timaeus222

Took me long enough to hear this, lol! I'd call it a SMASH hit, with some BURNing solos, showing you once again that WILL shall ROCK. Too much?

It takes a certain mind to proceed with this kind of vision and invest in it; each song has a logical progression to it, in both textural development and arrangement. [For example, "Constellations" is largely atmospheric, and it can be hard to nail proper textural progression while maintaining interest. You got that balance.] There's a large amount of stylistic diversity here, but I can hear the jazz influence (in terms of the chord progressions and time signature modulations) and the attention to detail that I would attribute to you. In terms of mastering, the track flow also makes sense. Great job! I think my favorite track is "Colour of Time".

tldr; you get out what you put in. ----- A good way to verify this is to rip audio using Audacity's "Windows WASAPI" audio host, and then render as WAV; then, encode using WinLAME into an MP3 using VBR1 on the "High" Encoding Quality setting. That should be enough to allow for what should be the highest bit rate based on the current time in the song, rather than providing a flat bitrate for the song (like you would get with CBR). [I do think that youtube is more efficient in its audio compression than soundcloud. I always hear a slight, or sometimes quite noticeable fidelity issue with the upper treble on soundcloud.] ----- Here is an MP3 based on the steps described above, of the first video from 2007 I showed, a raw AVI recorded of a 160 x 144 dimension video: https://app.box.com/s/r750tyd1hxufw6vda13j500qsanbewfw The most prominent bit rate range it has in WinAmp is 112 ~ 160 kbps; it goes no higher than 160 kbps. I think that sounds pretty accurate... it is just an emulation of a GBA game. Here is an MP3 for the second video from 2016 I showed rendered using Adobe After Effects and Sony Vegas on the highest settings possible, with the audio stream before uploading being the original VBR1 MP3 file that would be distributed on OCR: https://app.box.com/s/ytv60g8s766ban58qrx3iehjl3n3xr9c The most prominent bit rate range it has in WinAmp is 192 ~ 320 kbps; it goes no lower than 192 kbps. The actual MP3 I put in, for comparison, can be found here. Based solely on bit rate, these are nearly identical, with a few flashes of 160 kbps in the ripped MP3 above. Based on an explicit A/B comparison, I can tell that the actual MP3 sounds slightly better in the upper treble. But I think youtube did a pretty good job at keeping it sounding good, even if it's not identical. And for good measure, here's a third test with a third video, this time from 2009 processed through Sony Vegas (instead of uploaded as a raw AVI) into 720p HD, but recorded in the same way of a 160 x 144 dimension video. The MP3 that resulted is: https://app.box.com/s/bgq8bnn9as35tzyq7igpulgub5x87eh1 The most prominent bit rate range it has in WinAmp is 128 ~ 160 kbps, occasionally making it to 224 kbps and occasionally flashing 112 kbps; it goes no higher than 224 kbps. This is fairly consistent because the recording input was the same as in the first video, so it makes sense that the bit rate ranges are similar, but the bit rate is slightly better because it was rendered at a higher audio quality ceiling instead of being uploaded as a raw AVI. ----- So yes, the audio quality ceiling that you feed into youtube does "change" what bit rate you get out... because you get out the bit rate that you put in (more or less). I'd say, oh, about 95 ~ 98% of the original quality stays. I'd approve!

Experimental is fine, but yeah, it can be hard to pull off. Redg manages to pull it off: However, in this case, I do agree with @Cubeshark that this is a bit too sparse. You may want to add something to fill in the gaps, like a glitched drum loop to add interest, a pad to create some sort of tonal filler, or a bass to glue the mix together. Near the end of the mix, the glassy pad you had was doing that job. Something else you may want to consider is finding a structure; I typically want to be able to skip 15 seconds forward and notice a forward change in something, whether it's faster hi hats, more bass, less drums, etc., rather than just a change. Something where you can tell whether you're in an intro, a "chorus", a breakdown section, an outtro, etc.

