Insanctuary

Contributors
  • Content Count

    19
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Insanctuary

  • Rank
    King Hippo (+15)

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Well done, ol' chaps! :tomatoface:Since I have failed for once, I will now throw a tomato at my face inter-dimensionally. I was trolling about the song being a "remix". It would be absurd if I was lying about trolling, but the track I "remixed" was full of crap. It was a joke; I do hope some people got a laugh out of it. I'm surprised I was taken seriously after the first post being filled with satire and sarcasm. You guys are great and genuinely intelligent. I admire that outside of my trolling shenanigans. With that, I will take my leave. Farewell everyone! Before I go, I do have one last thing to share with you guys: http://soundcloud.com/insanctuary/go-fog-yourself I remixed the Jaws Theme. Do you think OCRemix will upload it to their channel of nostalgic treasuries?
  2. Ahh. Do you think my song is OCRemix material? Gario gave me his conclusion; I want to read yours. I also want to read from you, or him, or anyone else for that matter on how to improve it enough to be OCRemix material. I really think it was cleaned up quite well, so the discussion was greatly constructive.
  3. Well said. I'm a bit curious how this track could have the slightest chance of being added to the OCRemix treasury. I am willing to do more changes, if they are absolutely necessary. By the way, I find it ironic you have Kirby for your avi, hence Kirby sucks, but you do not. ^-~ (I like Kirby as a character, a very fluent and memorable fellow.)
  4. Yes, if that's how you feel, then express yourself. There are boundaries, so don't be sending me PM's telling me how I am your internet crush. Listening to the original, yes they are in the foreground, but when you realise how much more I added into my song compared to that song, you'll understand why I kept it "minimalistic". If anything, the atmosphere is the "lead element". Without that "atmosphere", there's no "song", thus there is no "remix". I'm a musically inept newb that is only big in their own world. It's so much easier to sit at the throne in your head, than it is infront of millions of individuals. As someone who gained much wisdom from silence, I thoroughly enjoy a small break in the midst of calmness and chaos. I honestly think the song is perfect in design right now. Sure I may look over things, but right now, I am not seeing anything absurd like the high pitches and the latter half muddyness. You do know that the 1 minute is ambience, right? Here's something you will enjoy reading, as small as it is. That atmosphere wasn't made with a pad or a drone; it was made with a default violin string with tons of effects! It's awesome, I have to say. I am baffled how realistic it sounds. You have to take my unique style into consideration. The same way judges should understand how much more depth lies within a talented circus performer compared to a talented singer. I like how you have the will to assist me further even while knowing our differences. That, I can admire greatly.
  5. I'm a complex man, but my words are simple? I'm a confused complex man. Great, I fixed it? It's funny how it's called "flowery language", when it hurts people the most, lol. I wanted a relaxing, quiet introduction to "surprise" people as the song gets heavier, even more heavier, then allow it to reach its finest weight in the latter half. I'm not changing anything, as it is the "true" melody. This is a nitpicky issue of yours, as much as I respect it, I am not at all convinced to resort to it. I killed the ear murderers, I cured most of the mud for user-friendly purposes. One thing I am never going to change is my manipulation of sound between what is ambient to what is chaotic. I thought the introduction was brilliant as is, for it is nothing great, but frivolously wonderful, like instead of having musical sex; you're having a musical kiss, and sometimes a kiss is all that you need, or that the kiss can lead to something much greater. I put a lot of thought into my music productions, and I simply cannot agree with your nitpicky suggestions. It's 1 minute, which is 1/8, you act like 1/8 is a big deal. I could've spammed a whole bunch of crap pads throughout the 8 minutes and called it "music", but instead I combined nearly every element imaginable that isn't genre-related into the mix for a flexible, everchanging environment to get lost in. So say some people enjoy the ambience, like what Clem stated, or others may enjoy the louder areas... therefore again, my music is about addressing as many feelings and emotions without screwing it up. This is a very difficult move. If different people like different areas, while covering the song as a whole, I did my job as a musician, but definately have the mind to improve further. It's called a foreground and a background. The sounds are supposed to be in the back, since they were in the front for the former half of the song. And besides, a lot of the sounds I used aren't there for melodic reasons, but for atmospheric reasons, I cannot bring most of it out anyways because some sounds are better left alone on one note. I found uses for the high piercing sounds, but you - of all people - should be happy that they are now in the background, lol. Resonances are fine, but ambience isn't? ;c Haha, those drums aren't repetitive if you understand this remix isn't a "song", but a story; it's also not melodic, but atmospheric. The original was an "atmosphere", so atmospheres require atmospheric instruments to be repetitive, but reasonably motivational to where everything can breathe without staling out. I amped up everything throughout the 4~8 minutes; the drums were great in their repetitive state. I'm not disagreeing with you here, but I see purpose in them, while you don't necessarily. Thank you for your criticism. While I couldn't agree with much of it, since it was nitpicky, I really do enjoy the discussions we have.
