zircon

For the record, the process that goes into selecting a judge isn't simply "who do we like? let's make them a judge!" If that was the case, we'd have a whole lot of people on the panel that currently aren't. We chose bgc and pixietricks from a pool of about eleven candidates, several of which were not offered a test evaluation batch, and seven of which were. They were asked to write full writeups of eight mixes as if they were actually judging them. As a panel, we then went through each and every test batch (which took quite awhile), discussed them thoroughly, and interviewed some of the candidates further. We then selected two batches that we thought to be the strongest, bgc and pixie's. They were easily able to provide specific and constructive criticism on all of the mixes and gave decisions that were in line with those that the actual panel gave. Based on this, we thought they would be ideal choices for our panel. But just to be sure, we talked about the matter further and each got a majority vote and Dave's approval before we brought 'em on. In short, they proved themselves to be the best of the best, and they earned their spots. Rexy, you can talk all day about how pixietricks "hasn't used anything but her voice" (not true) but in the end, we don't give a damn. Same goes for the people scratching their head at BGC - if you haven't heard of him, so what? Most people hadn't heard of Harmony either. Doesn't mean they can't evaluate ReMix subs. You don't become a judge because you have tons of ReMixes, or even ReMixing talent in the case of Larry. You become one if you're good at the job. Both Jill & Jimmy showed us that they are. Simple as that.

The arrangement here is pretty nice, for the most part. In the first two minutes or so, I really like the variations on and over the chord progression, and the treatment of the main melody. I'd definitely characterize it as interpretive by our standards, so good job on that. You did hit the nail on the head in your own letter though, sometimes it seems like you repeat the same riff one too many times, making things seem more drawn out as a result. I also think that towards the end - maybe the last third or so, you could have used a more significant changeup. A longer breakdown, a key or time signature change, maybe an original section, a different variation on the chord progression, something like that. Lastly, fading out when you still had some cool stuff going on seemed like a bit of a waste to me. Why not just write an ending? Anyway, overall, I don't have any big issues and I think you are on the right track. In terms of production, I'd like to hone on the sound choices and synth design a little more here. I felt your mixing/mastering was fine - maybe a little on the dull side, but that could be due to the low encode (I suggest using VBR encoding in the future), so no big deal. Your drums were pretty solid but there was a lack of transitions from section to section; no snare rolls, reverse hits, cymbal crashes... I hate to sound like I'm asking for cliches here, but to some extent, those things are important so it's not just 'GROOVE stop GROOVE stop GROOVE stop' etc. On that same note, having a selection of different drum patterns to keep things constantly varied would be a good revision to make. I noticed you did make use of layering for that central drum pattern, but it's still got the same kick/snare rhythm underneath. Even ONE alternate loop or variation interspersed with that main one would make things a lot more interesting. Moving on to the synths themselves, nothing struck me as particularly exciting, but nothing was really generic either. I think the problem in this area is that most of the synths are in a similar frequency range. The bass itself takes up a LOT of space, then you have the pads which are not a whole lot higher than the bass, and the melody synths which for the most part are still in the low/mid to midrange. So, throughout the song, it's like you've got stuff going on in all the frequencies pretty much constantly, which is going to wear down on the ears of the listener at some point. One thing I suggest is rolling off the 100-150hz range and below on everything that's NOT the bass or the kick. That'll start to give more breathing room to everything else, then you can sort of sculpt things from there. For additional help on this topic I would go to the ReMixing forum where plenty of electronic music producers regularly hang out. WIP and WIP:Other are also good places to visit. I like what I'm hearing so far, so don't be discouraged. Refine and resubmit! NO

Haha, very tactful Larry - "hey, this is like zyko track! NO" I gotta agree with him, though, that it's gonna be tough to make a good arrangement in only 2:19, and primarily only with two chords. You can feel free to revoice or rewrite the progression as necessary, if you think it'll add to your interpretation, and the same goes for the melody and harmony parts. I'm liking what you did as the song went on, adding multiple instrumental layers, but without that foundation changing it sounds overly repetitive. Also, while I could see a fadeout working in an arrangement like this one, you'd have to expand it for it to really work. Otherwise it seems like you've just run out of ideas, and I don't think you have in this case. I don't have a lot to add in terms of production... the drumkit sounds a little too MIDI-ish, so maybe you could beef that up with some better free samples/soundfonts, but otherwise, Larry covered the bases. I'd like to see a revised version of this. Keep it up! NO

