Zelda: Link's Awakening: Melodies of Mabe Village

[Sauraen]

https://soundcloud.com/sauraen/melodies-of-mabe-village-3-9 (Updated link)

Game: Legend of Zelda, The: Link's Awakening (Game Boy, 1993) (Kazumi Totaka, Koji Kondo)

Songs arranged: Ballad of the Wind Fish, Mabe Village, Koholint Island

EDIT: Original submission thread: http://ocremix.org/forums/showthread.php?t=38115

This is a the third version of this piece; the first did not make it through OC ReMix's inbox screening and the second was a "NO, resub". Now it's played on the EastWest Complete Composers Collection--there shouldn't be any problem with sample quality anymore!

Edited July 5, 2013 by Sauraen
Updated link

[Dafydd]

It sounds ok until the drums come in at 1:30 or so. Then it just gets really messy. The drums sound dead, especially the ride cymbal, and the toms mess up the lower frequencies something terrible.

Even before that, the attack on the flute is too slow. The flute doesn't sound real at all. Making this sound good isn't just about sample quality, it's about humanization, modulation. A flute player doesn't play a melody with 5 second notes at the same volume throughout the note, they do crescendos, pitch slides, vibrato modulation (i.e. variations in vibrato depth and speed) etc., even when playing very simple melodies, and even if it's hardly noticeable to the untrained ear. Use all these things to hide the fact you're using a sampled flute, or it's going to be very, very easy to tell you're doing just that: using a sampled flute. This goes for all reed and wind instruments, really.

It would also help if you could add a link to the judges' NO decision thread in your first post - that way we can see if there's anything they mentioned that still needs fixing.

Don't give up!

[Chimpazilla]

The melodies are really, really nice. The arrangement as well, is very pleasing. Good job on those! I like this song very much.

But the biggest things I hear in this track are:

1. You need to eq those sounds apart and/or do more aggressive panning so the instruments aren't fighting for frequency range. Here is a thread I started a couple of weeks ago about this issue, it is full of golden advice. I am still working through this issue myself.

2. The drums are very dry, very far in the background, and lack energy. It sounds like the drum track is being played through a thick layer of insulation, no clarity. That early ride cymbal is playing too often, it messes up the laid back vibe... and later you have a stick (or hat or something) that is playing too upbeat a pattern when it should really have slowed down. You could add a gentle shaker here for fill instead. If there is a kick drum there I cannot hear it. The kick needs some oomph, and the higher elements (hat, stick, cymbals) need to come out more... eq them so they only play in the higher frequencies, and for something like a hat, you could use a stereo separator so they stick out of the left and right instead of getting drowned out in the middle. And Dafydd is right about the toms messing up the lower regions... make sure you high pass them so they aren't interfering with kick and bass (no less than about 200Hz) (and for kick and bass, make sure they aren't playing anything below 30Hz and not much should be going on above 250Hz unless it's "click" related)

3. The samples do in fact sound quite fake... not so much because they are, but because they aren't humanized. Vary the note velocities first, then for the longer sustained notes, use a volume automation to "swell" the note: start at one volume, raise slightly toward the middle, then have it gently decline to a much lower volume before ending, then start the next note at a normal volume, rinse and repeat. Your volume auto clip should look like a bunch of roundish bumps. This applies to nearly every instrument you have used, except for maybe the piano, you can do most of the piano humanization within the patterns.

4. The track is lacking in lower frequencies. I hear a bass, but it is nondistinct. I want to feel it. Make sure it is playing just in the middle (no panning or stereo separation), and again, be sure to eq out most of the energy above 250Hz (except "click" frequencies) And no reverb on bass.

5. You can also use reverb to set the soundstage, more reverb for background instruments (and minimal predelay), less reverb (and/or longer predelay) for foreground leads. Your leads are getting mashed in with everything else. The soundstage should be sort of three dimensional, and just now yours is very flat and one dimensional. Reverb is a great tool. Set up some sends (main and lead), and apply some to each instrument, for better cohesion.

6. Wow that ending is abrupt! How about one more *brief* slow passage with a soft final repetition of the main melody, played on a high instrument like the flute?

I think this song could be great if you sort out these issues! Keep at it.

[Sauraen]

Thanks for your comments! I have a lot to learn...