  6. http://soundcloud.com/insanctuary/zombie-paper-with-brown-stains The link, father, I have the link! Do I do you proud?!
  7. I have "Zombie Paper" favorited. It's a niche song that deserves more love. It's an adorable atmosphere. Very memorable for something so simple. It's a godsend amongst songs. Why else did I write this remix? The thing is, you cannot say one is not open-minded, but then turn around to say they are. That's pregnant-wife-that-is-PMS'ing syndrome. I fixed the high pitched sounds - I think. You are the best judge for that, it seems. I'm wording everything correctly, but it may be somewhat complex in form. I do not simplify anything, because why would I do that? So many people in this world are so simple, but they try to be complex, but when my sentences are too complex, they want it to be simple. If they can't make up their mind; I'll make it up for them, myself. I have shown no signs of attacking people for not understanding me at first; I will discuss and explain to my heart's content if need be. I laughed at your way of expressing how you feel here, very nice images. However, I do not think of it in the same way as you do; I think of it as a drummer bringing all of his drummer friends, turning out all of the lights, everyone goes quiet, the curtains go down, and small lights are flickering behind the curtains, then when people start hearing the music roll back in, everyone starts cheering, the curtains rise; lightning, smoke, and all sorts of awesome stuff is going on for 4 minutes.
  8. Someone doesn't know what open-mindedness is... I'm not changing my mind about the whole muddiness; I'm changing my mind about the latter half of the song's muddiness. If you noticed, I am the only one here whom hasn't impartially thrown around the word, "better"; people being "better" than me is a subjective phrase that is based on my personal expectations of what they do and what I do. Simply stop using that word, lol. We all do what we do. If there's room for improvement, cool. It's that simple.
  9. I don't know what a normal person is, therefore I am normal in your eyes - or I should be atleast. I'm wearing headphones, at 60% volume, the pitches are low - likewise, I have listened to the song on other electronics (I do make sure things are fine on the technical side, myself), and the high pitches are brought out more than the rest of the song. I will turn it down, reupload it to SC, and you can tell me if it's fixed or not. I am not fixing anything else. Being muddy doesn't hurt anyone. Besides, who doesn't like girls wrestling in mud? Mhmm... Clem said something intuitive that will change my mind about only fixing the high pitched sounds. I will see what I can do to make the bass at the second half of the song breathe more with the instruments; I do agree that this may be "excessively" muddy. However, I thoroughly do not agree with how you disliked my fade in. It's one of my finest transitions, yet. It's ethnic, and I don't think anyone here has any idea how much of a monster music is for people whom compose by ear when you are screwing with pitches to create foreign sounds - and maintaining that foreign sound. The fact of the matter is, this is untrue: fade in > climax - this is true: fade in > build up. In fact, this part of the song is where one of my most critical listeners told me I should send it to someone whom goes by "Spacemind". Here's my significance: - The song never has been truly remixed by anyone except me. - It's 40 seconds of bells and bass creating a joke atmosphere. - Throughout the 40 seconds is simply that, thus the song itself has no significance. - I didn't make a 3 minute, or 4 minute, or even 5 minutes - but 8 minutes of awesome incorporation of the original song's sounds. - My song has a more evolved bass, it's atmospheric, it also contains the bells. The atmosphere it contains creates the same as the original for a while, then it unfolds into 7 minutes of a story which also relates to Earthbound. - I elaborated thoroughly how I incorporated the song, the sounds and the game into a story. What more do you want from me?! Have I not pleased you enough, father?! Do you want... more... fart sounds, father...?
