Emunator Posted May 22, 2022 Share Posted May 22, 2022 Original Decision Epic Footsteps, a remix of the first walkabout theme from Dragon Warrior 2, by the Audiomancer(a.k.a. Eric) Dragon Warrior 2 is an NES game. This is another attempt at this remix, and since my last attempt, I have: Procured some synths as they have gone on sale. Hopefully the new sounds are more pleasing. I also automated various parameters on them. In addition, I applied more layering of synths. I had two choirs at the beginning with different attack values, I removed the one with the slower attack. I also altered the "voice" part at 1:49 I have applied compression on a per track basis, as opposed to on the master. The master bus does have a limiter on it, but I didn't push it very hard (I think). I also removed the vocal/vocode part mentioned, and also added a couple "splashes" of the walkabout theme from the first Dragon Warrior game to increase the percentage of game music content. Those splashes are heard at 20-26, and 1:28-1:35. The part at 42-55 is based on the second walkabout theme in DW2, albeit very loosely. Thought I would point it out, and even then, I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't considered an interpretation of the source material. The previous 8 bars of melody are based on the Dragon Warrior 2 theme. I lowered the volume and did EQ changes on the hats so they don't take up as much room. I also varied the volume and panning on the hats as well. I did some small frequency cuts and boosts to try to make things more clear, and to give instruments more room against each other. Also tried to remove resonances. I still kept the arrangement largely as is. One of the judges compared this to older remixes arrangement wise, and I take that as a compliment. I like the older ones:) I did change some of the instrumentation, however. I spent what I think is too much time on the bass drum and snare you hear here. I tried to give them a little more meat, and there's like, 6 effects on each of those tracks. I probably put in a lot of work for something that won't be as well received as I hope it will;) Once again, I appreciate the time and consideration:) Respectfully, Audiomancer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophetik music Posted May 23, 2022 Share Posted May 23, 2022 (edited) i believe this is at least my third vote on this one. here's the wrap of my last vote: Quote turning down most of the instruments by the same amount, addressing that really blah hornet lead, and ensuring that it's not compression city will probably be enough for a yes from me. so let's see where it landed. the intro is still neat. the drums sound heavily processed, for better or worse. there's a lot of tone in the kick that in general feels like it gets in the way of everything else. glancing at the freq analysis, i think it's because there is not as much sub-100hz tones as i'd expect. there's a dip between 110 and 70, peak at 70, and then very little else. the kick's mainly present in that beater tone and not really in the sub-bass range, and the bass is almost unable to be heard throughout. i believe turning down the kick/snare (leaving the rest where it is) just a bit and giving some more EQ love to that bass will help a lot by letting everything else speak, and then adjust the kick a bit by scooping some of that pitched tone from it a bit and reinforcing the 40-60hz range. i still really like that arp going through the first break. there's definitely some more attention paid to the lead. it still tends to be more zappy and doesn't really move too much, but there's some automation on there that's a nice change from what there was last time. i still think it could use more! finding ways to vary articulations (glides, maybe?), more use of space in the lines so it's not constantly on, and also it could be brought down a touch since it's very loud compared to everything else, especially in the second half of the track. i am not really sure if i'm making perfect the enemy of good here. i think there's a lot of places it can improve but it's a fun track to listen to right now. i think it's got a bit farther to go but this is closer to my not-sure list than i've been in some time. NO Edited May 23, 2022 by prophetik music Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MindWanderer Posted May 25, 2022 Share Posted May 25, 2022 Yeah... it still sounds like very old remixes. If that's a compliment to you, feel free to take it as such... There are clearly synths with a lot of potential, but buying synths isn't the solution. You can make great remixes with free synths. It's how you use them that matters. Part of the problem is that there's a wide variety of synths used here, and they don't hang together. Choir, organs, synthwave, dark house... it's a hodgepodge. You can make an arrangement work that way, but it's harder than picking a genre and sticking to it. And there are still a fair number of primitive synths that don't really cut it, chief of which is the drums, especially the snares. And it's all snares and kicks. 