Beatdrop

Goodness, I haven't yet voiced how much I dislike this song? Yeah, it sucks. I've been wanting to redo it for awhile, since I love the original, and this remix is VERY old. When I do manage to redo it, I'll have this one pulled down.

I don't know, it sounded pretty good to me. It's kind of cluttered, and the hats that are hard-panned to the right and left are a little sharp (and irritating), but other than that, it's mixed pretty well. Synths sound smooth, although not particularly unique. Bass and drums really drive this one along. Like djp said, it's not COMPLETELY conventional (which is good), but it still doesn't stray too far off the beaten path. One problem I have with it is its length. Holy CRAP, did it need to be 5:42 to get the point across? The single change-up at 2:59, which isn't even that drastic, isn't reason enough to me to drag this one on for almost six minutes. Still, quite good, and it really sounds as though a big name producer took an old Extreme-G tune and resurrected it for the newer games (check out stuff in XGIII for examples). 8/10

LARRY! WE MUST COORDINATE! MY PARTICIPATION HAS BEEN NIL! SYNCHRONIZE YOUR WATCHES! (psst: I'll get in touch with you later.)

Yeah, what HE said. The soundfont PLAYER isn't free. The soundfonts are. Huge difference.

MIDI control. Set a MIDI Out for each individual channel of the synth.

I was really looking forward to a Mean Bean Machine remix, too. Like Anna Locke said, this does sound very amateurish. I personally think the phaser that's on the beginning plucked synth has too much feedback. The chords that come in after about a minute or so sound so incredibly dry and boring. You know, in some ways, this reminds me of something from the early Armored Core soundtracks. It's... mediocre. I could see this person, DJ Squarewave, developing some skills after a year or so, but currently, this is just too dull. The drums repeat tons, the song doesn't seem to have a whole lot of direction to it, and a lot of the synths are just... blah. Bass could be done better. The synth used for it is GOOD, but the programming is boring. It kind of works here, but it just leaves the song sounding... boring. Like I've said lots. Maybe with a bunch of reworking, I'd consider YESing this. Oh, and is it just me, or does that heavily reverbed hi-hat actually carry on through the entire song? You know, this reminds me of my first remix. NO

This would have been innovative about... ten years ago. As Veggilante said, it's very straight-forward. TOO straight-forward. It's pretty dull as far as techno goes, really. Got some decent ideas, but the overall lack of expression on the synths (besides the filter ramps thrown in here and there) leaves it sounding dull and boring. Also, I noticed some over-compression at 1:43 after one of the previously mentioned filter ramps. As far as the samples/synths themselves go, it almost sounds to me as though they all came from the same tone generator, and it gave all of them this SOUND that I can't quite put my finger on, but it just makes them seem low quality. Nothing new here as far as synth textures go, anyway. The marimbas or whatever those are sound pretty neat, though. The arrangement also left me pretty bored, since it does repeat a bunch. Wouldn't have been so bad if the individual elements of the song were interesting. NO

Okay, the first shouts from the game made me laugh really hard. First of all, the bass is fucking great. The guitar sampling is fantastic. The drums are pure house. Very clever use of voice samples, although like Prot said, they do kind of get annoying later. However, this definitely has some style, and I am of the opinion that we don't have enough house remixes of stuff on the site. Arrangement fused the song into the style perfectly. It does repeat a lot, though, but after the first two minutes, it does a lot more cool stuff. The guitar is clean, just like everything else. All in all, despite some slight arrangement issues, this is some sweet stuff. The slight repetitivity of the first two minutes doesn't really detract from the enjoyability for me, so I'm not going to let that hold it back. Way too much good here for me to give it a NO. EDIT: Hah, just realized that I said "the guitar sampling is fantastic." Yeah, that was before I realized that he wasn't using samples of guitar licks, but actually did all the guitar work. So, my mistake on that. YES

The drums didn't quite appeal to me. Way too overdone and unoriginal. They also lacked any kind of serious PUNCH that would make up for the standard 909 drum beat as heard here (and by PUNCH, I mean proper EQing and compression). This is also wholly boring. It repeats tons, and when it finally gets to the main lead at 1:36, I'm left very disappointed in the synth choice. Not to mention that everything seems to be set to the exact same volume with nothing taking priority. Actually, the synths all need EQing, too. And I am in complete agreement with analoq about the ending. It was SO sudden and just... bleh. NO

