Jump to content

I want to increase the remix size limit...


Recommended Posts

8MB is not enough for me to post a remix, because I am submitting my remix that is very long (~45 minutes, the size after the compression (to 48kbps) is 15MB).

So, I want the webmaster to increase the remix size limit to 15MB, or I can't submit my long remix.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, never going to happen. OCR has been strict about filesize in the past and will likely never lift that limitation, and they probably won't accept any song encoded any lower than 128kbps. Also, most of the judges likely won't let you get away with a remix that's much longer than 8-10 minutes before they NO it for being too long.

You could try splitting it up into chunks and submitting it, but you could only submit one piece at a time every two weeks. That's pretty much the only other alternative outside of sharing it on the Game ReMixes forum. (which I see you've already done.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, a 45 minute long remix will never meet the site standards. It will never, ever happen. Second, 48kbps is waaaay too low quality. Your song will literally sound like crap at that point.

Also, I took a listen to your song. That's not an interpretative arrangement at all, it's literally a medley of 20 different small song segments with no transitions or cohesion whatsoever. OCR isn't looking for medleys, it wants rearrangements of VGM in standalone songs.

It sounds to me like you want to "post" your remix on the site.

That's not how it works here; you submit your work to the submissions inbox and the judges will decide if it meets the criteria of an interpretative arrangement with attention paid to decent production values. If you're a long time consecutively posted remixer, you'll eventually get to the point where DJP himself will just instant direct post your remix instead of running it by the judges because you can meet the standards flawlessly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting...you obviously took the time to read the site standards, and you figure that rather than adhere to them, you'll make them change for you. Arrogant much?

There's no harm or arrogance in asking. The worst that happens is we say no. And that is what I'm saying, since I can actually speak on that officially.

If you're a long time consecutively posted remixer, you'll eventually get to the point where DJP himself will just instant direct post your remix instead of running it by the judges because you can meet the standards flawlessly.

No, that's actually not correct. There are people like Rayza who (his fingers crossed) have yet to ever hit the panel because their submission is obviously a direct post, but that's rare. Obviously some people are more consistent than others, but there's actually no preference given to someone's tenure. Generally you get a direct post if the submission is a straightforward YES, though a direct post doesn't mean it's flawless or better than a judged mix, it just may be easier to determine the level of arrangement & interpretation compared to the original.

Also, djp hasn't run the inbox since I took it over in 2006. Palpable's run it for a time as well, and currently OA and DragonAvenger are the workhorses of the panel and the lead submissions evaluators. At some point, maybe we'll figure out some way to better represent who handled XYZ evaluation, whether that was djp, the judges or any of the 4 of us who have been allowed to nominate tracks for direct posts.

EDIT:

Sorry, never going to happen. OCR has been strict about filesize in the past and will likely never lift that limitation, and they probably won't accept any song encoded any lower than 128kbps. Also, most of the judges likely won't let you get away with a remix that's much longer than 8-10 minutes before they NO it for being too long.

This isn't accurate either. We don't have an official length limit, though obviously there's a natural song length limit (which I haven't timed out) just because there's a balance between encoding quality and filesize where you basically can't go below 96kbps and still have decent enough listening quality. As it says in the standards, "a 128kbps average is suggested as a minimum," but some people are willing to make the tradeoff of encoding quality to fit under the filesize limit.

Longer songs are, by their nature, more difficult to evaluate, but they're not against the rules, and we wouldn't NO anything just for being long if it otherwise passed the judging criteria (and fit under the filesize).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Obviously some people are more consistent than others, but there's actually no preference given to someone's tenure. Generally you get a direct post if the submission is a straightforward YES, though a direct post doesn't mean it's flawless or better than a judged mix, it just may be easier to determine the level of arrangement & interpretation compared to the original.

I was more getting at that being posted more often gives you a better chance to be more consistent which gives you a better chance of being direct posted.

Link to post
Share on other sites
We don't have an official length limit, though obviously there's a natural song length limit (which I haven't timed out) just because there's a balance between encoding quality and filesize where you basically can't go below 96kbps and still have decent enough listening quality. As it says in the standards, "a 128kbps average is suggested as a minimum," but some people are willing to make the tradeoff of encoding quality to fit under the filesize limit.