First, about the ending, I forgot to mention that there'll be a fadeout from about 5:19 to 5:34, so that ending won't be audible at all. I just didn't want to leave it unresolved every time while it is in production, so I had to at least change the last note!

I think I'm facing two problems here: lack of control and lack of experience.

In terms of control, I'm using Sibelius 5, the EastWest Complete Composers Collection, and Audacity. In Sibelius, unless I've been missing something big for years, there's no such thing as automation, effect sends, filters, EQ, etc. There's a script that converts crescendos and diminuendos into sets of MIDI volume events, and I used this for the ends of a lot of notes in this arrangement, but I don't even know if the virtual instruments are responding to it because they don't sound like they're changing much.

One thing I can do is many of the instruments have keyswitches to select which articulation they're using. I used these here too, but mostly to avoid samples that were slightly out of tune. There must be some way to control things like vibrato, though, because the demo songs for the CCC sound excellent, even individual instruments.

As far as the drums, I know what you mean when you say "the drum track is being played through a thick layer of insulation". But that's just how it sounds--I didn't add effects to it or anything, I don't think I even put in any reverb. There's other drum sets that come with the CCC, of course: but they have their own problems: either they use the wrong kind of snare drum, or they have too much reverb, or the toms have too much pitch (I don't know how to describe it). But again, it must be something I'm not doing right, because the demos of the CCC sound amazing and so many people swear by it.

Which brings me to my lack of experience. I've been composing and arranging for MIDI or for humans for quite a while, but this is really the first time I've tried to make an mp3 that sounds professional. So here come some dumb questions about what you've been saying (if there's some general thing somewhere I should read, please let me know!):

- Why would someone ever use EQ in a piece? If you give a flautist and a pianist some sheet music and listen to their performance, you don't get to decided which frequencies each are emphasized in.

- Isn't part of the point of a fancy sound set like the CCC to add those things like velocity modulation and expression that are needed to make the piece sound realistic? That is, if you give it a MIDI that only has what's written on the page for the flautist, shouldn't it generate a flute part that sounds identical to what the flautist would play, including all that extra stuff?

- If not, am I really supposed to manually write in a bunch of automation tracks for all the parameters a person would add? When I was taking oboe lessons, I spent years just working on this: in effect, learning how to generate all those automation tracks--vibrato speed, depth, and delay; articulation and release; continuous velocity; almost inaudable things like tone color--in real time for any piece, tailored to my instrument. How can a computer musician be expected to manually (and consciously) replicate that for every instrument in the orchestra?

I guess a lot of my problems would be solved with a copy of Pro Tools and a music production degree, but until then, do you have any suggestions? Does there exist a freeware DAW that supports VST, ASIO, automation, and arbitrary audio paths (effects busses and the like)? And, if anyone here uses the CCC, where's the "make this sound realistic" button?

One more thing: if I upload the MIDI version of this piece, the samples will obviously sound fake, but all the production issues will be gone. It sounds clean, balanced, etc.,... and like a MIDI. I thought I could buy a giant sound set, replace the sounds, and have everything else fall into place. Evidently not.

[Dafydd]

I have no experience with Sibelius or CCC, but I'll try to answer what I can:

Why would someone ever use EQ in a piece? If you give a flautist and a pianist some sheet music and listen to their performance, you don't get to decided which frequencies each are emphasized in.

I would also like a well-educated response to this question. It has do with how a mixer doesn't mix sounds the same way air does, but I don't really know why not.

Isn't part of the point of a fancy sound set like the CCC to add those things like velocity modulation and expression that are needed to make the piece sound realistic?

Not necessarily. It does often provide you with different samples for different velocities though, so one way you can vary e.g. drums is by having the velocity vary slightly for each note to emulate human perfomance (a human player doesn't hit the exact same spot on a drum with the exact same force every time, so the drum doesn't sound the exact same every note irl). Only rarely does a sample set have several different alternating samples for a given velocity (clearly this isn't the case with your drums). Most DAWs can randomize, for a selection of notes, the note velocities within a given range so you don't have to do it manually. Velocity is typically mapped to affect volume, but not necessarily so, and if you vary velocity from, say, 90 to 100, volume most likely won't be affected enough to make a difference, but you have potentially 11 different samples, which alleviates a lot of the "deadness".

How can a computer musician be expected to manually (and consciously) replicate that for every instrument in the orchestra?