0:57-1:09 is the strongest part of the track because it has a pad and bass that go well together, a contrasting but not conflicting lead, and none of those cheap-sounding drums. The synths are also all used in a simplistic way. Take 2:02-2:16 as an example: You have a lead here that's doing the work of at least two instruments (melody, response). That could be two or even three different synths, which could be partially overlapping for more sophisticated interactions. 1:37-1:48 is another example, where the runs could be a different instrument (and the instrument you chose here isn't great to begin with). That's not to say this is the only way to do it, but it's a way that stands out to me where you could make things more interesting and modern. The arps in 0:42-0:57 are a nice touch that show some more complexity, but you also have no bass there... Speaking of which, bass is pretty lacking throughout. There are some pads that help, but the first real bass instrument doesn't come in until 0:57, and it's very high for a bass. And then there's again none until 2:02. You're learning, and that's a good thing. But this does need some more work to bring this into the 21st century. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimpazilla Posted June 12, 2022 Share Posted June 12, 2022 Gotta agree with MW that this sounds like a very old remix, I'll use the dreaded word "dated" here. That said, I think it's not that far from becoming "nostalgic" rather than "dated" with some mixing improvements. The main things I hear are volume imbalances and lack of sidechaining. Some instruments are excessively loud. The intro organ is quite loud. When the first lead hits at 0:27 it is so much louder than the rest of the soundscape that it is quite distracting. It doesn't help that the sound used is very static and unchanging (no filter movement or any effects of interest). The drums generally sound very weak and tame; the snare has no bulk to it, it's all sizzle, same with hats. If a drum sound isn't working for you and you've applied a billion fixes to it (as I see that you did from your writeup), time to replace it with something that works. Maybe go through Splice.com, they always have up-to-date samples of everything. The lead at 1:38 also comes in startlingly loud compared to the backing. I can't hear any bass at all in this mix. You've got some lovely arpeggios that are getting clobbered by the loud leads. So yeah, the mix needs a rebalance. I think the kick might actually be ok but it comes across as weak, I think due to the next thing I'll talk about which is sidechaining. But first, I recommend applying EQ to every element in this mix, cutting unnecessary lows out of everything that isn't kick or bass. Example: pads don't need to be heard lower than 100-ish Hz generally, same with plucks, other backing elements and most leads, you can cut the lows out of these elements allowing kick and bass to be the only elements playing in the lowest ranges. Hat loops and high-end elements can take even stronger EQing-out of lows. You'd be surprised how many useless lows and inaudible rumble are in elements in a mix, stealing mastering headroom. Apply the EQ gently enough not to change the character of the sound, just to cut out useless rumble and inaudible lows. You'll be amazed at how much this simple trick cleans up your soundscape, and your mastering compressor will thank you. NOW for the sidechaining. Sidechaining can be used to clean up a mix when applied gently, and of course it can be used for an effect when applied heavily. In this mix I think both methods can be used. If this were my mix, I'd sidechain your kick to your bass fairly heavily (8-10db of gain reduction) but with a quick release, heavy enough to hear it almost pumping if you solo kick and bass. Then I'd sidechain the pads similarly but less gain reduction than bass (more like 6db GR), not quite enough to hear the pumping but enough that the kick punches through when it hits. Then, sidechain the other elements including your leads. Yes, you can sidechain leads! It will add some groove to the arrangement and also clean up the mixing, provided it is applied gently enough (low ratio, very quick release, and high enough threshold that you can't hear pumping at all in the mix, only about 3db of gain reduction). When everything is sidechained purposefully, gently, in varying amounts, sanely... the mix will come to life. I know that was a wall of text but I see that you're trying hard to learn this and I remember being in that position myself and how hard I worked at it. Please keep going! (If not on this remix, maybe on something new, using what you've learned.) This is a cute arrangement and I think it will work with better mixing. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts