KVR Audio

chilledpanda · Post by **chilledpanda** » Tue Mar 25, 2014 2:41 am

bjporter wrote:
chilledpanda wrote: cheers for that , is good insight to how you are layering your kicks, especially with the patches so I can see what each layer is for and each layer is kept simple to it's requirement, I have been tend to do as much in 1 or 2 layers and possibly overcomplicate it. See why you drums are top notch.
If you ever get the urge to do the same with the snare , feel free lol
Yeah I was going to get to that eventually - thanks for the extra motivation... but it's pretty quick to explain so here's you go:
<snippet>

Strangely for some reason I was expecting more layers lol, but makes sense as the kick has a few extra ones for more depth/weight.
Cheers

, I have a proper look a bit tomorrow.

G-Roove · Post by **G-Roove** » Tue Mar 25, 2014 10:54 am

Voted

cytoSonic · Post by **cytoSonic** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:02 am

voted.

I don't like the idea of payware effects as I think too many entrants rely on "processing" to hype their tracks (my ears are still hurting a little from what I assume was the overuse of the Slick HDR thingy that everyone was using last month). The freeware limit seems a good compromise to let people use some effects but not necessarily go overboard.

I'm fine with the stacking. I'm also fine with a point system. I really don't care as long as the method of voting is simple - I would have problems with categories and/or "sub-columns" or some of the other ideas mentioned. I think either stacking or points will in practice lead to the exact same result standings, but some of the other ideas would, in fact, start skewing things.

Regarding mandatory voting or voting only for entrants - I believe invoking such regulations would detract from the good-hearted spirit of the contest.

In short, don't try to fix something that isn't broken. Just keep it simple and fun!
(just my opinion, of course)

-Brad

Harthstein · Post by **Harthstein** » Thu Mar 27, 2014 2:48 pm

Voted.

J.Ruegg · Post by **J.Ruegg** » Thu Mar 27, 2014 9:58 pm

Voted.

G-Roove · Post by **G-Roove** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 8:30 am

Awesome new EQ for OSC recommended-plugins page !

http://www.tokyodawn.net/tdr-vos-slickeq/

Tony Ostinato · Post by **Tony Ostinato** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 2:45 pm

voted

jasinski · Post by **jasinski** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 7:03 pm

voted!

Sonnydeluxe · Post by **Sonnydeluxe** » Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:19 pm

voted

crimsonwarlock · Post by **crimsonwarlock** » Mon Mar 31, 2014 7:32 am

Ugo just set all his plugins free

So M-Theory might be a great option for a (near) future OSC as it is 'something else' (Karplus Strong based synthesis).

V'ger · Post by **V'ger** » Mon Mar 31, 2014 9:02 am

Thanks for the headseup, M-Theory sounds great although it does require a lot of CPU last time I checked.

chilledpanda wrote:
V'ger wrote:How much effects to use has been a constant topic as long as I can remember here and seems never to have a clear consensus.

As it can't really be quantified, it can't be put to a vote either, and as it stands it's only limited by the 'beyond recognition' rule like pointed out.

I think it has to come down to the individual tastes when voting on a track and let the points reflect your views on the matter.

Personally I like a lot of effects as I would want to hear as nice tracks as possible and don't see why we can't do what any other producer can do (minues modulation effects), but if I was voting would definitely want to score up a track if it sounds amazing and no effects or only for example a limiter had been used and the rest synth, but that rarely sounds good unless the synth has a lot effects included.
Yes, guess that's the crux of the issue highlighted, if someone thought it was too much would the track be disqualified? or it's simply it's left too people to mark accordingly, because it's tastes a subjective thing. Just when new to osc people kind of take the rule literal, err on caution because it's ambiguous at best.
Imo some of the tracks do kind of sound unrecognisable from the synth, but as the quality is top notch, so really a testament to someone's artistry and skill with effects and sound design more than anything else.
So hence why it seems ambiguous. So if it's not a disqualification because nobody knows where the line is drawn, maybe it should be just a note that voters may mark it down if it is?

