OceansAndrew Posted August 27, 2008 Posted August 27, 2008 I would hope so. You're the second-in-command. The Spock to my Kirk. The Starscream to my Megatron. The Zergling to my Hydralisk. The Great Ball to my Ultra Ball. I believe that he is calling Brad the little spoon.. >_>
Pavos Posted August 27, 2008 Posted August 27, 2008 The Starscream to my Megatron. That's not really a pro... Ooh then I made a mix of the DA theme. Or something
DragonAvenger Posted August 27, 2008 Posted August 27, 2008 For once I really can't think of a response.
chrono26 Posted August 28, 2008 Posted August 28, 2008 oh im still here too. sry had no internet for a while
The Damned Posted August 28, 2008 Author Posted August 28, 2008 Me, Prophet, DA, Chrono26, Fishy (on and off-ish), Cerrax, Pocketman, and some others I can't recall off-hand.
Pavos Posted August 28, 2008 Posted August 28, 2008 I'm remixing practicly half of the soundtrack and he can't recall me?! I quit! alright, just kidding...
The Damned Posted August 28, 2008 Author Posted August 28, 2008 You never disappeared, so why would I need to list you?
prophetik music Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 Alright, alright....I'll go disappeaer then wyle ur bizy dissappeerings lern how2spel plz
The Damned Posted August 31, 2008 Author Posted August 31, 2008 Say hello to our newest remixer, Rozovian! He bites, so don't try to pet him.
The Damned Posted September 1, 2008 Author Posted September 1, 2008 And say hello to our next newest remixer, halc. He also bites, but in ways you'll like. Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.
Cleandregs Z Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 I can't wait to hear this. Fuck whoever said the music from Pokémon sucked when the first Pokémon ReMix was submitted. Said it was like trying to make Shakespeare out of crap or something.
halc Posted September 5, 2008 Posted September 5, 2008 Yeah. Uh, is the tracklist on on the project forums here current? Are the black tracks all up for grabs?
DragonAvenger Posted September 5, 2008 Posted September 5, 2008 Yeah. Uh, is the tracklist on on the project forums here current? Are the black tracks all up for grabs? I'm pretty sure that's NOT current. I don't know if there is a current list on there, though.
The Damned Posted September 5, 2008 Author Posted September 5, 2008 It's pretty much whatever you see in Private WIPs and Finalized Remixes. Everything else is free. I know, I know... "The Dammed, do a new tracklist", "that's your job amongst other things", "stop emailing me pictures of your crotch", "I'm serious, stop it"... OK, first page updated with a tracklist.
The Damned Posted September 9, 2008 Author Posted September 9, 2008 And Fishy shows why he's OCR's guitar guy. Fucker. How dare you show off your talent and skill!
SLyGeN Posted September 10, 2008 Posted September 10, 2008 I had a quick look at the website and wanted to mention that I didn't like this post: i do'nt want to use flac because no one's got the stupid program. one of the keys to soundtrack download is making sure that it's in a file format that is easy to use. even if we link to the flac site, it's still another step that'll turn off people.just something simple. 160kbps is fine. I can tell the difference between 160kbps CBR and lossless. After putting so much effort into a track, there's no reason to muffle it; it doesn't do it any justice. So if there's any indecision as to whether or not to include FLAC, there's my two bits. I can't see how it would turn people off if they had a choice between MP3 and FLAC. It's just a few extra boxes to tick and untick in bittorrent.
nrich Posted September 10, 2008 Posted September 10, 2008 Why 160kbps? Why not 192 or even 224?... Seems redundant to put together such a big project and then offer it in mediocre quality. Sure you don't want to use FLAC, that's understandable, but that doesn't mean you can't make use of MP3's higher quality bitrates.
prophetik music Posted September 10, 2008 Posted September 10, 2008 i can understand offering it in lossless. that post was a long, long time ago =) possibly 192 and lossless, eventually. we'll discuss it.
SLyGeN Posted September 11, 2008 Posted September 11, 2008 Why 160kbps? Why not 192 or even 224?... Seems redundant to put together such a big project and then offer it in mediocre quality. Sure you don't want to use FLAC, that's understandable, but that doesn't mean you can't make use of MP3's higher quality bitrates. Ouch. Don't give any to him. ;P I don't think redundant was the right word. You guys have been getting a lot of flac for not giving us a release date, so there should be plenty of .FLAC to go around.
nrich Posted September 11, 2008 Posted September 11, 2008 Ouch. Don't give any to him.;P I don't think redundant was the right word. You guys have been getting a lot of flac for not giving us a release date, so there should be plenty of .FLAC to go around. Radiohead got away with the 160kbps In Rainbows because a physical release was to be expected. When you're supplying virtually the only copy, I just think it's a good idea to sacrifice saving a couple dozen megabytes for better quality tracks that will ultimately be more enjoyable I like the pun
Recommended Posts