Mega Man: The Wily Castle Remix Gauntlet 2013

[Mr. L]

Speaking of ... What's wrong with 6 and 9? DarkeSword doesn't seem to like them (at least not in the point system)

I subbed my song also. It's my first remix of my first compo. Remember you had your first one once!

This competition is where I started as well - the one in 2011, that is!

With that said, welcome to the world of remixing!

Looking forward to hearing what you've come up with for this week!

Edited July 28, 2013 by Mr. L

[DarkeSword]

Speaking of ... What's wrong with 6 and 9? DarkeSword doesn't seem to like them (at least not in the point system)

First place needs to clearly lead over second place, which is why it goes from 10 points to 8 points.

Second place and third place should be competitive, which is why they're 8 and 7.

Top three should lead over everyone else, which is why it goes from 7 to 5 in third to fourth place.

[ectogemia]

Subbed. My tongue is still tingling from the spiciness of these trumpets, ouch...

In other news, I agree with Shadix. Recording a session player results in an audio rendering of music the composer wrote. Sequencing samples of a player who recorded them for a library results in an audio rendering of music the composer wrote. The only difference is the quality of the end product where a session recording will sound more organic. I don't think it's that important that the person who records the part is on your team so long as the primary arranger wrote the whole part (minus embellishments and articulations added naturally by the player).

Edited July 28, 2013 by ectogemia

[DarkeSword]

I have 11 entries so far. 2 hours left.

[NovaReaper]

I have 11 entries so far. 2 hours left.

Who are we missing?

[DarkeSword]

"I also want to stress that you cannot collaborate with people who are not on your team. This obviously means no collaborations with other teams, but it also includes people not involved with the competition, i.e. you can't get your sister to play drums for you, and you can't get your boyfriend to throw some vocals down either."

After discussing with a friend regarding my track last week and wanting to get live sax on my track, I want to express that making this a rule is actually detrimental to any benefit this contest is supposed to give, and is poor producer work ethic for those who have the resources to do this type of work.

When you use a sample library, you are collaborating with musicians that were strenuously recorded for use with your project. By claiming this to be a rule you are essentially saying using anything that isn't explicitly a synth is against the rules.

If the reason for the rule is because it puts individuals at an unfair advantage due to the expressive nature of live recording, I want to stress that the process of arranging for players and recording is a complicated, work intensive process, with a lot of variables both before and after recording that more than make up for the lack of sample tweaking and humanization to make your samples expressive.

Also, if the reason behind the rule is "samples only". What if I made my own samples of other people I want to use? If they just happen to play the same chord progress or melodic figure in my song, its still a sample.

In addition, if the point of this contest is arrangement and you are going to outlaw session musicians you should outlaw sample libraries altogether, because the guy that happens to own well recorded, expensive sample libraries like Komplete, EWQL, LASS, etc are already at a disproportionate advantage to the dude still scraping by on poorly recorded soundfonts and stock plugins. In addition sample libraries are pre-mixed and mastered, so if anything, pre-manufactured samples are cheating in a sense.

Now, I can see if you are concerned if external people are collaborating on the arrangement, but if you are doing the principle writing bringing in session players is exactly the same as loading up a patch in Kontakt, and thus shouldn't be an issue. I ask for you to reconsider your stance on this for future competitions.

You make good points. What does everyone else think?

EDIT: You know what? I DON'T GIVE A SHIT WHAT YOU GUYS THINK. I'M JUST GONNA MAKE A DECISION ON MY OWN!!!!! :-x

I'm going to adjust the rules for this competition and say that session musicians/performers are allowed. If you have the resources to make that kind of thing happen, then you should be able to utilize those resources.

Please keep in mind that musicians and performers should not be involved in the arrangement of your track. As always, I obviously have no way of enforcing this, so I'm asking you to be on your honor.

Edited July 28, 2013 by DarkeSword

[NovaReaper]

I think that's a fine idea.

[Phonetic Hero]

You make good points. What does everyone else think?