  10. No, no. I was stating that in general; overall. I wasn't stating strictly the time I was here. Like how you could've said, "No, you weren't concise. All you should've stated was that you were concise." It's hard to be "conveniently" concise for "others" when you're "passionate" whilst you have observed a smorgasbord of details that your average person refuses to pay attention to. You, too, are a passionate person, and so you can be the conscious example of why my posts are concise, but not "conveniently" concise. Furthermore, I see plenty of people who state an idea in one sentence, but I'm sure you - like me - cannot help but notice many holes in that sentence - even if it was "concise" to others. Okay, now I am going to stop with the deep responses. Do not respond to anything of my responses that is off-topic; only respond to what is on-topic. Treat this thread's integrity like you treat your ----'s at night. Gario, if I balance out the sounds, but keep the rest the same, how much hope do you have for it then? Actually, where is Tim? I want Tim to be my ow-my-ears-hurt radar, so I can lower the pitches where they need to be lowered. I don't want to turn down pitches where they are perfectly fine.
  11. Alright, this is the last philosophically, passionately, practically driven response - everything from this point on will be strictly relevant to the contents of the Workshop. I am whole-heartedly compliant to the regulations. I do not have any lick of reason to burn any bridge, however I will stand for how I present myself before those whom attempt to define "burning bridges". Tell me, Gario. If people cut ties with me because I am an honest fellow, should I turn to lies and tell everyone what they want to hear, just so I don't "burn bridges"? I'd rather live alone than live as something I am not. Furthermore, I seem to get all the flack, while trolls are so much elusive to the general population - I guess I'm that difficult to ignore? I have mentioned plenty of times how no one here hasn't found the resembling elements between the original and the remix, whereas everyone else I shared it with got it without me having to point it out for them. It really baffles me how that is so. That's the thing, many instruments and sounds are reused throughout time inadvertently due to the threshold between the mind composing something unique to that which is common being ridiculously large; and to journey further away from the "common" area of the spectrum, it will require a reflective amount of thought. This, I agree with 100%. My music is already intrisically unique and chaotic, so I am curious how I am going to work around my difficulties in connecting with people that aren't even nearly as defined as I am in anything they do and say. So many people are still using the primitive areas of their brain, whilst unaware of the practical areas of their brain. So they don't really think much of anything, they just "do", "expect" and "complain" throughout some wicked gang-mentality - do not get me wrong, I am extremely optimistic toward human development, but I am also extremely aware of the current human development. In fact, a few months ago, I wrote perhaps 5 pages worth of literature to sum up humanity; I am obsessively passionate about the way a human interacts with the world. Not obsessive enough to become a mad genius that uses people as guinea pigs, but you know... In my honest opinion - yes, it is finally an "opinion" coming from me. I blew the original out of the current universe; I presented the remix in a manner that takes massive amounts of talent; I took a fartsy bass, then I took it's-so-bad-it's-good bells, and I incorporated 40 seconds of nonsense into an 8 minute-long dream work. Then there are things very few people understand in my musical compositions; my music isn't normal, it's an illusion. I spend more of my time designing the illusion, than