Slimy
-
Posts
292 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Articles
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Slimy
-
-
Reaper can be used as a Rewire client with FLStudio.
-
You may find this video interesting, if you haven't seen it before.
- Rapidkirby3k and ticaw
-
2
-
What don't you understand? The arrangement/theory, the orchestration, or the software/VIs used?
-
Even though you have no midi piano to play on, can you imagine yourself playing the part on a real piano, and what that might sound like? For example, if I were playing this, I would play the melody parts like 00:5 soft and legato, except for the F6 note which I might accent. And I would play rapid bass stuff like at 0:51 harsher, louder, and more staccato. I might even rush it a bit.
Also, instead of just randomizing the velocities to get a "real" sound, try basing your velocities on phrasing. Whatever makes sense "musically:" maybe the end of a phrase should be louder, or a phrase should start loud then get soft, or chords with dissonance should be louder, or higher notes should be louder. Not sure how I could describe it better.
-
Why not learn to make music yourself? At least one thing that keeps me making music is the notion that no one is going to write down my ideas except myself.
-
Well this is a surprise, I've followed nokbient on soundcloud for awhile and wasn't expecting anything to get submitted here. Do check out his soundcloud, it's an absolute goldmine.
-
Native sidechaining has been confirmed for Mixcraft 8, and the pro version of Mixcraft currently includes SideKick6. Otherwise, you might find something you like in this list: http://bedroomproducersblog.com/2010/11/10/bpb-freeware-studio-best-free-sidechain-compressor-vst-plugins/
-
-
In order to use sf2 files you'll need a sampler that can read them like sforzando or Sfz by Rgcaudio. I can't really give suggestions for making samples sound better if I can't hear them, but you should probably try playing around with the effects included in your DAW. For example, the instrument might sound better with more reverb, or if it were EQ'd to have a better tone.
-
On 9/7/2016 at 3:38 PM, YoungProdigy said:
That's true, EWQL does have a legato script. But when compared to real legato strings; it really doesn't sound as good. It has marcato and portamento but that's also limited. I've looked up videos on youtube of real violinists playing portamento and the script in EWQL, doesn't sound convincing. However, I've listened to some Hollywood Strings demos and those do sound much more realistic. The only things I find that sound convincing are short articulations such as stacatto and samples that fade out.
*snip*
I'm not saying the only way is to buy more stuff. But what people seem to want is realism. Convincing realism. At least, that's the impression I get. You can definitely make expressive strings. But even with CC11, I haven't come up with anything that would fool anyone. However, I've listened to the Hollywood Strings and they definitely sound closer to the real thing.
But you haven't even come close to using up the potential of EWQLSO. That's why I doubt you'll sound significantly better when using Hollywood Orchestra, even if it does have better sounds. You have to understand how to use samples in a convincing way, and orchestrate well.
You aren't as limited as you think, far from it. If you can't find the sound you want sampled, try to think about how you can approximate it with the tools you have. Can you overlap sounds together? EQ the sound to be more appealing? Exaggerate dynamics by adding volume automation? Samples aren't all you have, you have the full functionality of a DAW at your disposal.
On 9/7/2016 at 3:38 PM, YoungProdigy said:I made a new song, where I attempted to add more expression.
What am I missing?
Well, thicker chords, but I'll get to that.
This really does sound more expressive, but the lead violins have a pretty bad attack. I think you could make them sound more legato if you lowered the attack, and slightly overlapped the notes. At 0:21, you can overlap your legato violin samples with some staccato samples if you want them to sound a bit stronger there.
I like the articulation at 0:05, I don't think I've ever actually used that sample. And I like the clarinet ear-candy at 0:32.
Concerning the thicker chords: At the beginning of the song, there's only a single violin line, and bass line, (and maybe a cello line, if so it's too quiet to really hear.) The chords don't need to be this thin, they would sound better if they were thicker. You could fill up the space in between your bass and violin with a cello, viola, and a 2nd violin part. That's a typical full string ensemble.
At 0:11, an oboe is added, but it's just matching the violins an octave higher, so the chords aren't improved at all. As well as the oboe, you could have other woodwind instruments playing under the melody, supporting it with chords.
At 0:43, the melody sounds pretty good by itself, but the woodwind chords supporting it are once again sparse. This wouldn't actually sound too bad as a contrast, but the entire song lacks thick chords.
I already complimented the the clarinet ear-candy at 0:32 - I like what you're trying to do, but it could be improved if you added in more woodwinds to play with the clarinet.
And one last thing - why did you suddenly end the song in a completely different key?
-
5 hours ago, YoungProdigy said:
The velocities could be more varied. But the whole "emulate the real playing and sounds of an orchestra" thing is easier said than done.
So what. We all have to do it, why should you be the exception?
