Be a Supporter!

Music Collab Discussion Thread

  • 22,836 Views
  • 423 Replies
New Topic
TheZaaL
TheZaaL
  • Member since: Apr. 13, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 11th, 2012 @ 08:44 PM

Or we could each do 1 minute, but 30 second with someone and 30 seconds with someone else, this way there is no cutting and everything will flow nicely!

Music Collab Discussion Thread


Computer has no brain. DEAL WITH IT!
Stupidity is a dangerous and contagious disease. It can happen to you. It can happen to me

zelazon
zelazon
  • Member since: Oct. 2, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Musician
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 11th, 2012 @ 08:53 PM

At 6/11/12 08:44 PM, TheZaaL wrote: Or we could each do 1 minute, but 30 second with someone and 30 seconds with someone else, this way there is no cutting and everything will flow nicely!

Wow, that seems like an interesting way of doing it... But we also have to see how the others agree to doing such an collab. Up for any other ideas ^^ .

NorskeDrittsekk
NorskeDrittsekk
  • Member since: Apr. 10, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Musician
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 11th, 2012 @ 09:12 PM

At 6/11/12 08:44 PM, TheZaaL wrote: Or we could each do 1 minute, but 30 second with someone and 30 seconds with someone else, this way there is no cutting and everything will flow nicely!

Great, now we need a main melody. Seriously, why not use semi-restrictive transitions INSTEAD of following everything the previous composer did? I oppose this option.

Remember we have over 2 dozens of people collaborating and this overlapping may hurt than help.

TheZaaL
TheZaaL
  • Member since: Apr. 13, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 11th, 2012 @ 09:24 PM

At 6/11/12 09:12 PM, NorskeDrittsekk wrote:
At 6/11/12 08:44 PM, TheZaaL wrote: Or we could each do 1 minute, but 30 second with someone and 30 seconds with someone else, this way there is no cutting and everything will flow nicely!
Great, now we need a main melody. Seriously, why not use semi-restrictive transitions INSTEAD of following everything the previous composer did? I oppose this option.

Remember we have over 2 dozens of people collaborating and this overlapping may hurt than help.

Ok, revising!! Each team of composer do 30 second of original work, and collaborate with the previous and next team for a 15 sec. transition.

Music Collab Discussion Thread


Computer has no brain. DEAL WITH IT!
Stupidity is a dangerous and contagious disease. It can happen to you. It can happen to me

NorskeDrittsekk
NorskeDrittsekk
  • Member since: Apr. 10, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Musician
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 11th, 2012 @ 09:39 PM

(2 collab piece x 15 sec) x 20 pairs = 600 sec = 10 minutes.

10 minutes is perfect for 196-256 kbps, decent quality for 10 - 15 MB size limitation.

TheZaaL
TheZaaL
  • Member since: Apr. 13, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 11th, 2012 @ 09:53 PM

At 6/11/12 09:39 PM, NorskeDrittsekk wrote: (2 collab piece x 15 sec) x 20 pairs = 600 sec = 10 minutes.

10 minutes is perfect for 196-256 kbps, decent quality for 10 - 15 MB size limitation.

Yeah, we'll decide the length of everything after the sign-up is finished, 10 minutes is decent.

But 40???? The list will be really really long!!


Computer has no brain. DEAL WITH IT!
Stupidity is a dangerous and contagious disease. It can happen to you. It can happen to me

Trampzy
Trampzy
  • Member since: Apr. 30, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 11th, 2012 @ 10:30 PM

The ZaaL's idea is pretty good. I was considering not doing a second round until this popped up.

TheZaaL
TheZaaL
  • Member since: Apr. 13, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 11th, 2012 @ 10:32 PM

At 6/11/12 10:30 PM, Trampzy wrote: The ZaaL's idea is pretty good. I was considering not doing a second round until this popped up.

Which one, first or second?


