Geoffrey Taucer

[This is an automatically generated message] I've reviewed your remix and have set it to Completed status, indicating that I think your remix is ready to be submitted to the Judges Panel. Congratulations! If you feel like you still need to work on your track and want more feedback, you can change the prefix back to Work-in-Progress and we'll go through the review process again. If you decide to submit your track, please change the prefix to Submitted after sending your email. Thank you!

EVAL: Arrangement: Recognizable, sufficiently different from the original, no objections on those grounds. Really smooth, chilled-out feel. I dig it. Vocal samples seem out of place; you've got this soothing, mellow piece, punctuated by vocal samples that don't remotely fit that feel. I like what you've done with the percussion. A more active bass part would be nice. My biggest complaint is the fadeout ending; I'm sure you could do something more interesting there. Production: If it were me, I'd bring the bass level down a touch, and back off slightly on the reverb, but neither of these is a dealbreaker. If I were a judge, I'd probably give this a borderline-yes; I could see the panel breaking in either direction on this. IF it gets a "no," my guess is that their biggest complaints will be the out-of-place vocal samples and the fadeout ending. As I said, it would be nice for the bass part to get a bit more active in some sections, but that alone probably won't be a deciding factor.

[This is an automatically generated message] I've reviewed your remix and have returned it to Work-in-Progress status, indicating that I think there are some things you still need to work on. After you work on your track and feel that you'd like some more feedback, please change the prefix back to Ready for Review and I'll review it again! Good luck!

Props for attempting this; a minimal, ambient piece like this can be really hard to arrange. Let's see what you manage to do with this EVAL: Arrangement: .... well, when I listened to the source, I was expecting something experimental and avant-garde, and you certainly did not disappoint. Some cool ideas, a creative and unusual approach, which shows originality while still using the source in a recognizable fashion. I'd love to see the motifs of the original come in earlier; the arrangement takes too long to get to something that is recognizable, but once you do get there, you do a good job of it. I'd also love for this to go on longer; it ends right when it's starting to get interesting. It's very minimalistic, and honestly I'm not entirely sure how to assess it on those grounds. Generally, it sounds very sparse, and the more active parts are rather discordant, but I think both of those things are intentional, and are a (largely successful) attempt to capture the creepy feel you're going for. It's daring and creative, but I'm honestly not sure how the judges panel would react to such a minimalist arrangement. The ending is also very abrupt. Production: I think it's clear that you're making your production choices deliberately weird. In some regards, it works, and in others it doesn't. The piano in particular sounds too mechanical, and could use more variation in velocity; I also think the intro needs more going on in the upper-mids, either by bringing those up in the piano, or perhaps adding some ambient noise in this range. On the whole, I don't think this would make it past the panel. I think it's just too sparse, and too.... weird, for lack of a better way of saying it. I get that this sparseness and weirdness is deliberate; this would work well as the backing track to go along with a video, but I think it's too sparse to stand as something to be listened to on its own. If you want to get this past the judges, I'd shorten the intro, and extend the track, expanding it into something a bit more active in the later sections.

[This is an automatically generated message] I've reviewed your remix and have returned it to Work-in-Progress status, indicating that I think there are some things you still need to work on. After you work on your track and feel that you'd like some more feedback, please change the prefix back to Ready for Review and I'll review it again! Good luck!

EVAL: Arrangement is on the conservative side, but I think there's just enough variation here to clear the bar in that regard. The original soloing at 1:48 is excellent. However, the percussion could use more variation. You have a few changeups, but on the whole the rhythm is too samey throughout the mix. I'd also like to hear more in the final chorus (starting at 2:40) to make it stand out and feel different from earlier iterations. This would be a great place to add in some guitar fills, since the melody leaves plenty of space for those sorts of flourishes. Production is mostly good, but there are a few issues that stand out to me. First, back off on the compression and saturation, especially in the percussion. I'd also bump up the volume on some of the harmonic squeals (ie at 1:03). The lead guitars, while they don't sound 100% authentic, have some really pretty tone, though again I'd back off on the compression so that tone can still shine through in the busier sections. The rhythm guitars sound a bit thin by comparison. There's several ways this could be addressed; my first impulse would be to see how they sound an octave lower. If that doesn't suit your tastes, then probably double them (or at least double the bass note) with something to give it a bit more low-end punch. I like your use of reverb throughout; I think you did a good job of using it in such a way to make the mix sound big and spacious without making it too muddy. This definitely has potential, but I don't think it's sub-ready yet.

