timaeus222

Somehow, nothing changed. These issues are still here. There's just not enough substance to keep people listening right now.

Jordan or Sixto still need to get back to me. Otherwise, I think I figured out why the guitar solo sounded off mixing-wise.

Yeah, I had a feeling it wasn't just something done in the comics, though I was thinking of the comic-like onomatopoeia bubbles. I miiiight have seen the Adam West Batman episodes before somewhere, but I don't recall.

Gets cluttered later on, but I really like the ideas you have in here. Good job! Might be the most creative and actually progressive of all the Lavender Town covers I've heard.

Haha, I love the SHISH BOOM PAH! or however you wanna say it. This is almost like a musical projection of the Batman comics. So hilarious.

There's an important distinction that needs to be made. Saying the site standards are a matter of taste would be somewhat like saying morality is a matter of God's taste (but in a much less serious way). See the 'second horn' of this. One of the judges' most important aims in their votes is to minimize subjectivity as much as possible. Any judge is supposed to not reject a mix they hate or accept a mix they love for the sole reason of their hating or loving it, respectively. If that were done, it would be continually whimsical to have a mixpost on the site and the standards wouldn't mean anything (consequently, they also wouldn't exist in the absence of judges). To minimize that subjectivity, we have multiple judges, because nobody's perfect. You can't specify "exact thresholds" on the conservative or liberal nature of a remix to the original because there are thousands upon thousands of VG tunes, and to set an objective standard on what you 'have' to do to be above or below some threshold on being too interpretive or not interpretive would be impossible. The best that can be done is to say "don't stick to close to the original and write it note-for-note", "try to change the tempo, flow, structure, harmonies, key, instrumentation, dynamics, etc. as ways of reinterpretation", or perhaps "make sure you can still hear the original in the remix without trying too hard". There's somewhat of a 50% guideline for source usage, but that depends on how confident and accurate you would be on saying "this counts as source, I'm sure of it, and others would agree with me." Even then, with those standards, it's kind of hard to apply to everything because there's always that oddball source tune (like what came from), or there's the chance that someone changes the notes too much. There's just too much room for error to make absolute rules on 'what you have to do to get on OCR'. It would also be too restrictive to creativity to do that. The bar, as Liontamer says, hasn't really 'moved' since 2007, though, no matter how inaccessible it might seem.--- The standards did change over time, but the removed OC ReMixes were re-judged according to the standards of their time. They generally had very obvious reasons---ones you could make within 5 minutes perhaps (MIDI rip, mere addition of drums, excessive sampling, primarily sound effects, overly low encoding, etc.), but also some other not-so-obvious reasons (game music not written for game, removed by request, too original, stolen arrangement, etc.)

Gaming Grandpas

Ooh. Maybe do a conditionally dynamic pool of showcased games. Something like "if this game has less than 5 remixes, include the game in a pseudo-random [seed-based] pool of obscure games and spit out a few of them every 24 hours." You could call it the obscure game showcase. =P I dunno, just putting that out there.

Whenever I see someone call something techno, I just go V_V because sometimes they mean it's too repetitive and occasionally boring. So to cause me to go O_O and call it techno-ish... I almost didn't want to say that. Maybe you're just in an inspirational slump? 'o' (then again, I'm not really familiar with what you write)