Computer has no brain. DEAL WITH IT!
Stupidity is a dangerous and contagious disease. It can happen to you. It can happen to me

Trampzy
Trampzy
  • Member since: Apr. 30, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 11th, 2012 @ 10:34 PM

At 6/11/12 10:32 PM, TheZaaL wrote:
At 6/11/12 10:30 PM, Trampzy wrote: The ZaaL's idea is pretty good. I was considering not doing a second round until this popped up.
Which one, first or second?

Either or. They both satisfy me. It's one of the few ideas I've liked so far that hasn't been rejected.

zelazon
zelazon
  • Member since: Oct. 2, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Musician
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 12:11 AM

At 6/11/12 10:34 PM, Trampzy wrote:
At 6/11/12 10:32 PM, TheZaaL wrote:
At 6/11/12 10:30 PM, Trampzy wrote: The ZaaL's idea is pretty good. I was considering not doing a second round until this popped up.
Which one, first or second?
Either or. They both satisfy me. It's one of the few ideas I've liked so far that hasn't been rejected.

Even so, both ideas would require that each person gets atleast 30 secs to a min of time, and not that I don't want you guys to have your own section, but even you halved 40 people, we still have 20 mins of material, and I don't think most people have the endurance of lasting 20 mins.

So it depends largely on the amount of people who decide to join.

Trampzy
Trampzy
  • Member since: Apr. 30, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 12:46 AM

At 6/12/12 12:11 AM, zelazon wrote: Even so, both ideas would require that each person gets atleast 30 secs to a min of time, and not that I don't want you guys to have your own section, but even you halved 40 people, we still have 20 mins of material, and I don't think most people have the endurance of lasting 20 mins.

So it depends largely on the amount of people who decide to join.

Whatever works really, because I honestly have no idea where we are with this whole thing right now. Are we basically doing what we did before? Im confused.

zelazon
zelazon
  • Member since: Oct. 2, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Musician
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 01:12 AM

Whatever works really, because I honestly have no idea where we are with this whole thing right now. Are we basically doing what we did before? Im confused.

Basically Square 1 since we need to know the amount of members who are going to join this thing... There's no point in trying to rush it since the deadline is on July 11, so right now we're just planning everything out.

Trampzy
Trampzy
  • Member since: Apr. 30, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 01:37 AM

At 6/12/12 01:12 AM, zelazon wrote:
Whatever works really, because I honestly have no idea where we are with this whole thing right now. Are we basically doing what we did before? Im confused.
Basically Square 1 since we need to know the amount of members who are going to join this thing... There's no point in trying to rush it since the deadline is on July 11, so right now we're just planning everything out.

Okay, sounds good. I think I put all my ideas for the mean time down already, so I'm for the most part just gonna see what anyone else comes up with unless something comes to me. I like the new times frames we're working with now though

Yoshiii343
Yoshiii343
  • Member since: Mar. 8, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 02:16 AM

Well, school holidays are over, so I'm not sure if I can be as active as I was...

Anyway, sorry I haven't given much contribution about the collab lately. Did I miss anything important?

NorskeDrittsekk
NorskeDrittsekk
  • Member since: Apr. 10, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Musician
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 10:40 AM

At 6/11/12 09:53 PM, TheZaaL wrote:
At 6/11/12 09:39 PM, NorskeDrittsekk wrote: (2 collab piece x 15 sec) x 20 pairs = 600 sec = 10 minutes.

10 minutes is perfect for 196-256 kbps, decent quality for 10 - 15 MB size limitation.
Yeah, we'll decide the length of everything after the sign-up is finished, 10 minutes is decent.

But 40???? The list will be really really long!!

On concept. Previous collab you get a whole long waiting list even the collab is closed. I doubt it is going to be lesser this time.

2nd idea is fine. We have time to work on part by part (3 months is a lot for 10~ min piece).

It is impossible to stick to 1min/2people = 20 min != 15 MB size limitation unless you want a 96 kbps quality.

TheZaaL
TheZaaL
  • Member since: Apr. 13, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 11:30 AM

At 6/12/12 10:40 AM, NorskeDrittsekk wrote:
On concept. Previous collab you get a whole long waiting list even the collab is closed. I doubt it is going to be lesser this time.