Most people can't. In fact, I remember some remix project that just plain didn't accept orchestral remixes simply because it's so damned hard to make them sound realistic. Jeremy Soule is one of the famous few who can pull it off. I have to listen really hard to tell his live-performed works from the sequenced ones. I guess it's something a conductor of live orchestras is especially well equipped to do (somewhat ironically, when you think about it). Edited June 9, 2012 by Dafydd

[Chimpazilla]

I believe that reverb, panning, and volume are all taken care of naturally by the amount and positioning of the different performers within a given space. The performers can vary their playing style and velocity throughout the performance to let leads have their space at the right times (which is what we are attemtping to emulate using eq to avoid the frequency clashing that happens in computer compositions). When you are using a computer to try to replicate this situation, you have to do it using effects and automations. It is never going to sound as natural, and it does take more effort and knowlege (and plugins). It may not be perfect but I think it can sound pretty good. It does take some practice to learn how to use the tools of eq, reverb, compression, and other things to get these effects, but with time you learn to do it faster and more effectively. (if there was a "make this sound realistic button" no one would need to learn the skillzzz)

I know nothing about Sibelius or Audacity so I can't comment on them at all. I use FL Studio and I have all the necessary plugins and the ability to do automation clips. So I'm not sure how to advise you to do this using your software, maybe someone else can jump in here and help you with this. You can also pose the question in the "music composition and production" forum here.

If you want to learn more about making music on the computer, a great book to start with is the Dance Music Manual. You will learn all the basics of synthesis (and dance music genres which you may not care about), but also how/when to use eq, reverb, compression and the like. It has been like a music production bible to me.

Clearly you have excellent writing skills. Your challenge now will be applying those skills into a computer environment. You've come to the right place, you'll get lots of help and advice here!

Oh, one more thing, please do a proper ending! Fade outs are a cop out!

Edited June 9, 2012 by Chimpazilla

[Sauraen]

I put like ten hours of work into programming the flute, plus I redid the drums and strings. I figured I would mute the tracks that I haven't fixed up so you can just hear the good ones. What suggestions at this point (other than make all the other solo parts like the flute, and fix the ending)?

http://soundcloud.com/sauraen/melodies-of-mabe-village-3-3

Thanks again, everyone, for your help.

[Phonetic Hero]

I'm just going to pop in here for a sec... I saw that you're using Sibelius. You had questions about automation and effects, and Chimp and Dafydd both said they know nothing about the program. I have EXTENSIVE experience with Finale, and Sibelius is basically nothing more than the Apple equivalent.

I can tell you this: those programs are for scoring, and are AWFUL for audio/production. Even if you have high power sample libraries, you're not going to be able to process things the way you need to in order to get a passing mix on OCR. I can tell you this from personal experience; my first remix was made in Finale with some Native Instruments stuff, and looking back on it, it's nowhere NEAR what I can do with FL Studio, even with lower quality samples. Processing is hugely important. A huge majority of the patches I use are actually single cycle waveforms plugged into VERY basic synths (3x Osc, for FL users). How you process a sound has everything to do with how it fits into a soundscape; for non-synthetic, sampled instruments, this still applies. EQing frees up sonic space for other instruments to cut through, and panning/stereo separation do the same to an extent. There's loads more to cleaning a mix and all that good stuff, but sadly, you won't even be able to scratch the surface with Sibelius/Finale... If it's in your budget, I'd recommend getting a higher power DAW (FL is fantastic, and only $200 for the producer edition - if I remember correctly, Sib/Fin are both a lot more than that )

Just had to jump in to say that. I'm only saying all this to help, because I know how frustrating it is to be able to do less than you want to do with the audio. I'm not bashing scoring at all (I have to do quite a bit of it myself), but as far as sound goes, there's far better programs to be dealing with.

I hope my wisdom will help you in some way, best of luck my friend! Feel free to PM me if you have any questions, or friend me on Facebook or whatever since I basically live on the internet

pH

EDIT: Oh, and now that I've read a little more extensively:

EQ is used mainly for productional work on a piece. Freeing up frequencies clears space for other instruments that may need those frequencies more without muddying the sound. Theoretically, you actually COULD use EQ in a live performance (which is what I assume you meant by choosing freq ranges etc.); all you'd have to do is plug the mic or whatever into an amp and put an equalizer in the effects chain. Obviously, it won't filter the actual sound itself (like the person's voice or the actual strumming of a guitar, etc.), but the post-processed sound will have those frequencies boosted/cut

Yes, high power samples have excellent velocity ranges; however, when you talk MIDI, there's a difference between "velocity" and "volume." I'm not sure you actually have access to the velocities in Sibelius, just the volume... (dynamic markings, piano, mezzo piano, etc.)

