Nase

haha ___________ wonderful piece man.

personally, the fantasy demonesque posing shit i only find mildly annoying. what really makes me rofl is the dude with goatee and oh so badass expression on his face look, filmed from a low angle perspective. as performed by exhibit 'Z'.

battle with zant in 5 parts http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iw1QJc5RKu8 i didn't even play the damn game, yet i worship it. oh lol someone made it in mario paint composer. brave effort haha seriously though, that gradual decline into fucking madness, realised in such a flawless fashion, is something i hadn't really heard before in a video game.

yeah, i was sad when i saw em removed. deleting them was consistant with the guidelines, but i would've loved to see them pardoned (among some others). classic ocr tunage imo. ah well...

...seriously? i'm sure there are some people who have a need for this exact sound that software probably can't match exactly yet, but...are you really really one of them? even without taking the unreliabilities of old analog gear into account, it's a fuckload of money you'll be spending, and there are a lot of cheaper alternatives around, VA or real analog (prophet08 as yoozer mentioned. or juno60 or whatever) just sayin, if you really worship the moog sound and can't have it any other way, sure, have fun. in any other scenario...it'd be a pretty stupid purchase tbh. unless you tend to shit gold.

lol. seems like the quest of finding a kickass name leads many people onto similar paths, eh?

or just twiddle dem knobs and go 'oooh! ahhh!' dunno, that's how i remember my first encounters with a synth. it kinda was more fun to do at that point, and after a while of doing this i got the hang of basic subtractive synth architecture. i read up on filters, envelopes and all that a while later, but what really got me started with synthesizers was the process of twiddling knobs and waiting for the crazee shit to happen. YMMV ofcourse.

Synthesizing: Serious Business

sounding great. price is alright, can't justify buying it for the occasional use it'd get though. in case you ever decide to do a deal like the previous one again, i'll be picking it up most likely. shreddage+koto nation for $99 for example would be something i'd seriously consider. by the way, ever thought about doing a competitively priced brass library? thinking of something that's somewhat flexible in terms of genre (jazz, funk, classical etc). no need for every articulation possible, just cover some popular standards in different genres. it should have decent solo patches but the focus would probably be on ensembles. i just don't see any competition in the budget range you typically cater for. horns are probably harder to sample well than a lot of instruments, but if you could get that right it might become a bestseller. anyway good luck with this lib.

Rushjet is simply too hardcore. but really, may i ask why? don't tell me that you're faster with it than an experienced famitracker user... it just seems like unnecessary geekdom unless there are any advantages to it that i'm not aware of.

i dunno, i'd just draw one bar of panning automation into a pattern and loop that. takes 10 seconds. one plugin less needed. did i mention i hate crowded plugin lists?

on a related note: i remember downloading some SoE arrangements in the early days of napster. they certainly didn't have an amateur sound to them; could that have been bonus stuff from the OST release?

great stuff.

oh, so i did beat a dead horse indeed! thanks for illustrating that with a clever picture.

Hm. Lemme speak my mind here, at the risk of beating a dead horse... Really good (authentic) chiptunes, in my opinion, always have really good production. That's because production and arrangement are very closely tied together when making a chiptune. For example, you can't just apply EQ when the sound is too muddy or too thin. You cannot really add to the fullness of a track with reverb or other sound enhancing fx. You have to expand on the arrangement or choose different waveforms and such. Disclaimer: I don't mind the panel's policy regarding chiptunes. It's ok with me that they don't consider chiptunes to have sufficient production value in most cases. What I don't agree with is the notion that said production value can be judged completely objectively. See, I like fat analogue basses. I like the rich tone of a grand piano, i like a good dynamic string section and powerful rumbling brass. I also like raw square and noise waves put together in a compelling fashion. I cannot possibly make a distinction regarding sound quality. All of the above just sound awesome to me when they're pulled off competently. I cannot fault the production of a perfect chiptune, and that isn't primarily because I marvel at what has been done with the limited resources available, it is because it sounds fucking awesome to me, period. So yes indeed, I think the argument boils down to a different level of appreciation of music just consisting of basic waveforms. Of course that doesn't mean that the panel/djp don't appreciate chiptunes, they just think that their technical limitations result in a natural huge disadvantage when it comes to production. And that's perfectly ok, it's pretzel's site. In the end though, what really constitutes good production? i'd say it means nothing else than 'make it sound awesome. let the arrangement shine'. in my opinion, really good chiptunes achieve that. others are free to disagree. I dunno, why not embrace the simple fact that judging music inherently requires some level of subjectivity and move on? relentlessly pointing to standards and guidelines won't really settle this argument when it really is about different aesthetic sensibilities.