I like me some Psytrance! Seriously though, this is nicely engaging, with some good pacing and development. Great work!

Nice, a 3-month wait! Indeed, they're getting faster!

As a passing remark, to me this sounds like you've used some 80's synths on top of distant cinematically-produced electronic drums. The drums sound a little strange IMO, because they're very low-passed. One example I can think of with similar sounds is: Hopefully that provides a basis of comparison for the kind of drums you may or may not want to go for. Also, in the reference, the starting background soundscape contains a DX7 electric piano and a sine wave with portamento (not to be confused with portmanteau :P).

It seems like the audio compression is to about 126 ~ 128 kbps AAC in an MP4 container. This link analyzes the video for the bitrate: https://www.h3xed.com/blogmedia/youtube-info.php Look for "audio/mp4;" under "type" and then locate the bitrate on the far left in "bps" (bits per second). As far as I can tell, even some of my old videos back in 2007 have retroactively-revised bitrates to be about the same as one of my more modern videos (rendered at 720p HD with 320 kbps audio, iirc). If you were wondering, after 2013, video resolution chosen on YouTube no longer affects audio bitrate.

@PRYZM You do what works for you; I just wanted to present what I find to be the most useful features in FL. Also, I just find the Parametric EQ 2 visualizer to be intuitive. I haven't been able to get used to other visualizers that I *have* tried, like FabFilter Pro-Q and TDR Nova. I still use them, but I always go back to Parametric EQ 2 as my main.

Well, there are several highlights about FL Studio, most of which I don't see in other DAWs... The parametric EQ 2 plugin is by far the most useful that I have ever used. Its visual representation of frequencies is absolutely critical to my workflow, personally, because I can simply look for what frequencies are clashing, even if I can't quite locate it by listening. If I didn't have that, my workflow would probably be at least twice as slow. The pattern system is actually useful for workflow... it's meant to assist in writing electronic music, which will have repeating elements. They can be copy/pasted, and Make Unique helps in making quick variations. It may take some getting used to, but if Image-Line removed that, I'm sure most users would complain at this point since they're used to using it. Who ever said that they "promised to remove it"...? The piano roll is filled with useful workflow features, like the following: Ghost notes, for complex harmony writing. Resize groups of notes by holding right-Shift and resizing from the right. Good for writing polyrhythms, triplets, etc., without changing the grid snap. Copy/paste groups of notes or patterns into the next bar (Ctrl+B), good for writing, e.g. bass or hi hat ostinatos. Mini-playlist preview right above it, good if the pattern is long and you want to see where you are. Change the time-signature within the piano roll pattern, separately from within the playlist (say, if you wanted to write a 15/8 bar in the playlist that was 4/4 + 7/8 in the pattern). and so on. TOOLS > "Dump score log to selected pattern" allows you to paste what you have been playing on your MIDI keyboard for up to the last 2, 5, 10, 20, or 30 minutes, if you realize you played something cool by accident but you don't remember what you played. Free lifetime updates! Need I say more? Have you tried it first, before judging...? ----- In regards to the OP, @Deadpigeon, FL20 is now much improved in recording capabilities, and I can sincerely recommend it for both writing electronic music and recording band instruments, after the new update! Of course, you can try the trial version for as long as you like, before deciding (the only drawback is you can't re-open a project file you saved in the trial mode using the trial mode).

I would go for it. I think the workflow enhancements are well worth the upgrade, but you'll want to read through the updates to see roughly what of the new stuff is useful for you. https://www.image-line.com/flstudio/history.php Or the quick version: FL 20 in 4 minutes / in 15 minutes FL 12.5 in a minute / in 21 minutes FL 12.4 in 11 minutes I don't know where you paused, but in particular I found these notable improvements (and this covers pre-FL-20 to some extent): Per-bar time signature change (you know why!) Live preview of recordings, and ability to consolidate MIDI into bounced WAVs with undo Stretch/compress entire groups of notes using right-Shift and click-dragging from the right-hand side. This can be useful for generating polyrhythms. Mini-playlist preview above piano roll, so you know where you are New Fruity Delay 3 VST (you'll love it!) Link a bunch of channels one each to sequential mixer tracks using Ctrl+Shift+L! Really helps when mixing with stems. Ghost notes (maybe new to you?), great for writing complex harmonies. Vectorial interfaces for certain VSTs etc.