I do designing the song. How the illusion works is profound; I take many different sounds to create a sound that doesn't actually exist - if I were to, say, remove a sound or two, the illusion will disappear. I'm not talking about placing sounds in the high frequencies, mid frequencies, and low frequencies, no, I am talking about advanced music design that creates patterns that nobody could ever copy - not even myself - simply because the sounds do not exist. My music is "Ghost Music". I compose with mainly "default" instruments, which is something you may not believe, but it's absolutely true. I rely more on effects, than instruments. Lastly, I cannot read music; I compose everything by ear. When you combine everything, you will come to the conclusion that I'm some sort of "Musically Blind Weaver of Ghost Music". Regardless of all of this, I am well aware that people simply do not care about my unique traits, but I'm simply sharing the details of what I really do to create these atmospheres. On a special note, "I" do not compose music; my "inner genius" does. I don't remember much of anything; my music simply is just "there". I'm definately for tweaks. I simply cannot remove anything, really. My design is masterful, but I will certainly adjust the EQ towards a user-friendly environment. I'm not going to change, or add any notes. As frivolous as that atmosphere is, it's one of my finest additions, as I never been able to create something so magnificently detailed. It really feels like the protagonist is lost in a fog-filled forest of creatures, then when the second half comes in(the latter half of the song compensates more than enough for the 1 minute ambience), it is a hybrid of climax/build up that lasts for 4 whole minutes. If you recall correctly, Threed is close to a forest. I'm not changing it. If you observe people that listen to songs, you'll see that nearly with every song, people are disengaged from the majority of it anyways, while liking a specific part they like mainly in conjunction with the rest of the song - without that part they personally enjoy, they wouldn't even touch the song. And besides, good luck pleasing someone that has ADHD. Actually, that is all true and all, but like the term "racist", it's used in ways that are definitively obscure. I'm referring to the naive use of the term. The "I have authorized skills, you don't." vibe people use it for. I was just talking to my girlfriend about this phrase, because she'd used it last night. I was telling her how the phrase isn't even complete, lol. Now you're using it. The coincidence! I am clear, I am concise. I do not fabricate anything nor do I compound my messages with fluff. This is my passion communicating through defined characteristics. It's not my fault that I didn't spend my childhood with drugs, sex, dwelling, compensating, manipulating, being pretentious, creating illusions of security and happiness for my little feelings. I suffered, and that's the way I learned and became strong. I have happiness, but I do not rest it on the bow of my life's ship, or else, I could only expect to be capsized. Yes, I was. Is my humour masked that well? I should be a dead-pan-comedian... Alright, yes, there are songs that are better than my songs in terms of definition, I agree with this. I would say that I am better than Aphex Twin, while I am still behind, say, Solar Fields, or Telafon Tel Aviv in terms of quality for the latter two. When it comes to my designs, they are quite masterful, and so, I really only need sounds that aren't "default", to bring out the life of my designs. However, I fear that the more realistic I travel into the instrumental realm, the less "dreamy" my music will be. I've tried using real instruments before, but they simply weren't my style. I am a man of chaos and distortion - I just am. All I can do is expand myself by exploring the wing-span of time.
