Jump to content

pixelseph   Judges ⚖️

  • Posts

    166
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

2 Followers

Profile Information

  • Real Name
    Seph Brown
  • Location
    Decatur, GA
  • Occupation
    Audio-Visual Technician
  • Interests
    Gaming (TTRPGs, PC games, board games); music (guitar-based anything); cooking.

Contact

Artist Settings

  • Collaboration Status
    3. Very Interested
  • Software - Digital Audio Workstation (DAW)
    Studio One
  • Software - Preferred Plugins/Libraries
    Helix Native, Spitfire LABS
  • Composition & Production Skills
    Arrangement & Orchestration
  • Instrumental & Vocal Skills (List)
    Acoustic Guitar
    Electric Bass
    Electric Guitar: Lead
    Electric Guitar: Rhythm
    Vocals: Male
    Vocals: Metal
    Vocals: Tenor
    Vocals: Voice Acting

Recent Profile Visitors

41,736 profile views

pixelseph's Achievements

  1. This one is a tough vote for me - I also hate this style! :D Production-wise, I do hear what my fellow Js are saying about everything washed in verb, but I'm going to side with Emu on this being a feature and not a bug. It gets the vibe right where it's supposed to be for the style. Arrangement-wise, this does a fantastic job of flipping the source into this style; no qualms about that. I have to side with Chimpa on the plodding nature of the piece, specifically because of the hat pattern on the drums. The way they establish the vibe @ :15 is great, bass entering with the slide @ :32 is also great! Bass drops out @ :49, and by the time we get to 1:05 with the guitar solo, I'm already sick of the hat pattern even with the drop. @ 2:10 not dropping the hats here with the rest of the kit is a missed opportunity to break that monotony. So the question is, is the drum writing here a nitpick, or is it sinking the whole ship? I think it sinks the ship, even though it wouldn't take much to bring it back afloat. I'm not saying y'all need to wildly alter the feel, but it's worth exploring more options inside this vibe - ride cymbal, shaker, tambourine, just something doing a different pattern with a different timbre for some of the piece. NO
  2. It's probably heresy to say this - I'm not super familiar with any Sonic game after Sonic 3, so this source is a wild and catchy newness to me! Some of the backing elements in the source are unpleasantly cronchy to my ear, which I don't hear in this remix - that's a plus from me! Proph nailed the main points - this mixdown is quiet, and there's a big lack of mixing done on the instruments, even though there's been plenty done on the arrangement and composition side of things. I'm not against reusing the intro as the outro in concept, though I would advocate doing something with the line if it's going to be repeated. Same goes with the repeated use of the radio transition: the first time is reminiscent of the source, the next 4 times it comes off as a lazy copy-paste transition, even though I can hear there's some filter changes to it in subsequent repeats. For me to sign off on this one, I'd need to hear: a better balance of the drums in the mix - partickuarly audible kick and cymbals (or overhead mics if you have them as a channel) the snare I think is fine as it is, having the other pieces brought out would give it better context fewer wholesale repeats of the radiowave transition NO
  3. TheManPF 🤝 Me Splitting the panel on every other submission I remember this one from Wise month and was surprised that it wasn't in the upper-third of rankings at the end of the vote. The arrangement is killer - a reharmonized take on a source is one of my favorite remix choices! - though the production is the elephant in the room. While reading the lyrics through and listening, I found I could understand the vocal pretty well - but without the lyric sheet, it was much, much harder to make out the words being sung. The vocals are exactly where one expects them in this kind of mix, with the instrumentation built around them for support, so it's not stereo placement interfering with the legibility, but the mixing itself. Overhead mics on the drumkit are pretty forward and compressed, which is good for the style but could stand to pull back a dB or two. I also would look at any compression you have on your low-end and dial it back by a dB or two as well. I don't think any of these not being fixed is a dealbreaker for my vote, but they would be welcome if you were to revisit the mix should this pass! I'm with Larry and Emu here; it's not perfect, but we don't vote on potential! YES
  4. I have been summoned! The guitars sound properly treated to my ear in this mix. The bass living @ 80hz seems to be a mixing decision to give the sub-bass frequencies to the kick drum (which is a stylistic choice for metal that I often make as well) and so it's a feature, not a bug. The drums, though, throughout the mix lack any room tone and sound dry as a bone; the opening choruses (@ 1:27, 2:41) and the second verse (@ 2:04) really demonstrate how dry the drums are. We can expect to feel a lot of dry kick and maybe a little snare, but if there's any room/reverb on the drums, I cannot hear it. Compare this to EK's vocal, which is swimming in reverb by comparison - would love to hear this balanced better! Another thing about the drum writing here that falls flat for me is the lack of time-keeping shells or cymbals - they aren't non-existent, but for this style especially, the song loses a lot of energy by their absence. @ :49 - 1:26 is an excellent example of how much impact from the part-writing is lost from there only being a single cymbal hit (the hats) on every other bar on beat 1. What frequencies proph perceives as noisy in the guitars would be swallowed up by the cymbals in this sort of section. If there was still too much fizzy/scratchy/amp noise (basically stuff above 11khz) audible after that, a nice shelf on the rhythm guitar bus tames that up. This mix has a lot of heart and passion in the writing! The part-writing and performance from the guitars, synths, and vocals are excellent, and my main problems with this piece are the drums and the production in general. I don't think the things it needs to find a home here on OCR are quick fixes, but they are worth pursuing for the song - specifically, to pass this track, I would need to hear: drum programming adjusted to feel more natural and dynamic adjust velocities, add room or reverb to the kit as a whole, and bring some element of time-keeping back to the sections missing it (choruses, verses) vocal production adjusted to balance out the mix EK's reverb crowds out the rest of the band and her own dry vocal, making it hard to decipher what she's singing NO (resubmit)
  5. LT and proph addressed the same issues I have with this remix pretty succinctly, so I don't want to beat the horse much more than we have already. There's a solid foundation in here to build on top of, but there's more personalization to this track that could be realized on your next go around, Bionic. I'll echo proph's comments specifically on stripping this back in length to the core idea (this theme but synthwave with glitchy amen breaks) and explore more with the soundscape. There's a lot of room for filtering the leads and countermelodies, working some sidechain compression on the drums to really push the limits of the groove, and introducing different harmony underneath the melodies here to give more emotional context. NO (resubmit)
  6. Classic source on this one! That ostinato and longform A-B is a major earworm. Opens with a MkII-style EP running the arp ostinato. Initial ride cymbal hits starting @ :09 sounds like they're all the same velocity (somewhere around the 110-127 range) and very up-front in the stereo image; we call this an "exposed sample" because it doesn't sound natural to the way the instrument would be played by a performer. The next synth layer @ :23 comes in with the choir line from the source with an interesting LFO wobble. The timing on the LFO creates a dissonant rub against the rest of the instruments that's unpleasant to listen to for an extended period. This trucks through the rest of the A section, bringing in the arp counter pluck and synth string line. The drum sequencing has some fun ideas, though the lack of velocity variation is still present here (and continues to be a major problem through the rest of the track). @ 1:18, we transition into the B section with some big burly guitar hits and stanky bass guitar. This section is much more in line sonically and dynamically, though rigidly locked to the grid. The live instruments are less rigid compared to the drums and synths, but the overall presentation (while loud) lacks the compelling, groovy element. 1:51 returns to the A section. The tremolo effect on the guitars is a great texture here, and then competes with that warble synth from earlier. Because they're occupying the same role in the composition, and the effect draws a lot of attention, it's important to decide which instrument should be taking focus and which should lay back. I think the guitar is more success here with it but the decision is yours as the arranger! 