First thing I noticed here was that the drums seem swung a little too much, to the point of sounding off-rhythm. I don't think it's a good effect. Though, aside from that, I thought the drum sequencing was both varied and creative - sample choice could have been better for 'em, but that's a little nitpicky. My main problem on the production end is the synth design. You've got lots of simple stuff, primarily based on square waves, and I don't think they stand apart from each other enough. The individual sounds also aren't all that interesting due to their simplicity. They make the texture feel sparse when it shouldn't - it's possible to go for a more minimal style without sounding like that. On the arrangement front, I had mixed feelings. The first two thirds or so were pretty uneventful. Some variation, some original material, but whether it was because of the synth design or not I wasn't reallly feeling that. 2:06 marked an entrance into more interesting territory; playing with the melody via arpeggios, stutters, and extra harmonies was very creative and I liked that quite a bit. I would suggest taking that kind of approach to the first part of the mix as well. Anyway, I'm going to have to go with a NO vote here, but I encourage a resubmit. More varied sound design, tightening of the percussive sequencing, and a more expansive first half of the arrangement would get this one a lot closer to our bar.

I'd like to formally congratulate our two latest additions to the OCR Judges Panel, Big Giant Circles and pixietricks! Way to go, Jill & Jimmy! As a panel, we spent a considerable amount of time discussing possible j-candidates, and when zyko returned we were initially only going to look for one person to add. However, after seeing pixie and BGC in action, talking to them, and deliberating further, we decided to do a two-for-one deal. Both are experienced musicians and talented ReMixers, and each of them have showed us that they're more than ready for the job. So here's a hearty "welcome aboard" for yas. Now then, start getting that queue smaller. Those mixes don't judge themselves. Oh, and before Wingless posts it...

Sorry Cerrax, but that is incorrect. Anytime you play back samples via something like Kompakt or Kontakt you're eating up processor cycles. If you don't believe me, load one string patch and play a single note. Watch your CPU meter. Then, play 20 simultaneous notes. Your CPU will spike. That's because it takes power to play back those voices... RAM only matters for loading the samples initially.

I don't know anything about Live 5 so I can't help you there. But I know Live users who use Kompakt/Kontakt and other programs with multiple MIDI outs, so I don't think it's an inherent limitation. You could try calling tech support for the software and asking how you could do that.

Wait, "only" 10? Streaming high-memory, realistic samples is CPU-intensive. 10 instances of that thing is gonna rape ANY computer. But yeah, you're not getting it right. Each instance of QLSO Gold can load up to 8 patches. Each patch has a MIDI channel assigned to it; by default starting with 1 and increasing by 1 each time. Depending on your sequence, you need to set it up so that MIDI data is getting sent to each of those MIDI channels in the sampler instance. Each instance would then be on it's own MIDI port, thus giving you 8 channels per port (and you have unlimited ports, of course).

Cookie-meat abominations? Don't laugh! I'm going to be rich with those. Anyway, thought you guys might want to know that Brian and Becky created a *promo mp3* for "The Next Level" featuring... us! It's both well-produced and very funny; both pixie and I were laughing at loud in several parts. You can download it here: http://www.vgdj.net/Misc/gmr_promo.mp3 And if you haven't heard the interview already, it's still available at www.gamemusicradio.com - check out our second latest news post at www.vgdj.net for more info.

Make sure "Rendering Mode Notify" is checked in the Fruity Wrapper for Kontakt 2. Access it by clicking on the downards triangle in the upper left of the wrapper. Use Fixed Size Buffers can help also.