that's what i've been using for years, no troubles with accuracy so far. wow, looking at the lines...maybe it's just broken. can't think of anything that would explain this amount of drift (software related anyway). dirty lense maybe??

no rush, take your time. i'll listen again once you've fleshed it out. also, i didn't know there was a factual difference between criticise and critique apart from the fancy french syllable 'criticism' matches your definition of 'critique' in my book. pointing out perceived flaws and merits.

where's anything but tangerines? there's some pentatonic stuff that could be vaguely related to the bassline of the original, but otherwise... correct me if i'm wrong of course, but i find it hard to criticise at this point because there's no remix in it yet.

i'd comment on it, but i can't come up with anything sensible to say about it. it's a flawless abomination.

i just bought it thinking 'well, how can it be much worse than kontakt etc', but apparently it eats way more ram than comparable instruments in kontakt, like scarbee's stuff. i felt reluctant so far to use up half of my ram just for bass duties (i hardly ever settle for just one bass sound), but the bridging thing should make it more bearable. did they add a more elegant way to change time sigs, btw? did i miss a statement by gol saying he'll never do it? seems to me like a lot of users would like a rework.

+2 gb RAM, wheeeee! I might get some use out of Trilian now.

http://olremix.org/remixes/774

you really just have to train your ears. learn how the different intervals sound. once you know that, recognising a scale is easy. you can learn about commonly used scales/modes, but just knowing about the theory won't get you anywhere unless you can link that knowledge to what you're hearing/ what you want to hear. once you can safely recognise intervals, you can go on to practice in your head anytime. that's what i did (and still do) anyway. think of a melody you know, try to determine the root key, and work your way through the notes. imagining the notes being played on e.g. a keyboard, a guitar fretboard or a piano roll might help, whatever works best for you. i find myself switching between those 3 images. singing helps a lot! it's the most portable instrument you have. try stuff like singing/humming a root note, then its minor second, root note again, major second, root note, minor third, root note, major third etc etc. if you have problems with recognising semitones in your head, practice on your computer or an instrument first. program arpeggios, scales, melodies in the piano roll, understand the intervals and try to sing them. this will help to burn them into your memory. at some point, if you keep practicing, you will be able to hear what you just programmed before you even hit the play button. these are just some techniques that worked for me, you will probably invent some of your own on the way. some of my suggestions might sound a little dry and annoying, but once you have some basic understanding of intervals, it can get quite fun. your brain will grow so accustomed to recognising pitch that it'll start analyzing tunes without you even asking for it; any commercial or movie soundtrack you listen to can become a lesson in theory. by the way, scales are overrated. they're helpful in a theoretic context, but when making music, i'd rather focus on the individual relation between notes. it's true of course that different scales have some inherent quality to them, but the scale a melody is in alone doesn't really tell you all that much about its mood. there's no reason why it shouldn't use three different scales either hope that helped a bit.

paulstretch rules. i remember not having a birthday present for my mom, making a load of unbearable gabber/hardcore loops and throwing them into paulstretch. tadaa, instant ambient album (after selecting the best results of course). she's really into the ethereal newage stuff so it was perfect. i chose not to tell her how it was conceived tho :>

weird, the negative opinions i read mostly state that it's too cluttered and convoluted, as in bloatware. people who claim it's too simple probably have a warezed copy of FL 3 on their hd. OP, do you just want to use the general midi sounds? there's other potentially better stuff available in FL, you know