  12. I heard you like Pontius Pilate. In denial? Oh? If you feel that I am in denial, don't worry about "offending" me; people that are "offended", offend me; but they still do it, while expecting me not to "offend" them with all due hypocrisy. However that's as far as a statement can go on its own without a proper explanation. I can clearly see 'what' you think of me; I cannot clearly see 'why'... and you expect my song to be clear, whilst you are not? Mhmm... It's not arrogance... my brilliant girlfriend wrote an intellectual assessment on what people accuse of being my ego here: "I do. I do not view it as they do. You are not putting yourself above me and boasting about yourself, you are not telling me that you deserve less or anything like that. You are being honest and saying that you are very much able to do what you will yourself to do and have no trouble at all putting your mind and body towards your passion. They all think that talking about yourself automatically means it is boasting. It is not. Talking about yourself is sharing your insight, wisdom, and experiences and thoughts/feelings because you know it is helpful to whomever listens and hears you out. Boasting is roasting in your accomplishments, bragging of what you can do and how it is better than others. You are not ever taking part in the latter, no matter how many people may be offended by their own ignorance and incapability to comprehend that while you are learning still and gathering in your own life you are as well teaching, showing us all what is able to be done with one's own willpower and strength. It takes a great mind to do so, and an even greater mind to fully achieve the goal of teaching another to do the same." Refer to above ^-^ Yes, but by your logic, a man in a 5 star restaurant can put the "u rant" in "restaurant", by simply stating in a supposedly unbiased, objective manner that the food does not taste good; and the man will cry about how it's not his fault he was born with nitpicky tastebuds, while everyone else in the restaurant are doing well to not agree with this man's "opinion". Just think about it. It is not your fault for your naturally explicit properties, however it is your fault for attempting to judge people based on your naturally explicit properties which generally differ with every person. Let me better explain myself: You were implying throughout your entire "critique" that you simply were too distracted by your personal taste to appreciate the song as well as others have; you created a judgemental atmosphere that I can tell straight away, by simply observing your reactions toward every individual element within my composition; and I can reasonably assess in a critical form that you were dodging my composition's high-pitched sounds, while griefing over the "muddy" nature. I cannot simply accept your critique, in the same manner I cannot accept a dojo master's critique, when they spend their entire training session cringing and refusing to do what they are supposed to do whilst teaching me how to sword-fight. Is the man at the 5 star restaurant objective? Gario expressed themselves in a practical, objective manner; you expressed yourself in a personal, subjective manner. If you noticed, Gario enjoyed my remix a lot, because they didn't expect anything out of my song, while suggesting what they thought would improve it in a critical manner that I can only respect. If you also noticed, Gario's first response was many times defined than your first response. You can learn much from Gario. I still think you're good at what you do, but only when it comes to people who do not pay much attention to "definement", as I do. You mean what you "personally" observed, as everyone does not share your feelings. Be specific about your critique, because again, I pay attention to every detail on a personal and practical spectrum. Meaning it does not mean anymore than what you mean, personally. However, you did finally use the term "opinion", which is where the discussive heart lies; I hope to see you follow that pattern in the future. Furthermore, you say that it's your "opinion" in one sense, but in a hidden synonymous manner, you implore that it's also an "objective" technical manner, which cannot be objective, for the majority hasn't shared the same "opinion". I am very aware that there's nothing in this world everyone can agree upon, but the sample size that declares your "technical opinion", is tremendously small. You're trying to pidgeon-hole, albeit I don't perceive it to be something on purpose. I will again demonstrate thereof - as much as I already have, but frankly, it continues to elude you. I like this excuse. You have no idea how many people attempted to resort to "you don't know me" responses, whereas I instantly retaliate with a simple question, "what is the point of me walking in your shoes, if you cannot define your own life, yourself - your conjecture is as moot as my conjecture - besides, did you forget about the love birds that swear up and down to scream to the world how they understand one and the other as if they were one in the same, but individualistically unique?" I am very open-minded; I am only close-minded to the close-minded.
