Dream Bubble: Kirby Returns to Dreamland & Nintendo Zone Jingle

[WiFiSunset]

Well, this is my first time posting a very early WIP so that I progress further in remixing. I'm new to having a whole lot of people look at a song/WIP that I did.

I’ve been composing in Notation Software (MuseScore) for 8 months, and have been using Reaper for 10 days now. The name that fits this mix so far is Dream Bubble.

This is a remix of 2 songs:

1. Kirby Returns to Dreamland (The Arena: Lobby):

2. and the 3DS Nintendo Zone Jingle, It can be heard at 00:23-26 in this video

3. Short Motif: Kirby Crystal Shards (File Select) at 00:19.

The first source is the same as the Save Hut from Kirby Superstar; but, I want to list this game as the source. (This game has amazing music by the way). When I first heard the jingle I started to alter it, and then my mind automatically meshed the Kirby song with it.

Dream Bubble: http://soundcloud.com/cosmic-sounds-1/dream-bubble Update: (7/6/2013)

Edited July 6, 2013 by Cosmic Sounds

[Chimpazilla]

It's a good early attempt for sure. Very nice progressions, I can get a flavor of where you are going with it. You have tons to learn about how to produce though, how to arrange and write and mix and how to get it sounding good. I suggest watching some Youtube tutorials on anything you might be interested in learning. I'd also recommend getting a book or two, like the Dance Music Manual (2nd edition by Rick Snoman). Also, practice with your different sounds. You can take a track you like, take one aspect of it and see if you can replicate the sound. Practice, practice, practice!

[WiFiSunset]

Update (3/22/13): Thanks Chimpazilla , I took your advice and took it one track at a time, and found out some interesting things within my DAW.

I’m going to take it in an orchestral direction soon.

Again, any advice is welcome. I believe that I put too much EQ in the track; although, I’m not sure.

I also updated the link on the first post as well.

Edited March 23, 2013 by Cosmic Sounds

[SnappleMan]

I think you should try to stop thinking of EQ as being applied in amounts. You don't really have too much or too little EQ, it's a matter of balance. So the balance of your EQ is very off here, you have put too much of a boost in the midrange frequencies, sounds like maybe 500-2000hz. That gives your song a very boxy sound. You want to use EQ to bring out characteristics that you like in a sound, or bring down characteristics that are not as good or that clash with other sounds too much.

[WiFiSunset]

Thanks SnappleMan, I adjusted the EQ to try to balance it, but it came out a bit quiet, so I'll fix that.

I updated the link in the first post again. Thanks for your help everybody . I'll keep posting as I move along so that I can learn more.

[jnWake]

The sample you use at the beggining has a very muddy sound. Try cutting out stuff from the 500Hz range, it should make it sound a bit cleaner. You can also try boosting higher frequencies to make it stand out more.

The flute that enters later is very quiet, try raising its volume!

The haro-ish sample at the end suffers from the same than the beggining. Cut the 500Hz frequencies, they usually sound bad...

The arrangement is pretty. I didn't listen to the source so I don't know how conservative it is though.

[Chimpazilla]

Here is a

to get you started. It explains what EQ is for and generally how it is used.

[WiFiSunset]

Thanks Chimpazilla and jnWake .

I’m going to watch the tutorial, and tweak the harp as well. Glad you like the arrangement as well jnWake. I’ll post an update by Sunday/Monday night.

Edit: yikes XD, my ears are getting better at identifying this stuff. I hear the muddiness that you're talking about jnWake.

Edited March 23, 2013 by Cosmic Sounds

[WiFiSunset]

I’ve Updated the song in the first again.

I also had created this part for the song, but I think that it’s too liberal; or, that things just went downhill. In this link I attempted to mix the .wav from my notation software into my DAW. I think that like usual I went on a small tangent and am almost ending it like an original …..?? (The link below.)

One good thing is that I watched the EQ tutorial, and it was super helpful .

Thanks for everyone’s continued assistance.

Edited March 26, 2013 by Cosmic Sounds

[WiFiSunset]

I've updated the song once again in the post. Big thanks to Timeaus222 for guiding me to that cello soundfont. The song is almost complete, because all I have to do is fill in the rest of the song to the cello. Complete meaning start to finish minus any technical issues and touch-ups.

I also ended up adding a short motif in this update from another Kirby game, because I keep meshing sources together.

Can anyone spot the motif, and the game that it comes from ?

[timaeus222]

I personally think the first 32 seconds are too bare with the exposed piano with no variation. Maybe you can add some note variation or some new backing in more quickly?

The structure of this song tends to be based on keeping the listener interested, rather than changing a lot, so I don't think it will be accepted by OCR based on the static arrangement. It will be good practice for developing your skills, though!

[WiFiSunset]

I’ve been working on this song for 9 days now; and, I’m posting the finished version of the song Dream Bubble for Mod Review!!!

The short motif is from Kirby 64: File Select at 00:19. I’ll add that link to the firs post as well.

Thanks for commenting on the track Timaeus, and for everyone’s help.

[Gario]

MOD REVIEW

Well, it's not too bad for a first attempt. Not something that will get on OCR, but it's better than other first attempts I've heard in the past.

