Chimpazilla

Members
  • Content count

    2,518
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

About Chimpazilla

  • Rank
    Judge, Esther's Dreams Co-Director
  • Birthday 04/02/1965

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    Phoenix, AZ

Converted

  • Biography
    I started remixing in April 2011. I LOVE video games and game music! Anything Zelda, anything Mario. I could live in a Zelda game and be perfectly happy. ;-)
  • Real Name
    Kristina Scheps

Artist Settings

  • Collaboration Status
    3. Very Interested
  • Software - Digital Audio Workstation (DAW)
    Cubase
  • Composition & Production Skills
    Mixing & Mastering
  1. ^This,^ in it's entirety. What a cool arrangement, but the distortion just kills it dead. For anyone who ever hears it without reading the production notes, it is just going to sound bad, period. I will add that the piano sequencing sounds very stiff and mechanical. I hope you can fix this up and resubmit it, the concept and arrangement are ace. NO (resubmit, please)
  2. This arrangement is awesome, I agree with MW! Really creative use of the source. Even so, the mix sounds repetitive to me, not so much because the same sounds are used all throughout the mix, but more because every single element is saturated/distorted. There is very little contrast between clean and distorted, so it kind of sounds like a wall of grunge, and not in a good way, especially in the busiest parts. I suggest going back through and deciding which things should have heavy saturation on them and which might be better cleaner. The synth that you are using for bass sounds like it is playing lower than it's optimal range so it sometimes sounds like it is straining down there. The really full sections are definitely overcompressed and have no dynamics and I can hear overcompression artifacts over and above all the saturation. Even with that much compression you are only getting a max RMS value of -9.3, which tells me something in the mix is badly unbalanced and/or needs eq treatment (probably some low end rumble, 30Hz and below, stealing your headroom). I feel like the track is going to require a full rebalance, and re-mixing. Some elements such as the low synth starting at 1:45 are much too quiet, making the track dynamics too diverse overall. The drums are fairly squashed in the mix, and the kick in particular can not get through the soundscape in the heavy parts. I get what you are trying to do here and I love the concept... the execution isn't quite there though, but I hope you'll take this opportunity to fine-tune your mixing craft and please do send this back to us again, I look forward to passing it. NO (resubmit, please)
  3. I love it. Can't wait to hear it finished. I adore Spirit Tracks.
  4. The arrangement is good. The harpsichord is way too quiet to carry a lead by itself, but it doesn't do so very often, and I agree that making the harpsichord louder might not be helpful. I agree that the brass is lacking bite; better samples would improve this. I also agree that part 6 is the most cluttered, melodically. I feel that these are all areas to work on for next time, and that this arrangement is over the bar as is. YES
  5. Larry, this is one of those tracks where, as you often say, the artist may come back to this months down the road and listen and regret how hard he pushed the limiter. Perhaps my vote can be considered more of a conditional. Should we reach out to the artist?
  6. Performances and arrangement are really good, very enjoyable track. Opening guitar has too much delay. The soundscape quickly gets too busy for my taste, the worst offender is the section starting at 1:51. Perhaps part of why it sounds so busy though it that the master is overcompressed. I hear some distortion in the densest parts, over and above any desired distortion, and the crashes are completely destroyed. Cubase is reporting that the track is mastered to -6.9db RMS and that seems quite loud for a mellow rock track. I like the track quite a bit, it is 90% there for me, but I'm gonna be that girl who sends it back for a more gentle mastering job first. edit 2/20/17: MUUUUUUCH better. With the master no longer clipping and the delays under control, I can hear some beautiful melodic detail that was buried in the distortion before. I don't have that overcrowded feeling anymore. I agree with Gario that the track is DP quality now. Nice work! YES
  7. Tough call. The performance is good, but it does sound a bit blocky and choppy, and the pauses don't sound natural, and that may be due to the sample, as others have pointed out. It is very hard to hide flaws in a single-instrument mix. I feel quite borderline about this, but ultimately I think it falls just short. Perhaps look into changing the sample? That transition at 3:12 is very awkward, but with the piano sample sounding more natural, that won't bother me all that much. I agree with Gario about the pedal bleed, but if he hadn't mentioned it I would not have noticed it. NO (resubmit)