Watch as I push the boundaries of length and encoding quality next week.

In the name of prog!

Link to post
Share on other sites

My my my, if that passes through then I have a 20 minute minimalist track to show the panel members that I know will be posted. Right, Liontamer? :wink:

Seriously, though, you've got to take bandwidth into consideration, here. I'm sure this site isn't exactly cheap to keep running, and it hosts over two thousand free songs that people download everyday. Without the imposed memory limitations this place would collapse under the weight of the 15+Mb tracks that would get hundreds of daily downloads.

Perhaps you'd like someone to make an exception for your track, but then that's quite unfair to the hundreds of other remixers that are on this site that needed to adhere to the proposed limitations. As Liontamer already made it official that they're not going to up the limit for you, I guess the only thing that can be said is to make shorter/smaller songs if you want to get something posted here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
There's no harm or arrogance in asking. The worst that happens is we say no. And that is what I'm saying, since I can actually speak on that officially.

I don't know, it was something about the way it was asked that struck me as arrogant, not the question itself (e.g. "I want you to do this" versus "I have a really good mix that's too long; could you consider increasing the limit").

Either way, the official call has been made.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know, it was something about the way it was asked that struck me as arrogant, not the question itself (e.g. "I want you to do this" versus "I have a really good mix that's too long; could you consider increasing the limit").

Either way, the official call has been made.

I get you, but there's potentially a language barrier there, and I just choose to look past that inference. I'll just assume it's plainly stated. Either way, no exceptions. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Size limit = 20mb.

That would accommodate most serious prog musicians while still keeping poopy 45-minute megaman mega-mixes out of the equation. Accommodating prog at ocr is a SERIOUS ISSUE. :-D

Sure, it still wouldn't be enough for a Transatlantic-style piece (and I don't think the panel could comprehend or tolerate a piece of that length / epicness anyway)

Also..

The easy way to estimate:

1MB per minute at 128Kbps

1.5MB per minute at 192Kbps

So a 5 minute song "might" be 7.5mb at 192kbps

Link to post
Share on other sites
Size limit = 20mb.

That would accommodate most serious prog musicians while still keeping poopy 45-minute megaman mega-mixes out of the equation. Accommodating prog at ocr is a SERIOUS ISSUE. :-D

Sure, it still wouldn't be enough for a Transatlantic-style piece (and I don't think the panel could comprehend or tolerate a piece of that length / epicness anyway)

Also..

The easy way to estimate:

1MB per minute at 128Kbps

1.5MB per minute at 192Kbps

So a 5 minute song "might" be 7.5mb at 192kbps

It's not real prog rock unless it's at least 25 minutes long.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought about this last night and I think it'd be cool if OCR "gets with the times" so to speak. The submission guidelines actually still list 128kbps as the minimum -- true story. I haven't downloaded a 128kbps mp3 since Limewire in the early 2000s.

The internet standard for mp3s is closer to 192kbps now, although anyone who is really serious (read: an audiophile) about music downloads 320kbps. Just ask anyone who uses bandcamp. I know people who regularly download the FLACs from there.

In the early and even mid 2000s I think an 8mb limit would have been a decent idea, the site was still growing and people didn't take music quality as seriously back then. Probably because we were still slapping music on cassette tapes because our used cars were from the early 90s. Now our used cars are from the early 2000s and I think the quality of our digital music should reflect that.

It's the basic evolution of the digital format

Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought about this last night and I think it'd be cool if OCR "gets with the times" so to speak. The submission guidelines actually still list 128kbps as the minimum -- true story. I haven't downloaded a 128kbps mp3 since Limewire in the early 2000s.

The internet standard for mp3s is closer to 192kbps now, although anyone who is really serious (read: an audiophile) about music downloads 320kbps. Just ask anyone who uses bandcamp. I know people who regularly download the FLACs from there.

