I have been "done" by SC a lot. Wait a few days and it will allow you to comment again. I think somehow they measure how many comments over a period of time - ie they think you are trolling (which of course you are not, maybe, possibly, haha!).
The instruments as loaded first are panned to their "correct" orchestra positions. But, as you say, without close mic-ing, the separation can be a little "mushy" with that reverb! I found I needed to tweak the pans a little to help with that. I had to volume automate every track (of course!) to get some dynamics into the track. I suspect with the full product you have oodles more control over all this, and lots of mics as well.
This round has brought out some interesting/good/unique composing skills. It was good to not have to mangle sines or find out how to make noise by stacking notes for a change. I think it did make people think about composing in the broadest sense. I feel sure this will have helped many to bring out their " inner composer", and will enhance their tracks in further rounds.
Given we have 47 tracks, I have found after a few listens, I can have a reasonable voting list for refinement. This will come with commenting and moving tracks around the bins!
Enjoy the voting phase folks. Oh yes, I agree that some have not fully embraced the "compose for the challenge" rule. Sadly, those tracks are very good indeed ... not sure what the guidance should be. At least I know mine was composed over a few hours on the Sunday night before submission, and even though "basic" in the composing/arranging arena (ie minimalism), I found that passing the phrases around the orchestra in various forms worked quite well - i think, or, "I would say that, wouldn't I ???"
I would like the say thanks to Richard Semper for being "brave" in choosing this - a number of people had suggested it - there was some trepidation to start, but everyone stepped up to the plate and did good.



dB