• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Overkillius

  • Rank
    King Hippo (+15)

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Touhou, Touhou Remixes, Music Theory, Chiptune

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Artist Settings

  • Collaboration Status
    3. Very Interested
  • Software - Digital Audio Workstation (DAW)
  • Software - Preferred Plugins/Libraries
    Famitracker, Synth1
  • Composition & Production Skills
    Arrangement & Orchestration
    Mixing & Mastering
    Recording Facilities
    Synthesis & Sound Design
  • Instrumental & Vocal Skills (List)
    Electric Guitar: Lead
    Electric Guitar: Rhythm
    Vocals: Male
  • Instrumental & Vocal Skills (Other)
    Opera Vocals: Baritone, Countertenor, 8String


  • Real Name
    James Wilkinson
  • Occupation
    University Student
  • Twitter Username

Recent Profile Visitors

1,012 profile views
  1. YES SIR *salutes* Finals are this week so... I'll see if I can end up squeezing in a remix, because this source is bonkers cool
  2. This source is a real booger to analyze in any meaningful way! Cool beans!
  3. More like Bread 'n Butter compo amirite? I might actually try to make a submission this time. Usually I don't feel like the meat 'n potatoes style is my thing, but I have a different feeling about this source.
  4. Oh. I think I didn't communicate very well when I was talking about the clean guitar part. I think it is awesome and works well as a brief moment of peace, I don't think you should extend the clean guitar part. I was suggesting that the form of the song allow that brief moment of peace to happen a second time at some completely different time in the song, because I thought that the section worked really well and it could be effective in other parts of the song too. That's just me tho. Most importantly A better version of this might be "2:51 is so sick that I missed a whole week of classes"
  5. @Furorezu I hear you! I have the same issue constantly. It only barely makes any sense to me. The best thing you can do to mix is to use references. Pick a kinda similar song, even if it is a different genre. The subtleties will stand out more and you can use your knowledge on how compression and EQ works and even just moving your faders to make the mix sound similar. If it were me I'd look at this song as a reference (don't be afraid to use more. Three songs similar to yours but different from eachother that you like the sound of is a pretty thorough way to do it) Just by comparing the two mixes side by side I see a lot of possible ways to go. Also mixing with guitar and drums would appear now to be way harder than I expected ehehe. This isn't really an instant gratification technique since you really have to understand how the tools in your kit (EQ Compression Reverb etc.) work to get the general sound to match closer (which is what tutorials can be good for). Good luck! The way I'd do it is to put a song or a few songs like this (or something you like the sound of better) in your DAW and switch between your track and your reference. Also using several different speakers/headphones is another way to enhance the reference song process. For example, I'm working on a Eurobeat song right now and I thought I had the kick sounding pretty good on my mixing headphones! I even used a reference. When I went to my smart phone and listened to my mix, I couldn't hear the kick and I wondered if that was just a speaker problem or a mix problem, so I pulled up a DJ Command mix; I was in pain at how well I could hear his kick in the mix on my phone speaker compared to my track. I'm not necessarily saying that you have to optimize your mix to be heard on apple earbuds and phone speakers, but using different audio hardware whether it is expensive monitors or a crummy phone speaker can give you insights into what your mix actually sounds like if you use references. I'm thinking the difference I heard is that the kick on DJ Command mixes has more mids compared to my kick, but I guess I'll figure that out next time I sit down with my DAW. Again references are probably the best thing you can do as far as production goes. You might even want to ignore everything I said in my previous post and just reference professional mixes. (maybe I should reference professional mixes when I give feedback hmm...)
  6. I don't feel right for voting for some of these options in the poll but still like them, so I'll just add my two cents. I like the current state of choosing a single source and having it remixed, but I also like the ideas of choosing a game to remix and choosing songs from the request forum. Maybe rounds should alternate between those source selection methods somehow; maybe for round 338 bundeslang chooses a game to remix, the single source for 339 is decided by the winner of 337, the game source for 400 is decided by the winner of 338 etc.. Maybe work the request forum into that formula, or just keep everything the same. I think it is kinda fine as it is. One thing I had in the first compo I ever participated in: there was always a sync listen where everyone would go to an irc chat at the same time, the person running the sync listen would say "queue track: Subspace Ruins by PlanarianHugger" and then a few seconds later "play track: Subspace Ruins by