2:47 gives us another tasty feel change from the drums under the continued A section. The instrumentation is feeling stale and repetitive at this point, mostly because the only changing element is the drum sequencing underneath it all. 3:13 returns to the B section, and it's a little different from last time! Love the variation here, though my earlier comments on rigidity still apply here. Cool bass groove to signal the outro and it's done. @paradiddlesjosh can speak better on to how to make the most of your kit with velocity programming to sound natural; I'm merely going to point out that the feel of the sequencing is appropriate for the style, but the lack of velocity differences cripples the groove AND what I think is the single most important job of the drums in a rock/metal context - the drummer drives the bus. The drums tell us so much about where the song, dynamically, is going. An example of this is @ :44 - the push to open hats tells us we're bringing the dynamic energy up, but the lack of groove on them hamstrings that feel. The big gnarly guitar and bass hit @ 1:00, by contrast, is damn awesome because the drums cue them up nicely! There are some great ideas on this framework, and some tactical changes would bring this up to our bar. Should you choose to take this feedback and revisit the work, I'd be listening for: humanization applied to velocities and timing on all programmed instruments, most importantly the drums; and a more compelling, dynamic arrangement (have elements rest, switch sections around, etc) If you need more ears on this (or other) piece(s) as you work on them, we recommend our Workshop forum or the #workshop channel on our Discord! I want to stress that this is a great start - would love to see this come back to the panel! NO (resubmit)
  7. I missed out on this one the first time, glad to be able to give it a go around on this version. Very cinematic opening with the swells. I do agree with Proph that the scalar pattern differences between the vocal and the rest of the track could fit together better, but aren't a dealbreaker. The flute has some digital artifacting on the vibrato that is distracting, notably audible @ :40, 1:02 - 1:05, and 1:23 - 1:33. Aside from the artifacts, the implementation also feels somewhat mechanical because of the tempo; the other Js have noted the stop-tongued marcato elements on both the flute and trumpet (later in the piece) sounds out of place and I have to agree. I don't think the marcato is a bad idea, per se - just that the current implementation takes more away from the piece than it adds. Lingering on the shorter notes longer could make the phrase sound more compelling without compromising the vision. The arrangement overall leans conservative, though there's enough here to work - the expanded cinematic intro and the rubato breaks (@ :59 and 1:34 - 1:43), combined with the melodic flourishes, are just enough to get over the bar for me. I think this idea has legs, but there's more work to be done to get it across the finish line. I'm aligned with my fellow NOs in that, for me to sign off on this one, I'd need to hear more organic expression from the lead instruments (flute, trumpet). NO (resubmit)
  8. Super groovy source, as expected from a Sonic OST! Not much for me to add that hasn't already been noted by Proph and Wake, unfortunately. As a bassist, I can get behind a bass-guitar-forward mix all day - as long as what the bass is doing is meant to be the focus. As it stands, the bass is in direct competition with both the Omnisphere bells and piano (:00 - :12, :12 - :38). I definitely agree that volume-wise it could be lowered several dB and still have the presence in the mix it deserves without standing on the toes of the melodic phrases. There's nothing inherently wrong with the bass using passing tones to transition chord roots, though you'll want to be careful that the harmony you're crafting between all the layers (bass, strings, piano, pad, and all the reverb and delay) is copacetic. Wake and Proph noted the dissonance/crunchiness @ :38 - :51 where the delay FX on the piano clash with the piano itself as well as the pad/string layers. You may need to automate or duck the delay during those clashing sections or remove that effect in that section. :51 - :55 is such a highlight section, and I also would love more of that feel in this piece. :55 - 1:20 would be a cool spot to continue the tonality of that gnarly distortion guitar since you're recapping the A section here. In general, when reintroducing sections from the piece, it's a good idea to vary parts of that section to keep things from feeling stale or redundant. For me to sign off on this one when it comes back, I'd need to hear: the bass guitar reduced in volume to give space to the piano, bells the clashing/unwanted dissonant notes fixed @ :38 - :51 more variety to the sections after :55 There's a lot of opportunity here to make this one feel more like AshleyXR, and you've got a good foundation established here to build on. Feel free to bring it on back to us after spending some more time with it! NO (resubmit)
