Chimpazilla

Members
  • Content count

    2,555
  • 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. Wow I really like this source, and I love the remix approach. I hear the criticisms about the mix being awash with reverb and release tails, but it doesn't bother me too much until 1:25. That wonky lead note at 1:25 does bother me, and the backing harmonies from 1:25 to 1:52 sound dissonant and harmonically muddy, possibly due to the long release tails but also possibly due to some wrong chord note choices throughout that section. The volume jump at 2:00 is startling and causes me to have to lower the volume. Wow I'm really on the fence here because this is so good, and I could flip to YES if that is the consensus but I'd prefer to see some issues addressed first. NO (borderline, resubmit please)
  2. Guitar performances are really great. The flute is noticeably fake but it has a minor role. The drums sound fine. The string pad is not the loveliest pad sound I ever heard, but I don't have the feeling that it means to be real strings, and it gets the job done just fine. Nice arrangement. YES
  3. Emery shared this with me a couple of weeks ago and I was amazed by how smartly it was put together and how ten minutes went by without a moment of lost interest. Production is as clean as it gets. Lots of love went into this track and it shows. Easiest yes ever. YES
  4. Not much to add to what the other two Js have said. The flute sounds nice, but that entire section has no real leadwork. The drum groove is probably the biggest issue I find holding this track back, it never changes. The kick sound doesn't seem to fit with the instrumentation either, it seems to be more of a hard rock kick and a soft kick would work better, and since the sound doesn't fit right and sticks out of the soundscape, the noticeably repetitive pattern of the kick is emphasized. Ok so I did have more to add. Fix the drum groove and this should work better. NO
  5. Yep the drum balances and mixing are off, that tambourine or hat right in my face and so mechanical. The lead guitar tone is so mid heavy and has too much reverb, so the lead lacks any kind of sparkle, yet the backing chugs are mixed bright and up-front. I agree with Gario's vote pretty much entirely. Hope to hear this again though, I like the concept. NO
  6. I like the concept, I like the interpretation of the melody quite a bit. But I'm not quite feeling this one, it is so sparse and that simple backing gets old quickly. The violin playing is competent but I dislike the right-ish panning and the sound is very dry. The piano when it enters is very simple and mechanical and feels like too little too late. Feels more like an extended concept wip to me. NO
  7. Omg what an awesome track, great arrangement and ace production. Easily into my favorites folder, but I can't argue with Gario's source breakdown and unfortunately it isn't enough for OCR. If you wanted to throw in some other recognizable motifs from other sources (the section starting at 3:29 could almost hint at Zelda's Lullaby but would need to be made more easily recognizable) into those longer fully-original sections, that would put it over the top in terms of source use. If you don't want to revisit it, I would understand, and it sounds so great as it stands right now. Great listen, enjoyed it thoroughly. NO (please resubmit)
  8. Wow, tricky vote here. I am listening and have read all the votes above. What I am hearing is a track that sounds overcompressed and yet not loud enough (limiter ceiling too low), all the way until 3:35, then there is this super quiet and clean piano, followed by a horrendously loud section with comically loud/dry vocals. I feel like the arrangement, odd as it is, is cool and quirky, but the balance and compression issues are ultimately putting it under the bar for me. It feels like too many cooks in the kitchen and the head chef went on break instead of overseeing this cake getting made. Needs another pass at the mixing/mastering, then it will be good to go. NO (resubmit, please)
  9. Although I agree with both of my fellow judges here, I think MW's vote sums up my feelings best. Wow, I really think something went wrong on render here, I hear so many glitches and not the cool groovy kind. I love the concept, but wow, piercing frequencies, mid-heavy eq, and rendering errors all around. Needs work. NO
  10. Even I am going to say there are too many sfx and vocal clips, and I'm a HUGE fan of game sfx and vocal clips. Many of the sfx are also too loud. Way too many in here, gotta take at least half of them out, and make the rest of them count, throw one in right before a big change, along with a noise sweep or something, and give us a break in between. Other than that I think the track is very good. The saw lead could use a little filter movement or something, not a dealbreaker but that would give it some more expressiveness especially on the longer notes. I like the starman interlude a lot, such fun soloing! The transitions into and out of starman are a little abrupt but I'm fine with it. It's a fun track, pretty easy pass without so many vocal clips and sfx. I guess I'm with Gario here, but since there are so many sfx I don't think conditional is a good way to go, as conditional is for super quickie fixes, and you should take your time rethinking the sfx in this track. NO (borderline, remove some vocal clips and sfx, and resubmit please)
  11. The brass and flute have way too long of attacks, to the point where the track sounds sidechained and I know it isn't (or, shouldn't be). The flute especially should have a much shorter attack as it is playing lead. I agree about the rain fx, they are overused with this source generally, and in this case I agree the thunder claps are too loud when they occur. The deep drum isn't doing a good job of keeping the beat because it lacks punch, perhaps layering a proper kick in with it would help, but the big drum is also taking a ton of space in the low end and making it muddy overall. I feel like the soundscape is quite empty though throughout the piece, even with lots of stuff playing the soundscape needs different stuff to fill it out. The writing is also repetitive. I like the concept, but the execution isn't there yet. NO
  12. The clarinet is great and could be louder. The old-time piano is perfect, love it, it sounds mechanical but in a good way, like a player-piano, and the tone is great. Omg that faster section, hilarious and I love the transition. That final chord is excellent. Well done, guys! I've got rhythm, indeed. YES
  13. I really like the variations you've done on the motif. The concept is dynamite. I agree with Gario, the piano immediately is a problem, the sample isn't great and without any sort of reverb to put it into a nice space, it just sits there flat. The sample lacks any kind of expressiveness and sounds really clunky. The viola isn't much better. They both sound like they are overpowering the soundscape instead of jiving with it. I think the viola could be fixed with eq, take some of the low-mids out and it will be less honky sounding. I'm also not totally sold on the drum groove you've chosen to go with the soundscape. I like the idea of adding a drum groove but I'm not sure this is the right one. I'm not sure if it is too fast of a pattern or just one that doesn't compliment the writing, but it feels off to me. I love the idea, but the execution isn't quite there yet for me. NO
  14. Fun cover, but I agree the arrangement is too conservative. Performances are indeed good, it just feels much too close to the original in every way. The track hits it's stride early on and has no change in energy throughout the piece, no breakdown, nothing very original added and no outro either. Adding a breakdown would go far in setting this remix apart from the source, as would adding a section with unique yet complimentary writing. The other thing I notice is that the master is set for 3db of headroom which makes this sound like a premaster and not a master. If you were trying to go conservative on your master, -3db peak is too conservative. -0.3 is a very good conservative limiter ceiling, that is what I always use anyway. NO
  15. Cool blending of these sources, but I agree with the gentlemen that this soundscape is just too busy. Too much competing writing going on together at several points, melodies and countermelodies all competing for center stage. The other issue is that the leads and backing elements are all playing in the same frequency range, so that further adds to the overcrowded and competitive nature of the soundscape. You will need to do some eq work to let leads shine and push backing elements back, and also don't be afraid to delete parts outright that don't add anything to the mix. NO (resubmit)