I can't seem to download this one - only play it via the embedded player. Anyway; Unfortunately, while I hear some interesting arrangement ideas here and there, this for the most part is well-below our bar. Very rigid sequencing across the board, low quality samples, relatively poor production (no real use of effects, muddy, weird mixing between the parts), and obviously fake-sounding parts like that guitar later on. The original material added was a nice thought but the rhythms were usually very simple and thus the parts came across as somewhat boring or plodding. I would give more specific times on where these parts are, but Putfile's embedded player make sthat more difficult. The dinosaur sounds panned hard right didn't add much, either. Don't be discouraged, however. I encourage you to make use of our resources at the ReMixing forum to find better samples and learn how to use those samples in a more realistic manner. I also suggest visiting the WIP forum to get feedback before submitting, so you can fine tune your mix and fix problems before it gets to us. Keep at it. NO

Well, it's nice to see someone taking a shot at this theme even though it's pretty difficult to ReMix. Let me first say that I really like the concept here. The original seems to lend itself very well to the style you were attempting here. However, I think the execution fell short. The production jumped out at me first. The bass is WAY too loud. It practically clips the whole time, and it plays very mechanically. A more realistic sequence is definitely needed there. The drum pattern on repeat the whole time was grating in the high frequencies, and honestly, using a looped sample for this style is no good. Hit the ReMixing forum for help on how to sequence a good, varied drum part, or better yet, find a jazz drummer to record the part for you (*cough* DrumUltimA). In fact, it wouldn't be a bad idea to find a live sax player too, though I think with some work you could make that line more realistic. The piano sample was generally OK though again, the sequencing was somewhat mechanical, and it was a little too low-end heavy. In regards to the overall arrangement, I feel like you were on the right track, but didn't quite get it. The intro was a little too sparse given that it was just playing the original melody straight up. Some basic variation there to keep it fresh before the rest of the instruments come in would be a good idea. The instrument solos that came later were both placed well, but in and of themselves were sloppy and amateur-ish. The idea behind the end of the piano solo also sounded good in theory but didn't really work, IMO. Again, here's where I would recommend either brushing up on your sequencing/performing skills or finding some instrumentalists to record/sequence the parts for you. At 2:02, returning to the main theme + chord progression is a good idea, but I would have went with more variation there rather than repetition of the basic melody. In short: good concept, weaker execution. Hit the ReMixing and WIP forums for additional help. I look forward to hearing more from you, and a resubmit on this. NO

Source is track 7: http://www.ocremix.org/songs/original/Castlevania%203%20(1989)(Konami)(28%20Songs).nsf Fun little source tune. I love CV3's music. Anyway, this is the kind of quality I've come to expect from goat. Great performance + production values across the board. The arrangement did tread the line between being coverish and interpretive, but there's clearly variation present and original material added. The stylistic change up at 2:08 was unexpected but very cool. On the other hand, the brief bridge at 2:32 was probably the weakest part of the whole arrangement, if I had to pick one - something about the sounds used just didn't sound right. Luckily it went right back into the full rock setup and resolved nicely. Nice job! YES

Larry covered my main complaints. This really does seem to be on autopilot for most of the mix, relying on simplistic backing parts that have little to no variation. The intro before the melody comes in is too long considering the length of the mix. The melody itself is played pretty much verbatim, which isn't interesting. The break sections in between repetitions of the melody have simple chords following that bassline, but that's it. I do disagree with Larry that the change was 3:23 was jarring, but I agree that it could have been explored more and that the drums didn't fit. Less repetition, more interpretive material please. NO

Yeah, sure. Link: Ok, definitely wasn't expecting vocals like this, especially given the genre classification as breakbeat/electro. And even after going back and listening again, I gotta say, I don't feel like they fit. Seems like they were just sort of put on top to fill up space, rather than having been recorded specifically for the remix. I really don't know what else to say. The performance is good, I guess, but you didn't write nor perform them, so... The underlying arrangement is not impressive. It's too close to the original up until 3:07, where it starts to branch off a little. If you had done that kind of stuff earlier and throughout the whole mix this would have been a lot better off. Variation is definitely a good thing. Though, some of the harmonies didn't quite sound right with the slightly varied melody, so you might take another look there. The ending was also kind of lackluster. It sounded like you had some original material there (unlike most of the rest of the mix), so why would you just fade it out? I don't get it. The production was a mixed bag. The drums were solid and there was a lot of variation there to keep them fresh. However, the synths, which seemed to be comprised mostly of Sytrus presets, were not mixed well. Being an FL and Sytrus user myself, I can tell you that the sounds are often hard to work into a mix and often require significant processing so they're not muddy. I don't think that was done here as many of the parts seemed to reside in the lower end and thus were not as clear as they should have been. Some of the parts should have been written an octave higher at least, others need more EQ, some needed both. There were several times in the mix when things seemed overly sparse, too, like 1:42 where it's just the vocal and one synth. You gotta have more. NO