I'm pretty much in agreement with Jameson; the idea, imo, should be to create a good piece of music and grow as musicians and producers. Some of the rules hinder this a bit

I was about to say something about 50/50 source usage since a lot of people seem to take that into account when voting, because this ties in VERY closely with "creating a good piece of music". But, that's nowhere in the rules. It just says the sources need to be integrated well. For my track, for instance, there's more Tengu man than the other source (probably somewhere around 65/35). But I wasn't about to try to force in more of the other for the sake of source usage and completely fuck my own structure. So I think people need to take that into account when voting too - 50/50 isn't in the rules. That being said, it'd be kind of stupid if someone went like, 90/10 or something, but just bear in mind that forcing one source into another when it doesn't want to go is NOT for the better of the piece.

Edited July 28, 2013 by Phonetic Hero

[SuperiorX]

You make good points. What does everyone else think?

I personally am all for it. This is what I allowed in the SZRC. So long as the remixer still arranged the song and wrote the parts for it themselves, then I don't see how/why it matters if you are using a sequenced instrument and/or pre-recorded sample library versus having a live player record the parts for you. You (the remixer) still did the grunt work and needed the arrangement skills/knowledge to write the part. What I think would NOT be ok for the purposes of this competition, would to be like "hey instrumentalist/vocalist, I have 16 bars on this track I'm working on, go do your thing". Basically having a session player write the part for you should not be allowed, and would violate the "you are the primary arranger" rule of the compo.

[Ethan Rex]

You make good points. What does everyone else think?

I think it makes sense, as long as it's the arranger that writes the part

[DarkeSword]

Yeah let's just go with that. I've updated the first post to have a special note about session musicians and performers. Please feel free to utilize all of the resources you have at your disposal.

Still waiting for remixes from:

The Handsome Devils

The Robot Museum

The Robutt Masters

Edited July 28, 2013 by DarkeSword

[Sir_NutS]

I think he makes some good points, however I don't really care whether other people use expensive libraries or the London Philharmonic. I'm here because its always fun to participate and it's a very good experience if you want to grow as a musician (just this round I picked up on some new stuff). I don't really care about winning. But I understand how others may be more competitive about it.

If I were into this for actually winning, I would think about the implications of allowing outside members to help. The rules serve as limitations to keep the competition sort of leveled and to help you do stuff you wouldn't normally do. Without rules or limitations nothing can really stop me from doing a barebones arrangement, handing it over to say Thomas who's much better at arranging than me to make it epic, then hand it over to blind to get amazing production values on it, and then paying for the final mastering.

There is actually something I want to do for this competition but I won't be able to because it requires a female vocalist. Without rules I would tell Mae or even ask Injury to do it, but because I can't I'll have to think out of the box if I want to do this idea.

tldr: If I was actually competing I would say its good to have these limitations. But since I'm more into this for personal growth, I'm fine either way.

EDIT: well, nevermind now! hmm time to do the preparations for that idea of mine...

Edited July 28, 2013 by Sir_NutS

[Phonetic Hero]

Still waiting for remixes from:

The Handsome Devils

Just sent it, Sharty <3

Edited July 28, 2013 by Phonetic Hero

[DarkeSword]

I have Handsome Devils remix.

Also, seriously, please do not call me Sharky.

[Phonetic Hero]

I have Handsome Devils remix.

Also, seriously, please do not call me Sharky.

What if I spell it with a "q"?

[SuperiorX]

There is actually something I want to do for this competition but I won't be able to because it requires a female vocalist. Without rules I would tell Mae or even ask Injury to do it, but because I can't I'll have to think out of the box if I want to do this idea.

EDIT: well, nevermind now! hmm time to do the preparations for that idea of mine...

My interest is piqued

[Shadix]

I think he makes some good points, however I don't really care whether other people use expensive libraries or the London Philharmonic. I'm here because its always fun to participate and it's a very good experience if you want to grow as a musician (just this round I picked up on some new stuff). I don't really care about winning. But I understand how others may be more competitive about it.

If I were into this for actually winning, I would think about the implications of allowing outside members to help. The rules serve as limitations to keep the competition sort of leveled and to help you do stuff you wouldn't normally do. Without rules or limitations nothing can really stop me from doing a barebones arrangement, handing it over to say Thomas who's much better at arranging than me to make it epic, then hand it over to blind to get amazing production values on it, and then paying for the final mastering.