You hit the nail on the head with automation: it's used to make instruments sound more human (or synthetic instruments do what you want them to with filtering and all that in order to sound cool ). A lot of the work is a lot easier than it sounds if you have a DAW like FL Studio; the velocity track is all right there in the piano roll when you write notes, so you can hand pick what velocity each note plays at as you enter it in, instead of having to make a bunch of clicks in order to adjust things. I'd really recommend checking out FL or another good DAW (if you have a Mac, I'd look at Reason or Logic, I know there are users of both on the site, and a lot more - just find what YOU like using).

And these aren't stupid questions. Trust me, I was in the same boat, and asking is an absolute necessity. I refrained from asking questions when I started posting here because I didn't want to come off as stupid, and it really only hindered my progress. Plus, nobody here will ever call you stupid or make you feel dumb. So if you've got questions, ASK THEM!!

And all this being said, your mix does still sound pretty good. Don't get discouraged!

Edited June 22, 2012 by Phonetic Hero

[Chimpazilla]

Oh gosh... listening again... what a lovely arrangement, even with some instruments removed... so nice. But... I think you are only going to get so far with your software... you'll need to be able to automate and use effects to get it really sounding good. I hope you'll consider getting yourself FL Studio or Cubase or Logic or ProTools or one of the other DAWs. It will take you a little time to get up to speed... probably not that long though, I suspect (you know what needs to be done, with a proper daw you'll have the tools available!). And you'll get tons of help here. Wow, really nice composing work.

[Sauraen]

Oh gosh... listening again... what a lovely arrangement, even with some instruments removed... so nice.

Thanks!

Please pardon my delay in responding--my hard drive got corrupted and I lost a lot of the programming I had done on this mix. I'm almost back up to speed now, though, and doing it again forced me to do it better.

I hope you'll consider getting yourself FL Studio or Cubase or Logic or ProTools or one of the other DAWs.

A new DAW is not in my budget for now, not right after I dropped a grand on the CCC. Maybe in a year, I definitely would like to upgrade. But I think I'm going to have to finish this mix with my current software, even if it means more work.

I'm not sure you actually have access to the velocities in Sibelius, just the volume... (dynamic markings, piano, mezzo piano, etc.)

My earlier posts complaining about how Sibelius would not do automation from before the most recent version of the remix were not entirely informed. True, Sibelius cannot automate VST parameter channels. However, I not only have access to the velocities of individual notes, I have access to any arbitrary MIDI data I want to include. In the most recent version I posted, the flute is being "automated" in four ways: expression (CC 11), volume (CC 7), velocity, and keyswitches for different samples. Take another listen to the latest version--do you think the flute is passable, or do you think it still needs more work?

I have EXTENSIVE experience with Finale, and Sibelius is basically nothing more than the Apple equivalent.

*ahem* I run Windows. I have used Finale before, and in my opinion Sibelius is basically nothing more than the generally better-designed and more-intuitive equivalent. But your point still stands that I need a DAW, not a notation program.

it's nowhere NEAR what I can do with FL Studio... FL is fantastic, and only $200 for the producer edition... if you have a DAW like FL Studio... I'd really recommend checking out FL...

Hmmm, I wonder what DAW you use?

I've used LMMS, which is supposed to have the same interface as FL Studio, and I found it to be underpowered, clumsy, and unprofessional. Piano-roll note input seems so 1995 when I could be writing music on a score; selecting between velocities of simultaneous notes is a pain; and drawing automation curves is so difficult that I wasn't even sure it was working until I saw the knobs moving. These problems may just be with LMMS and not with FL Studio, I don't know. (If there's some trial version, I'll certainly check it out.) But most importantly, my composing tends not to be of electronic-sounding music--I rarely use anything that could be called a "loop", which is in the name of FL Studio. I feel that it is essential that the DAW I wind up with allows me to write on a score.