5 hours ago, YoungProdigy said:Real instruments can play several different articulations such as legato, marcato, portamento and stacatto. Convincing legato doesn't seem possible in EWQLSO. Realistic marcato and portamento seems to be limited.
EWQLSO has legato, marcato, portamento and stacatto samples. I don't see the problem here.
5 hours ago, YoungProdigy said:This is a song by a real orchestra, orchestrated in a similar way:
*snip*
That song isn't trying to convey the same energy you were trying to convey with your song. When it starts to picks up, the orchestration gets thicker.
1 hour ago, YoungProdigy said:When I said "I have listened to real orchestral arrangements", I meant that I understand how real orchestras are arranged.
You thought your thin orchestration was excusable because a random song in the Super Mario Galaxy OST with a completely different style was slightly comparable. You haven't convinced me.
1 hour ago, YoungProdigy said:I don't think I should aim for a "real orchestra" sound with these samples. There's simply not enough convincing samples and scripts to do that.
*snip*
I think my goal should be to write something "similar" to a real orchestra, but not 100% exact. So I should aim to have "similar" expressiveness to a real orchestra; but not 100% of the expressiveness of a real orchestra.
I really don't mean to gloat or anything, but can you at least make your orchestration sound as decent as I was able to get mine to sound while using EWQLSO before you decide the only way to proceed is to buy more shit?
-
Make your velocities varied. Just applying EWQLSO over a midi arrangement isn't going to improve it by much. Your samples would be much more effective if you put in the effort to emulate the real playing and sounds of an orchestra. All your instruments currently are perfectly quantized, and have no variation when repeating. At 0:29, your trumpet consistently has the same harsh attack for every note, without any expression. Not only does this sound unappealing, a real trumpet player would play the phrase with some expression.
For example, at 0:29, at 0:39, the trumpet could get softer each note, then get louder right before the legato note.
Here's a good rule of thumb for for general/subtle orchestral dynamics - higher notes can get higher velocity, and vice versa. For example, at 0:29, the trumpets can get louder on the C#.
Also, you melody at 0:07 seems to come from an entirely different song. Your staccato strings seem to be in a minor key, but the melody is in major??
Your orchestration sounds very thin. Where's all the chords? At 0:44, it sounds like the only parts of the string section you're using is a single violin and bass line. The entire song is like this. In orchestral arrangements, parts are written for entire sections, not just single instruments. You should listen to some orchestral recordings to hear how orchestral scores are usually written, (typically with many instruments blended together.) Watching videos/live will help you become familiar too.
I'd also recommend becoming familiar with all the instruments commonly used in orchestras, so that it's easier to consider how instruments can work in sections.
-
Minor update:
- FX at the ending has better tuning now
- Made the quiet bits slightly louder overall.
10 hours ago, The Nikanoru said:*snip*
I think the idea of realism for the drum kit in this case has cost something musically here, IMO.
I'm not experienced enough when it comes to drum kits to really have an opinion on this. If anyone else agrees/disagrees, I'd be interested to hear it.
10 hours ago, The Nikanoru said:I think changing out for the Rock Tunnel would go better with the Lavender Town theme mood-wise, but it would make the last part sound REALLY out of place.
I think you misunderstood - I was talking about making an entirely new "song" to go before this one, since this entire song is currently a part 1 of 2. Part "prologue" could potentially contain a hint of the Cerulean City theme, the Route 9/10 theme, and then the Rock Tunnel theme. Basically the journey before you get to Lavender Town.
10 hours ago, The Nikanoru said:You have a bit of dead space between 2:34 and 2:37 now. Was this to deal with the bass rumble you spoke of? It sounds kind of ... empty there now.
Did I overdo cutting back on the bass rumble? Can someone with better headphones confirm this?
6 hours ago, Gario said:Just quietly (or not so quietly, as is the case here) taking this off eval, for the moment, as the track has had an eval, and more importantly is changing quite a bit over a short period of time. Tough to know if what's present is what's planned for submission, or if the tag just wasn't removed. No worries, but just poppin' in for that.
I think it'll be ready for submission when the above issues are worked out.
6 hours ago, Gario said:For what it's worth, I listened to it and thought the orchestration was bitchin'. Dynamically it's rich, though I think it would benefit from just a little limiting on the master track for those few spiking moments in the track, as it's pretty quiet all around - might be able to get 2-3 dBs without sacrificing a noticeable amount of quality. I can't try for myself since it's a soundcloud track, though.
Ok, I've limited the peaks and re-done the compression/amplification. The quiet parts should be slightly louder now.
-
I've updated the file in the first post.
- Fixed the loud tuba honks at 1:15.
- Decreased the volume of some of the percussion at 0:42 and made the snare darker.
- Tried to make the drum kit less wide.
- Decreased the volume of the bass rumble, although it gets louder at 2:37.
