Jean Of mArc

Another option is to combine it with another skill and be hired to do both, depending on your interest and ability to do so. For example, I am a programmer and did that exclusively for a few years. I wanted to get into doing game music, and was originally planning to try and only focus on doing that. I had an interview with a company and they only needed a part-time music composer because they only needed about 7 tracks. However because I am a programmer as well, I was hired full-time to work on both the development of the game (with other programmers) and to do music. This is extremely valuable to me as I had no prior experience doing music for games before, and it allowed me to do it without the pressure of looking for other work. The downside, of course, is that you don't get to work on music full-time, as I'm sure many composers desire to do.

Welcome to the tribunal, guys!

Congrations everybody! All the entries sounded good to me! Only a few points of difference between them. Great job on your mix BrothaDom! Glad I was able to help you out! Look forward to the next one!

Ah great! That'll fit me just fine. Thanks, Arrrow!

Hey guys! I sent this e-mail to eStarland, the company that makes the OCRemix shirts: They wrote this back to me: Anyway, does anyone know approximately the size of small t-shirts or who I can ask about this? Thanks! Jean Of mArc

Hey Fishy, just wanted to check in and make sure that you still had my submission from 2012. Should I post it in the forums?

Congratulations! I knew right from the first WIP that this would be a winner.

Hey pokemoneinstein, Sorry it's taken me so long to get to this; was on a trip to see the family. I'm glad to see someone else give feedback about this piece besides me. First, it's really nice to hear it all in a completed form. The length feels about right, it has both source and original material, and it develops well, so good job on getting all that just right. My only complaints would actually be the same as Rozo's. When he is saying it's "too dynamic" I think he means there is too big of a difference between the soft notes and the loud notes. This has less to do with volume than it has to do with pressure, I think. It sounds like the piano player is slamming finger down on certain notes, especially compared to the other notes. It's not too "loud", just a bit too "hard", if that makes any sense. Not sure how much control you have over that with the software you use. A note that I noticed as an example is the "hard" note at 0:22. Because the piano is so prominent, even small variations in strength have a big effect, it doesn't need to have a big difference to be noticed, so don't think that narrowing the difference between the two will make your piece less dynamic than before. I really like all the little embellishments you've got in there, with the strings and bells. They are all well-placed and suit the piece wonderfully. Actually, I wouldn't be afraid to add a bit more of it, if you're up to the task. Not necessary though. Either way, you've got a pretty solid, relaxing, enjoyable mix here, and I'm adding it to my library whether it makes it on OCR or not.

Hey pokemonistein, I'm listening to it right now, and I care! I'm too tired to give good feedback at the moment, but I can say that I like what I'm hearing! It certainly sounds like an improvement over the original, and the development is nice too. I'll try to give more when I'm awake enough to do it well. Good work man.

I'm not surprised in the least; it's an awesome track and really needed no further evaluation for quality. Congrations, you deserve it for your hard work, and I look forward to seeing it on the front page some day soon!

This is definitely one of the coolest things I've seen online in a long time. Thanks a ton for pointing it out!!!

And it's pretty impressive too! Other entries will have a high bar to compete with this within a week.

Hey SuperiorX! This sounds like a fun project! If I can come up with an idea, I'll make sure to submit it!

Don't know for sure, but I think you only get one, unless you request another directly. Don't quote me on that, though. I guess its a matter of your confidence in the current version. You've gotten lots of feedback, made lots of changes, got a mod review, could make some changes from that... So it's just a matter of saying "OK, it's ready now" and submitting it.

No surprises here, I knew this one would be a winner. Again, great work man. I have no doubts this will make it in, and deserving so. I look forward to seeing it on the front page soon!

You're going to hate me for this... but you can probably actually put the guitar back up a tad. In other words, it DOES sound better, but it might be a bit too far in the other direction. Either way, you've proven that you CAN make it more pronounced without being irritating! So, just adjust it a bit, fix the rhythm towards the end (if you haven't already) and you're good to go!

The alternative would be to take the other instruments DOWN a bit. They might sound fine on your speakers, but the guitars and such are much louder than the whistling on mine, and they are set to pretty average levels all-around. Of course, you could get a few more people to say how it sounds for them... maybe I'm in the minority.

