Emunator Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Original Decision Hi there, Contact Information Your ReMixer name: Manji Your real name: Christopher Mole Your email address: Your website: http://www.chrismole.co.uk Your userid on our forums: 16265 Submission Information Submission link: Name of game(s) arranged: Metroid Prime Name of arrangement: Prime Directive Name of individual song(s) arranged: Menu Select Comments: It's only been three years since I last submitted this... time flies! The idea came from my endearing love of both the Metroid Prime series and heavy, progressive metal- I'm a big fan of Metroid Metal and their versions of Metroid tunes, and after a repeat playthrough of the original game in the Prime series decided to try and record my own version. I last submitted this in late 2012 and got some solid feedback from the judges about both the arrangement and the mixing, so I took it away, did some rejigging of the arrangement and then eventually got round to re-recording the whole thing- I hope it meets with your approval this time! All the guitars and the bass were recorded from a shiny new Kemper Powerhead using my Schecter Hellraiser (lovingly named 'Cherry') and a 4-string bass belonging to my partner (named 'Sid'), the drums are sampled. As I noted in my last submission email- I absolutely adore the Metroid Prime soundtrack, and it's a large reason behind my enduring love for the game. It was subdued at some points, driving and terrifying at others, and it meshed perfectly with the exploratory nature of the game itself. Although I generally blacked out in abject horror whenever a Metroid latched onto my face, so I have no idea what the music during that sounded like... Thanks very much! Original submission thread: http://ocremix.org/community/topic/32629-no-metroid-prime-prime-directive/ Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfGsArRQjKE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonAvenger Posted March 7, 2016 Share Posted March 7, 2016 Listened to this one a couple times. I think it's a vast improvement on the arrangement side; I do not that the issue of the source either being there or not being there like I did for your previous submission. The energy is still there, and the guitar playing is really strong. I do feel like the drums are still lacking a bit of punch that would really make this track shine, but overall I think it's not an issue where this needs more work. Good to see you sticking with it! YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaMonz Posted March 7, 2016 Share Posted March 7, 2016 This is nice! I'm liking the guitar performances overall throughout the track, nice work there for sure. I think the biggest weak point here is the drum writing, mostly noticeable during some fills that felt awkward to me (0:58 and 1:31, for example), and the velocities on the hi-hats sounded quite unnatural at times. I also thought the snare sounded a bit weak. Although, the arrangement is great and holds together very well in the big picture. Structure has plenty of variation and flow, and source is quite easily recognizable most of the time. Bottom line: drums could have used some improvement, but the great arrangement and guitar playing keep this above the bar for me. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir_NutS Posted March 11, 2016 Share Posted March 11, 2016 Oh I love this source! I read through the complains in the old voting thread, although I couldn't check the original submission. I think the drums aren't quite where they need to be yet, specially the kick which gets lost in the busy sections, the track overall has a busy low end, but this is satisfactory. The guitars sound fairly clean and powerful. The arrangement represents the source pretty well while also supporting it with plenty of new elements and there's a fair amount of interpretation going that flows in a natural way. I liked the break you introduced at 02:51, it was the perfect moment to bring that in as the arrangement has very high levels of energy all the time, if it was like that through all the song it would've tired the listener but you knew better and that break was also executed well with some expansions on the original melody. Solid rework, I'm happy to give it aYES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 :08.5-:25.5, :37-1:51.5, 2:31.5-2:50.5, 3:37.75-3:54.5 = 127 seconds or 52.91% overt source usage (that I recognized) I'm hearing a ton of light crackling from 2:54-3:37; it's easy to miss or overlook, and wasn't a huge deal, but that's an unfortunate production issue. Otherwise, pretty solid arrangement and performance. I didn't hear the first version, but whatever held it back before isn't doing so now. The mixing was somewhat cluttered, but nothing that was below the bar since I could make out the various parts well enough. Let's go. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts