Skrypnyk

Not a bad remix attempt, you do add a bit of personality to the original tune, but there's some weakness in your writing and production. Your arping synth plays the same thing for far too long with no changes in either notation, modulation, filtration, etc. It does change up to a more stabby sound around 1:46. but repeats it same notation, and gets stale rather quickly. Your hats/cymbals may have too much treble / presences as they stand out too with my headphones when they come in the song. The overall mixing is poorly compressed with evidence @ 2:49, when the snare builds enter that synth gets buried. You do tend to have either too much going on, or everything is just squashed so nothing can breathe. And your outtro is weak. The guitar scream is fine, but just dropping the drums and arp is anti-climatic. On the good side of things, I liked the drum change @ 2:08, and though the originality @ 3:24 was good, but overall felt there was too much bland repetition with the writing and poor execution with the mixing. There's a good idea here, it just needs some more TLC to be fleshed out.

So create original content and use public domain songs. I have a YouTube channel, with videos consisting of an image and my audio playing. Anyone capable of registering a google account and loading an image and audio into windows movie maker (or the equivalent) can do this. How are you helping anyone out exactly? Are your animations / videos on adobe after effects award winning? Have you already gained a significant following? Are you guaranteeing the video you make will go viral?

No one is going to have an accurate answer for you because no one knows what music you make, how you make your music, what your work flow is like, etc. I've never used Reaper but I believe those who make use of live recordings tend to prefer Reaper or Cubase or Pro Tools, those who rather sequence everything typically use FL Studio, electronic music producers use Reason, the list goes on. You're gonna have to play around with the other DAWs to get an answer to your question, and you can worry about doing that whenever you feel stuck or frustrated or bored with Reaper.

Uhh... lol hopefully this answers whatever you're asking. Assuming you aren't using uncleared samples/synths/vocals/etc (using something you don't have permission to use), any projects and song you create are your property and thus you have the date and time in which the project/song/copyright is created, and all rights are reserved to you. Once you've released your work online, nothing is stopping anyone from taking what you've done and doing whatever they want with it, whether it's using it in their let's play video, putting their name on it and calling it their own, selling it for billions of dollars, remixing it, etc. etc. and no label is going to prevent those kinds of maliciousness to occur. Site's like soundcloud and bandcamp have the option to have your work listed under the creative commons license should you choose to release work under that. I'm assuming loudr lets you keep all (or most) of the rights to your work, but have yourself a read if you want to make sure. So keep doing this and don't worry about the other stuff No guarantees If a tree falls in the wood and no one is around, does it make a sound? Do whatever you want, you're the commander and chief of your work

My impression with copyrights (and someone else can chime in if I'm wrong), is that when you create the project file and the song, you've created the copyright, all rights reserved, and it's yours. It's only when you start using a label or service that you can lend copyright control to the party in question (i.e using soundcloud you can give the song a creative common licence, etc.) No, people do this, there is very little you can do about it other than e-mailing them directly saying 'hey cut that out', or e-mailing the service hosting the stolen productions claiming it's your work and you never gave permission.

Don't worry about crossing that bridge until you actually come to it. Just don't go about directly copying everything you hear and calling it your own in the mean time.

Absolutely Only if you do next to nothing with the original song and pass it off as your own work.

Pretty sure this started off as a complete sentence and then started to self destruct the more words you added to it. Being on a label is a good way to associate your music with similar acts, and be a rather central location for people to go to to hear that type of music. It's not the only way to be heard, it's not the only way to get your stuff distributed. Yes it's possible, people can and are doing it all the time, but you have to solve the bold statement. You can write unimaginably beautiful scores or put googly eyes on a rock it doesn't really matter, if people don't want to buy those productions you won't be earning a living from it. loudr.fm will distribute your stuff without being associated with a label, you can price your stuff however you want. Your music has to be good (or acceptable) enough though that stores like iTunes or sites like Pandora would take the songs.

You really don't want to put in any effort on your own do you?

Is there a way to design the page to show three or four of the main tags, and then have a link that'll show/hide the rest? It seems redundant to me to list the same type of tag multiple times (i.e. electronic + synth, or strings + cello) but I understand the reason for wanting as many terms for a mix you can give it.

I'm not sure it has, I don't think it has. I remember way back when I started producing and remixing I liked Trance and House music and would try creating pieces in that style, but since discovering downtempo and ambient and glitch music (outside of ocr mind you) I changed direction, and brought those styles to ocr with my accepted mixes. I still think I'm a bit all over the map with styles though, maybe ocr is to blame for that.

Nice 5/4. Such a warm mix, I like it. Some notes: - I think the piano is mixed too loudly in this. It might sound better playing backup to the guitar. - Drum samples are alright but they feel a little loopy. Different change ups and fill would add some spice to this. - You did just loop like a minute worth of material to 2 minutes, add something to the second minute (strings, pad, horns?, whatever) Overall good stuff though

Did we sample Portishead? Definitely gave me some nostalgia

Muddy sounds are caused when too many instruments are taking up the same frequency. Think of it like you have an empty cup, but you're overflowing it with too much liquids. Panning the instruments are like having 2 empty cups and splitting the liquid between them, but again the cups can only hold so much. Attenuating the frequencies on instruments that don't need them as prominent as the instruments that do will help clean the overall sounds of your projects. In some cases a low shelf filter is good enough, in other a high pass filter does a better job.

If the 8-bit VST is a demo, or is being processed through an effect that's a demo, it may mute the sound during the rendering process.

@noTuX Did you take @Blue Magic's piece and remix it more? Or use his mix as an influence and did your own thing? Blue's mix isn't available anymore. Gave it a listen, overall it sounds good, I'm thinking a little less is more in some sections (i.e. remove more drum samples or the bass arp in the middle section, re-introduce them later) but I don't have any major criticism on this, thumbs up.

Confirming. Cheers

I don't want to receive an e-mail every time someone sends me a message through the forum, but administrator has disabled the option from being toggled. Can this be changed? Why is this option disabled?

If we're using my argument that this is ultra-conservative, it sounds like you're using elements of the original piece through-out this mix, but you aren't incorporating anything that defines you as an artist/remixer/producer. You can argue that the ambient/drone approach defines who or what you are, but I see this song as a "really slowed down Dave Wise track" and not necessarily a "bitlegs remix".

Soooo, I liked what you were doing with the supersaws around 0:40-0:50. Unfortunately pretty much every other aspect of this mix is super weak. The synths are dry (although I understand if you were trying to go for a Gameboy sound), the drums are very generic, there's no TLC put on anything, the mixing is poor. This sounds like you found a copy of FL and made this in a couple of hours, it really lacks character.

I know it's a huge no-no, but after about 3 minutes I started just skipping through the track to see if you did something more than just sloooooooow the tempo of the original track down some. It's pleasant, but ultra conservative and ridiculously long. Could use a ton more personality.

I tried limiting myself to using Solid EQ that came with Komplete 10(?) or using the built in EQ in FL's mixer, I always find myself going back to EQ2 though for it's visualization and just ease of use.

I'm guessing you aren't familiar with Stan Brakhage. I've been following this thread for a bit, and I'm on Angel's side when it comes to separating 'games' and 'art'. Djp comment on trying to define art is pretty accurate though