B33J

This might be a fairly common question with an easy response, but I'd like to throw it out there at least and see what your method of gating or what you think the best way would be. I've read around a bit that programming a Matrix to the volume control is a way to do it. Anyone else have a way of doing it or is using a Matrix just flat out really the best way?

I second what Nicole said. Add a really soft, quite, very wide pad when the percussion comes it and it'll sound a lot different. It seems like there's not a "background" layer, where the front layer is the melody and percussion, middle layer is the strings, but no background layer, so to speak. A nice soft pad would certainly help that. With the melody that comes in at :08, what would a little bit more reverb sound like? ..To give it a bit more body. And that clicking is kinda annoying. I understand what you want to do, but maybe find a better sample or mix samples to get what you want, so it doesn't sound like an accident.

If anybody can help me or suggest some means of being able to record guitar/bass with the same quality that Sixto has, please help me! I have a X-Fi Xtreme Music sound card, but not the extra input module thing. Would anybody know if that console would be sufficient to record in high quality like that? Or if anyone has a suggestion for a completely seperate module/device, prefereably USB, to record on and then transfer to my computer as wav, that would be completely awesome. Sixto has also suggested something like Guitar Rig 2, so I might get that too. I have more questions about that later, also. I would love to have a home studio, so the price for everything isn't a huge issue. I'd probably get a loan... But I eventually want to get everything to make my own songs (sans instruments ) Thanks!

Fourth on the Axiom 49.. I really like it alot. Especially with the Afterouch stuff it has.

What did you use to record your stuff?? I've been trying to play this song on bass guitar and I don't have a good way to record my playing. >

Kinda depends on what program you use too. I found myself learning quicker with Reason. I've seen quite a few people say they've been remixing and using their program for over a year, and they've got some really good stuff. So like with any instrument, don't be overly in a hurry to learn it, take your time, and study about it's ins and outs as much as possible via books or online tutorials - what have you.

What program are you using? Right now, it's' not enough of a remix. Simply adding drums doens't make it a remix. I'm glad you're trying stuff like the key change, but I'd suggest making more of the song so we have more to critique and will know where you're headed with it.

I really really really like this song. Good combination of sounds and instruments. I don't suppose you'd be up for sharing the Published version of your file so we can see how you did it? *begs*

Another quick way you can tell is (for audibly seasoned people, albiet), is if you cannot distinctly hear each instrument in the soundscape. When instruments start "running together" and you cannot tell where one begins and the other ends, is an aloof, mediocre, metaphorical way of explaining it. Maybe in the same way when someone says a song is "too muddy" or such. The "muddy" part would be the purple area in Dr. Rod's graphics above. As like Dr. Rod, I've been learning music and how to use Reason for the past 3-4 months, not very long. But I'd like to think I understand the concept of what sounds good and what doesn't. Nice posts by the way, Dr. Rod! And many kudos to Zircon as well.

Sounds good man! Don't know what else to say besides the obvious (better samples, vary velocities, etc, no big stuff). I certainly think that had a good chance of passing back in the day. Dunno.. Time to see what the judges will say? P.S. Think you could put a little bit of echo and reverb on the sound (at 3:13) near the end of the song to fill it out more? *shrugs*

Much much better sounding overall. Now, I think the snare might be a little underplayed. heh. It could have a bit more volume or bite to it. What are other people's opinions on it? Maybe a bit more *TOAW* to it instead of the *BAM* it is now, y'know? Some suggestions just to see if you like them: Have the bells sounding appregio slowly pan between channels, maybe a max of 15-35% on each side over two measures continuously. Try this and see if you like it too, at the 1:43 mark, have the percussion and the bell appregio the only things playing. Then slowly bring in that pad. Then bring in the rest of the stuff when it sounds appropriate. I think it will make the song much more interesting.

Pretty much my only complaints, even if you don't plan to submit this to OCR, are: The percussion is very thin (use better samples) and doesn't seem to vary at all thru the entire song. The backing 'pad-ish' strings (that come in at 1:43, i think) get too loud and could be turned down. And there's no break down in the song to allow the song to flow into other ideas easily. (not entirely necessary though) If you'll listen to other synth-pop bands like The Postal Service (if they're considered that), they have only a few layers of sounds that don't get too loud or thick. If you don't get too thick with some sounds, you can hear the other sounds much better. Though just lowering the pads' volumes would probably help this. Actually, I like how the snare sounds at the beginning before the crash. It keeps that kinda low-fi feel which is neat. (all of this again IMO) But when those crashes hit and those pads come in, the low-fi snare seems out of place. I hope this stuff helps... :-\

This song IS rockin! I'm actually playing this game for the first time now too, so this song certainly piqued my interest. One thing I think that might help with the humanization aspect is to have a bit of a release on the guitars. Having them immediately end I think is the biggest part about them sounding fake. If you can, have a release (not sustain, right?) that will still play the note, like, 1/10th of a second after the note's released. Having it fade out, even that quickly, will add to the quality of it. (if not, well, I learned something new. ) This can probably go unsaid, but humanize the percussions a tiny bit too. *shrugs*. (PS zomg game is beautiful, even for PS2 system)

After it was pointed out the percussion, I agree, you could maybe make the entire volume of the strings louder, or maybe turn the shakers down. Maybe have them continue farther in the song, just even more quiet? I dunno. Possibly turn up the violin that comes in at 1:00 up too, cause compared to the harp, it seems quieter than it needs to be, too. Past that, all of it seems really spot on! Great stuff!

Sorry bud, but I think the song is too loud, way too busy and muddy. If you could turn those 'backing strings', I guess they are, down in volume a lot, we might be able to hear the instruments and effects. You might not need as many instruments in there. There's no dynamics to the song's volumes and while there is some progression, it's not noticeable because of those synth strings/pads that cover everything up. Also, try varying up the percussion lines. That very static hihat gets annoying after a while (every other tick-hit). Change up the hit times of the snare and bass drums, too. After you calm the song down I would like to comment more on it.

...Wait, what?

I was fiddling with some things with a remix I've been working on and came across this, what I guess is a feedback loop. It's a really neat/weird effect. Edit: Okay, I just opened it back up.. You'll have to add a device to make sound for it to work first. After the first time it makes sound, it'll keep doing it. ; You can plug into the Merger side of the Spider M&S device. http://www.b33j.com/files/audio_feedback.rns (Reason 3.0) Directions: Touch the Master Volume on the Line Mixer for the Rate of pulses and the X-Over Freq knob on the Stereo-Imager to change pitch, kinda. I'd advise moving the volume knob up to 78 as slowly as you can at first, so you don't scare yourself. Play with it around 75 to 95 (or higher/louder, whatever). Move the X-Over Freq and see what happens.

Can you be more specific on the 'channels'? Are you talking about the very top device, "MIDI" thing up there on the rack? Don't forget, you *usually* have to add a "Mixer" to the device rack, if it's what I think you're doing. That would be the main thing you patch in to. And, some people have so many devices and sounds, that they use more than one Mixer. However, there's also just "Line Mixer"s you can use without needing to have all those auxillory and whatever options. What you *might* be patching into there is just the MIDI device, which sends signals out to other midi devices or programs, or is input FROM other midi devices or programs. It's not the Mixer for sound levels. (I did this too when i first started learning Reason and was like WTF? no sound?) As a tip for very first beginners, there's an option to set up a "template" or a `default selection of devices` when you first start up Reason - devices that will already be on the rack. How to do that is start on an empty rack, add a main Mixer and a MClass Mastering Suite. (I'd guess that every song you'd make would need a main Mixer and that MClass stuff. You could even add a Redrum or anything else if you use it alot.) Then save it somewhere, probably in your Reason install folder, as "template.rns" or whatever. Then under Options/Preference, look for the "Use file for default rack/setup" or something along those lines. Everytime you start up Reason, it'll have those devices on the rack already.

The crackle is *right after* (or right on) the 1 second mark. I can certainly hear it too.

Welcome to OCR! This is quite a good song, especially around the 'bigger' parts like 1:35. Well placed effects too that do mix things up well. A strong beat with a good breakdown, too. Just a little tiny point.. IMHO, Is to maybe shorten the lo-fi intro down a little bit? As I'm sure you know, you have to plan a song's relistenability (whew) and how many times a listener is going to play this song. After they get familiar with it, how will that intro be perceived? Will they think of it like "okay, this isn't the main beat of which I like, so hurry up and get past it to get to the good stuff" or does it hold a listener's attention long enough not to want to skip it? Or, (again IMO) you can keep the intro that length, but add more entertaining effects to it, y'know? What ever you wanna do man, this is a really good song. If you feel good about it, submit!

Wow, that song has an amazingly clean sound to it! Very nice! That's some good levels and sounds, man. Catchy

Speedcore? like http://www.ocremix.org/remix/OCR00683/ ? Love the song Skrypnyk! woot! Your mix is faster than that SMB Dirty Mix one, too.

I haven't noticed the kick in a bad way. Is it too soft, not enough bass? The *only* thing I don't like, and it's a very very minor issue, about the song is the beginning pad is a little generic. But at 0:25, it sounds much better with the other effects in there. I can't complain really, ..it all fits. And the static too. What is that from?

This is some good stuff! What if you were to try and have everything but the piano fade away starting at 1:33 which would lead into having the piano and scream'd strings the only things playing? Then you could bring some things fading back in, or a quick fade in to the heavy guitar. Maybe during that quiet part you could bring in some more piano, letting it have a nice piece with thosoe strings backing. I've always liked having a 'beautiful' part in a heavy song like this. Reminds me of Rob Dougan or a little bit of NiN. You can take or leave these ideas. The song is really good the way it is, it just needs an outtro part.

In your sequencer window, I guess you could look at if the device drop down list right next to the name of the track is pointing to the correct NN-XT. This is where naming your devices helps so much. At the "In Rec Name Out [m]", make sure Out is pointing to the right one. If not, all those tracks point to the same NN-XT. :/ Or it could be a CV linking problem. *shrugs*