I'm not wearing my production headphones right now, but... Use Your Body Solid overall. Some practical points: The lead at 0:57 has a fairly high amount of reverb on it, and since it's a saw wave, there are a lot of high harmonics, which falls in line with evktalo's EQ clutter concern. Dat cowbell. I also really loved the occasional intense vibrato on that synth. I'm not so much inclined to say that the E. Piano in the beginning needed more with it, but it would be nice to have some sort of background sweep or maybe an ambient arp at 0:08 - 0:25. I did think the bass that comes up by itself needed more filler textures to accommodate it. Maybe a few arpy DX7 E. Piano notes? Still 80's if you do that. The drums sound good in general, but sometimes the kick creates quite a bit of low end clutter with some rapid-fire hits (2:06, 2:10, 2:13, 2:14, 2:18, 2:22, 2:25, 2:28, 2:33, etc.). I would either adjust the velocity variation on it or do some sort of noise gating or transient shaping to shorten the envelope and clean up those types of sequencing. The synth lead at 3:24 - 3:39 was a little buried by the saw wave from 0:57. The Princess is a Cow Good ideas here. There's a lot of reverb washiness though. It kinda feels like your lead doesn't have a lot of reverb, whereas your backing stuff has a lot. Ignoring the reverb, it has some nice complexity to it. Lead guitar performance can be tighter (esp. after 1:08 ), and the choices in the implied dynamics (and the reverb) seem to make it feel understated. Head Into The Abyss The piano is evidently mechanical. It's good that there's certainly velocity variation, but the sample and rhythmic error don't do the notes justice. Also, the left hand feels pretty simple. Maybe you can progress from single note left hand parts to more chordal left hand parts by the time you get to the orchestral part. Orchestra sounds like free samples, which isn't a bad thing, but it ought to sound realistic for the general listener (and most people have heard of an orchestra, so a lot of emphasis is placed on the realism of an orchestra). You have nice ideas, but they can be augmented to accommodate for the limitations of these free samples. You may want to study zircon's Dungeonmans soundtrack to better understand partwriting for realism, and for making as much use as you can with free samples. That soundtrack uses all free stuff. Whip Yer Head Boi (Version 1, 2) 1) Sounds kinda 80's. The harmonies and groove feel kind of... generic and plain to me. I hear a lot of fifths and fourths, and almost a techno-ish vibe (O_O). The balance is a bit off in certain parts, like 1:48 (piano is a touch loud), 2:05 (bells are a little piercing), and 2:55 (the distant lead is a touch too distant but is not problematic as a stylistic choice). It was a nice listen; I just think it needed more diversity in moods (and more humanized piano), and maybe your hybridization idea can bring that in. 2) Drums feel nice and punchy. Sorta more of a rock-ish vibe than the other version. Still kind of a loop-y feel though. The fake guitar lead at 1:58... I dunno about that. It gives the soundscape a lo-fi quality. It might work better if there was some vibrato. Getting simplistic harmonies and groove here, like in the other version. Mahtava Mato It's a WIP, but I feel like something heavier than what's there now ought to come in at some point. Maybe 0:26. User your PLASMA Some synths are really simple. The first one, for example, is just a basic envelope with a slow attack on a static sustained synth (i.e. no filter action?). Overall a pretty nice soundscape, and I just have these thoughts: Hi hats can have more velocity variation to make them less mechanical, maybe vary the sample too The ambient arp that comes in at 0:46 is a little too loud at first. The basic saw lead at 1:01 is pretty loud, and is kinda abrasive to me. Some transitions needed; stuff just happens right now. i.e. where's the cymbal at 1:02? At 1:32? What about a riser before 1:32?

Sure. I like analyzing language and seeing what rhetoric people fail in or succeed in conveying properly, and when it's done improperly, it can get pretty noticeable. When people start bringing in context that requires inductive reasoning... that's where it gets harder. But not so much that you're completely in the dark. Rhetorical analysis gets you far, but oddly enough, sometimes instinct too (it's a pretty interesting book, and you should read it for fun). ...what? I'm reading this and seeing quite a few constructive statements. A few egregious and rash predictions here, but I see a fair amount of dignified people. OMG hope. Optimism. Concession to her abilities, plus a little anticipation of failure with a remark. Somehow got here, but unusually progressive. Lookee, a fan. Genuine care here. And that's only halfway down the page.

So sarcastic. Neither. Who studies how to fabricate? More like "the type that develops particularly [with regards to] gender/justice [situations] that" ask for the critical evaluation of what is clearly biased and what looks incredibly suspicious before the making of claims regarding their qualifications.

No, but it is quite relevant to the gathering of good evidence. That was the idea.

I'm not going to purposefully ignore the fact that there certainly are subgroups within the whole that each make up a very diverse group. Basics of cultural relativism. So, I'm aware, though you did understand me correctly as to what I meant. The descriptors I gave already specified the 'subset' of gamers that you are emphasizing. i.e.: When I said, "viewed viciously by the impetuous, insensitive gamers.", it also meant "viewed viciously by those gamers who are impetuous and insensitive.", not "viewed viciously by gamers, who are impetuous and insensitive." O! the subtlety of English grammar. I could have said, "viewed viciously by the impetuous, insensitive gamers (but presumably not those remaining who are otherwise)." and that would also be fine (except it's a bit wordy).