There is actually something I want to do for this competition but I won't be able to because it requires a female vocalist. Without rules I would tell Mae or even ask Injury to do it, but because I can't I'll have to think out of the box if I want to do this idea.

tldr: If I was actually competing I would say its good to have these limitations. But since I'm more into this for personal growth, I'm fine either way.

EDIT: well, nevermind now! hmm time to do the preparations for that idea of mine...

Yeah, it wasn't so much for me wanting it to be more competitive, I wanted it moreso so that I could fully realize my arrangements, as for instance, I didn't have a really good sax library but I do know some great sax players that I could've printed up sheet music to.

The barebone's arrangement being played by live players is an interesting issue to bring up. However, addressing a problem like that I think might be better addressed by setting up different voting categories for arrangement and production. Simply mixing a live ensemble you aren't playing in takes SO MUCH WORK on its own, between coordinating, transcribing, editing, mixing, etc. just to get it to a professional production level. There's also the variable of whether the live players you are getting can actually play the music you are giving them to. Lots of psychology and prep work required.

Right now, an individual with great sample libraries and good production skills can get away with getting more votes with a simpler arrnagement than someone with less that has an extremely complex, thought out arrangement. I hope that people will factor other things into their voting decisions as this is a contest to see who can arrange the best.

I think this actually will be a good thing to get people to look at the arrangements themselves more objectively in the long run. It enables the people who want to go the extra mile to do live arrangements to do the work and if everyone catches onto it hey, we all benefit as producers. As long as you are explicitly the one writing the piece I don't see a problem, and not just tossing music to people and telling them to play something over a section. For instance if you want a solo section I'd say you should either be the one playing the solo or should have every freaking note in that solo written out on paper. The reason it appeals to me is because I'm still in engineering school and need excuses to get more experience with that convoluted workflow.

Thank you Darkesword for considering my proposal! I'm really excited to see how people might utilize this new resources, and I'm sure it'll make for some absolutely killer mixes.

Edited July 28, 2013 by Shadix

[Brandon Strader]

tldr: If I was actually competing I would say its good to have these limitations. But since I'm more into this for personal growth, I'm fine either way.

EDIT: well, nevermind now! hmm time to do the preparations for that idea of mine...

Wait, so can I do a new metal song with screams by Rexy, and have a rap break by Sir_NutS and Jivemaster?

[SuperiorX]

Wait, so can I do a new metal song with screams by Rexy, and have a rap break by Sir_NutS and Jivemaster?

DOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ITTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I seriously would really enjoy hearing that. So. DO. IT.

[Ethan Rex]

Still waiting for remixes from:

The Robutt Masters

Sent in mine

[Brandon Strader]

DOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ITTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I seriously would really enjoy hearing that. So. DO. IT.

You'd enjoy hearing it, but would it get you off your tractor and into the voting booth?

[Garpocalypse]

You'd enjoy hearing it, but would it get you off your tractor and into the voting booth?

Nu metal?

Do that and i'll boycott OCR for a decade.

[Troyificus]

Nu metal?

Do that and i'll boycott OCR for a decade.

Now now, some nu-metal isn't bad!

[Brandon Strader]

Nu metal?

Do that and i'll boycott OCR for a decade.

I was thinking more like Chthonic meets Baby Metal

[Sir_NutS]

Right now, an individual with great sample libraries and good production skills can get away with getting more votes with a simpler arrnagement than someone with less that has an extremely complex, thought out arrangement. I hope that people will factor other things into their voting decisions as this is a contest to see who can arrange the best.

As you said, this is a competition for who can do the best arrangement, and the "best" arrangement wont' be an objective thing. More often than not a simple yet effective arrangement will win over a very complex one on equal production values.

For example, I thought Gravity Bandits was the best song of the past round. I didn't vote it first place because I think it was unfinished (abrupt ending, maybe it was intentional, but it sounded like the song was unfinished) was that your song? anyways, I talked about it to some people and they thought it was confusing and even off. So if that was your song I think not many people voted for it because it was way too complex for most people to get a grip on. I absolutely loved it though, and totally got it, but I don't think a bad sax sample was the problem.

The point is that in my experience a simple and to the point arrangement will appease more people in these competitions, I don't think production in itself affects much of the voting unless the production is really, really poor.