[Phonetic Hero]

My earlier posts complaining about how Sibelius would not do automation from before the most recent version of the remix were not entirely informed. True, Sibelius cannot automate VST parameter channels. However, I not only have access to the velocities of individual notes, I have access to any arbitrary MIDI data I want to include.

Oh, DUH, I knew that... I've written shitloads of drumline music in Sibelius. That writing knowledge seemed to have run off to a far corner of my brain. Oops!

*ahem* I run Windows. I have used Finale before, and in my opinion Sibelius is basically nothing more than the generally better-designed and more-intuitive equivalent. But your point still stands that I need a DAW, not a notation program.

I'll give you that... Finale is one of the worst designed and most clumsy programs I've ever had the displeasure of... well, buying. And as such, it's my only means of scoring, and so the only program that I'm really experienced with.

Hmmm, I wonder what DAW you use?

I've used LMMS, which is supposed to have the same interface as FL Studio, and I found it to be underpowered, clumsy, and unprofessional. Piano-roll note input seems so 1995 when I could be writing music on a score; selecting between velocities of simultaneous notes is a pain; and drawing automation curves is so difficult that I wasn't even sure it was working until I saw the knobs moving. These problems may just be with LMMS and not with FL Studio, I don't know. (If there's some trial version, I'll certainly check it out.) But most importantly, my composing tends not to be of electronic-sounding music--I rarely use anything that could be called a "loop", which is in the name of FL Studio. I feel that it is essential that the DAW I wind up with allows me to write on a score.

I looked up LMMS, it looked similar but I can't be sure without actually getting in there and trying it out for myself. I'm pretty sure there IS a free demo version of FL (which was just rated #1 DAW by Synthtopia, so you bet I'm a proud FL user ), so get in there and check it out if you want, or don't and keep your eyes peeled for something else. I'm honestly not really sure about other Windows DAWs. I've heard things about Acid and Reaper, but never really used either for myself, so I couldn't tell you. I could put you in contact with people who use both though, if you so desire. I really am quite surprised with how well you're doing in Sibelius, which makes me more anxious to see what you'd do with a full power sum'bitch

[Sauraen]

I'm pretty sure there IS a free demo version of FL

I just downloaded the demo. I was also looking into ProTools, because it uses Sibelius as its notation editor, but the price tag discouraged me there.

First, I just wanted to say it feels a little weird to see a song by zircon and pixietricks as one of the demos, even though I knew their work was going to be in it. It's even more strange that all the things I can hear in the music are supposed to be right before my eyes, and I have no idea how what I see is making what I hear.

Second, the interface is much better than LMMS--I can see what LMMS is trying to copy, but it's not even close. It appears that you can even edit the song while it's playing, which is something I've never seen in any program before, though I'm not entirely sure why you would want to do that.

But I think the biggest thing is that it feels completely and absolutely foreign to me. It appears to be designed for a sort of music that has lots of exact repetition in the inner voices, and music that heavily uses samples and synthesizers. There is an editor that seems to be dedicated solely to one-measure long patterns like a hardware sequencer, but no editor that will display those notes on a staff. I don't think I've ever written a piece where that pattern editor would have helped me; for instance, in my remix, the drums are varied enough so that the whole thing only repeats every 16 measures. In short, it seems that making the kind of music I do in FL would be about as contrary to its purpose as making electronic music in Sibelius. To be clear, I don't think there's anything wrong with electronic music, and I've been listening to OC ReMix for two years, which seems to be predominantly music of this type; it's just not the kind of music I know how to write.

That said, FL is obviously a powerful DAW, and if I had it I would certainly do the final stages of production of a piece in it. But it doesn't seem to be exactly what I'm looking for. Have you heard talk of any software that is more focused on sequencing for high-quality virtual instruments? For instance, when film composers buy big sound sets like the CCC or the Vienna libraries, what programs do they use to edit and produce those pieces?

[Phonetic Hero]

I think the biggest thing is that it feels completely and absolutely foreign to me. It appears to be designed for a sort of music that has lots of exact repetition in the inner voices, and music that heavily uses samples and synthesizers. There is an editor that seems to be dedicated solely to one-measure long patterns like a hardware sequencer, but no editor that will display those notes on a staff. I don't think I've ever written a piece where that pattern editor would have helped me; for instance, in my remix, the drums are varied enough so that the whole thing only repeats every 16 measures. In short, it seems that making the kind of music I do in FL would be about as contrary to its purpose as making electronic music in Sibelius. To be clear, I don't think there's anything wrong with electronic music, and I've been listening to OC ReMix for two years, which seems to be predominantly music of this type; it's just not the kind of music I know how to write.