YMMV, but honestly, I ended up not using many of the given plugins (other than Fruity Delay 2, Blood Overdrive, Waveshaper, Parametric EQ 2, PanOMatic, and other basic ones) and instead integrated external resources into the experience after about a year. Various Kontakt libraries, Zebra2, Goldbaby drums, etc. I tend to value ease-of-use more than the capabilities to produce certain types of sounds when searching for plugins.

My instinct says no. See how it says things like "look, this DAW lets you pan! It also lets you adjust volumes! And drag stuff around!" Any DAW can do that. It's pointing out details that are basic necessities in any good DAW. (I'm being a little sarcastic but that's what I'm seeing) So any alternatives? Many. FL Studio Sonar (higher versions) Reaper Logic Reason etc. I don't know what OS you have, but I would lean towards Reason for the plugins that come with it, or FL Studio for the workflow (but not-so-good plugins that come with it).

I took a listen to this earlier, and I like the general mood of it. Objectively it seems like ambience + vocoded/buzzy groove + dubstep drums. I wouldn't go so far as to call it "Chillstep", but I think the drums don't seem to fit the ambient nature of this track because they're pretty strong yet sorta dry, and the vocoded groove feels repetitive because it's often there without changing much. I don't think the tempo is too slow or the track too long, but the repetition might be why someone thought that. The dynamics don't seem to go anywhere because it feels like a groove plus some melodic experiments and occasional dropping of the drums, making it seem longer. Instead of sticking to one single [vocoded] groove and writing a melody that acts as nearly the only dynamic element (besides the genre of the drum rhythm), try considering the changes you can make in the overall mood in distinct sections of the remix. You can make it heavier (climactic), lighter (breakdown), or maintain the current groove (main). Try scanning through your track 15 seconds at a time. You can't tell where you are (intro, main, breakdown, climax, or outtro) if you don't look because there's the same set of drum samples pretty much everywhere past 0:18. There's my take on it.

Option A seems like pay X + $100 to get 500 GB, the XBox, and something CoD-related. Option B seems like pay X to get the console and pay Y to get a 1 TB HDD. http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=A7499999&ST=pla&dgc=ST&cid=262077&lid=4742363&acd=1230980731501410 ^ That 1 TB costs less than $100 MSRP, like you anticipated. So it seems better to just buy that external HDD. If you think you can take good care of it and not toss it around somehow, then yeah, go for it. As long as you handle it gently, it's not so unreliable to have an external vs. internal HDD. Besides, then you'll get moar [sic] space. Not to mention: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=874883&gclid=CPyGyqvqzcECFRFgfgod0AIAYA&Q=&is=REG&A=details 3 TB... $115. That's a really good deal. Much more satisfying long-term.

I did a Copper-Pyrazine Metal-Ligand polymer lab a few weeks ago, so I guess I had that on my mind. I'm a Chemistry Major.

Or... http://www.clickhole.com/article/summary-gamergate-movement-we-will-immediately-cha-1241 Seems just insulting to tell someone how to properly do something wrong. http://wiki.gamergate.me/index.php/GamerGate Minor thing, but you missed my point. I was questioning why you would say "no, this is not how you perform this fallacy. This is how you do it" (which is not that much of an extrapolation), not how you wanted to try correcting DusK about his definition of GamerGate, because the intent, again, feels sardonic. My post had nothing to do with whether or not I understood what GG was. In a few lines, I actually said "try looking at this definition to see where DusK could have gotten his, instead of claiming DusK didn't know what he was talking about and sardonically (from my perspective) telling him he improperly performed the fallacy of hasty generalizations, because if it was easy enough to look up this definition, why couldn't he have done it earlier, right?" Sure, I might have been oversimplifying my point, so there you go, a clarification. But I'm not going to dwell on that. So [/OT]

