Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Gario

*NO* Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 'Electric Nature'

7 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Contact Info

Remixer Name: TOPiAN
Real Name: Ben Hayward
Email: 
Website: topianmusic.bandcamp.com
UserID: 34458

Submission Info

Game name: The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time
Arrangement name: Electric Nature
Song Name: Forest Temple
Original Composer: Koji Kondo
System: Nintendo 64

 

Edited by Liontamer
closed decision

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is really a cool track. It takes something that's creepy and transforms it into something that is chill as hell. The reharmonizations do a lot to get mileage out of so little - making the track less abrasive while utilizing the same textures does a lot of good for this.

Reharmonization does make connecting it to the source a bit tricky. That combined with the fact that one of the big source connections sounds like a sample from the source brings up the possibility of this being too liberal, but at the moment I'm strapped for time to stopwatch it. I'll get back to this soon to see if it falls within site guidelines.

I'll get back to this sometime soon with a proper vote.

EDIT (04/14)

Alright, I'm back, and got a quick breakdown of where the source recognizeably occurs in this. I am NOT including parts where the sample is the only place that connects the source.

0:27 - 1:46 - Pretty clear reinterpretation of the source in the melody, even with the reharmonization it's pretty easy to connect to the source.
2:07 - 2:28 - Background texture matches a pretty iconic texture of the source.
2:32 - 2:36 - The first two steps from the source theme in the melody
2:42 - 2:46 - The first two steps from the source theme in the melody
2:52 - 2:56 - The first two steps from the source theme in the melody
3:02 - 3:06 - The first two steps from the source theme in the melody
3:12 - 3:16 - The first two steps from the source theme in the melody

Overall: 127s / 217s

~59% source

The sections past 2:28 are a pretty liberal connection to the source, admittedly - if that's not considered this clocks in at about 49% source representation. At the same time, the rattling sound isn't counted at all in these interpretations (which is playing throughout the arrangement)... I think there's just enough connection to the source if we were to listen to this without the sampling, so I think this is good to go for me in that respect.

EDIT (4/21): Glad to hear Liontamer weigh in on this - it's certainly a borderline case whether or not what I listed counts as source. It's nice to hear some clarifications, and while my vote holds if you don't pass the panel this time around be sure to give the arrangement more clear source connection in the other sections outside of 0:27 - 1:46, as while everything sounds inspired by the source it's a real stretch to count anything in the arrangement as source connection. When it comes to direct sampling, it's discouraged from counting something like that as arranged source, for OCR purposes; an alternative would be to recreate the sample (or something that sounds like that) and use it to give that extra bit of source connection, as well.

I hope it passes, but I completely understand if it doesn't. Hopefully this will help with your resubmission if it doesn't pass.

YES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is one of the best Zelda sources of all time, but a tricky one to remix.  I like the bassline added.  Without the sampled rattly bit, I think it would be too liberal and also too sparse.  My big question is, are we allowing this much sampling straight from the source material?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Besides the sampled rainstick, I thought the instrumentation handling the source tune sounded too similar to the tone of the original, e.g. :27-1:46, so overall, I felt the parts referencing "Forest Prayer" (airy vox, pan flute) didn't do enough in the first half to distinguish itself from the original audio. Gario mentioned the re-harmonization of the theme at :46; to me, it's very understated, plus the tone sounds the same, and then the rainstick and pan flute are more prominent and also sound nearly the same in tone as the source. I'm not saying the re-harm counts for nothing, but on balance it doesn't mean much.

The original groove over the top of the "Forest Prayer" writing (:50-1:20 & 1:51-3:25) didn't connect well with the source tune, IMO; it just sounded awkwardly laid over the source references and the pattern was extremely, extremely repetitive. For me, there wasn't any real synergy there.

I hear the similarity, but I can't really count the two-note pieces cited from 2:32-3:16, and they didn't sound like they were from "Forest Prayer's" melody, which has a 3-note opening. I'm open to being corrected on a music theory level and what notes were used; but even if I counted all of that as a simplification of that melody, to me, this just didn't feel like a cohesive and developed enough arrangement. To me, the sampled rainstick is leaned on for too much of the track as being the most prominent connection to the original song. It's a crutch at times, in terms of providing the audible connections to the source, but that's because I didn't agree with the melodic simplification argument for the 2nd half. And the core groove is just on a very repetitive auto-pilot.

I don't dislike the piece in a vacuum, Ben. It sounds like an interesting traditional remix that falls outside of the arrangement standards, and sometimes that happens. It could have used more development/variation with the beats and different instrumentation for the "Forest Prayer" parts to distinguish it more from the original to fit the arrangement/interpretation standards here. To me, the track isn't as much a out-and-out sampling violation as much as I thought it wasn't creative and developed enough for the standards here. But definitely don't compromise your vision and goal with this track if you don't want to revisit it.

NO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is definitely a tough one. To me I think it comes down to what Larry said about the rattle/rainstick in that it's being used too much both as a sample from the original and as a crutch to make source connection at times. I really enjoyed the groove overall, and I'd love to pass this if there was a little more in regards to the source being used. Good luck on the rest of the vote!

NO (resubmit)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been mulling this one over for quite some time now.  I think the source connection is technically enough to meet our standards, but it does so at the cost of being static and repetitive.  There's a nice break in the center, but most of it is mellow riffs over that rainstick and the flute-like source notes.  It's a good concept to start off with, but the original ideas that are present here aren't enough to make an entire remix out of.  To extend the metaphor, a crutch isn't just a support, but can also hold you back.  To get this to work, I think you'll have to go further afield and get more adventurous with how you adapt the source material.

NO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a hard one, I've gone back and forth on this one for over a week.  In the end, I think my thoughts are the same as MindWanderer's here.  The source is enough and recognizable throughout for me, even with some changes done to the progressions and harmonies, and the bassline serves as a nice hook, but I can't deny the track as a whole feels very static and underdeveloped, even through its short duration.  The fadeout ending didn't help the track feel more developed either.  I also think the rattling drum could've been used less, though it wouldn't bother me that much if the track was moving to different places melodically.  

Nothing bad production wise, but not enough on the arrangement side.  This is very close however, it was a very hard decision that I didn't make lightly.

NO (resubmit)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0