- I made the FX at the ending in-tune with the last chord to hopefully make it less jarring. I still have the original FX fresh in my mind though, so it sounds a bit strange to me.
On 8/25/2016 at 8:26 AM, Rozovian said:Speaking of headphones, the bass rumble is horrible on decent headphones. I don't mind a subtle low end presence, but it gets way too loud for my liking. I recommend you find a standard listening level that you use both for the main mixing work, and for listening to your reference tracks. The effects of the low end are often not obvious on low listening levels, so make sure the lows in your reference tracks sounds good on the level before settling on it.
My headphones don't have a lot of bass, so I'd appreciate knowing if the bass rumble if it's still a problem, or if it's too quiet.
On 8/25/2016 at 8:26 AM, Rozovian said:When it comes to the many small timestamps, I think those might stand out more on the aforementioned reference listening level on headphones. Some of them stand out a lot, others just enough to bother me. I can list exactly how each of them bother me, but for your own critical listening development, it might be better to listen to the track yourself, on headphones and with appropriate level, and try to identify what I've pointed to. Your call.
If I have to guess at what might instruments might possibly be wrong, and then guess at whether it's the loudness, articulation, or timing that bothers you - then no, it feels more like I'm wasting my time.
However, there were a few spots you mentioned that I did notice, and have changed.
On 8/25/2016 at 1:43 PM, Bowlerhat said:Although, seeing that there are multiple sources involved it could be that the contrast between songs is a maybe a bit too much. It's a subjective thing, and i'm personally not a big fan of medleys, but I feel like I'm just listening to three different songs. The intro doesn't have any correlation with lavender town, and lavender town doesn't have anything to do with the outro. The individual source interpretations work great, and they really have been arranged in a way which makes the most out of the source. But that's just that. Three great orchestral pieces played after each other You could consider mixing things up a bit. Throwing in some battle theme quotes at the beginning, adding some lavender town at the end. Whatever works for you. I think it could really make everything sound a bit more like one big piece, instead of three different pieces.
On 8/25/2016 at 8:26 AM, Rozovian said:seeming unwillingness to take the feedback and try to understand it.
Oh boy.
I'm afraid you're listening to the first half of an 11 minute medley. No, I'm not changing that. I'm not going put the battle theme in the beginning, because there's no battle happening in the beginning of the song, if that makes any sense. And I'm not going to add Lavender Town to the end because that would ruin the mood, and it would be impossible to recapture the emotional tone from the middle right after that giant climax. (And I'm not going to add a "goofy-scary" section because I don't consider Lavender Town "goofy." Also because that would just make the tone confusing. Yes, the tone changes, but it stays consistent within each section.)
Basically, I really, really doubt I'm going to take any idea seriously that involves re-writing the entire structure of the song. I'm not re-writing the entire thing just because you just don't like medleys. To put it even more bluntly, and I apologize in advance - I don't think yours or anyone else's random ideas for the structure of the song is anywhere near as coherent as the one I've been working on for years.
(There's one possible exception though - I could write an entirely new part based on the Rock Tunnel theme, to give the intro of this some emotional context. I would have to write ~4 minutes worth so that it could be it's own separate part though, and that's pretty daunting.)
On 8/25/2016 at 1:43 PM, Bowlerhat said:The intro doesn't have any correlation with lavender town, and lavender town doesn't have anything to do with the outro.
The intro is an interpretation of the route 3 and route 11 themes, which gets explored more in the 2nd half. After that, it actually is a remix of the Lavender Town theme.
-
9 hours ago, Rozovian said:
There's some balance issues. Just before the slowdown, there's some really loud brass honks, before that, some bright and exposed percussion elements.
I can fix the brass honks, but which percussion elements do you find bright and exposed?
9 hours ago, Rozovian said:I don't mind the slowdown of the Lavender Town parts, but that rumbling noise is annoying. It's ok to be subtle, you know. It also eats a bit of headspace.
Could you please phrase that in a way that helps me? What about it do you find annoying, or un-subtle? Is it too loud? Does it need better EQ?
9 hours ago, Rozovian said:There's a few notes and parts that seem off, usually in loudness, but sometimes articulation or timing. You should look into those parts: 0:45, 1:00, 1:06, 1:19, 2:03, 2:21, 2:31, 2:44, 2:57, 3:05, 3:30, 3:46, 4:21, 4:39, 5:27, 5:46, 6:00, 6:04.
Can you elaborate?
9 hours ago, Rozovian said:I'm not sure a traditionally panned rock kit fits into any illusion of an orchestra. You might want to put the rock kit in one place, rather than stretching as wide as the orchestra itself.
What about the drum kit sounds "stretched as wide as the orchestra itself?"
9 hours ago, Rozovian said:II think these samples could be made to sound better. The right reverb and reverb settings, the right panning, the right levels and eq... To me, it comes down to mixing, little things about loudness of notes, and I'm okay with just about everything else. Almost.