That said, FL is obviously a powerful DAW, and if I had it I would certainly do the final stages of production of a piece in it. But it doesn't seem to be exactly what I'm looking for. Have you heard talk of any software that is more focused on sequencing for high-quality virtual instruments? For instance, when film composers buy big sound sets like the CCC or the Vienna libraries, what programs do they use to edit and produce those pieces?

I know exactly how you feel, I used to do a hell of a lot with more orchestral stuff (actually marching instrumentation quite a bit), so when I opened FL for the first time I was like, "this is stupid, there's no staff, and it's all loop based... no REAL musician would use this." But as I got more familiar with it, it became much easier to navigate. I still use a lot of high power organic samples in my work (I actually just bought Native Instruments' West African instrument soundpack, and am eagerly awaiting the download at work ). You can import sound libraries by putting whatever you need into the plug-in folder within the FL folder, and then scan for new plug-ins in FL itself.

As for the "loop"/pattern based stuff, you don't need to be constricted to one bar. It sounds like you're talking about the sequencer on the left, which I really only use for percussive stuff and drum programming, and even then, I end up using the piano roll for velocities and stuff. If you right click on the instrument in the sequencer window, you can open the piano roll, in which you can do all your pitch-based work and alter velocities and a bunch of other fun stuff (and go for as many measures as you want). I've heard of people doing all of their work in a single pattern, meaning all the instruments would be in one track in the playlist for the whole piece. I've also heard of people making completely new patterns for literally everything in the song and ending up with about 150 of them. I personally write what I need as I need it, with one instrument per pattern (sometimes more, for chord work and stuff), and then if there's something that repeats, just put the pattern where it belongs in order to repeat properly. There's really a lot of freedom in how you compose, and I wouldn't write FL off just yet

EDIT: And with film composition, there are other DAWs that people use, Nuendo, Cubase, Pro Tools, even Logic and FL have their place in film composition. Really, it's just whatever works best for the composer, whatever their personal taste may be. I personally don't like Logic or Reason, I've used both and they just seem too unintuitive to me, and the automation is nowhere NEAR as precise and easy to use as it is in FL. I've never used Cubase or Nuendo, though I've heard great things about both. Sonor is another one to look into, though again I've never used it personally. If you've ever heard how fucking awesome Vurez's organic instrumentation is, he's a Cubase user, for reference. BGC and zircon both do amazing work in FL. I don't see any reason why you can't do great sequencing in FL or Logic or Reason or WHATEVER if you have the know-how and the sample power. This is the part where I come back to preference. It's all about what you're comfortable using

And hey, to your credit, I just found out that James Horner (composer for Avatar, Titanic, etc.) uses Sibelius to compose and then exports the MIDI to Pro Tools to dick around with. So there's that

Edited July 7, 2012 by Phonetic Hero

[Sauraen]

I don't know... I've been trying to figure out FL and I can't seem to do a bunch of really simple things: see a list of what instruments are running, see a list of what patterns exist, get ANYTHING (instruments, patterns, audio from file, automation graphs) to go in a track, connect the audio output of anything to anything (e.g. the output of a track to the input of an effect, and the output of the effect to Master), automate anything that's not a knob (e.g. MIDI data to send to a virtual instrument; the help file seems to indicate this is not supported). Obviously I'm missing a few big things, because clearly these are things that have been done in the demo songs. Is there some tutorial you would suggest?

the automation is nowhere NEAR as precise and easy to use as it is in FL

I've used Sonar on a friend's computer, and it seemed a lot easier to pick up than FL, though it was tedious in some places where FL seems smooth. I'll grant you that editing automation curves in the demo songs of FL was much easier than in Sonar; but creating and connecting them, or even seeing where they were connected to, seems much harder. When I right-click on the automation graph's title bar, in hopes of selecting "Open wiring dialog" or something, that deletes it!

Looked up Nuendo. $1800? Next please.

I don't see any reason why you can't do great sequencing in FL or Logic or Reason or WHATEVER if you have the know-how and the sample power.

Yeah, I guess I should just keep downloading demo versions of these programs and trying them until I find one where everything works how I would expect it to.