This isn't worth a NO OVERRIDE. It's not a rip. There are a few noticeable changes to instrumentation, voicing, and structure. That being said, I'm not going to pass this, generally mirroring the reasoning offered by TO and Larry. When it comes down to the meat of the mix - the main melody - it's essentially identical to the source. Chords, melody, rhythms... all verbatim, more or less. Structurally, past the introduction, it's also too similar for comfort. The ending is WAY too abrupt especially considering the introduction, which was at least decently well-writen. On the production side, the overall mixing is too quiet; I know it's supposed to be a soft piece, but still, you can boost the volume and not make it harsh-sounding. I also think more harmony elements could have been added without detracting from the mood. We have lots of quiet, pleasant ReMixes on OCR that manage to pull off that feel without being sparse. A more substantial arrangement is in order. Go for more of a unique interpretation - don't be afraid to change chords and rhythms around, and add your own material. NO

Ooh, this is chill as hell. The first mix that immediately comes to mind as a base point of comparison would be SkyHigh's "Snow Motion" from Sonic 3. That mix had a very similar approach; lay down an awesome groove and let it carry the mix, with the source primarily being recognizable from the main melody and a few harmony parts here and there. Another similarity is the somewhat simplified chord progression from the original to the ReMix, which smoothes things over somewhat. I had to think pretty hard about it, but even though Snow Motion is an older mix, I think that precedent is a good one that I'm going to go by here. The arrangement factor is clearly evident in this ReMix. The main melody is played several times, and not *quite* verbatim, which is the most obvious connection. Then at :40 you have the acid synth there in the background which is playing a variation on the riff right at the beginning of the original. The main melody and the riff show up later on as well, of course. As the piece progresses, more harmony parts are added that fit in with the adapted chord progression, just like how Snow Motion had the slow sweeping pads and synth stabs. The texture here is denser than that mix also. Changes to the layering of the groove - adding to the bass, drums, and pads - was welcome, and that to me served as the clearest indication that the structure is not just one idea on repeat. This is no different than what TO typically does in his ReMixes, which are almost always passed. I do have a few production complaints. I don't think the main melody lead is pleasing, for one thing. It's so heavily highpassed that it's more on the grating side than the "smooth" side, something I'd expect to hear in a hard techno song than a chillout one. Also, it's used later on playing a simple octave riff on the tonic of the underlying chords, and it doesn't fit there either. The fact that it doesn't change throughout the mix is probably the weakest thing here. If this gets rejected and you decide to go back to it, I strongly recommend choosing another lead and perhaps using automation to give it more motion (tuning, filter cutoff, pulse width modulation). However, these things are not dealbreakers. The production was generally very strong. I thought the mixing was solid and the use of effects, panning, and EQ was excellent. In short, I'm going to go with a; YES

I'm going to have to agree with zyko here that the drums and bass, which should be the foundation of the groove, are on the weak side. Keeping in mind that many of your mixes are groove-oriented, TO, I gotta say that you could have done a lot better in that area here. The original really did have more 'funk' to it. I don't have a huge problem with the piano, really, but I do think that like many of the other sounds (eg. the backing pads) it's rather mundane. I wouldn't object if it was made more realistic. In regards to arrangement, I'm hearing the interpretation factor because original material was added, but I don't think it builds enough on the source tune. Melodically, the source was pretty amazing. It had a very interesting main line with lots of cool rhythmic stuff going on. You took away the varying rhythms in the ReMix, effectively simplifying it and making it less engaging. Usually one would aim for the opposite effect. Structurally there's not a whole lot going on here, just gradual additions to the groove that was introduced right at the start. I don't think I feel comfortable yesing this one. The original was a melody-driven piece with a very solid foundation built on the drum and bass lines. Here, the approach is identical to the original, but with a simplified melody line and nominal additions in the form of bridges (taking from the original chords) and harmonies. I would suggest going back to this and working with the melody line more and perhaps changing the structure around so its not just a repetition of the chords from the original with a single instrument melody on top and some basic pads in the background. I'm a big fan of your mixes and your style, TO, but I don't think this one quite reached the bar. NO

