Actually, this 44kHz material today is sometimes suitable for remastering. Old samples, uneven quality. But yes, they are.Word of advice: Professional mixes like the Rayman 2 soundtrack should be your point of reference, as they're already balanced to near perfection.
I know what you mean, but remember that original 44kHz is not commonly know files to this reference since are heavly compressed 22kHz which are none point of reference. Let's say that 22kHz files thinks that they're know better than composer.I would highly advise you not to think that you know better than Éric Chevalier
Well, please be forgiving cause I still learning. And for the record, I didn't use X-Fi Crystalizer for those files, if you're interested, listen to this:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mtz2sbckadrda ... %20nmr.wav
Too much bass, sometimes hiss, but far more better than DC/PS2 I guess.
There is Crystalizer.
Source is gameplay. Should be same source for tweaking like Droolie's files. It isn't.Actually, that sounds really good. It sounds really crisp in some places. Nice work! It's a pity that it's riddled with the pops and clicks I mentioned though. And the maximum frequency in your file is about 24kHz, so you could just have made it a 48kHz file too.
Try doing the same with my file and I'm pretty sure you'll get better results.
In this file I see example of sense of doing all of it. I have more.
original:
http://hosting.raymanpc.com/raytunes/mu ... 0Glade.mp3
http://hosting.raymanpc.com/raytunes/mu ... eprise.mp3
If it's not too much, can you say me what some kind of crystalizer/plugins/vst/options in some DAW will be the best for this purposes? Cause I achieve really good results with this X-Fi, but my point of reference should be enhanced.
I'd like to move that what I'm hear for all soundsystems, since I like my files more.Also, there's nothing you can do to restore the super-11 khz frequencies in the RayTunes soundtrack, as they simply do not exist.
Right thing but, I need just better reference and all have better music, since no professional doing things like as this, and I already made something like that beforeit's up to you to apply an EQ in Windows that sounds good to you as it likely won't sound good to anyone with a different system
Once again, thank you for exhaustive response and forbearance.
@technology4617
Don't excuse your self, you was just unkind, and you just insult me.Malice is sometimes necessary in getting a point across
Now I demand apology for vocabulary for above sentence, and official warning from moderator for offence of other user. I can read all of it. I will not be offended.
No, I asked first to verify the quality. I met with hostility when I tried do anything, with you and the same with Droolie, and I met with relative, evasive responses which wasn't serious from both sides. Your was this offensive. The end doesn't justifies the means.he's outright demanding for his re-EQed version
I still master my English, which has some manners which I still learning. My point wasn't to show arrogance, but will of help. I said some words of respect for his rip for solid and mass of work requiring specialist knowledge. No doubt.saying that the version Drolpiraat had on RayTunes was horrible, and arrogantly assuming his product
Method of acquisition files is not my part, only final effect.implying that Drolpiraat did a terrible job and that he could do better, when he in fact hadn't a clue what he was talking about
34 band EQ+ Noise sharpening. There wasn't X-Fi Crystalizer there - this method is more complicated, but it's better.And if it was an actual "fanwork" (as in, if it wasn't simply a re-EQing)
About my method, you don't know amount of work which I put to sound all of it reference; but my point of reference has weaknesses unfortunately. That's why it's bad for you, good to me.
You jump to conclusions and isult me to just beat me down. And you did it again. You don't have respect.
Occupation: evil-doing
and everything's clear
Still, we don't have distinction in 3 versions of my work.