big giant circles

rofl why is this even on the panel? I don't drink, personally, but after listening to this, perhaps I should start. I'm not even going to bother commenting. This is just one that the community is going to have to hear. And I feel completely justified in not saying anything useful. ABSOLUTELY

...Drive down here so we can spoon on your birthday. <3 also... BACON!!!

I was already cool with the prior version, but without breaking out the old one, I notice the drums sound a lot better. Better production, not too reverb-heavy, everything fits together nice and snug, and once again, the lead synth work and arpeggios are absolutely rockin'. Larry, I'm gonna kick you. ABSOLUTELY

Sweet mercy, I'm voting. What is this panel coming to? I'm going to keep this short and sweet. SML was the first game I ever owned (besides Tetris which came with my Gameboy, so I don't count it). I'm quite familiar with the melody. I played this game for freaking hours and hours and hours. I think it's a fun deviation from what a lot of people around here seem to try to put into a remix lately. I didn't hear any production gripes that caused me to bite my cheek. I think it's a great arrangement and to me, the source connection remained plenty solid even during the parts where it seemed like entirely original music. This is great, I think this type of arrangement is in perfect accord with our standards. ABSOLUTELY

There are workings on the backend that y'all don't know about. All you need to know for now is, despite the understandable tendency to fret, things will get better.

I got a chuckle out of "Obama probably likes 50 cent because he's always going on about 'change'"

happy birfday, slinky head hope it was a fun one, bro

what's with all this subjectible garbage still? let the dead horse just lay there. stop trying to pick it up with strings and make it tapdance.

TL:DR, although I did skim a sentence or three. I realize you're only going at it "just for fun", and that's cool. But I will say you've likely over-thought this whole situation, and pretty much music/art in general. What it really all comes down it is personal preference. There have been countless discussions on what constitutes art, and whether or not the terms and conditions of its creation violates that status, but really, in the long run, it's all a bunch of over-analytical nerd talk, and it's all pointless. It's like telling someone who doesn't like bananas why they should like bananas and vice versa. And adding speculation only makes the argument sillier. The proper answer to the question "Is video game music the best music out there?" is: There is no answer. It depends on one's personal preference.

nice work, par for the course.

Pretty much, yep. Likewise, I could tear into your post, but in so few words, Slygen's pretty much said all that really needs to be said. Nothing personal. I know you were only playing DA "just for fun" so I don't feel like you deserve a full reaming anyway

So, I'm not very good at making videos, so please feel no need to tell me what I already know But at any rate, here's a little something I whipped together. It's also worth noting this is my first semi-successful attempt at using screen-capture software. And though the song ultimately ended up out of synch with the video, I hope you dig it anyway.

I'm thinking of buying a Mac Wheel for my music.

the M-audio BX5a's are not a bad substitute for the crappy new rokits in that price range. Or you might be able to still find an old pair new online.

eh, the old rokit 5's (what nicole has) were pretty good, but they don't make them anymore. Instead, they have the new RP-5 G2's (generation 2s) which look more like their VXT line. And so far, I'm simply not impressed.

Some people count to 5. Some people count to 3 and then 2. Me personally, I like to count to 2, then half, then 1 and a half, then 1 again.

That's a good question, I'd be curious to know the *technical* answer from the ISP. I'm sure this is probably addressed in the ToS thesedays since so many people have wireless now. My own personal take on it is that anyone who doesn't secure their wireless signal is putting up a neon sign asking people to use it, and it's their own fault. It's like riding a bike on a major street. Even if you have the "right of way", it's still better to pretend like you don't, because in the end, you can be *right* but still get killed. Apply that to this topic in the sense that even though it's *your* internet, it's better to expect that there are people who are going to ignore that fact. Re: Zircon & Nasenmann's sub-debate, it sounds like both systems have certain advantages over the other, but we just have to accept that everything has its price in one way or another.