Super Audio Cart has replicated SNES sounds (as well as exact samples from Famicom, C64, GB, SMS, 2600, GEN, NES), with an extensive 4-layer synthesis engine, mod matrix, fx rack, etc. Comes with over 1000 presets. May be worth looking at! https://impactsoundworks.com/product/super-audio-cart/

I'm ecstatic, for literally all of the updates in the video, especially the track bouncing, time sig change, return of the graph editor, and pre-computed effects.

MOD REVIEW Hey, good to see this going again! Alright, let's take a fresh look at this. It looks the judges' main concerns were the lack of clarity in the lead work, the amount of distortion going on, the lack of a justified ending (whether it's a fade-out or not), and the overcompression. I do hear that there is less reverb on the lead and an improved amount of clarity. I might experiment some more by lowering the amount of delay on the lead a bit, as the lead work is still somewhat blurry. Is there something accompanying the lead at 0:23 - 0:45, 0:56 - 1:19, and 2:07 - 2:28? I think I might be hearing something with a similar timbre competing with the lead, but it's hard to tell. For another reference on the amount of reverb and delay for lead accompaniment on a DnB track, perhaps consider this. As a note, I would suggest experimenting at 1:45 with a different and more upfront lead to see what you think. You might want that lead to come out more there because it's relief from the energetic main sections. The previous version had a pretty high amount of distortion, and I think it's more balanced this time around (but I can't be too sure because soundcloud doesn't properly encode high treble on playback). I think at least that the overcompression is decreased, because for example, at 1:07 the crash did pump the track in the previous version. It doesn't do that nearly as much now, but instead some sounds like the crash are more distant. Do be careful and keep watching out for overcompression. I think it's a good idea to work on that ending, because listening through it, there isn't that much of a timbral variety going on; what I hear is mainly saws and other abrasive sounds that have lots of high harmonics. (As a note, whenever I write mixes, the breakdown section and outtro are typically moments where I introduce more diverse sounds in and let them shine.) Regarding the ending, I might have started the outtro at 2:32, with no energetic drums, and perhaps made another iteration of the melody you showed in the breakdown at 1:44, maybe with a piano lead instead (something calm with some body, mainly). If you do that, I might also suggest adjusting the arp surrounding it to support the calm lead and be less energetic. By having the drums keep going at 2:32 so far, the track wants to keep going, but if you remove the drums at 2:32, then you can let it start to cool down. I don't think this is quite ready for submission yet, but it's mainly because (1) you're still working on an ending (which would be quite important), and (2) there could be more clarity between the lead and the accompaniment by toying with the delay and/or reverb on the lead and/or accompaniment. But keep at it! You're almost there.

I've usually known pu_freak for his piano arrangements, such as the one wayyy back in The Missingno Tracks. This is a calm + moving rendition that showcases the development in his longer pieces; the tempo changes worked pretty well, I thought, and despite how there are occasional spots where the flow seems to stop, I think it just feels more spontaneous/in-the-moment/live that way.

I think Callum put up a particularly solid vocal performance---with good clarity/enunciation, and the mixing by Jorito is overall fairly clean. I also like how the lyrics contain to-be-expected rickrolling references, but not in a forced way. I really dig the intentionally crunchy production, and I appreciate the dedication to fine-tuning this packed soundscape. Eino kinda has a thing for controlled chaos, it seems! Plus, who can deny the swagger in the half-time rhythm?

(His link was to the HS8.) Point is, different models with the same brand name, and @Master Mi should not mix them up.