In the early and even mid 2000s I think an 8mb limit would have been a decent idea, the site was still growing and people didn't take music quality as seriously back then. Probably because we were still slapping music on cassette tapes because our used cars were from the early 90s. Now our used cars are from the early 2000s and I think the quality of our digital music should reflect that.

It's the basic evolution of the digital format

To be honest everyone should making VBR mp3's.

Link to post
Share on other sites
There's no harm or arrogance in asking. The worst that happens is we say no. And that is what I'm saying, since I can actually speak on that officially.

No, that's actually not correct. There are people like Rayza who (his fingers crossed) have yet to ever hit the panel because their submission is obviously a direct post, but that's rare.

And people like me, who had to tell Dave face-to-face to stop DPing and start judge-posting my stuff so I could get some feedback :P

Edit: And about filesize, I'd love to see it increased, as I have (more than once) edited a piece because it was "too long" and went over the file size, and no VBR encoding could help it. I would like to create something long and substantial and still have it here, but that doesn't seem possible for now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also gonna put my voice here in favour or raising the file limit. If my vote that's happening right now continues in my favour then it proves you can have 10 min+ arrangements of ONE main source that fit the OCR bill - who might be judged down ONLY because of the encoding quality. That it balls. All it needs it to keep out the stupid mega mix medleys is a comment in the standards and some common sense in the inbox handling.

"If you're going to submit a long arrangement, the quality and variation in the arrangement should justify the length. If you have several sources one after another in movements, please consider chopping your arrangement into parts. We may request this at the inbox or judging stage if it seems appropriate."

If that is handled properly I see no reason why there can't be a size limit of more like 12 or 14mb. Yes the limit does encourage a cohesive and non-rambling arrangement but by limting it you're making it not even possible to have those qualities in an epic longer arrangement.

I feel like my arrangement, which I put a lot of work into making cohesive as a whole individual movement, has been disadvantaged by the sizelimit, and as soon as that happens once it should be reconsidered imo. Thank you plz for listen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Fishy. Sure, most long arrangements are nothing but medleyitis garbage, but there are some truly epic and amazing longer remixes out there, and not allowing them just because they are long kinda sucks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I gotta state songs I'm aware of here.. Of course Fishy's which I think he recently (funfortunately) shortened is now what, 10:32 or so I think he said. My collab with mithius is 10:00. I think Prince of Darkness's Prancing Dad is 11:41 or so. There's a couple things in common with these tracks; first that they're all over 10 minutes. Secondly, that I believe they're all worthy of being posted and are cohesive.

As mentioned before a 10 minute song at 192kbps would probably be around 15mb. So a 12 minute song would be what, around 18mb? In the interest of quality I think the 20mb limit would be perfectly reasonable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I gotta state songs I'm aware of here.. Of course Fishy's which I think he recently (funfortunately) shortened is now what, 10:32 or so I think he said. My collab with mithius is 10:00. I think Prince of Darkness's Prancing Dad is 11:41 or so. There's a couple things in common with these tracks; first that they're all over 10 minutes. Secondly, that I believe they're all worthy of being posted and are cohesive.

As mentioned before a 10 minute song at 192kbps would probably be around 15mb. So a 12 minute song would be what, around 18mb? In the interest of quality I think the 20mb limit would be perfectly reasonable.

I disagree. If you're making a song that long, split it into two parts and submit them both with a higher encode if you want that. The line has to be drawn somewhere, and bandwidth is still a concern.

What if the mixes were hosted on another site...the 128kbps version would be on OCR with a link to the higher quality version?

That wouldn't work because that takes away the ability for OCR to have QC over that separate mirror. Some current mixes have higher-quality links in the comments section, which is just fine, but an official link elsewhere in the mix writeup? I doubt that would fly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really think longer remixes should be handled on a case-by-case basis. If it is an absolutely fantastic piece (and I can think of a few) why does length preclude it from being on the site? Most long remixes can suck and do suffer from terrible medleyitis, but not all of them. I can kind of understand the bandwidth thing, but that really seems like a holdout from 2004 in this era of site providers practically giving away massive bandwidth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...