  8. This is kind of a bizarre thing. The drops are... odd. They are dubstep drops, but there is no bass, so my bass-loving brain is betrayed and bewildered. There are wubs here, but they are so tame. The lead writing is so very stiff, choppy, and repetitive. I like the slowdown and speedup of the synth from 3:15-3:53, that's pretty darn cool! Although I think some other effects could accompany that element. There are some cool sounds in this mix, but ultimately I find that there is too much straight copy pasta repetition here. The following sections are (nearly) identical: 0:13-0:40, 0:40-1:07, 1:36-2:03, and 3:53-4:20 (although this section has padding). That is four playthroughs of nearly identical material. Then 1:08-1:34 is almost the same as 2:31-3:25 (except this part is more iterations of the same thing), even with some filtering and that speeding up synth it sounds too samey for me, personally. This one isn't there for me yet. NO
  9. This arrangement is conservative indeed. I like the metal interpretation of this source, but this arrangement is also relentless. There is no break in the action at all. Adding a unique breakdown would take this out of cover territory enough for me, personally, and something slower and/or drumless would really give the feeling of more arrangement dynamics. But then there is the mixing. It doesn't sound like much mixing has been done, everything is competing for frequency, and most of the instruments are smack in the middle of the soundscape with the exception of just the hats and crashes. I just slapped a simple stereo widener on the whole track and I get instant improvement. (I don't suggest doing that on the entire track, not on bass or drums anyway, this was just a test.) I agree that the first 18 seconds do not need to exist, and there is a rendering error at the very beginning (at 0:00). All that said, I like the approach, and a few changes would push this over the bar for me. NO (resubmit)
  10. This arrangement is indeed too conservative for OCR. I hear a lot of copy pasta too, including a repeated rendering click on the left side (on repeated listens, I think this may be a snare hit, but regardless it sounds like a rendering click). I dislike hard panning and there is one guitar that only ever appears on the right. When that happens I have to stop to check if my left speaker has stopped working! I agree with the other two gentlemen that the mixing here needs work. When things are full and busy, everything is competing for frequency space and the whole soundscape sounds like midrange mush. I like the concept and the performances are good, but the arrangement and mixing need some attention. NO
  11. The soundscape is nice and full. The leads sound buried to me, they lack presence, they could be so huge and make such a great statement. The lead sounds are good but the volume and mixing aren't quite there with the leads. The arrangement feels quite repetitive overall, especially with the same arp pattern repeating all the way through. Drums could be mixed bigger. I have no problem with vocal clips generally, but I agree with MindWanderer that the quality of these clips isn't so good, and the final clip feels too self congratulatory. Still, nice track. YES
  12. Great soundscape set up right away. I hear cool effects, some hints of wubs that I wish I could hear better but they are buried. The lowest of the low end could use a bit more control. Harpsichord is a bit loud/dry/in-your-face. Trap hats are sequenced well, could be louder and possibly a bit wider. I do love the combination of the orchestral elements with the trap (I did a song like that too awhile back, it is still in the inbox atm). Love the transition at 1:58. Agreed with the other two Js that the kick could be used in a more traplike manner, but this works well enough. Great glitching and fx here. Arrangement is cool, awesome creepy vibe, enjoyable track overall. Ending is a bit of a dropoff and I would prefer some closure. YES
  13. This is a source I know extremely well. This arrangement is very conservative, I only hear minor writing differences between the source and the remix, and similar sounds are used. The remix gets repetitive as well. I would really prefer some original melodies here or there instead of the 95% verbatim I'm hearing. I'm going to revisit this one after seeing what other Js think but I'm leaning towards this being too conservative. NO
  14. Agreed with the gentlemen above. The major/minor clashing is odd, makes everything sound dissonant. The acoustic guitar sounds very fake and mechanical and I don't feel like it goes with the electric guitar at all. The final section of the track does sound quite overcompressed. Very awkward transition at 2:17. Drums sound buried. The track needs a rebalance for sure, but most importantly the chord structures aren't working well. NO
  15. I also did not hear the previous version of this track, but listening through this version, I am in total agreement with MindWanderer. This concept is dynamite, but the execution just isn't there yet. The strings are too loud and present, the celesta is too soft to carry a lead (don't make it louder! layer it with something else, or have it play a countermelody), and everything sounds very quantized and robotic. The track needs more elements of interest, some more ear candy here and there, and somehow the drum track needs to be more varied and interesting. Still some work to do here, but I really do like the idea. Source is well represented, no issue there. I like the swirling synth sound, and the koto, those are highlights. The bass sound is really plain, but works well enough. The ending is much too abrupt, that's a dealbreaker for me in itself. NO