Just wanted to point out, @Jorito seemed to be talking about the HS5, and @Neifion was referring to the HS8.

In the future, you could also post the audio file; it would be easier to help if we can hear it, not just inspect the piano roll.

Damn son, where'd you get this? Sick beat, yo!

Thanks, I appreciate it! No word back yet, but I would give it another month before asking; I would check the Judges Decisions page to see where they are.

That's a fantastic deal! Most other suppliers are saying >$400. I actually haven't ever used the A20 amplifier, but it looks good; I like the 0.01% total harmonic distortion, since you'll hear a more accurate playback. I tend to enjoy products made in Germany (NI is centered in Germany), and it will work for up to 600 ohm resistance.

I use mine with a headphone amp, and they ARE the 250 ohm version (btw, I got them for 51% off at Sweetwater iirc). It's nice to have, but I don't think you need the headphone amp for the loudness. I would still suggest getting one sometime though, so that you can re-balance the low-end and high-end to reference tracks (I calibrated my low-end with "Vessel of the Void" by zircon, my high-end with "Go Ninja Go" by bLiNd, and my loudness with "Level Bounce" by zircon on soundcloud). Without an amp, it still feels bass-light.

Here's my perspective (btw, I'm using the latest FL 12, fyi). tldr; I prefer to do certain things to the mix for reasons that I'm aware of. If there's no perceivable difference in the context of the mix, then what's the point? ---- 1. Sure, I've heard @WillRock say it to me before. It makes sense; you should be able to hear roughly the same balance at quiet or loud listening volumes. 2. Yeah, sometimes that helps. But for synths you could simply adjust the ADSR envelope and that would probably be easier. For real instruments, yes, I would consider automating volumes. 3. Yep. 4. Probably placebo... I never use Fruity Limiter anymore (because the default setting overcompresses more easily than other limiters I've used), except for sidechaining (where the effects of overcompression are negligible). I don't just stick it on a mixer track without doing anything with it. 5. But why? What's the purpose? To add brightness? Why do it when you can leave room for brightness on your hi hats, for instance? 6. I really don't hear much difference. I prefer to leave the original stereo image how it is, and use that as a starting point, because I know exactly how it started as the original sound source. 7. Yeah, I also use multiple EQ instances to do small edits. That's normal for me. 8. So the purpose is to slightly blend? Can you hear the difference except by turning on/off on bounced WAVs? If not, then why? 9. I suppose... what you're doing is phase inversion to make the net result sound more mono, so it should feel "smaller" horizontally. Reducing the brightness dulls the sound, which should make it feel "smaller" vertically. 10. That just seems to be boosting the volume... and not doing anything else. Notice how all three bands are bypassed. Couldn't you just NOT do this and then just boost the volume using Fruity Balance? 11. As in 10, does it actually do anything more than raise the volume? I would stick to using Density MKIII, and learning to use it (without relying on presets) if you are trying to do soft knee compression to keep peaks in check. I get that presets are meant to be used, but "set and forget" isn't exactly the best motto. 12. ...Why? I always like to know what's going on in all parts of the mix. This just adds a random factor out of my control, and it doesn't make sense to me. It's just going to get drowned out anyway once you add in all the elements of your mix, so it likely just adds clutter. 13. I suppose you could do that, or you could determine what instrument is capable of doing that within its own UI (such as Serum or Zebra) and add that layer within that plugin. That way, you don't have to write a whole separate pattern and you already would have synchronized ADSR envelopes, i.e. it'd be taken care of already. 14. Uh, I suppose you could, but I just listen to the mix fresh. That to me is the most honest listening perspective, not colored by previous songs. 15. That really applies to everyone, but it depends on what headphones you use. I can go for 2 - 3 hours of writing and mixing at a time and not lose track of what's off, because my headphones (Beyerdynamic DT-880) are comfortable and semi-open, so my ears don't hurt by the time I'm done.