WillRock Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 woah gario, thats some in depth stuff right there But whatever, I got the jizt of what you where saying however. I think with a matters like this, its dependent on the listener whether something like this is a good or a bad thing. I can see what your saying gario, I don't have a problem with the parallel fifths in this case here. I am personally a big fan of using dissonant chords like that and vig disliked one of my chords in a sub of mine a while back whereas the other judges (apparently) didn't have a problem with it. I think in this case, the best thing to do is for rozo to decide for himself. Dissonance is an unusual concept that different people react to in different ways. If Rozo likes it, I say he should keep it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gario Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 I think in this case, the best thing to do is for rozo to decide for himself. Well, of course; I'm not telling him what to do, just giving suggestions (as are we all). I'm giving some depth behind my critiquing 'cause he asked for it... ...and blame Hemophiliac for my ungodly post size; he put me up to it . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WillRock Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Well, of course; I'm not telling him what to do, just giving suggestions (as are we all). I'm giving some depth behind my critiquing 'cause he asked for it......and blame Hemophiliac for my ungodly post size; he put me up to it . I was getting the impression that you were saying it was incorrect to do that in his circumstances in your first post about it. You did redeem yourself in the next post, but only being human, I didn't find it until a second scan through of your post . But whatever, we are turning this thread into a parallel fifths debate I vote to get back on topic before it goes out of hand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozovian Posted February 17, 2009 Author Share Posted February 17, 2009 Update. Not a big one, but something to lsiten to. I've screwed with the key change as well as with the pads, added a couple of drum tracks... nothing big, imo. Update. Also, I'm not hearing what sounds bad about parallel fifths (but am enjoying the big thing it's become on my thread). I'm getting how they state the chords, but not seeing how that's a problem here. Yes Hemo, I know, I don't have to listen to Gario, but I want to understand why he's got a problem with it and apply that to my works, whether I change this one or not. Also wondering how this would sound if I had been taught theory at some point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WillRock Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 One impression of this that I have is it seems anti-climatic to me. One thing I have to say is the backing sounds very controlled - everything is filtered in a certain way and you have a very intentional sound it seems. But the dynamics seem to waver between loud and soft in the background, and I expect the dynamics to hit a peak (if i'm more precise I expect it after the breakdown, when the second run-through of the main melody happens). However it doesn't happen T_T I really like the controlled atmosphere, and the drums aren't as big a problem as I thought before, altho I still think they are a little loud. Basically, I like it, but I don't think its there yet. Keep at it man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gario Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Also, I'm not hearing what sounds bad about parallel fifths (but am enjoying the big thing it's become on my thread).lol, glad you liked the posts ... and sorry that I can't make it any simpler than that. It's a historical kind of thing, and many people have difficulty hearing what is wrong with it (as it is used in more contemporary music, now, anyhow). The only thing is that many composers write in a language that is over 400 years old, and the P5ths rule holds sway on that style.Also wondering how this would sound if I had been taught theory at some point.Heh, it would sound devastating if you were taught theory (with the proper aural training that should accompany it). One of the first things you learn is that P5ths are taboo for tonal music... It's part of the reason that I can't stand it in the context of tonal stuff (which this counts as, BTW) . I feel better for it, though.Don't worry, I'm not gonna expand on the P5ths epic I've created... but I'd simply suggest trying out some different things at the parts I mentioned, and if they don't work for you, go back to what you had before. Perhaps you'll find that there is something out there that sounds better for you (and me, lol)... Ok, I agree that the drums may be a bit loud for this track (mainly the bass). They drive the music, for sure, but the bass seems a little loud for me, right now. Otherwise they're good (especially with the additional doodads you've added). I actually like where the key went better this time (as it took some of the 'edge' off of the background texture), but how you approached it sounded a bit worse. That sliding lead really messed with my head, there (in a bad way). I made some suggestions on this before, and they still hold true, IMO. As for being anticlimatic, I actually liked the subdued sound of it all. Not all music needs a climax, really... BTW, I sort of miss the intro material that you expand on in the beginning of the piece... I think it could be in more of the music as additional texture to add some richness to it all. I want more of it! Keep it comin'! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozovian Posted February 19, 2009 Author Share Posted February 19, 2009 Hah Will, you should see my automation tracks, they're a mess. So much for controlled backgrounds. This is actually part of my "use as few midi tracks as possible"-type songs (like the yet to be posted Beyond Velocity) and, ironically, probably the track where I've used the most auxes and buses, which could also explain something. Lotta work, and scary to edit at this stage. As for Gario's crits and nitpicks... How to make a key change of one note more subtle: make it one seminote instead. Hope I've fixed the transition into it now... I might have made it worse, in which case it's completely intentional and done just to annoy you. Also, I'm not entirely sure which intro material you're talking about, if it's the melody or the chords. The chords are screwy, and the melody actually does make an appearance in the end (and in the calm middle section as well, tho lower). Now I screwed with: -the sound of the lead after the key change -volume levels -the break just before the key change -moved the bass, somewhere, to fit better with the chords -volume and mixing tweaks on the drums -got rid of a noise in the bass that probably nobody heard but me -some reverb wet/dry levels fixing -noticed a P5 occurrence and realized I can't screw with that one -something else -stuff I forgot Things already noticed: -unwanted cutoff resonance effect in the first pad chord -some big compression jumps... need to fix the compression issues somehow Hey! Listen! Almost there. Can't submit for another two weeks tho. That's actually a bit funny; when I submitted EYOD I had Beyond Velocity ready before I could submit it (tho it needed some tweaking after the Js had it), and now it's pretty much the same - something recently subbed, something else almost ready. Oh well... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WillRock Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Well, I'm liking it at the mo. My ears are tired, so it sounds good to me at the mo (or maybe tired ears isn't the reason for it but i'll confirm any misgivings on mixing etc tomoz. Arrangement sounds good, I liked the little details you added. Off-topic a moment Gario, your sig is hilarious Alas, only the foolish need a foundation to base any music on Because all the remixers here including me AND you technically base our music on the video game tunes that we remix, you are calling yourself foolish, and every other person who remixes on this site foolish XD Or... Was it intentional? Was this an attack to every remixer here and yourself? Was the parallel fifths just a ploy by you to confuse everyone? Or i'm I going completely stark raving bonkers? My insanity seems most likely, but whatever i'm going to bed XD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gario Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 ...all the remixers here including me AND you technically base our music on the video game tunes that we remix, you are calling yourself foolish, and every other person who remixes on this site foolish XDOr... Was it intentional? Was this an attack to every remixer here and yourself? Was the parallel fifths just a ploy by you to confuse everyone? Or i'm I going completely stark raving bonkers? Heh, I'm glad you caught on to the sig, Will. Yes, the irony was intentional, there. Call me an ironic son of a gun . It also follows the theme of the site at the same time - to make video game music a real experience outside of the game itself, so it's got a duel meaning, there... Now that you caught me I've got to go and change it .I'll listen to the new track in about an hour or so, 'cause I've gotta go... so I'll be back! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WillRock Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Now that you caught me I've got to go and change it . Nah keep it, I like it lol See if anyone else catches on, assuming no one reads WIP Threads Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gario Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Also, I'm not entirely sure which intro material you're talking about, if it's the melody or the chords. I think it's the chords that I'm thinknig about, the chords that sound like - Baah - Baah - Baah - Bah - Baah - Bah - Baah - Baah - Baah - repeat... ...for a lack of a better way to describe it... I think it enters at 0:18 on the mandolin' like instrument. I hear it in more of the piece, now that I'm listening... better stick my foot in my mouth, now . Hope I've fixed the transition into it now... I might have made it worse, in which case it's completely intentional and done just to annoy you. Gee, your a pal . It's not the change itself that's ackward, it's the lead that goes from one key to the next. It sounds like it wanted to go up (like the older mix), but then slides down to the appropriate key. I believe it's simply a residue of what you were trying to do before... then the lead changes it's mind and moves somewhere else. The drums sound just right for me, as they are now. Nice fix, there! You've still got a few weeks before you can sub, right? Still time to make the piece better! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozovian Posted February 19, 2009 Author Share Posted February 19, 2009 Thanks guys. All right, I know which melody you're talking about (counting the a's made it obvious). Will see if it fits somewhere. Yeah, I realized the bend might go to far, but it works for me, it's one of those screwy things I like doing to my listeners (like keeping the lead quiet for a few measures in EYOD... and let's not talk about my other fzero track). Besides, I think it's more an issue with what you remember and expect, than what fresh ears would expect. Couple of weeks time to screw it up, yeah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diamondfalcon Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 I really like this mix, keep up the good work! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hewhoisiam Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 OH MAN! I can't believe I missed this! Like if I owe anyone a review... I listened to the link on the first post, so, I hope that's right. LISTENING! WILL EDIT THIS POST LATER! okay, as I'm listening to this, it's getting hard. I'm not finding things to complain about. I'll find nits to pick. It'll just take a while. I'd like to see a sort of very quick fade in on that first note. Just an 8th note in length maybe to help it not not sound quite so harsh first thing you hear in the track. At 3:35, I can't tell if that's over aggressive pitch binding in the first few notes, or a key change that comes on really strong; but I'm not liking that. If it's a key change, I'd augment maybe that first note back to the original? This really isn't my area of expertise. At 2:25 that static chord build seems like maybe it should move some, it wears out its welcome after it's to volume. I'm thinking specifically after the build is at volume at 2:30-32 ish. At 2:57 that sustained note is LONG. But it needs to be, so I don't really know what to say about it. I don't really enjoy it up there though. Maybe add something to it to help the build up and tone down the pitch bend at the end of it? Or do a combination of toning down the bend and shorting the whole note. I dunno. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pogo8bit Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 I must say that MMX Braincooler its such a big song, pretty nice arrangements, and it have the main essence too. Keep it up. Sounds great to me!. The tune changes almost at the end of the song are good, but maybe u can improve the beggin of the solo. Excelent job! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozovian Posted February 24, 2009 Author Share Posted February 24, 2009 Update. lol I'm running out of things to fix with this, I guess it's getting close to being subbable. Thanks everyone who's critted it, it's greatly appreciated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WillRock Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 I personally can't think of anything to say except to check it through with a judge and/or sub it. It sounds pretty sweet to me now lol yay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eino Keskitalo Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 Sounding good. 00:42-00:45 sounds off tonally, especially 00:44. 00:42 is interesting, but then it goes to 00:44 and sounds just wrong (to me at least). The sweeping chord(?) behind the non-changing riff is off. (Ten points for terminology for me.) --Eino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pogo8bit Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 I really liked this one. The quiet part its awesome, that crystal piano. Sounds good to me. Good job! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jabond23 Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 Sounding good.00:42-00:45 sounds off tonally, especially 00:44. 00:42 is interesting, but then it goes to 00:44 and sounds just wrong (to me at least). The sweeping chord(?) behind the non-changing riff is off. (Ten points for terminology for me.) --Eino I agree with that. It sounds like that one of the notes in the chords is off and sounds wrong. But other than that, i love this ReMix! It sounds awesome! And kudos on the source too! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammerlink Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 So, um, yeah.... 404 not found? got the short 1'58 version. Sounds great, but short. What's the deal? not seeing it published either... nor a ruling of y/n. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozovian Posted May 15, 2009 Author Share Posted May 15, 2009 Thanks for reviving something fairly old. It's subbed, an updated version. I cleaned my server space a bit, must have taken this version down. You'll just have to wait until 2011 when it's finally posted. Cut the filename from the url, see what versions I've got in my remixes directory. Don't need any more crits on this, tho I don't mind feedback. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gario Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 Look at it this way, Rozo - your stuff generates interest even after it's been collecting dust for 3 months. That's gotta be a good thing, right? 2-23 : 5-15... Well, almost three months. I wonder when the judges will even get to this one - it isn't even on the panel yet. I'd give it another two months before it's through . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.