crisp treble, clean midrange, clear bass.

I think it sounds a little strange in the sample combination. At 0:14, I was expecting more low end, like from a timpani for example (in EWQL SO Gold). The hand drums sounded odd to me, and there's quite a bit of reverb from something in the left speaker. Also, the guitar at 0:34 sounds oddly narrow; did you just use one instance of Shreddage II? You could probably double track it and hard pan it, except put it at maybe 50% pan or less, just to widen it but not do true double tracking panning. Otherwise there are some humanization issues in the orchestra, but that's tougher and we can work slowly on that.

That's when you just find someone you would want to give feedback and tell them the topic's there by PM or something. Maybe it was just forgotten. You don't have to keep waiting, just ask.

Kay, after a closer listen, yeah, I think the piano could use a touch more reverb just to slightly hide that hard tone, but it's not a big deal. Source usage is there indeed, even in the piano chords. Rhythmically it's different, and obviously the harmonies are different, but the core bass line seems to be retained in the harmonies, so that connection is still there in parts where that's playing. Seriously amazing sense of harmonies, man. <3 So yeah, easy pass. Maybe a touch of reverb on that acoustic piano and we're even more set.

Oh yeah! I was tested on this once. It goes G# A# B# C# D# E# F G#. The oddball. xD

Pssh, your 80% is probably still great.

I think it would be pretty cool to remake an old Mega Man Battle Network game or Zero game into a more 3D version, maybe Wii-ish style but not CoD style. But maybe that's just because I'm not an FPS type of gamer.

I love horror music. I think that'd be interesting. In my opinion I haven't really heard many truly scary OC ReMixes with dynamic finesse.

I'll get back to this soon; this crazy week is over. = moar time

I hear that occasionally in his mixes too, so it's probably not just you. But yeah, I know it'll almost pass on arrangement alone, and with this level of production, it'll be more than enough. I'll listen to this more thoroughly later, but this is sounding good even on a quiet cursory listen in a library. My only concern would be if it's too liberal. Source breakdown maybe?

Mainly I would work towards putting the most important information as the largest font size (but not ridiculously large), but still maintaining a sense of space and attention-directing. People have to be able to look at it and know what the heck they're looking at before they read it in full detail.

Unless I'm mistaken, it sounds like the song should be moved up a half step to B Major or Ab relative minor.

It's more of an experimental experience, but what you basically do is use certain layers of tubular bells that you want to try out, and balance the volume between them to get them to sound how you want them to sound. The same applies to any other sound, like .As for metal guitar, lead guitar especially, it's much more worth your time to just save up money for a sample library like Shreddage II and download the free Kontakt Player 5. Few, if any free guitar VSTs sound remotely like the real thing.

Tubular bells would be pretty close with some layering. You can get free tubular bells here: http://nando.oui.com.br/_static/sf2/5_SoundFonts.zip http://ethanwiner.com/tubular_bells.zip http://soundfonts.darkesword.com/fonts/tubular_bells.sfpack + http://soundfonts.darkesword.com/files/sfpack.zip

As a whole I think it has great potential. I think it can use something to fill in the empty parts (0:37 - 0:44, 1:00 - 1:15, 1:49 - 2:08), like a pad or arp sound. Also, the lead at 1:00-on has a modulation depth that still happens to be a little high, so it stretches across a touch too large of a dynamic range, and the bass used at 1:00 - 1:15 could be more interesting (it just sounds like a simple tone). 1:53 - 2:08 is pretty cool. I think it can be expanded upon in terms of soundscape to become a nice breakdown section. However, I think the lead notes could use more variation to sound less 'rambly' or 'meandering'; there are a lot of 16th notes in there. I also really like where 2:08 - 2:23 is going. You might want to try going for a shift into a big beat feel later on after that.

Long enough to state all your details concisely. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/ocremix/an-epic-5-disc-ff6-fan-album-from-oc-remix-take-tw Probably 6 minutes or less should be sufficient.