PlanarianHugger". The method you use to sync listen could change and isn't important, but what was important was that it got people together to just hang out and talk about music and other stuff; it created a sense of community and it made people who attended the sync listen look forward to participating in future rounds. Infact I left that compo because the community got a little too crazy with people spamming IRC and submitting a lot of joke submissions where they would be exclusively comprised of obscene noises and/or clipping volume, and there were a LOT of submissions-- somewhere closer to 20 sometimes around the time I left I think, but it was really great when everyone was making music and not just trying to troll everyone. I'm not sure if that is anything that people would be interested in, but who knows maybe I'll try to organize something like that (assuming no one else does it) in the future for this compo, because I really like the idea of sync listens.
  7. Sorry it's taken a while I think the composition is pretty great, though it took a while for me to discern how all of it was related to the source; some of it just sounded like geetar wanking, like the section at 0:33, but now I definitely see how it is related to the source; you accent the notes from the source, and I think it's pretty clever to embellish it like that, though you might also want to find a way to make it more immediately obvious. One thing that bugs me about the arrangement is the "riff" (the one that is first introduced in 0:23). There is nothing wrong with the riff inherently; I can hear how it loosely relates to the source, but it doesn't stand on it's own in terms of substantially referencing the original, nor does it stand alone musically (The bass fills really help, but it is otherwise compositionally dry). Again nothing inherently wrong with that, and I only have a problem with those things when it comes in at :55. I think throughout, the use of source needs to be considered more; while it isn't too much of a stretch to hear the source, you might want to lead the listener more in the direction of hearing it. If it were me, I'd think a good solution to my gripes at :55 would be to add guitar or bass guitar doing some kind of G F# Eb D motion to relate it back to the source more; honestly I think it would be appropriate to do more bass in that section by playing G F# Eb D (Or maybe more likely D C# Bb A or who knows some other transposition might sound cool as well) in some way and then finishing off with the bass fill parts you already have, but that's just me. Also, it would be cool if you found a way to make 1:16 happen again; it's a really nice contrast to the rest of the track and just cool in general. Maybe instead of going into the solo at 1:37 you could find some way to iterate on the material a bit more in a way that doesn't seem too repetitive and then have 1:16 come back after some time so that we get to hear it again, then the track would progress like normal after that. By the way this guitar playing is just really good. Maybe I'm rating you too highly because I just suck at guitar, but seriously I really like your playing on this track. 2:51 is so sick that it sent me to the emergency room (in a good way!). For the wall of text that I wrote about the composition, I still think it is great, and I think where this track needs the most work is on the production side of things. The reason I wrote so much about composition is because I'm better at that, but production isn't my strong-suit, and hopefully someone else will come along and drop some knowledge for us (and hopefully contradict some of the stupid stuff I'm about to say). I can share what little advice I have though. I'd say that you should usually take absolutely everything I say with a grain of salt, but especially when it comes to production just feel free to ignore what I'm saying. I don't think that this mix really has any big clarity issues, so that is a great starting point! I think my only possible gripe on that would be that I want to hear more bass, maybe crank up a little more distortion so that we get more harmonics, or maybe it can be fixed with a little bit of subtle EQ. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjRzsiP_aDWWLHV4-2LKBtg BTW this guy is great for learning mixing. He tends to just use Rock and Praise & Worship stuff as examples, but I do Eurobeat and I feel like I've learned a ton from him regardless of genre; he's just a good teacher. He's recently done two very nice series on his channel, one on EQ and one on Compression. And finally, one of the biggest things I think this mix needs is some work on the drums. The drums especially are really dry, so some reverb would definitely help. Again keep in mind that mixing isn't my strong suit, but I think it might also be appropriate to use compression to change especially the snare; it needs more OOMPH. I'd probably start off with a compressor on the snare track by setting a non-instant but rather fast attack, a moderate release (probably faster for how the snare is played in some parts of this song), 3:1 ratio, a threshold where I get a few dB in reduction from compression, and a few dB on the makeup gain so that the snare is around the same average volume as it was before. If I am remembering correctly what this will do the sound and I'm not just being silly, then this should make it sound bigger without it just being louder and possibly clipping. I'd tweak settings from there to experiment and see if it is making my song sound better. Make sure you don't fall into the trap where the makeup gain isn't just making it louder because louder sounds better. Hopefully some of that can help! Good luck with the tweaking and keep up the good playing.