And hey, to your credit, I just found out that James Horner (composer for Avatar, Titanic, etc.) uses Sibelius to compose and then exports the MIDI to Pro Tools to dick around with. So there's that

Yeah. I knew about that. That's one of the reasons I was considering Pro Tools.

[Sauraen]

Here's the most recent version:

http://soundcloud.com/sauraen/melodies-of-mabe-village-3-5

Thanks for your feedback!

[OceansAndrew]

This is sounding pretty solid! A few minor things I think would improve it. One, a suspended cymbal lead into the drums would help them not be as surprising of an entrance when they come in the first time. Most of the articulations sound pretty good, though some of the faster ones like the passage at 1:57 could have a little harder of an attack. The guitar arpeggios at 2:09 should be a little more humanized. They have a little bit of variation, but they should have even more. A stronger velocity downbeat with lighter top notes, or a lighter downbeat with an accent in one of the other three, but of the 4 notes in the arpeggio, one should have an accent. Speaking of 2:09, it feels a little empty, and could use more cello/low strings to fill out a bit. you don't need to add any extra texture, just double some violin stuff down an octave and see how that sounds.

I enjoyed the nostalgic RPG sounding drum parts a lot, and i think the beat variety was good, but I feel a few additional fills sprinkled throughout would improve the song. THe one fill at 4:27 was exciting, and while not all of them have to be that amped, having some more would be good. The drums at the end definitely felt the most inspired, and I feel the end section was really working, though the horn attack is way too slow. You'll definitely need to adjust that; I can promise Larry would NO this just based on that (probably Deia too).

Overall this is feeling much better to me, and I hope to hear a finished and polished version in the inbox soon!

[Sauraen]

It's been a LONG time, but here's an updated version. I'm much happier with the mastering. Think I should submit it?

https://soundcloud.com/sauraen/melodies-of-mabe-village-3-8

[timaeus222]

The harmonies are well-planned. I like how the flute goes into focus at 0:52 while the piano goes into the background a little. It's not overdone. 1:19 sounds a little weird harmonically though. You went from a diminished chord with an A base to a first inversion m7 chord with a G base. It could sound right, but I think you should try bringing that D# down to a D just to hear how it sounds before going with either one.

1:28 is where it gets iffy. The drums are a bit quiet. Yeah, in an orchestra they're farthest away, but even so, they're slightly too quiet, mainly the cymbal (most evident at 3:21). Also, the kick rhythm is a bit awkward in this musical style. It makes the drums feel separate from the song overall. I've never seen an acoustic drumkit in an orchestra before. It could still work, but the drums should be a tad less buried, and leaning less towards a dramatic rock style, as it doesn't seem like the rest of the instrumentation conveys that.

2:02 needs more stereo separation and more EQ work on that guitar. I could barely hear the strums. 4:25 was a bit strange to me, and again, that makes this less of a traditional orchestral song. The limiter might also be pushed a bit too much. You can really hear that at 4:46. Think of it this way: Can you give this song to anyone in the entire world who has the same materials you have and as much experience as needed to recompose this song from scratch, leave them alone to do it, and trust that they'll succeed without much hassle? If you can say yes, then the mixing is good enough.

Right now, it's about 85% there.

Edited June 19, 2013 by timaeus222

[Sauraen]

I worked on the EQ and instrument placement a little more and I would say it's about as good as I can make it at this point. I did the actual arranging of this piece two years ago, and while I won't claim that it's the best arrangement I have ever done, I'm satisfied enough with the musical aspects (chord structure, drums) that I haven't really wanted to change any of that for the last two years. Most of the chords are from the original pieces, and I couldn't take out the drums without making an entirely new remix.

https://soundcloud.com/sauraen/melodies-of-mabe-village-3-9

So I submitted it. If it is accepted, then all is well; if not, I'm not going to be able to work on it for a couple months anyway because I will not be near my computer. (I'm going to Hawaii to live up to my username and learn to soar!)

[eatacay]

Hey, Sauren!

If you want a good DAW for kinda free, I'd check out REAPER. You can use it as long as you want, no limitations. They request you pay after 30 days, but don't stop you.

I personally used it for about 2 months, and then payed them. It takes a little getting used to, but it's worth it, of course.

Also, from my experience in trying to make electronic music with Sibelius, there are places to put VST's and effects and things, if you go to the mixer window.