2nd idea is fine. We have time to work on part by part (3 months is a lot for 10~ min piece).

It is impossible to stick to 1min/2people = 20 min != 15 MB size limitation unless you want a 96 kbps quality.

It can work on 10 minutes if there is 15 second of original work, and 15 sec. of transition on both end, theorically splitted in 2 team: 7.5 sec per transition per team. At the end, we get : 15 sec + 7.5 sec + 7.5 sec = 30 sec.

So everybody will contribute in 45 seconds, but at the end because the transitions will be splitted between two team, we have 30 seconds per team, and the 10 minutes mark is met!


Computer has no brain. DEAL WITH IT!
Stupidity is a dangerous and contagious disease. It can happen to you. It can happen to me

NorskeDrittsekk
NorskeDrittsekk
  • Member since: Apr. 10, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Musician
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 11:40 AM

Great, I like it.

TheZaaL
TheZaaL
  • Member since: Apr. 13, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 11:57 AM

So, what I'd like to propose now is a 4 step process, on each would be set a deadline

1. Every team produce their own 15 sec. part. at this stage the order is not determined
2. One of us decide the order, so that there will be at least a bit of coherence
3. Production of the 1st transition
4. Production of the 2nd deadline

How bout that???


Computer has no brain. DEAL WITH IT!
Stupidity is a dangerous and contagious disease. It can happen to you. It can happen to me

zelazon
zelazon
  • Member since: Oct. 2, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Musician
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 06:58 PM

Alright, I need to go back a bit before people get confused as to what we're doing...

This is a Team collab, meaning that you'll be working with someone on a part to contribute to the collab. We've already contributed towards a singular collab (the last one we did), and so we're looking to do something different this time...

What this means is:

1. You will NOT be working on alone on your part (This is the reason why the deadline is so far away and the fundamental idea behind this version of the collab)
2. You will need to find a partner... Don't care if they're a part of newgrounds or not, just find someone who can help you with your part.

because right now it seems like people are thinking that each part is seperated into sections so that everyone can make their own part and collectivize it together, but that's not what we're aiming for with this collab.

Also, right now, we're just throwing out ideas until everyone comes on board (either hitting the July 11th mark, or the 40 people that join up by then. If only a relative few join, we can go solo, but otherwise I want to see people teaming up together, and if your having trouble finding someone, we can start a separate thread for that.

TheZaaL
TheZaaL
  • Member since: Apr. 13, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 07:11 PM

At 6/12/12 06:58 PM, zelazon wrote: Alright, I need to go back a bit before people get confused as to what we're doing...

and everything else

small typo on here, should have read : each team produce their 15 sec.

And, yeah, I was throwing my ideas here. Say no and we'll move on something else!


Computer has no brain. DEAL WITH IT!
Stupidity is a dangerous and contagious disease. It can happen to you. It can happen to me

TheZaaL
TheZaaL
  • Member since: Apr. 13, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 07:13 PM

At 6/12/12 07:11 PM, TheZaaL wrote: small typo on here, should have read : each team produce their 15 sec.

Woops, forget it!


Computer has no brain. DEAL WITH IT!
Stupidity is a dangerous and contagious disease. It can happen to you. It can happen to me

Bones341
Bones341
  • Member since: Apr. 3, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Musician
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 07:28 PM

At 6/11/12 09:24 PM, TheZaaL wrote:
Ok, revising!! Each team of composer do 30 second of original work, and collaborate with the previous and next team for a 15 sec. transition.

How would this work? I think there might be some issues with programs crossing over, like if one team uses a certain program to make their part, but the next team uses a different program...? Maybe send each other midi patterns, VST patches and samples used? But what if either doesn't own that particular VST?

Bones341
Bones341
  • Member since: Apr. 3, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Musician
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 07:38 PM

I think it might be better if we give each team an order to do their part, so they can get an idea of how to come into the transition. So for example:

Team 1 would do their 1 min (or 30 sec, whatever we're doing), then pass it on to team 2

Team 2 would then carry it on from where team 1 left off, then pass to team 3... And so on.