Er, actually, I thought the playing and syncing was messy throughout the entire song. Some parts weren't QUITE as bad, but the whole thing was kind of a guitar mess. The guitars are recorded quite poorly, too, just like Veggilante said. As a whole, the song is also mastered very poorly. Hell, I can even hear the buzzing from one of the amps almost as clearly as I can hear the guitars at some points. That's pretty scary. NO

Yeah, what they said. I think the worst part of it was at the end when it does the... FUNKY pitchbend. Anyway, lead aside, I like the arrangement. The drums don't do a whole lot and they sound really... icky, but the arrangement as a whole is pretty decent. This kind of lacks a beginning, though, but that's just my opinion. Panning in this is executed quite well, as is the mastering (except on the drums). I don't really like the synths as a whole. They just sound too basic. The strings are nice and really fill out the background, though. But MAN, that LEAD is just... *dies* NO

Hmmm... 1:58... too short... The arrangement here bugs me quite a bit. It just kind of launches right into the song without any kind of build up except what was in the song in the first place. The guitar playing is... pretty good. However, it's too distant. The guitar is the focal point of the entire song, so it needs to be more in your face than it is here. This also pretty much just follows an ABAB arrangement. Boring, and for such a short song, it really shouldn't repeat (practically?) the exact same thing twice. Not much new in this version. Drum work... works. It's not very spectacular, though, but given the style, that's okay. Over all, I don't think this is mixed or mastered very well, either. Just sounds too flat. NO

This is actually a lot like the original. The original song itself was already pretty jazzy, so making it like this didn't change a whole lot. Also, waaaaaaaay too much reverb. At times, it makes it sound more realistic, but at other times, it's just way too much. I suppose I would probably lighten it up on the drums a little bit, and maybe increase the amount on things like the piano. I like the trumpet work, although it isn't very complex or anything. This repeats a lot, too. Sample quality is decent enough, though. Hmmm... I don't know. Adjust the reverb, work on adding in more soloing, since after all, this IS supposed to be Jazz, and Jazz emphasizes the individual musician moreso than the composer, so expression is what it's all about. This doesn't have a whole lot of expression. NO

I find it's useful if I want to write breaks or glitchcore, although they're not really your style, I suppose. It also comes in handy if I want to write a long rhythm without extending the step sequencer. However, in most cases it's much easier just to use the step sequencer. Hey, breaks are totally my style. I've done a number of breakbeat songs, and I've got a new DDR remix in the works in that style. However, for that, I just make a drum loop with samples the regular way, export that, and then load it into the slicer and reprogram it however I want.

I don't have the original file. All I have are pieces (read: loops) that I created for use in the original file, which I believe Ailsean posesses, since he was the last one to do touch-ups to the full song. Just chop that part off in a wave editor if it bugs you that much.

Heeeeeeey, cool. I didn't know you could do that. Not that I'll probably use it, but still good to know.

Actually, what I believe he's trying to do, Xelebes, is apply a flanger to a sound that only flanges certain frequencies in multiple ranges and excludes others without actually altering the sound (with the exception of the flanging). Using an EQ anywhere in the signal path like that would alter all of the sound. He could, however, use your method if he used multiple instances of the sounds. In fact, the ONLY way to do that is to use multiple instances of the same sound: one with a flanger, one without. Without doing it this way, it would take a fantastically powerful flanger, and I don't think there are any available that can do what you want to be done. Not exactly. You see when it goes through the send, you are only putting certain frequencies through the flanger. In the original signal, you are having all the rest of the frequencies except you are cutting out the frequencies that being applied in the flanger. That is example no 2. If you want to include some wet/dry function, you can omit the parametric eq but run the risk of certain frequencies being way too hot. Ahhh... I see it now. Good thinking. You are exactly right.

Actually, what I believe he's trying to do, Xelebes, is apply a flanger to a sound that only flanges certain frequencies in multiple ranges and excludes others without actually altering the sound (with the exception of the flanging). Using an EQ anywhere in the signal path like that would alter all of the sound. He could, however, use your method if he used multiple instances of the sounds. In fact, the ONLY way to do that is to use multiple instances of the same sound: one with a flanger, one without. Without doing it this way, it would take a fantastically powerful flanger, and I don't think there are any available that can do what you want to be done.