The different BPM doesn't make it unrecognizable by itself. It's the notes you chose and the order in which you arranged them that did it. The 'style' you reinterpreted in also has nothing to do with its connection to the source. Still the notes you chose and the order in which you arranged them. The interpretation also doesn't have to be butt-simple despite it being of a Game Boy tune, as long as it reminds someone of the source tune. (Since 1:58 sounds like 0:22, the recognizability doesn't change between them) Basically, it seems like you arranged the notes in a way that feels circular in its flow. If we presuppose that you picked the first melody to use at 0:22 and 1:58, then it sounds like you took its first half, took a few notes out (let's say the first few), added a few original notes around them (i.e. left and right sides), and repeated them like a polymeric chain rather than just taking the entire melody and changing the singular notes in the melody that make it most memorable into little fills here and there. tl;dr: you overmodified the connection to the source tune. I'm not suggesting "keep it simple", but try referencing the source tune as you keep modifying your interpretation of it and check to see if it still sounds similar enough that you can tell you're listening to the original in some form. ---- Let's assume the first note is a C and we're in a C Major scale for Vermilion City. Then the first half of the first melody is: C _ F E D _ C-D E _ ( where _ = some sort of rest and hyphens refer to connected eighth notes. The second half of the first melody is: C _ F E D _ C-D C _ ( )So the 'call' in the 'call-and-response' is C _ F E D _ C-D E _ , and the 'response' is C _ F E D _ C-D C _ . The only difference is that the D resolves to a C, the root in the key, whereas if it tried to resolve to an E, people naturally want to hear another half to the melody to finish it; i.e. it feels incomplete. One way you can simplify the melody is if you decided to take out the [C-D] in the call or response. The only thing that's different is that there's no more D as a neighboring tone, and there's no C that connects to the neighboring tone, so you go from a three-note phrase to one long single note. Since the [C-D E] and [C-D C] are what change in the melody between call and response, [F E D] is memorable. So, if you decided to take out the [F E] and make it just a long D, it sounds like a different melody with the differences between the call and response portion of it retained. It's sounding less like the original now. It gets into more of a gray area already. If you take out both [F E] and [C-D], all you have left is: Original C _ F E D _ C-D E _ C _ F E D _ C-D C _ Modified C _ D___ _ C___ _ C _ D___ _ C___ _ That's oversimplified. You can see that it's just three notes, which could correspond to any game in the world. Now if you modified it in this way: Original C _ F E D _ C-D E _ C _ F E D _ C-D C _ Modified C _ G F E _ C-D E D C _ G F E _ C-D C D It starts to sound more like the first half (the memorable part vs. the portion of difference between the call/response) of Final Fantasy 6 Setzer's Theme at 0:14 - 0:18. i.e. you would have changed the melody and made it recognizable as a different melody.

I can vouch for her being an excellent vocalist. I've never collabed with her before, but for what it's worth, I recognize the talent!

Yeah, what is with 0:22 - 0:53? I don't hear Vermilion City in there, I hear a vague interpretation of the credits theme, I suppose---not that close, though IMO. I'd consider that both original and unfocused. Instead of a call-and-response type of melody, you have a call-and-call type of melody. You started half an idea, then repeated it rather than finishing it, so it doesn't resolve. I don't really hear Vermilion City anywhere, actually, until 1:36 - 1:59, in the background, barely. Yeah, this sounds pretty liberal. The kick is a little strong in the fundamental. Nice otherwise. Seems like your best soundscape so far, despite this being pretty original.

Exactly. They became 'blameworthy' and viewed viciously by the impetuous, insensitive gamers. (Hence the 'insofar as...')

How in the Apparently my studio isn't so small anymore And a cool view of my minimalistic keyboard Computer & DAW Windows 7 Pro 64-bit (2.20GHz, 6GB RAM) 1TB HDD Image-Line FL Studio 11 Hardware KORG Microkey 37-key MIDI Keyboard Pyle PTA2 Mini 2x40W Stereo Power Amplifier Software/Samples Various drum samples and free soundfonts u-he Zebra + Filterscape + Uhbik 4Front TruePianos Spectrasonics Trilian New Sonic Arts Granite Native Instruments Kontakt + Guitar Rig + Massive + FM8 EastWest Quantum Leap Ra + Symphonic Orchestra Gold Audiobro LA Scoring Strings Impact Soundworks Shreddage II Complete, Resonance: Emotional Mallets, Cinematic Synthetic Drums, Juggernaut, Curio: Cinematic Toy Piano, Groove Bias Drums, Celestia: Heavenly Sound Design Heavyocity Damage Gospel Musicians Neo-Soul Keys Orange Tree Samples Evolution Electric Guitar & Acoustic Guitar Crypto Cipher Tarangs & Voices Of Ragas Vol 2 I also have two pairs of headphones, but only one is pictured (Grados SR-60 on the left)