What headphones do you have? Fundamentally, I would strongly suggest to work towards the following results, in no particular order, and in the long-term sense: - Go for clean low-mids, i.e. lack of muddiness in the low-mids (~200Hz) - Go for crispness above 10000 Hz (not-dull treble) - A midrange with room for instruments to breathe, but not so little midrange overall that it sounds "hollow" (500~4000 Hz) - No overcompression (this is hard unless you have a tolerant limiter or you want to mix quietly) - What leads should be audible enough but should not overpower background instruments; try adjusting volume from below the expected final result, instead of from above. I detected volume changes more easily back then when I started below the expected perfect volume. - Percussion and drums should be audible the whole time but not too loud, i.e. don't let them get buried, and don't let them smash the limiter and create overcompression, pumping the whole mix down, and don't let them smash a soft clipper and clip the output. And one overarching goal: - I think about this constantly. If someone else has all the resources that you have and all the skills they will ever need (in other words they're exceptional enough), can they listen to your remix or song and recompose what you have written by ear from scratch (within reason)? If they're going to have trouble with that, then there's something off with the mix. Once you consider that, you could then imagine what you would have to do to make it so it would be more possible for them to do so, and give that a shot. At some point you might say, "eh, it's good enough", but if you're uncomfortable mixing in the first place, I think you should just keep practicing until you can confidently say "eh, it's good enough now. Any further is just super nitpicking". What I think you shouldn't do is try to compare songs of completely different genres. So don't compare metal with orchestral when it comes to mixing because they appear to be completely different when you disregard the objective mixing aspects. Metal to metal, definitely though. Basically, the above points apply for practically everything in some sense.

haha, in other words, too hard without audio artifacts (afaik). For example, kicks probably would line up with bass sounds in EQ. If you wanted to isolate a kick drum, you'd usually be considering around 20~200 Hz, midrange-ish, and around 4000 Hz for a more-or-less full result, but basses overlap the 20~200 Hz range, among other ranges, so getting rid of the bass to leave the kick, if the kick is never playing alone, would be hard without losing the low end thump on the kick; you'd generally be left with whatever's above 200 Hz, making it no longer low-end heavy unless you have your own kicks to layer in. EDIT: And the reverse is also true for already-finished songs (as 1 stem); if you want to get rid of the drums with EQ instead of keeping them, you might get a thin/light bass sound in the end after getting rid of the kick, maybe a dull mix if you got rid of some hi hats, and maybe a slightly hollow mix as well from getting rid of the snare. But that's all with EQ, so maybe there's a better (but still not super effective) way. Depends on context.

You mean in... already-finished songs? If so it's impossible. You would need the source tracks or you would need to rebuild it from MIDI sequencing or importing and editing.

I'd be cool with teaming up with Anorax. Just Skype me if you have any questions (timaeus222 on Skype, of course), and I can usually get back to you within the day. It'd be best to contact me at around 6PM~12AM PST. If you want, I can provide what I have listed in my signature for sample upgrades or a solo section. Feedback or sample upgrades on pretty much anything, I'm game. I use FL Studio. What do you use?

If you wanna run it by me as a feedback guy, I think we can figure out which tracks are up to snuff before official judging. (well, if nothing happened with it yet) Indeed, Kristina deserved it! (We've both officially written at least one orchestral piece in FL! )

If you like this, you might also like this: http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR02982 I dunno, maybe ddddd can find inspiration in Redg's work, then.

I'm surprised this was deliberate, because it didn't make any sense to me. It was just chaotic in not that good of a way. The off rhythm just sounds sloppy, honestly. Sorry.

Actually, don't "that" or those" relate back to the very previous object(s), i.e. the properties? It sounds like you wanted to say, in elaborated form, "Ludwig's dog shares Ludwig's name and hairstyle with the dog of another famous composer." "Ludwig's dog shares [its] name and hairstyle with that of a famous composer" sounds almost like a plurality error, vs. "Ludwig's dog shares [its] name and hairstyle with [those] of a famous composer", which sounds fairly different. Overall, It sounds like you might have said (in elaborated form): "The dog belonging to Ludwig shares the dog's name and the dog's hairstyle with those properties of a famous composer." (if using its and those) or this: "The dog belonging to Ludwig shares the dog's name and the dog's hairstyle with the dog(s) of a famous composer." (if using its and that/those) or this: "The dog belonging to Ludwig shares Ludwig's name and Ludwig's hairstyle with those properties of another famous composer." (if using his and those) or this: "The dog belonging to Ludwig shares Ludwig's name and Ludwig's hairstyle with the dog of a famous composer." (if using his and that) Just some weird pronoun specificities (of course, assuming "his" refers to a male human and not a male dog).