Hey XPRT, Yes, I see your dilemma. We do need that lead to come out a bit more, but we don't want the listeners' ears to suffer as a result. There are a few ways that you can bring out a sound without causing damage: 1. Raise the volume. Obvious, but not always to good effect. 2. Double the line, and then pan one of them left and one of them right. You can usually keep the same volume, but having it come from two sides at once gives it more presence. Rap uses this technique a lot. 3. Parallel compression. I've never done this, but it might help the situation: http://www.tenthegg.co.uk/tips/t008/ 4. EQing. Basically, you raise the volume, but use EQ to take down the really high, harsh frequencies a bit so that it is more mellow. Best thing to do would be to blast up a node in your EQ, scan through the frequencies until you find the really harsh ones, then bring it below the middle line so as to lessen it. Then you can raise the volume without much damage. If these don't work, try asking someone who knows what they're talking about haha, because I'm a noob at this stuff. But we really have to find a way to bring the lead out more... there must be a way.

Awesome!!! I went through it, and rhythmically this is MUCH more together! Great work!! Also, the EQing and such sounded much better to my ear: the instruments sounded more separate. I did find one area where the rhythm didn't quite sound together, and I pointed it out. The only thing left, which I've been saying from the beginning, is that the whistling is WAY too quiet, especially in the beginning. Actually, it sounds quieter in this version than it did before. Unless my speakers are the issue, I can almost guarantee that the mods and judges will bring this up, so that would be my final recommendation, and it's a pretty simple one, so it shouldn't take long. Anyway, once you've done that, and fixed the rhythm at the end, I think you're ready for a MOD review. Great work on this piece, man.

I would agree: transcribing by ear takes a lot of time and patience, but it's a skill that any good composer should develop. Doing some simple songs (with a lot of step-wise motion and straight-forward rhythms) first might help you feel more confident before taking on more complicated pieces. I always start off by transcribing the melody, and then the bassline, as those are the essence of most music melodically and harmonically. Then I try to fill it in, and there is some guess work involved at times. But even so, if you've got the melody and bassline, you've usually got something solid to work off of. If you're REALLY having trouble with a part, you can always ask someone else on OCR to help you out by providing what you have and pointing out what you can't just "hear". I'd be willing to help out if you need it, and I'm sure many others would too. My advice to you would be: don't rely on MIDIs or other people's transcriptions all the time. Try transcribing music, even if you take the "is this it? nope" approach that Darangen started with. It'll make a HUGE different in your compositions, because you'll become unconsciously more familiar with theory along the way. (I say unconsciously because you might not know WHY something works, but you'll just know that it does because you've heard it so many times).

Probably an octave so that it sounds harmonically consistent.

Hey pokemonistein, Wow, this is already a huge improvement over your first version! I think your musical sense is there, so it was just a matter of knowing how to convert that into a digital medium, which can be a challenge at times. Improvements: - The bass is much more organic playback-wise than it was before, especially with its dynamics. - The tempo has a bit of give to it, which is nice. - The volume difference between the treble sounds about right. - The strings are much more subdued than they were before. - The vibraphone is a great addition, it really adds some brightness to the mix! From here: - The some separation of frequencies between the vibraphones and other parts may need to occur. - The strings are almost TOO quiet now: they could probably come up just a tad. - The bass, though much improved, is still much more active than the main line, which means it can be hard not to distract us from the melody. At the same time, without it this arrangement wouldn't have that rhythmic motion it now enjoys. Perhaps a different instrument, other than the piano, could be used for the bassline? Maybe a stringed instrument, or even the vibes? If you'd really like the piano, perhaps make it more subtle while the melody is playing? - I feel like this whole mix could benefit from being raised a few keys, as it feels a bit on the lower end to me... but that's left to personal preference. If it's not too hard, give it a shot and see what you think. As for your bridge, going high in the melody is a great idea. Why don't you bring the bass up higher at this point as well? It doesn't have to stay there, but the contrast would add more interest to the bridge, and identify it as being different than what came before, which is always the goal of a bridge. As for its composition, I'll wait to see how you flesh it out before commenting any more. I think this mix could benefit from other peoples' input as well... where is everyone!? Either way, keep it up! I'll continue to check out your revisions!