  8. I want to comment on this but I'm not too familiar with the source. Is this it?
  9. I like the arrangement! The choice of chords is pretty cool, and I like the variations on the melody at :40; this "B" second section at :40 is a pretty good example of how you can make something different from the original while still keeping the resemblance, love it. Even though I like the chords, I feel like they may be clashing with the melody and bass. Do you have a list of the harmonies (or the notes in each chord) you are using? I might be able to better explain what I mean when presented with that. While the structure of the remix Intro, A, B is good, it is a little lacking in length-- it's over sooner than I want it to be. I understand that you are working with an even shorter source, but you've already shown that you can extrapolate the musical material into something musically different (at :40); I think you could totally make a more than 2 minute song out of this source. If you consider the typical form or structure of most songs nowadays, you get something like Intro, Verse, Pre-chorus, Chorus, Verse, Pre-chorus, Chorus, Bridge, Chorus, Outro or, spelled differently Intro, A, B, C, A, B, C, D, C, Outro So really you'd only need one or two more distinct sections available to make a longer song (Although I'd think of your first section as a "Chorus" since it is interesting and well done) There are a lot of other ways that you could do it Even without adding any sections you could probably make a compelling remix that doesn't seem repetitive by doing Intro, A, B, A, B, A Maybe make the first A half as long so that you don't get the listener too tired of it all at once, make the second A not do the second half of the source material and just repeat the first half of the source, cut out some or even all of the drums on the second B, and finally come in strong with an unshortened A at the end. Hopefully that all doesn't just sound like my inane rambling! Forewarning, production isn't my strong suit. The only thing negative I'd mention is that I can't clearly hear the chords, they are a little too ethereal, but while that might be my preference, a more explicit realization of those harmonies may not fit the mood. Other than that I'd say that this is pretty good. The mix sounds great, and nothing sounds covered up. Good listen over all!
  10. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/34087043/Dance of Decision.mp3 This is an NES (2A03 no DPCM) arrangement of "Corpse Voyage ~ Be of good cheer!" from Touhou 11 - Subterranean Animism. Original: (This video loops the track twice + a fadeout. 1:40 is where the track loops, so you don't have to listen to the whole thing to hear the source fully) I already submitted this to the judges, but in the future I'll probably post tracks here first since this seems like a cool place. While I am looking for general feedback on this track, I'm particularly interested in how much of the source material people hear in my remix; as far as my intention goes, about 2:58 out of 3:38 (about 82% of the whole track) is related to the original. I know that some of the relation to the source might be a stretch unless the listener is actively analyzing my remix, but I figured that a little over 50% of it was fairly obvious. What do you guys hear? .ftm for people who are into that: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3lTDlX2A630dTF4bDRSeDdfb2c/view?usp=sharing
  11. I am so sorry. I stayed up all night writing the thing and recording and thought it sounded a little cringy but decent But wow I listened to it again and just... I'm sorry.
  12. https://www.dropbox.com/s/9gi6nspoi30420m/storageemulated0utw.android.midsequerexportsCinderella Cage.mid?dl=0 ok I made a basic transcription with my phone. It's just melody and bass with none of the texture or harmony filled in, but hopefully that helps! What DAW are you using? Is there other software where those midis work for you like Windows Media Player?
  13. Sorry, Trism https://www.dropbox.com/s/xh93qdym5zdtx34/th08_11.mid?dl=0 Or go to http://touhoumidi.altervista.org/imperishable-night.html and download the 11th track, Cinderella Cage ~ Kagome-Kagome. That should work; I tested it with my computer before I put it into storage.
  14. Haha I wish I had seen this thread a few days ago before I submitted my chiptune to the site. Still I really like pure chiptune, but I guess if my chiptune gets rejected two years from now I'll load it up again and give it some panning and maybe even some subtle eq and compression if appropriate. This was a good read. If you say so. Now I'm determined to make a single channel Beepola arrangement get through
  15. This is exciting! Use this picture please. (Or just use my OCR profile pic.) https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/34087043/Lorelei 360x360.jpg The color is fine.