[This is an automatically generated message] I've reviewed your remix and have returned it to Work-in-Progress status, indicating that I think there are some things you still need to work on. After you work on your track and feel that you'd like some more feedback, please change the prefix back to Ready for Review and I'll review it again! Good luck!

EVAL: The bass seems much better balanced than in previous versions. Piano and violin both sound pretty nice; you could go the extra mile by adding a bit more variation in velocity to the piano, but on the whole I think the piano is one of the strong points of this mix. Synth coming in at 0:24 still feels a bit bland, but not enough to be a dealbreaker. The biggest issue in your earlier version was percussion, and I can definitely hear that you've put some time into that. It sounds much better than in the earlier version, both with regards to EQ and arrangement. It still sounds mechanical, though. My biggest gripe is that the instruments sound a bit too mechanical; they sound like some high-quality midi samples, but won't fool anybody into thinking they're real instruments played by a real player. In some arrangements, this is fine, but this arrangement relies very heavily on "real" instruments; piano, violin, bass, and percussion all sound like they want to sound like live performances, but fall short. Bass and violin, while they won't fool anybody, are acceptable; they have room for improvement, but they aren't deal breakers, imo. Piano has gorgeous tone, but could use some more variation in velocity and timing. Percussion... still sounds pretty mechanical. It's enormously improved over earlier versions, but is still, I think, the weakest link. Where this really stands out the most is in the sections where the tempo changes. In general terms, gradual tempo changes are really hard for a live band to pull off, and when the percussion is keeping the same rhythm while gradually changing tempo and still hitting every beat exactly right, it makes the whole thing feel more mechanical. I'm not sure how best to address this, but my first impulse would be to make the tempo changes happen a little quicker, and try not to have multiple instruments playing anything complex during those changes; hopefully that all makes sense. If you haven't already, take a look at Zircon's tips for "live" instruments. For now I'm inclined to say this still needs a bit more work before resubmission; it's close, but it's not there yet.

[This is an automatically generated message] I've reviewed your remix and have returned it to Work-in-Progress status, indicating that I think there are some things you still need to work on. After you work on your track and feel that you'd like some more feedback, please change the prefix back to Ready for Review and I'll review it again! Good luck!

Ok, sorry it took me so long to get to this. Anyway EVAL: Source is easily recognizable, with more than enough original variation. The slowdown at 1:12 is awkward, but I don't think this is a big enough issue to prevent it from passing the panel. As for production, though, this is a mixed bag. The piano sample sounds gorgeous! But the bass feels a bit too loud and a bit too present; I see the judges thought the bass was too quiet in your original submission, but I think you've overcompensated in this version. The synth coming in at 0:25 feels like it could use more high-end sizzle, but the percussion is the biggest weakness in this section (and throughout the rest of the mix). Comparing this to the version you subbed to the panel, I like the older version better with regards to EQ on the drums. The percussion needs more punch, and needs more high-end; bump up the treble on the snares and hats, and bring down the low/low mids on the snare. Percussion also needs more variation in velocity to keep it from feeling monotonous. I would take a look at zircon's percussion tutorial; just spicing up the percussion would immensely improve this mix. The judges mentioned the violin was panned to the left in your submission, and it's still panned a bit left here, it's a minor issue, but I'd probably move it slightly towards the center -- it doesn't have to be dead center, but it feels too far left right now. It does sound clearer in the current version; that's a definite improvement. tl;dr: I think the percussion would prevent this from getting past the judges right now. There are a few other minor issues (the bass being too loud is the biggest one for me), but I think spicing up the percussion should be your main focus.

Do you have a link to the original source for comparison? EDIT: nvm, found the link and added it to your first post. I'll take a look when I get a chance, hopefully later tonight

JSYK, the "ready for review" tag is intended for use on tracks that you plan on submitting to the judges' panel. Since you don't plan on submitting this, I'll switch this track to "work-in-progress," though feel free to switch it to "completed" if you prefer. As for the lead tones, I agree that they sound too thin. My first impulse would be to decrease the wet/dry ratio on the reverb, and slightly bump up the level, but there's probably more that can be done. What are you using for the guitars? (ie, are you recording an amp, or using a vst amp modeler and if so which one?)

[This is an automatically generated message] I've reviewed your remix and have returned it to Work-in-Progress status, indicating that I think there are some things you still need to work on. After you work on your track and feel that you'd like some more feedback, please change the prefix back to Ready for Review and I'll review it again! Good luck!