You're most welcome! I really like to be as in-depth as I can be, but usually don't have enough time to do that. Maybe if it were my job haha! I look forward to your next version!

Hey Etherealurtz! Thanks for sharing this track! You've got some pretty cool ideas. I will say that the arrangement itself is actually quite strong: - The supporting harmonies are pretty unique and don't follow the original to a T... and they work quite well, for the most part. You've given the melodies a different flavour, and it works. There are some moments where the combination of melody/harmony creates some dissonance, but I personally think that good dissonance can be used to create better music, as long as it resolves well, and in your case I think it works pretty well, so I won't say much about that. Others might have a problem with certain areas though... - The mixing of two entirely different tunes is done VERY well here. Mixing two different melodies is something a lot of people have trouble with, but you pretty much nailed the movement from Green Hill to Emerald City, so great job on that. - The solo at the 1:00 mark is a nice addition to make it "your own". - The "bells" sound you use is pretty cool, because it really sounds like the Sonic "get rings" sound effect. It might be a little loud, but it sounds nice, so good work there. - I like the way you make the melody your own a bit at 2:00. Definitely some cool ideas. Now, I'm no expert when it comes to production or synths, so I can't say much about that. However, here are some things that stood out to me: - The crashing cymbals are overwhelming. I've heard some professionally-released music that had obsessive crashes cymbals, but don't follow their terrible example in that department. It just drowns out all the other hard work you've done. If you want lots of crash, that's fine, but make sure we can still hear what else is going on clearly. - As others have mentioned, the bass seems absent. This is to your advantage, because adding a bass will improve your mix a lot, yet production-wise shouldn't be too difficult to achieve. Just take some time to make sure they match up with your harmonies and you should be fine. - Rather than a synth lead, have you thought of maybe an electric guitar lead? VSTs should work fine. You can use the synths if you prefer, but's just an idea that would work well for this kind of music. Either way, the lead should (almost) always come out more than anything else. That's pretty much a golden rule. - At about 2:43 my ears start bleeding with how high the synths go... but I must admit it does make for a good climax. - After the climax there, there is a bit of a drop at about 2:46. Given how high-energy the rest of the song was, you could probably allow this drop to last a bit longer and it would make for a good break. Not too long, just another bar or two. Almost every high-energy song has a breaking point. If you were really adventurous, you could break it down completely and then build it back up over a few bars. - Although bringing it back to Green Hill at the end makes sense, I don't recommend doing a perfect repeat of the opening and then fading out... it sounds a bit "cheap" as an ending. Rather, make it THE ending. As in, find a way to turn Green Hill into an effective ending. This usually involves drawing out some notes longer, longer chords, and some altered chords to make it more of a cadence. I really think you've got some solid ideas here, and it's a pretty rockin' tune already. Just needs some tweaks to really make it what it was meant to be.

A few more comments: Going through soundcloud now... I seem to have a comment limit or something, as it isn't letting me post any more. I will remove some and post them here instead: - In the transition between the slow part and the fast part, I think you could afford an extra second or two to let the first part "end" before the upbeat part kicks in. - I love the whistling effect you do at 1:30! - I REALLY like the background singing you do at one point. I really wish there were more of it. (Hint?) - You've got some funky guitar riffs at 2:00, which sound really great as a variation! - When the guitar comes in and takes the lead, the whistling seems to just kind of die out... It almost feels like it just doesn't want to let go, but isn't really "there" either. Also, the solo may be a tad loud, but that's better than too soft. - Hey, I think I hear some singing now during the Golden Saucer theme! It would be good to bring that up more! - Wow, I never noticed this before, but at 3:10 you bring in the "prelude" theme... it actually works REALLY well there, because it doesn't feel like a "medley" at all; it feels quite natural. COOL! - Great riff at the ending, by the way, with the final whistle at the end. - Check out soundcloud for the rest of my comments. I forgot to mention this, but I played this tune for my wife and she LOVED it! Even as I was playing it to try and find the rhythm problems she couldn't stop whistling along. I think this will be a hit with a lot of people once it's done and ready!