mirev Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 (edited) SOURCE: I just finished this. I would like some critical thoughts. As always, it's free. Anybody think it'll make the cut? -----JourneyJay's Spyro The Dragon: Menu Screen----- https://soundcloud.com/journeyjay/journeyjays-spyro-the-dragon From the title: "Spyro the Dragon" 1998 Edited March 3, 2014 by mirev Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timaeus222 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) Well, by the mechanical/robotic instrumentation and the sparseness of the soundscape, nah, but this isn't unpleasant to listen to. If you were to rework this for OCR, it would mean: - A more dynamic re-interpretation of the source. This is too conservative. - Fixing up the sequencing so that it sounds real, not "blocky" (all same-y velocities), and meaningful (i.e. not variation for the sake of variation, but for more interesting melodic contour). This is the case for the entire track. 1:26 - 1:30, 1:35 - 1:39, 1:44 - 1:48, and 1:52 - 1:57 are the most evident, in case you wanted time stamps for the robotic sequencing. - Varying the drums more and making them seem less "autopilot" and more of a participating part. The drums are too independent of the other instruments (i.e. it doesn't work with the other instruments. It's like they're playing by themselves), and too repetitive. - More variation in the notes to add a sense of progression so that each part of the song doesn't sound quite the same as a previous part. This contributes to the repetition. - More cohesive instrumentation; it kind of works now, but seems awkward at times, in my opinion. The production is relatively good in context and you can hear everything clearly, but all that would change if you adjust anything here. That's part of the challenge; interpret the source well and mix the result well. It seems simple but it'll take a few years to learn. Good luck. In case you were wondering, hip hop and rap remixes on OCR are not unheard of. Here are a few. http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR01600/ http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR02820/ http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR02821/ http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR02822/ Edited March 3, 2014 by timaeus222 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirev Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 Can you go into more detail pertaining to your use of the word "Dynamic"? The velocity issue, I definitely understood. I can agree %100. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonicThHedgog Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Can you go into more detail pertaining to your use of the word "Dynamic"?The velocity issue, I definitely understood. I can agree %100. Dynamic could mean a range off things from Energy, to Volume, to Power, to Feeling, Flexibility. But I do agree with some of timaeus22 points. Sounds like a 80s pop song (Unless that is the sound you are going for). Feels a bit flat in sound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timaeus222 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) Can you go into more detail pertaining to your use of the word "Dynamic"?The velocity issue, I definitely understood. I can agree %100. Dynamic means primarily: - evolving, progressive, substantial development, revisits previous sections where practical (i.e. introducing new things throughout the whole extent may be too much to handle as a listener the first time through), climactic vs. anticlimactic, volumetric curve (crescendo/descrescendo, terraced volumes, overall flatness, etc.) - Not same-y throughout in textures, notes, and mood; overly repetitive (depends on genre); nor flat in its perceived energy Edited March 3, 2014 by timaeus222 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirev Posted March 4, 2014 Author Share Posted March 4, 2014 I'm seeing the words, but not how you mean to place them when referencing the track. That's what I meant when I asked for "specifics". I would like to make these changes, you seem to recognize things I have yet to learn to see. AKA: Confused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timaeus222 Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 (edited) I'm seeing the words, but not how you mean to place them when referencing the track. That's what I meant when I asked for "specifics".I would like to make these changes, you seem to recognize things I have yet to learn to see. AKA: Confused. It's not something I'd expect someone to just *poof* learn in a few days, but something to keep in mind in the long run. It helps to listen to music you're interested in more closely, analyzing the overall structure, transitions, and how the song progresses while also maintaining your interest. That way, you can learn more about what people do and see how you can incorporate that into your own music. Since you want me to be even more specific, here's an example analysis with terms that are generally universal (and particular terms are defined or said in parentheses): https://joshuamorse.bandcamp.com/track/you-got-me The intro is calm (with an electric piano), then uses a (distorted bitcrushed) sound effect to lead into a (jazzy) slow jam at 0:21. Begins song. At 0:29, the drums drop out except for the kick, which has some syncopated (off-the-beat) rhythm that works with the lead sound to lead into a section featuring that same lead sound. First slow jam section. At 0:48, all the drums drop out except for the leadin toms and the kick, then the electric piano plays a larger, more syncopated role to make this section sound fuller than the previous. This has louder dynamics than the previous section because it sounds fuller. At 1:05, the drums drop out while the bass and the lead work together to lead into a breakdown section with no drums except for a kick and/or a (distorted bitcrushed) clap. This is a reprieve to the previous two slow jam sections. At 1:28, a big tom roll leads from the breakdown section into a fuller section. Back to the slow jam sections. At 1:45, the drums drop out except for the kick, which has some syncopated (off-the-beat) rhythm that works with the lead sound to lead into a section similar to 0:48 - 1:05. This has louder dynamics than the previous section because it sounds fuller. At 2:04, the bass and the lead work together to lead into a new breakdown section featuring the bass. This is a show-off section, for fun with the bass. At 2:34, the bass does a slide up and down to lead into the next section, which is a solo based on 0:29 - 0:48. Another show-off section for fun with the lead. 3:13 becomes an outtro with a fade-out. Ending. Overall: Intro -> A -> A' -> B -> A -> A" -> C -> A with solo -> A' without leads as Outtro You don't have to do this explicitly, but thinking about it as you listen to something may help you catch onto how songs are arranged, and that should address most of the dynamics. Edited March 4, 2014 by timaeus222 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirev Posted March 4, 2014 Author Share Posted March 4, 2014 Now I think my context was misunderstood, but I appreciate your effort to explain. 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.