  9. Hell yeah, another track I can point to for properly programmed guitars! Great velocity manipulation to get the most of the palm mute rhythms, especially @ :13 - 1:08. I do think it maintains that palm mute feel a hair too long personally, but the intro is excellent. Proph mentioned the gating feeling awkward @ 1:35 - 1:39; to me, the gate is nice and tight, though I think the pickup selection on the guitars are taking away from the effect. They're very dark, which works @ 1:40 - 1:42, but that upper octave needs more bite to it. Still, excellent work here! Listening to the sources to get a grasp on this one, I wish there was a little more in the way of interpretation overall across the track. It's not that there aren't moments of personalization (the Wet as a Fish segment @ 2:24 - 3:08 in half-time, the opening of The Return of the Creature segment @ 4:41 - 4:51 are great examples), it's more that this is landing more on the side of cover rather than rearrangement to my ear. A return to one of the other themes, as suggested by Wake, would help alleviate this feeling. The transitions, even the slam ones, don't feel out of place in the style - Metallica's various medleys are the gold standard for me, and this mix walks the same line. Production-wise, this is rock solid. I have gripes with the toms in The Return of the Creature being pretty much all attack with no body to them. They almost sound pitched up to bring their attack out, which gives them a sort-of tabla/conga/hand-drum tonality that doesn't gel with the rest of the presentation. However, that's a nitpick and not a must-fix - getting toms to be phat in a mix with lower-tuned guitars and bass is troublesome to begin with, and that they're audible is good enough. Like Proph and Wake, I too would love the leads to be more forward, and I wonder if they're simply being smashed by the multiband or limiter on the mixdown? I'm finding myself also on the fence here, and I think I'm going to fall on the side of Yes - this hits more than it misses, although I wouldn't mind a second pass on bringing the leads forward and adjusting the toms. YES (borderline)
  10. Hi Goodman! What's here is an excellent mixdown of an immaculate vibe. Nothing I'm about to write in this vote is going to alter that opinion! I agree with Liontamer that this is a much more straightforward remix of the source, where our standards look for additional rearrangement to pass the bar. Below is my stopwatch timestamps for what I feel is source usage (which the sampled audio won't count toward). With 3m:28s (208s) of runtime, I'm looking for roughly 104s of recognizable material from the source track; ideally, it's using as much meat from the source as possible. This one is relying a lot on that Intro 3-note melodic motif while never really adding in the harmony voice from the source, nor diving into the arpeggio of the A or B sections fully. Aside from the transitional tag going from the A section to B section (@ 1:48, @ 2:19, etc), there's not much else that I can directly hear as a strong enough tie. We don't typically count bass note movement or the chord progression as source usage unless they are atypical, which is not the case here. Again, the execution of this track is undeniably good and I don't doubt that it would see success outside of OCR. It just doesn't have enough juice for me to sign off on it being above the bar. NO
  11. Hi H36T! As noted by the other Js here, this is two rounds of the A-B loop of the source with 3 bars to vamp into the second repeat around 1:26. The additional instrumentation on the second repeat is a lovely add; having it arrive earlier in the piece would be better from a personalization standpoint. The strings, choral voices, winds, and piano counterpoint line are doing some heavy lifting on that front (and the chimes!), but there's still more that can be done to bring more H36T to the table. Proph mentioned adding variation in the velocities of notes for more dynamic contrast in the writing, and I agree. Given the title of the track and the direction intended in the write-up, I agree with Wake that a more subtractive approach to your sections could improve the emotional dynamic curve. I'll add that some rubato (gentle deceleration of the tempo and holding the last note/rest a little longer than the metronome) on the ending of phrases would help break the rigidity of the structure and bring more of the emotional weight to the piece. Right now, it feels locked to the grid and mechanical. For me to sign off on this, I'd need to hear more personalization to the piece, primarily in the dynamics of voices or the dynamic curve of the piece as a whole a less locked-to-the-grid/mechanical feel to the presentation NO (resubmit)
  12. until
  13. until
  14. Everyone has access to it, worst case is that it requires approval from admin but we will make it happen! Also put me down for “Theme of Laura” from Silent Hill 2. I’ve got a cowpunk version of it I started up for Xaleph’s 1-hour remix roulette that deserves more attention
×
×
  • Create New...