Aside from buffer length, the "overdrive" problem could be one of two things: 1.) Your soundcard. Yes, it might have gotten fried or just turned into a piece of crap in general. Either way, your soundcard could definitely be causing you problems with sound quality. 2.) Sample rate. Go into the same window where you set the buffer length and check to make sure the sample rate (somewhere off to the upper-right of the buffer) is set to 44100. A lower setting would degrade quality, but allow FL to run much faster.

This song was originally made by Naoki Maeda, one of Konami's in-house producers, so it's fair game. Fear not, for if a song from DDR comes up on the panel that has copyright issues, I will be sure to point it out.

You need to reverse your MIDI routing on that. Instead of using your microKorg to control dashboard, try using Dashboard to control microKorg. In doing this, you can lay out your own control scheme that has all of the controls on it that you want to manipulate in your mK, and using Dashboard, you can automate all of them. Dashboard can also be used as an internal controller for multiple things at the same time. For example, you might have four Fruity Filter FX channels loaded into four different FX tracks. Well, using Dashboard, you could bind the cutoff knobs in all four to the single Dashboard interface to allow you to easily access all of them for automation. Basically, Dashboard is meant to allow you to have an even easier time programming in FL. It's the absolute best MIDI controller in the program (if you sink some time into setting it up properly). EDIT: Also, apology for the double-post, but they were two seperate thoughts, and I haven't posted in ReMixing 101 for awhile, so I don't think it's that big of a deal. *shrug*

Actually, Xelebes, the problem he's having is likely tempo related. He is probably attempting to play drum loops back as one shots in a project that does not match their tempo. Solution to this is to use the Fruity Slicer or timestretching. Right click on the sample in the sample browser and select "Open in slicer channel" and the loop will load sliced up so that you can resequence it to match the tempo. To avoid pops associated with the ends of the slices, either add some decay to all of the slices (simply turn up the decay knob in the slicer) or select "Fill Gaps" in the same window. For the time stretching option, load the loop into a Sampler channel, open the options window for the channel, and down near the bottom, there's a little digit box that reads "Stretch to Fit." Simply, drag that number to fit the amount of steps that the loop takes up. For example, if the loops is two measures long and you're in 4/4 time, that box should read 32 (as in 16 steps, and then 16 more). Four measures: 64. Eight measures: 128. Get it?

I've loved this song since the moment I heard it. At first, some of the changes in the lyrics bugged me a little, but I've come to appreciate them, as the original lyrics seem much more aimed at an upbeat song, while these are more laid back, suiting for the style. The synths in this are BEAUTIFUL. They take the melody of the original and change it from a hyper rave song into a floaty downtempo break tune. This is definitely the best DDR remix I've heard come from anyone in the OCR community. The piano in the beginning is also fantastically played. Mastering and mixing is borderline pro. This one's a winnar. YES

Whoa, I'm completely in agreement with analoq about it sounding cluttered. Half of the sounds are muffled and muddy, and the other half are sharp, and it just ends up sounding strange. And with the muffled half, it's hard to make out individual things. I don't like the lead synth in this. It feels completely out of place. The drums are pretty weak, too. They're decent in some places, but most of the time they're just... there. No presence at all. The funny, yet logical, thing is that when there's very little going on, it sounds pretty good. Another thing I'm hearing is what sounds like issues with tuning. The lead synth sounds out of tune in some places, which is peculiar. There's also something really weird going on at 2:22 when the two synths come in for that section. It's a weird rhythm or something. The arrangement seems pretty good, and I like the ending. Sounds way too drafty and unfinished for me. NO

Whoa, this reminds me of Unfinished Symphony by Massive Attack. Hell, this reminds me of Massive Attack in general. Anyway, I like how it starts off. The strings sound sweet, and when the bass comes in, it brings in lots of energy that wasn't there in the intro. The drums are a little lacking, but they work for the style well enough. At times, it seems a tad boring, but I think the style holds it together quite well. Length seems just right, and the ending is a little uncreative, but I'm hardly one to criticize that. The harmonizing on the melody at 2:23 is cool, and builds it up before it comes back full circle. Good. Not fantastic, but good. YES