No track has yet been DQed by the 'beyond recognition' rule and mostly due to the reasons you say, but I believe there has been warning about distortion once (to be fixed before deadline). It's difficult to draw the line to what breaks the rule with normal effects like EQ etc but there is still a line. I guess mostly it's self regulating in that people score the tracks up or down according to their own view on effects usage, but the trend is that people like a lot of effects judging from the winning tracks over the years.

Breeze · Post by **Breeze** » Mon Mar 31, 2014 4:41 pm

V'ger wrote:No track has yet been DQed by the 'beyond recognition' rule and mostly due to the reasons you say, but I believe there has been warning about distortion once (to be fixed before deadline). It's difficult to draw the line to what breaks the rule with normal effects like EQ etc but there is still a line. I guess mostly it's self regulating in that people score the tracks up or down according to their own view on effects usage, but the trend is that people like a lot of effects judging from the winning tracks over the years.

Funny this topic came up in the Obxd thread discussing what "beyond recognition" really means and this is what I replied (full quote this time), and what bj replied to me:

bjporter wrote:
Breeze wrote:And BTW, that's why IMO the rule on allowing any processing at all is questionable. In the specific case of the Kick, you can "transient design" the sound to shape it into consistency using freeware dynamic processors: IMO that's also modifying the sound of the synth as much as using effects, or in this case, sampling the best iteration of a sound: you are changing the natural capabilities of the synth.

The spirit of the OSC seems to be about hearing what the synth can do on its own. IMO it shouldn't allow any processing at all, except maybe on the two buss. And BTW, an open contest between different synths with rules like these is not really fair at all as a powerhouse like Zebra has so much more in the FX department than the Obxd (which has none!). Something to keep in mind if and when you ever do that again.
Agreed - I think we should be able to do one shot samples as well... but it's a tough sell. Bring it up in the General OSC threads - maybe we can put this up for the next vote.

In fact, bjporter is pulling it the other way from what I consider would be the right way: to hear what a synth can do OOTB. I've already mentioned MANY times that I'm new to the OSC, but if it really is about seeing what a synth can do, then it really should be judged on it's own merits with no processing other than anything built-in. But if it's about more than that, if it's a music contest, then it shouldn't be called the OSC at all and anything should be allowed.

The bottom line is really: what do you want this contest to be about? That defines everything.

z.prime · Post by **z.prime** » Mon Mar 31, 2014 5:05 pm

Breeze wrote:The bottom line is really: what do you want this contest to be about? That defines everything.

Indeed it does. It boils down to basically 2 schools of thought on this:

1) this is a contest to use a synth
-or-
2) this is a contest to make a song

This is, of course, a contest for both but the line between the two is what defines it, as you say. I, personally, want to make a song and I don't want to be fighting stupid things like CPU limits or insanely complex automation just to do that. I believe you'll find the majority in this camp (though there are also certainly a few vocal outliers). I want to figure out how to make better songs, not how to use a random synth for a month only to table it when the next month rolls around. I want to have the best track possible be it from the music, production techniques, or using the synth to get as good of a sound as I can. And quite frankly, the quality of the tracks would be much, much worse without effects - these synths aren't really intended to stand on their own a lot of the time. OBXD is a perfect example - if it was intended to be used completely on its own, there would be built in delay, reverb, more sound shaping, etc. But developers don't add that stuff because obviously everyone has good sounding effects already - much better than the effort to include it in a synth would be worth.

So, I'll always vote for anything to make better tracks or make our lives easier (like sampling a kick).

BlackWinny · Post by **BlackWinny** » Mon Mar 31, 2014 5:13 pm

Yes. My opinion here in this present thread was exactly in this line of Breeze's and bjporter's thoughts and mine is really very close to Breeze's one. And I've developed a bit also here in the native OBXD thread.

Actually OSC doesn't seem anymore a "synths" contest neither a "music compositions" contest... but nothing else than a huge "effects" contest!

abovethoughts · Post by **abovethoughts** » Mon Mar 31, 2014 5:59 pm

Re-Voted

We need the choice to leave comments while doing the stacking. Until such feature, I am choosing the old 5 point system.

One-Synth-Challenge: General discussion thread