timaeus222

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).

If you pay closer attention to 0:03 on "All mics", there's an odd note on the right speaker. Is that a library issue?

WOAH. Wartime Kabuki Robot KASHIWAGI! That's some tight stuff! You've got me in for this track!

Hm... yeah, unfortunately it doesn't really jive with my tastes here. I do agree that it is mixed well enough, but I just think the vibrato was a bit much and the lack of a substantially long breakdown section made the chaotic aspects of it more memorable. I dunno man. I think it's good in the objective sense, but it's just not my thing.

Just sit up straight, breathe in, leave your chest up when you breathe out, and you should be able to sing or talk pretty sufficiently as if you were standing up. I did that in choir all the time 4 years ago.

Fixed. icwutudidthar

Why is it not related to pigs

I don't have an actual, physical bass, but I do use a VST library (specifically, Spectrasonics Trilian). An example of where I used it would be the Jazz Fusion Kirby's Dreamland mix I'm working on in the remixes forum.

Okay, like I promised, here's what I have to say about this: So, first of all, the kick is missing a touch of lows to punch through; I can hear it, but it's a bit light in the bass (specifically at (90 ± 10) Hz by about (2 ± 0. dB). It's easiest to hear at 0:33 - 0:47 that the guitar in combination with the bass has a bit much bass (specifically at (100 ± 20) Hz, by about (2.4 ± 0. dB). Coincidentally, it seems like based on what I just said, the kick happens to be light near the spot where the bass happens to be too heavy on my audio system. I'm on Beyerdynamic DT-880 headphones that monitor cleanly at 30-20000Hz (where 20~30 is obviously hardest, naturally, to hear). These headphones specifically monitor the low bass range, midrange, and upper treble the best out of 20~20000Hz frequency range. You do have a good guitar tone, and the drum tones sound suitable. The main issues I'm hearing are the bass mixing on the bass and guitar in combination with the kick. I also 100% agree with AngelCityOutlaw that the lead guitar at 1:18 is narrow. It sounds like it was recorded in mono, which is fine, but like he suggested, I would specifically suggest that it could have used some sort of stereo delay with a delay time of, say, 1/32 of a second in 60 BPM (you can calculate how long that would be for your tempo), to just widen the stereo field without adding an distinct echo (15 ms or more is distinguishable between the left and right speakers). If you want to see where I first learned that idea, it's here; just search "15ms": http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep10/articles/pt-0910.htm Cheers, as you say.

Yeah, that sounds much more reasonable. I think you should start it as an EP recruitment, and if more people sign up than you initially hope for (10, for example), then maybe you can decide whether or not you want to expand it and work towards a full album in 2017~18, or send it in as an EP in 2016.

When I get time tonight, I'll post some feedback on this... thrash-ish metal, I think it is. Hope your day goes well/went well. At some point, I would suggest checking this as reference for mixing metal. https://soundcloud.com/isworks/shreddage-2-subterrenea-by-ian

That's fine. I was aiming to convey to you that music is not entirely subjective; that's all. Good day to you.