VGMA2: Preparation

[Solaphar]

Perhaps consider the feedback checklist here for more ideas. I like a few of the ones in the "Structure" subcategory.

[amendments in bold brackets]
This entails [reasonably professional] sampling, mixing, mastering, etc. Very low volume or extreme compression should both be avoided. When emulating live instruments, samples should tend toward realism. [Electronic sounds should be run through at least a nominal post-processing treatment (reverb, delay, compression, etc.)].

If you have doubts [about a particular element of your composition], you may get confirmation by [presenting a previous example of a similar effect from another composition of yours]."

I like this, except for the "reasonably professional" line, since most of us are amateurs, not professional. But I'm guessing that's not meant in an "amateur vs professional" context?

How about "reasonable effort" instead? Or something along those lines...

Does anyone object to using this as the official statement on quality?

I guess I'm fine with it. I just want us to have a set standard in place that will allow people to enter and not face the possibility of rejection at the end of putting their track together.

[Blitz Lunar]

so many of these things depend on the individual song though. in some instances, a lot of compression is fine or even expected. in some instances you won't have DSP on electronic sounds (very common for sounds to be dry these days.) size of soundset is also no cut and dried marker of quality either. all depends what you're doing and how you use things.

shrug. i just disagree about trying to force standards across the board, if something sounds crap it's most likely not just limited to what someone is using. everyone has a different approach. that is why i think there can and should be peer revisions, and also that idea about showing other songs you've worked on with approximate similarity is a good idea as well.

myself if i entered i'd probably just MU100+DX it... i think ultimately, people should just be aware of guidelines, but do what they do anyway, and i expect it'll still be good enough.

[Kris Troutman]

Yeah I pretty much agree with all you have said. My main thing was that I happen to use a lot of compression, which is a concern for me after seeing what was said. I'm not saying everyone should use it, I'm just saying I personally enjoy using it, and I just don't see myself not using it, mainly because it has pretty much become a core part of my methods and style.

I would be cool if you entered a song Dave.

[AnthonyMorgan]

By "extreme compression" what I meant was, BWWMMRRRBRBWMWMRBBRWMWMBRMBRMBWMBWMBRMBRMBRMBR.

The good thing with compression is you can easily change it if it's not ok. So I don't think you should worry.

[Rocco]

@Anthony - I polled hard at BRRWWMBRRMMW.
@Solaphar - I'm with Dave on this one. If we decide to have a blanket quality requirement, it just isn't going to cover everything, and will be mostly arbitrary. It also won't keep someone from submitting crapola that meets all the rules. These aren't compositional guidelines, they're production guidelines. So as long as the music is acceptable, these are things that can be edited on-the-fly, like Kris said.

EDIT: I added the guidelines to the first post, and made some changes based on community feedback.

[Kris Troutman]

So is there any kind of deadline on this thing btw? For the record, I've been holding off on making my song until I know all there is to know about the album project. I think we also need to get a name soon that we turn all this stuff into when it is done.

Preferably, it should be somebody who is capable of making various audio formats, in the event some of us can't make them.

In my case FL only encodes in wav or single bitrate mp3. And apparently, Audacity doesn't encode to mp3 unless I download something (never had to do this since FL renders directly to mp3 anyway, but just tried now and noticed it wants something downloaded).

[Rocco]

As far as tracknames go, I imagined we'd all pick titles that had the name of our theme in it.

Is anyone here familiar enough with encoding VBR MP3 and FLAC who would be willing to do all the processing?

[Kris Troutman]

What I mean by "get a name soon" was I need to know who we are going to be turning things into. Sorry for not being clear.

[AnthonyMorgan]

Is anyone here familiar enough with encoding VBR MP3 and FLAC who would be willing to do all the processing?

Sure, I can do that.

[Charybdizs]

In my case FL only encodes in wav or single bitrate mp3. And apparently, Audacity doesn't encode to mp3 unless I download something (never had to do this since FL renders directly to mp3 anyway, but just tried now and noticed it wants something downloaded).

http://lame.buanzo.com.ar/

This is what you need.

[Rocco]

Is anyone here familiar enough with encoding VBR MP3 and FLAC who would be willing to do all the processing?

Sure, I can do that.

This would involve downloading all of the tracks as uncompressed, 24-bit WAV files, and re-uploading them as both VBR MP3s and lossless FLACs. I didn't volunteer myself because it will be a tremendous pain for whomever undertakes it. Do you have the hardware capabilities, free time, and storage space necessary after all?

[AnthonyMorgan]

Yeah I know. Unless we get 1500 tracks on this album there should be no problem.

[Rocco]

Yeah I know. Unless we get 1500 tracks on this album there should be no problem.

Okay, then. I updated the first thread. How would you prefer to receive the WAVs? Probably links from an upload site like Megaupload or Soundcloud?

[blue.nocturne]

I don't get all the hype about WAV and FLAC over the MP3 standard.
It will give a marginal difference in sound quality and even with good headphones you can barely hear the difference for 99% of songs.
At most those formats are only needed for temporary files that will be put into a song and for super high quality mics.

[AnthonyMorgan]

Okay, then. I updated the first thread. How would you prefer to receive the WAVs? Probably links from an upload site like Megaupload or Soundcloud?

I don't think Soundcloud allows WAVs. But yes, upload sites would be the best, I think. Quick and easy.

I don't get all the hype about WAV and FLAC over the MP3 standard.
It will give a marginal difference in sound quality and even with good headphones you can barely hear the difference for 99% of songs.
At most those formats are only needed for temporary files that will be put into a song and for super high quality mics.

Well both VBR MP3 and FLAC will be made available, so there's no battle against those.