Evaluation: Ok, before I get to anything else: the use of the lavos scream sample at 0:30 would instantly disqualify this mix, as OCR cannot accept mixes with samples from Square games. With that out of the way, let's see how the rest of the mix holds up. Production: The whole thing is very compressed and busy, and my ears feel tired long before the track ends. Go lighter on the compression, let the parts breathe. The bass synth has too much presence in the mid range. Arrangement: The melody isn't changed much, but the accompaniment/background is sufficiently interpretive. However, at 1:05, you repeat the previous section with no variation that I can detect; if you're going to repeat the main melody immediately, it should have some sort of variation to keep it interesting. The brief slowdown at 1:50 was awkward. The already-repeated section from earlier repeats once again at 2:30. The fadeout ending, while characteristic of the synthwave style, still felt disappointing. On the whole, the mix feels very busy and repetitive, but I feel like you have enough material here to make a much more interesting mix. First of all, I recommend backing off on the compression. But arrangement is, I think, where the most work needs to be done. Throughout much of the mix, you have a lot of different synths competing for the listener's attention; by allowing these various parts to take the spotlight at different points, rather than having them all going at once for pretty much the whole mix, you could use most of the same sounds and ideas to craft a much more captivating arrangement. As-is, I think this mix would very likely be rejected.

I loves me some Linkin Park, and these guys absolutely nailed the style

Was a great set!

So with Texas being Texas, I'm thinking either spring or fall would be a better time to do this. This spring is too soon, this fall conflicts with MAGLabs, so I'm thinking spring of 2019 in Fayetteville, Texas. That work for everybody? Also, if all goes according to plan, I'll be spending the next six months or so building a house, which means I will have neither the money for the initial deposit nor the time to get this put together. If somebody else can take the lead, that would be awesome.

If we do Texas, This is the one I have in mind

Two reasons I like this place in Texas: 1) It's cheap 2) I'm hoping hosting in Texas will make @Sixto more likely to show up

Ok, sent messages to several places requesting details; I won't know for sure until I hear back, but it seems likely that we'll be able to keep the price under $270/person for the weekend (not counting food) EDIT: I found a 10-bedroom farm in Fayetteville, TX that's uber-cheap; if we manage to fill all 10 rooms, it would come to about $50/room/night. My guess is that's about the best deal we'd be likely to get.

Depending on interest, I'll research other possible locations to try to keep the price down. It would be a bit difficult, because I don't know how many people will share rooms and how many people will get their own rooms. Goal is to keep it under $100/night/person, but obviously that can't be guaranteed. Depending on numbers and location, it could be cheaper than that -- possibly a LOT cheaper (for example, I found one in Boone NC that -- if we filled every bedroom -- would be about $175/room for the entire weekend).

So after this past MAGFest, I was left feeling like we need a different focal point for an annual community meeting. A chance for people of the OCR tribe to get together and hang/game/rock the fuck out, without being hampered by an inability to get hotel rooms at the Gaylord. The overall impression I got from talking to other people is that I would not be the only one interested in such a thing. SO If, hypothetically, I were to rent a bigass mansion (say, something like this) for a weekend in the summer (say, July 6-8), and distribute the cost among participants, how many people would realistically be likely to sign up? The goal would be to keep the cost under $250/room for the weekend. Keeping a list of people interested, just so I can keep count: Taucer + S Bahamut Nabeel Ansari Earth Kid Dyne zyko Theory of N +1 Sixto Shaggy Hemo Arrow Gario Prophetik Phonetic Hero Liontamer Mazedude JohnStacy Garpocalypse DA + OA Flexstyle DarkeSword Rama EDIT: IF SOMEBODY ELSE CAN STEP IN AND TAKE LEAD, I THINK THIS WILL HAPPEN. IF NOT, IT WON'T. I don't have the time or organizational skills to run this, and I don't have the money to make the up front deposit. I can provide contact info for what looks like a great place to hold it, if somebody else wants to step in and take over.

RFB I didn't see you at all this year

Recording and production. It's where I'll be making remixes. (and also where I'll be doing my PC gaming) Will take a look, thanks!

So my fiance and I are preparing to buy land and have a house built. The house will not be huge, but it will have a space set aside specifically for use as a recording studio. The room will be 8' wide, by up to 13' long (I was thinking 10' room with a 3' deep closet, but that's flexible). The ceiling will be somewhere around 9'. Anyway, given that I have this opportunity to build a studio literally from the ground up, what advice can you give me? Obviously the space is fairly small, but I can do pretty much whatever I want as far as building materials, wiring, windows, etc -- basically, the structural planning of the room can be whatever the hell I want as long as it fits within 8' x 10' by 9'. Either advice or links to useful resources would be awesome.