This being the case, it would be better to set a tempo

TheZaaL
TheZaaL
  • Member since: Apr. 13, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 08:40 PM

At 6/12/12 07:28 PM, Bones341 wrote: How would this work?

They'll have to collaborate. One team begins a wav file and pass it, the other add something to it, repass it, first team doesn't like, so team 2 edit their passage... Sure, it will be more work, each team would have to communicate, but it's totally possible. Another way of doing it is the "PRAY/PAY" system: Progressively Remove All Your (Instruments)/ Progressively Add Your (Instruments At The Same Rate Than The Other Team).

I suggested that way because of 2 things: 1, the way you suggested could create some drastic cuts on the final work. A way to bypass this would be a mandatory 4 bars (or less) added after the "15 sec" mark in the note determined, so that there will be a continuity, or, like Norske said, have a semi-restrictive transition. 2, The last team would have to download >500 mb file (no way we do this in mp3 because of the repeated compression on the 1st team's part). but yeah, that's a pretty small downside, but think of the ones restricted by their internet quotas.


Computer has no brain. DEAL WITH IT!
Stupidity is a dangerous and contagious disease. It can happen to you. It can happen to me

NorskeDrittsekk
NorskeDrittsekk
  • Member since: Apr. 10, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Musician
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 09:32 PM

At 6/12/12 06:58 PM, zelazon wrote: because right now it seems like people are thinking that each part is seperated into sections so that everyone can make their own part and collectivize it together, but that's not what we're aiming for with this collab.

Since when was the first one as a 'collab'? :P

oh wait, now it's ACTUALLY a COLLAB
Trampzy
Trampzy
  • Member since: Apr. 30, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 09:48 PM

At 6/12/12 09:32 PM, NorskeDrittsekk wrote:
At 6/12/12 06:58 PM, zelazon wrote: because right now it seems like people are thinking that each part is seperated into sections so that everyone can make their own part and collectivize it together, but that's not what we're aiming for with this collab.
Since when was the first one as a 'collab'? :P

oh wait, now it's ACTUALLY a COLLAB

haha yeah, I've just considered the first one to be showcase this whole time.

JJM121
JJM121
  • Member since: Dec. 19, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 08
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 12th, 2012 @ 11:41 PM

Anyone want to suggest how a team is going to work together? Not too familiar with this. ^^

Trampzy
Trampzy
  • Member since: Apr. 30, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 14th, 2012 @ 12:31 PM

@Zelazon-> Yoshiii343 and I are teaming up on this one, for whenever we get started. Just so you know.

So where are we with this whole thing right now? Should we maybe form a list of all the people that are in this so far?

zelazon
zelazon
  • Member since: Oct. 2, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 02
Musician
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 14th, 2012 @ 05:53 PM

At 6/14/12 12:31 PM, Trampzy wrote: @Zelazon-> Yoshiii343 and I are teaming up on this one, for whenever we get started. Just so you know.

So where are we with this whole thing right now? Should we maybe form a list of all the people that are in this so far?

You can check the list of people out in the project systems tab and look at the project members.

And you can either send me or chimeranoise a pm about who your partnering up with. Since he's going to be dealing with the mixing, it's probably better to let him know. I'm still going to document it just for future references...

Also, post the type of genre your going to try to make so it'll be easier for chimera to mix together.

Trampzy
Trampzy
  • Member since: Apr. 30, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Audiophile
Response to Music Collab Discussion Thread Jun. 14th, 2012 @ 06:13 PM

At 6/14/12 05:53 PM, zelazon wrote:
You can check the list of people out in the project systems tab and look at the project members.

And you can either send me or chimeranoise a pm about who your partnering up with. Since he's going to be dealing with the mixing, it's probably better to let him know. I'm still going to document it just for future references...

Also, post the type of genre your going to try to make so it'll be easier for chimera to mix together.

oh I didn't realize we were using the same project system thing. We don't really know what we're doing yet, we just teamed up last night.