The newest episode of "The Next Level", with Becky Young and Brian DiDomenico, has been released and is now available at www.gamemusicradio.com! But wait, why did I post about that here? Because it's the episode that contains our interview! It might not be VGDJ, but it came out very well and was a whole lot of fun to do. Instructions for how to listen to it have been posted at www.vgdj.net - enjoy!

Ah, so that compressor has a limiter built in. So, once it compresses the sound, it lets you choose a hard limiting point. That's unusual, but not a really bad thing I guess. I would recommend using Audacity's compressor - in fact, I would recommend using Audacity, period. It's a great program.

Well, yeah, it SHOULD be more than that. But I was pointing out that his current signal path appears to BE that, and nothing else

Yep. A "recording chain" or "signal path" is just the list of hardware/software that your sound goes through. eg. Mic -> Preamp -> Mixer -> Computer, or Mic -> Computer.

tgfoo brings up an excellent point... you could have a fantastic mic, but if the rest of the recording chain is no good, then the final result will be no good. In other words, your sound quality is only going to be as good as your gear's weakest link. However, I disagree with Doomsday on the SM57/58 thing. They're excellent mics not only because they're durable, but because they sound good. I record with a 58 every week and it sounds great (I only use a Behringer UB502 and an EMU0404 in the chain, so nothing fancy). But it's also worth noting that you can even have a bad mic and get a good sound. For a collab I just recently finished w/ pixietricks, she recorded on a headset mic which is absolutely TINY. You wouldn't expect it to sound good but with a little bit of polish in the production stage, the recording came out great. If we can manage good results with that mic, you should do FINE with a 57/58. Anyway, here are some other general tips when it comes to vocal recording... 1. You say you're doing an acapella mix so you probably don't want a lot of room noise. Thus you want to position yourself pretty close to your mic, but not so close that the bass part of your voice gets exaggerated ("proximity effect", which occurs in mics like the 57). 2. Your recording - with no editing or processing whatsoever - should be loud enough so that your loudest sections are around -10 to -6db. If you record really quiet, when you boost it later you'll have a lot of noise. If you record too loud, you risk clipping, and that can't be fixed once the recording is made. 3. Once you have recorded a part, I would normalize it first. Next, I would make any EQ changes you want to make. Then, I would use compression to level out everything - the amount of compression would vary based on the exact type of sound you want. Finally, I would put a limiter on everything to ensure there's no clipping, and then normalize once more. Now, this is just the way I do things - it's not the only right way of recording. It's just what I have found works very well.

In the words of the Bay City Rollers, it's SATURDAY, and as such... Episode 056 of VGDJ has been released, and is now available at www.vgdj.net! While the filesize of this episode is a bit more manageable than has been the trend lately, make no mistake; we've got tons of good stuff on this one... including a stinger that I really enjoyed contributing to Gogogo download!!!

Not even gonna comment on that alblum image Anyway, we've got some news for everyone regarding our release schedule... Episode 056 of VGDJ will be released on Saturday, September 9th! We're going to try this schedule and see how it works, but I think it's gonna be awesome. No longer will you have to stay up late Sunday nights to be the first person on your block to get the latest episode of the show! Now, you can enjoy our late Friday night chats in #vgdj, pick up the new episode when the clock strikes 12:00, sit back, and relax with the knowledge that you've got the whole weekend ahead of you. Pretty boss, huh? Also, this makes it a little easier for us since we'll be busier during the school year, and doing the show a few days earlier gives us our weekends off... and I think we're gonna need 'em for this term.