I take it you were going for a calm, orchestra approach. I personally liked the instrument choices, but I feel that you need to learn how to make an orchestra sound convincing. Everything is played at the same volume note to note. I promise you there are no instruments that play the same dynamically throughout a song - it just sounds flat. There's also the issue of every strike sounding the same; instruments shape and swell over phrases in real life, so if you want a convincing orchestral piece you'd need to do that in your DAW, as well.

Overall, the piece is too quiet. I suspect one reason of this is because you your super reverb-y harps taking up all the sonic space, not allowing you to increase volume without clipping there. This is a great instance of why it's important to balance your instruments throughout the track - if one is significantly louder than another, it simply ruins your ability to raise the volumes to significant levels without insane levels of clipping.

Speaking of balance, there's the issue of bringing out instruments that are important (like the flute) and bringing down instruments that are not as significant (like the non-melody arpeggios of that run). Seriously, try it yourself on this track and listen to how much more focus can be brought out in this track when you balance the flute more to the front of the mix (meaning making it stand out, volume-wise) while bringing things like the non-melody harp arps to the back (lowering them in volume compared to everything else) - you'll be shocked just how much of an improvement it'll give your track.

Arrangement-wise, it's structure does actually lend itself to something that could be considered on OCR (it's not a cover of the track, yet the source is there), but it's very hollow. It doesn't fill the space with very much, relying on singleton instruments or groups of two (without this track actually being a solo or duet). It would need a lot of interesting texture work and a more full orchestral sound for it to work.

There is a lot to know about arranging music on a DAW, as you're probably learning right now. Notice all that you need to consider about writing an orchestral track, for example - without even getting into production details (the trick is trying to get louder without losing any quality; that's where you'll start needing to dabble in production values). This track won't pass on OCR, nor is it close to the standard, yet. Arranging music on a DAW takes years to learn, though, even for a seasoned musician (took me about five years to get where I am today... and that was with 8 years of musicianship prior), but it's very worth it, in the end. Go out and read up tutorials on how to use Reaper, how to write orchestrally (or whatever style you're interested in) in production and on what plug ins are great for you, and be ready to invest a lot of time into this craft. People are willing to help you along the way, so don't be afraid to show us what you've got when you have it (like with this track here).

Hope this helps you out a bit. Good luck, man.

[WiFiSunset]

Thanks for the comment.

Yes, a calm orchestral beginning, turning into a more realistic tense-ish ending, like the progression of a dream (sleeping, dreaming, and beginning to wake up). When you pointed out that they are flat I realized something. When I plug in a note into Reaper, it automatically sets the velocity at 127, which leaves me little to no room to raise the sound and ultimately forces me to use the tracks volume levers to gauge the sound. Glad that you pointed that out, because it made me realize that issue. I’ll try to set the velocity at a base line of either 80 or 70, so that I can adjust it along the way to create swells and etc.

You’re right about bringing out the flute more, it does end up making it sound better. It’s good to know that this would pass arrangement-wise. This is a song that I’ll definitely try to bring to OCR standards over time. I’ll work on adding more texture and orchestral sound. I’m trying to build my soundfont library as much as I can in order to do that (since my budget is Free).

I am starting to learning that there’s a lot to know, which is why I’m glad that I came to OCR. It’s also really good to hear that this takes time. I’ve had about the same amount of musicianship years as you had prior to using a DAW. I’m going to designate a day or two a week (depending on my schedule) to watching tutorials during the time that I would usually be composing. I’m learning about plug-ins as well. I got Crystal yesterday and experimented in it, and I’m beginning to get a sense of what plug-in are good for me in terms of user friendliness and what I’m using. From what I’m hearing I have to be ready to invest time into this, which is a good thing. I’ll be sure to post any remix that I make in this forum.

I’ve actually been kind of surprised at the willingness to help here , because I’m new to this site (in terms of joining) and all. I’ve signed up for remixing with the stars, which should help me a lot in terms of advice and other things as well.

This helps a lot, within a few weeks I’ve learned so much. Thanks.

[Argle]

Yep, I agree with everything said here. Arrangement is quite sparse, and some of the instruments EQ balance is way off, particularly between sections. Feels dry as well, add some more reverb to everything. Don't be disheartened, we all have to start somewhere.

btw, good to see another Reaper user.

[WiFiSunset]

Yep, I agree with everything said here. Arrangement is quite sparse, and some of the instruments EQ balance is way off, particularly between sections. Feels dry as well, add some more reverb to everything. Don't be disheartened, we all have to start somewhere.

btw, good to see another Reaper user.

Thanks .

I think that I'll stick with Reaper whenever I'm able to buy a DAW.

[Argle]

Thanks .

I think that I'll stick with Reaper whenever I'm able to buy a DAW.

Reaper is exceptionally powerful for the pittance they charge for it. If you have any Reaper questions feel free to PM me.

[WiFiSunset]

XD, I was just about to ask if it was okay to do that. I like the way Reaper works, and it has Engineer in it (which is what I want to be ).

I'll PM you later , I have something that's due soon.

