DarkeSword

Absolutely beautiful. Also incredible restraint in not just going full on Song of Storms here, hahaha.

Folks, we are getting things started THIS FRIDAY on MARCH 21st. Make sure you HOP ON THE OCR DISCORD and join the GSM3 channel so you can take part. This compo is primarily being run on the OCR Discord, so you need to be on there to participate.

OC Records is defunct now. We still sell some older albums on Bandcamp but we don't publish new work.

Love this game, and the OST is one I come back to quite often. The arrangement here is good, but the slow string articulations are killing this for me. You've setup a monstrous task for yourself: doing a straight sequenced orchestral version of a piece that uses live orchestra. In that comparison, it's absolutely going to sound lacking. Not that it can't be done but even on its own the production of this feels flat. It doesn't feel expressive. I think the Js all made some pretty thoughtful comments and I'm gonna come down on the side of the NOs. This is a valiant effort and I think with a focused approach to articulations, you could give this one a kick in the pants. NO, resub

Metroid Fusion rules. (Love this mix.)

Hey just so you know, this whole "they don't care about privacy anymore" is 100% fucking nonsense. Mozilla does not say that they can use your data however they want. This is also part of the terms of literally any site you upload anything to; the service needs to say "you grant us the right to do things with your work so that our service can actually function." For example: uploading a picture to Bluesky? Bluesky asserts the right to transform your work so that they can generate a thumbnail of the picture you uploaded. That's what these terms always mean. It's never about a service or a piece of software asserting ownership of your data. It's about you granting them a baseline level of permissions so that they can actually do the things you need them to do with the data you give them. This type of "company is stealing your work" scaremongering makes the rounds every few months in art communities and every single time someone has to clarify that companies are not stealing your work. Mozilla is not claiming ownership of your work. Mozilla is not throwing privacy to the winds. Instead of watching a clickbait video that perpetuates the same stupid misunderstandings, maybe go directly to the source and actually read what Mozilla has to say about it? Also, Brave is the second-to-last browser you should be using (behind Chrome). Brave has engaged with scummy shit such as: Replacing ads on pages with its own ads and taking a cut Putting their own affiliate links in search suggestions Installing a VPN on Windows without notifying users Numerous partnerships with cryptocurrency firms If you want a reliable browser that's not Firefox, there are plenty of options like Orion, Waterfox, Ungoogled Chromium, Arc, etc. Brave is not it. EDIT: But also just keep using Firefox.

The answer literally is what you already said: "Do what sounds good." Turn off snap in FLStudio so you can freely drag the reverse and keep adjusting until you get the sound you're looking for. If you want something more seamless, consider adding some reverb to the reverse to help mask the hard cutoff.

Our forum software doesn't provide a self-service account deletion option, otherwise I'd enable it. If you'd like to delete your account you can request it in the Security & Privacy section of your account settings.

It's a tough call but I'm gonna side with the NOs on this one. I don't feel like there was enough variation to justify the length here. There's a lot of repeated phrases, which normally I don't mind, but it doesn't feel like a structure thing here, just more like padding. I think the production is feature of the genre, so no qualms there, but Flex is dead-on about the drums; needs more humanization and variation, which I feel like you could pull off while still operating within the conventions of the genre. Interesting take but ultimately it's a NO from me.

It's an ongoing issue with PHP config on our server. You can use the offsite hosting option and provide a google drive or dropbox link or something to your sub instead.

The Judges Panel has been talking about ways to work through the queue of submitted remixes at a faster pace, and after a lot of discussion and weighing the pros and cons, we've come to a decision that's probably one of the biggest adjustments to our process in a long time: Submissions no longer require four (4) YES votes to pass. A decision is reached as soon as the difference in votes is three (3). To clarify the key change here: when a submission receives three (3) YES votes and there are zero (0) NO votes, the submission is accepted, because the difference in votes is three (3). If a submission continues to go back and forth without reaching +3 in either direction, the panel will continue to vote until all active judges have voted and the majority will determine the decision. This update to our decision making process will immediately apply to any submissions on the panel at the time of this announcement going live, and for all decisions moving forward. We won't be going back to previous rejections to find decisions that started with three (3) uncontested YES votes but eventually got rejected; in those cases, what's done is done. We hope that artists will find this new criteria a little bit easier to understand. Overall, we've been impressed with the quality of work being sent in these past months, and this should make it easier for us to get the slam dunk tracks through the process faster. Thanks to all the artists who continue to participate in our curation process. Hope to hear your work soon. - DarkeSword

Thanks. This is a known issue related to an intermediate fix for the torrents while we got some issues with the tracker worked out. Will resolve soon.

Had a lot of people leeching/seeding last night when things went live. I personally used qBittorrent to make the torrent and saw peers using qBittorrent and Transmission. I can take a look again at the torrent to see what's going on.

I've been a web developer by trade for a long time before I took over OCR, so I have a general sense of where features like this end up getting put. One thing you can always try is when you log into a site, you can sometimes click your own username (the thing that indicates you're logged in). Sometimes designers put information related to you or your account under that. Rainwave does the same thing. Click on your username, and a big info block with some links slides into place.

I assume you're referring to OCR Radio on Rainwave. We don't control that here but a quick look brings me to this page: https://rainwave.cc/pages/all_faves Looks like that's where Rainwave keeps your favorites.

Don't try to throw the OCR mission statement in my face and think that that somehow proves your point. Nowhere in that mission statement does it say that we need to treat all forms of music in the world equally, regardless of whether it was written by a person or generated by a machine-learning algorithm. That's not there. We are dedicated to the appreciation of and promotion of video game music as an artform. This has, for the last 25 years, meant recognizing that the composers who wrote music for video games created art. They are artists. They are human beings who made thoughtful decisions about the music they wrote. They created with intent. Can you use machine-learning tools to create artwork with intent? Sure. I pretty clearly stated in the announcement that I don't have a problem with machine learning as a technology, but that I don't want people to post music on OCR from services that trained their models on music that was not provided with consent from the artists who created that music. The technology is not the problem; the people building these services using resources they're not supposed to are the problem. These folks have not figured out how to build these services without plundering the collective creative works on the internet. No thanks.

"Recording wind chimes" is not in the same space as using machine-learning algorithms trained on consentless work. The first post of this thread also says don't share work generated generated wholly or in-part by UDIO. Come on man.

Yes it's fine.