Can you elaborate?
9 hours ago, Rozovian said:Haven't played any proper Pokémon in at least a decade
I believe this may be your problem with the ending.
____
I'm really sorry if I'm coming off as an asshole, but almost none of these comments actually help me.
-
8 hours ago, DMT Produktionen said:
If try to make everything "human" by hand, it will take hours and hours and hold up song writing. The only way to fix this is by buying a keyboard, and have at least 2 years of piano playing under your belt, but most people starting out dont have that skill.
Nope. Most DAW's have "humanization" options. I actually don't use a keyboard for most of my compositions. (Though I do have 2+ years of piano playing under my belt.) And it's not hard to just go through a track and give it a dynamic rage via velocity controller, especially as you're writing it.
-
18 hours ago, YoshiBlade said:
How the hell has this been up for 11 days and not one outside comment ? Well I'm going to listen to this sum more, but for now the thing that sticks out like a sore simile, are the drums at the end. I went and listened to an earlier WiP of Lav Town (yes I tend to Soundcloud creep) and the solo snare and crashing cymbals seemed to add more energy than the drums. It breaks the flow of the whole track when BAM! drummer breaks in.
I'm not sure what you're talking about. The ending of the current version doesn't exist in the WIP.
18 hours ago, YoshiBlade said:But i went back and read the JD's and the pacing was the issue,from 1:30 to 4:30 it just reeeaaallllyyy slows down...
The song is going to slow down as long as it contains a Lavender Town section. Can anyone tell me why the song shouldn't have varying mood and pacing?
18 hours ago, YoshiBlade said:...which I like, but it tends to stay the same, without much change, I like the low rumble it's like pokemon in on a spacestation, I guess the only thing I could suggest is to make maybe one part goofy scary (Danny Elfman-ish), and then the other part scary scary(Nightmare on Elm-ish)?
I'd rather not, I think it's plenty varied as it is, sorry. (Actually, the bass rumble was inspired by Eraserhead.)
Edit: I've made an update. I've improved a few of the chords in the Lavender Town sections, and added some chimes for flavor.
-
First post now contains an updated version.
- Fixed the rouge clarinet velocity at 0:56.
- Raised the overall volume of the Lavender Town section.
- Added cello chords at 1:47 to transition into Lavender Town better.
- Adjusted the volume of the low bass rumble, and gave it some better EQ.
- Added bowed crotales to Lavender Town for effect.
- Fixed some of the sour staccato string notes in the Tower section.
- Minor stuff - made the bit at 2:30 longer, fixed the ugly brass at 3:39, made the snare sound more consistent, etc.
Is this technically a FireRed remix, since it contains FireRed SFX at the end?
-
8 hours ago, Gario said:
*snip*
I'm glad OCR's "your arrangement must be substantial and original" rule hasn't been taken to an extreme.
-
Last time I tried submitting something like that the judges didn't like the transitions or the contrasting slower sections and it got rejected. But remixes covering multiple sources aren't actually banned or anything, just make sure it's not something that would sound better as multiple songs, I guess.
-
I like the cleaned up soundscape in the updated version, but... is the opening supposed to be funny? If not, then that's my only criticism of this. It's the helium voice speaking gibberish that gets me, everything else about the intro is fine. Although I guess if Pokemon were real, and Marowak's ghost started talking to me like that, I'd be pretty scared. Maybe you could just try making it more subtle? And wait a bit before it plays so that we have time to get immersed.
-
I've been away from my computer for awhile so I couldn't listen to this. The string melody at 1:14 seems rather midi to me - every note seems to have the same amount of seperation between them and the same attack. I didn't like how dark/tinny the EQ on the strings was, and I also didn't like how "open" the chords were at 1:28 and 2:35 that the staccato string arpeggios were making. Combined with the EQ on the strings, it seemed to give the song a bit of a "hollow" feel that I found a bit weird.
Despite that, I liked the song overall, and the intro in particular.
-
-
22 minutes ago, Brandon Strader said:
*snip*
So because you are not willing/able to contact everyone, of course their opinions probably fall in line with yours!
I'm glad I don't have any songs on your albums, I'd have to become paranoid and constantly make sure my remix was still on the site.
(Regarding the topic on-hand, this is the only strong opinion I've had since the thread started.)
- Platonist, k-wix and Kenogu Labz
-
3
Ninendo is launching an mini-SNES
in General Discussion
Posted
I consider this to be a big deal. I always wished StarFox 2 had been released, but the version circulating around the internet is only a fan-patched late beta version, and allegedly not even close to the final build that exists but was never leaked. Even if the SNES Classic becomes as hard to get as the NES Classic, I expect it won't take long for the finished version of Star Fox 2 to get extracted and put on the internet. (As a real game!)