  13. I will do this for now on. 0:36 into the song is where the remix truly begins with the bell sounds, as they sound exactly like a more melodic version of the bell sounds 5 seconds into the original, The song I composed doesn't really use the laughable bass sounds, but rather evolves the bass sounds combined with the bell sounds to make an 8 minute story (this is not true, I am making a part 2 because part 1 was too massive) about the protagonist running to the store for more zombie paper.It's strange because everyone I shared it with outside of OCRemix better made the connection than you guys that claim to be "professional"; I'm not saying you aren't, but in this case, you're not being "professional" enough. That's what I like to read in someone's statements, the word "personal" where personal is due. I will re-listen to the remix tomorrow and look into that to see if I can do as you suggest, That part of my song is one of the most emotional additions to the song. There's no way I am taking those pitches out of the song, they are like crying howls, I love them to death. I can tone it down perhaps, which is something I wouldn't mind doing. This is where I disagree; it's a story, it is supposed to be turning all over the place as the protagonist enters through different areas. The music starting at 3:18 isn't music, it's atmosphere to calm the listener after all the chaos I composed (I do this with nearly every other song I compose; I mix chaos and peace). I will not be changing any of that, as I am very proud of that atmosphere I created, which leads into the epic latter half of the remix. Why would it be an issue? It's a remix. Why does it matter if it is parabolic in nature? Why can't I interweave sounds throughout the 8 minutes? If you noticed, "Zombie Paper" isn't so musical itself, but atmospheric. To change any of that seems to be defeating the purpose of the remix. I love humility; I eat it for breakfast. I'm sure all the congress "officials" are very experienced in gish-galloping, I mean governing, but what does that have to do with the possibility that I - as a human being - have long studied enough to be more intuitive than those who are pronounced "professional" - I mean really, what truly makes one "professional", where does the term even originate? I'd much rather enjoy a hobo do an amazing dance infront of a street crowd. I'm like life; you either hate me, or love me, but the smart thing to do is love what you can, and hate what you attempted to love. That is why I am here discussing the contents of the remix. Then you're lucky. I went through an entire +2 years of zero bombing. I then gave up for a few years; came back, I was suddenly talented, I made many experiments that received interesting feedback, I lost my inspiration; came back, I was suddenly professional, I made many quality experiments that received not much feedback, but healthy scores, and I lost it again; came back, I reached a point where I can only see myself forever growing on a level that is simply undefineable. A lot of people don't understand how much more harder it is to compose a non-commercial song with the quality I grant it from a commercial song. I simply don't have any true "melodic" flow in my songs; it's all abstract. It's a massive arregation of sounds that do not compliment each other when one or two are alone, playing, but when everything is thrown into the mix, it creates something that doesn't actually exist - my music is something close to an illusion. If you take 1 or 2 sounds out of the mix, the entire song loses its atmosphere in an instance. I spend most of my time creating the atmosphere, building it up and creating a story with it is very easy for me as everything falls into place whence I discover that beautiful atmosphere. My music is certainly intelligent and thought-out; most music comes from unidentified feelings, while my music comes from feelings identified; deep feelings that even the conscious mind cannot pick up. Again, what you call pretentiousness, is my passion. Passion is a scary thing for a lot of people, so they demonise it quite easily, but it doesn't faze me. I am discussing with anybody that wants to discuss with me at the fullest caliber; I don't understand why you count my critically thought-out responses to be "a pretentiously self-entitled waste of time".
  14. However much you've tried, you still are missing the reasons why you as a critic, giving critique, is questionable - at the moment. My music; myself, is simply profound and complex, intrinsically; I understand where confusion can conjure itself up out of the civil abyss, such as silence, as well I as understand that very few people create their own unique style that differs greatly from anything before - so it is highly reasonable for you to apply your judgement that is comfortable with simple composers with simple minds, whilst struggling to do the same with someone whom created something different and interesting which does not follow normalities; but keeping sensibility, quality and responsibility at the same time. I thoroughly adore muddy sub-bass, for it relentlessly tears away at reality until there is only a euphoric, ethereal, existential wave of life and feeling. It's because I am challenging someone who is generally "professional" at what they do, as a new member of the forums that is generally a "casual" until proven otherwise. Do not confuse my passion with arrogance - a lot of people do this, and it's tiresome. Besides, it takes arrogance to attack arrogance; whether that is difficult to understand or unbelievable, that is for you to decide, but as a "professional" in psychology and philosophy, arrogance - like fear - only induces more of thereof. Calling