[timaeus222]

When I plug in a note into Reaper, it automatically sets the velocity at 127, which leaves me little to no room to raise the sound and ultimately forces me to use the tracks volume levers to gauge the sound. Glad that you pointed that out, because it made me realize that issue. I’ll try to set the velocity at a base line of either 80 or 70, so that I can adjust it along the way to create swells and etc.

Neither Reaper nor any DAW actually "forces" you to a specific velocity on every note. I'm almost certain the first note you put in happened to be at nearly max velocity, because DAWs tend to remember the final velocity for the previous note you put in and apply that to every note thereafter. Or, maybe Reaper... sets a default velocity for every note? That'd be weird.

Maybe if you buy a MIDI keyboard and practice playing it, it'll help give you a better sense of velocity-gauging. My playing piano for 8 years has helped with that a lot.

[WiFiSunset]

DAWs tend to remember the final velocity for the previous note you put in and apply that to every note thereafter.

Well. That explains a lot . I guess that I’ll make sure that the first note or note thereafter is at 80 or 70.

[WiFiSunset]

Well, I've begun to revisit this mix by fixing some issues with velocities, panning, and a few other things.

Any comments are apreciated, I want to get some comments on the mix so far before adding some things to it. I've updated the link in the first post, but I'll also put it in this post as well.

Dream Bubble: http://soundcloud.com/cosmic-sounds-1/dream-bubble

I had used different soundfonts throughout the song to give it a instrumental progressive change feeling, like going deeper into a dream.

The issue that I'm thinking about now is: Will it sound good if I have one uniform sounding string soundfont backing the other instruments.

[timaeus222]

For some reason, this is lacking in treble quite a bit, so it sounds pretty narrow to me. The intro strings could have more harmonies going on, or at least some low end power with a note one octave down. The strings that lead at 0:32 tend to fall behind, so maybe you can stitch together notes from different articulation banks?

The piano's phrasing is a bit strange, as well. Every chunk of four chords sounds mechanical, and I'd suggest the second and third chords to be just singular notes.

1:02 flute has the problem of mechanical articulations too. If only you had legato on it.

1:18 harp should be EQ'd out some more. There's a lot of residual low mids that clutter the mix, and you can see that the song got a whole lot louder when the harp came in, if you look at the waveform, but I can really only hear the harp playing.

More open chords on the strings afterwards would help a lot too. The articulations are somewhat passable, but the harmonies make them sound thin and are the main problem.

2:04 cello in the right speaker is unusually loud compared to the staccato strings on the left speaker. Feels pretty dry, too.

This does sound a lot better though.

[WiFiSunset]

For some reason, this is lacking in treble quite a bit, so it sounds pretty narrow to me. The intro strings could have more harmonies going on, or at least some low end power with a note one octave down. The strings that lead at 0:32 tend to fall behind, so maybe you can stitch together notes from different articulation banks?

I'll expand on the opening harmonics, and fix the cellos fall behind sound (with some automation).

The piano's phrasing is a bit strange, as well. Every chunk of four chords sounds mechanical, and I'd suggest the second and third chords to be just singular notes.

1:02 flute has the problem of mechanical articulations too. If only you had legato on it.

Not sure what Vst could help with the flutes legato sound, maybe I could add some wetness to it?

Or overlay some of the notes, so that it sounds more fliud.

1:18 harp should be EQ'd out some more. There's a lot of residual low mids that clutter the mix, and you can see that the song got a whole lot louder when the harp came in, if you look at the waveform, but I can really only hear the harp playing.

More open chords on the strings afterwards would help a lot too. The articulations are somewhat passable, but the harmonies make them sound thin and are the main problem.

Yes, after the Flute stops only the harp comes in, because it is playing the main progression from the Kirby Source. Maybe I could alter the EQ so that it keeps its sound when it's alone, and then adjust the EQ it to where it takes up less space when other instruments enter.

2:04 cello in the right speaker is unusually loud compared to the staccato strings on the left speaker. Feels pretty dry, too.

This does sound a lot better though.

I hear the dryness that your mentioning. I'll add some reverb to it.

Thanks for the comments!

Edit: After fixing a lot of issues I can hear how hollow it sounds, but it also allows me to add some more things.

Although, I want to refine what I have first.

Edited July 7, 2013 by Cosmic Sounds

[WiFiSunset]

Updating this post . For later refinement of the song .

Goodness it's been so long since I've looked at this , lol.

I've gotten better from when I've started.....it's cool to see .

Edited April 26, 2014 by Cosmic Sounds

[WiFiSunset]

This is a remix of 2 songs, with 1 cameo:

1. Kirby Returns to Dreamland (The Arena: Lobby). The main source in the song:

2. and the 3DS Nintendo Zone Jingle, It can be heard at 00:23-26 in this video. Opening Harps.

3. Short Cameo: Kirby Crystal Shards (File Select) at 00:19 in the video.

The first source is the same as the Save Hut from Kirby Superstar; but, I want to list this game as the source. (This game has amazing music by the way). When I first heard the jingle I started to alter it, and then my mind automatically meshed the Kirby song with it.

This is the main source and cameo that I was talking about for the collab .