Don't lie. I've heard your music. It's all a bunch of BOOM-tss nonsense. You can't fool me.

I can't help but wonder, how did you not know that until just now?

Fixed. As reelmojo fessed up to, it's a matter of opinions. Please don't start pointless debates on personal musical preferences.

Slygen makes a reasonable point, ALTHOUGH, I will throw out the factor that unless I'm mistaken, schools, institutes, organizations, etc usually have the option (and are generally required) to purchase commercial or multi-user licenses for such programs. I can't quote this in every case, but especially in music software, the EULA is almost always for a single user. Therefore, such organizations that have more to lose generally protect themselves by acquiring adequate permissions to install and provide software. Therefore, saying that in CASE 1 the software company still receives no support may not be entirely accurate. It could be that they have already received proper compensation and granted the appropriate license. Otherwise, if I'm totally mistaken, I still think you've made a reasonable point and I admire your thought process. Here: I'm too lazy to do the legwork, but for this example, here's Adobe's EULA's, if someone would like to do some research. http://www.adobe.com/products/eulas/ Bear with my frankness, but perhaps then it's better that you sit this one out then and leave it to people who either know what they're talking about or at least present a more compelling argument. Or at the very least, try a little harder to have some substance to whatever it is you want to say. I have no problem with opposing arguments, and as I've stated, I'm even in agreement with some of them, but only if they're sensibly presented, which you've struggled with. Don't take it personally. I promise I'm not trying to be an ass or condescend you, but pretty much everything I've read that you've posted by this point has been mostly nonsense with little to no credibility. Cheers.

Indeed, I'm going to have to back Brian up on the shenanigans that have been thus called.

I think we just found a new candidate for the "judge bots"

@ Slygen That wasn't entirely directed at you, I'm not making accusations or taking anything personally. It's all for the sake of the discusssion A couple things though, Omnisphere isn't a game, it's a ~$500 synth instrument. (If you already knew that, my bad, I just gathered from your post that you assumed it was a game). Also, the reason I was mincing theft and piracy in that instance is because whether or not the copy was physically shoplifted or pirated still pisses me off, because I paid money for my right to use the program and the people on the other side of this fence did not, thus I compared it to someone cutting in line when they have no right, and I've paid my dues. Again, I personally don't care about trying before you buy, and if Cubase doens't have a demo version, then it's their own fault if people pirate their software for (genuinely) evaluational purposes. Once you've evaluated it fairly though, I think it shows good form () to either buy it or delete it. Which it seems you did, so rock on.

Well, technically there are copies of everything, whether it's a data-based program, or a car, or a box of cookies, or a pair of shoes. If a guy invents a pair of shoes, and people like it enough that he makes copies of the shoe for the purpose of selling them to others, using the exact same materials and procedures for assembling it as he did with the original shoe, you're not infringing on his product if you acquire a copy of a of those shoes illegally, you're stealing them, not infringing on his rights of ownership. Now, naturally, you're talking about someone taking those shoes and with a couple mouse clicks making perfect duplicates of them and putting them up on the ol' Pirate Bay or something, which is obviously different when dealing with digital information versus something tangible and made of leather and rubber. However, since the man went through the appropriate process of ensuring that any and every such shoe that is IDENTICAL to the one he created belongs to him, and when you obtain his shoe, you must acquire the necessary license to use it, and furthermore, you do not have the right to copy, recreate, or distribute it, then you are essentially infringing on his rights, AND stealing from him. (how's THAT for a runaway sentence??? woo!) I mean, I definitely understand your line of thinking, it's in a very technical sense, but since copyright infringement is so closely tied into theft, it's sometimes kind of hard (and perhaps pointless) to bother distinguishing where one technically ends and the other begins. It's easier to just think of them as kind of a whole. It's like, trying to tell "unmellow yellow" apart from "laser lemon super happy yellow" naturally, this of course goes without saying, as the look in your eyes when we spoon says it all. <3