me arrogant, or feeling in that way, does not make me arrogant no matter how convinced you are; inorder to truly reveal arrogance in a person is to ignore it - if it is untrue, the person will sustain reasonability, personality and responsibility - fine, I'll make this easy for you, the term "arrogance", itself, reveals all "arrogance", in that the moment you call someone "arrogant" - if they are arrogant - they will react in a different manner than from those who are not arrogant. An arrogant person would reply to you in a manner short from, "nah man, you are just a freaking dumbass that can't do so and so because I said so and so." You're completely mistaken, which is also something I already predicted, hence my side of the discussion appears to be much more objective than your side of the discussion - for now, so all you can do right now is either A. Support your mountain of subjectivity with a mountain of objectivity, or B. Continue to pidgeon-hole my discussion based on more subjectivity, rather than being critical about it by supporting the discourse with objectivity. I will reveal a great example of your "pidegon-hole-esque" actions here shortly, that way you have the chance to challenge my claims accordingly. You're the only one that couldn't stand it. There was no mandatory alarm for me to notify people of possible ear-damage, because everyone I've shared it with simply didn't pay any mind to the high-pitch sounds, which mind you, are part of the song to create the necessary atmosphere it rightfully deserves. The difference in devices is the only objective thing you've said throughout all of this, save for your ears being uncomfortable with sounds, which is half-way objective. You're still being biased if you are basing your criticism on what you personally don't like, rather than addressing the song universally. If I wanted to be a dick, I could say that judgement towards people via personal dispositions is an arrogant move, but I'm not a dick, so I will simply pay mind to how difficult of a person I can be, while discussing with me compared to many other people which is certainly, should I say, new territory for you. You're one person - out of a few dozen people. Tell me again why your criticism is fundamentally special compared to their own personal judgement? I'm not missing anything - it is you that rests your judgement on what you define as "clarity", rather than accepting that "clarity" is "subjective" and not "objective". Who are you tell what is "clarity" and what is not? I know plenty of songs that have everything cleaned up, but the design is unclear, thus it has no "clarity", whereas my song is muddy, but the design is anything but "unclear". You're also asking a lot from me, after criticising me with questionable statements that I practically demonstrate to be subjective, vague, rushed and rash. I do not mind criticism, for the last time, I simply do not like "personal" criticism. That's your personal opinion, which has no relevance to actual judgement of my song - as long as other people do not all share your opinion. Lastly, to point out one of your more blatant attempts to "pidgeon-hole" my responses is when you say "the girls may not have the right headphones to pick up certain frequencies", while at the same time the girls, my friends, and random strangers appreciated my song enough to not give it a 0, a 1, a 2, or a 3, but a 4 out of 5 - and the most blatant error on your part of them all; my friends and these girls can hear the resemblance between the two songs with their "cheap" headphones, while you still can't personally, and at the same time, you're placing the onus on me, when your judgement simply doesn't stand on its own in the midst of my counter-points, of those who inadvertently challenge your supposedly objective, unbiased statements that are based entirely on personal, subjective, irrational feelings. You fool! You dare defy my name?! Nevermind, I give up, being pretentious is being superfluous - no matter how creative you are at being thereof. Point out my self-congratulatory ways in my posts. Explain it; don't claim it - or in this case - clem it.
  15. Praise? Tell me the logic behind a man whom seeks for praise, when seeking praise is implying you are not worthy of praise. I'll tell you the logic - there is none, lol. That phrase was created upon a man's compensation, in that this compensation seeked for reassurement. That's all a praise is - reassurement. If I wanted reassurement, I would be depraising myself... You're so silly, I really hope you were trolling me with that specific sentence. Do not fret for my desires, sir. I raise the bar everyday, but my bar is many times different than yours. I do not seek for professionality, as it is commercial; I seek for passionality, as it is curious. My music is as wild and chaotic as the world can be, and that is all I ever could want in my music. It is also prevalently relaxing at times and it does not disappoint in reaching every spectrum of the human psyche. When people listen to commercial works, they have no room for their imagination; when people listen to my congruous works, they have so much room to expand on what already is - likewise for the world before them. I have self-humility, for I would only be humiliating myself for not accepting self-humility. I am humourous, honest and harsh on others - including myself. My intuition only comes from a brittled spirit. You must be trolling me if you think I am here to pretend I am perfect. I personally, along with others, are very proud of this remix. The score also tells the same story. The critic/critique - hitherto - only appears to be personal, subjective and obfuscated. That said, I do enjoy a good discussion!