prophetik music   Judges ⚖️

loads of sound design and sfx clips to start. a beat starts to surface at 0:27, and the rhythmic foundation for the original N64 track can be heard in the patterns being played here - an interesting idea. there are steadily more melodic elements added in until we get to the break at ~1:02, and then 1:21 is where we start hearing more of the melodic material again. there's some alternations in here, and notably the choice of notes at 1:40 and 1:47.5 are a half-step off of the key (should prob be Eb-F instead of D-E to avoid the D-Ab tritone)). this is real intense for the most part and a toe-tapper of a section. i really like the super-heavy electro bass through all this. a mid-range element is added around 2:04 that feels a little too much and makes it a touch too dense, but overall this is a neat section. the melody coming in as a break near the end of it is a good glue section. between that initial part and the deconstruction that happens after, around 2:30. we get a wildly unexpected stylistic transition at 2:58 into...i guess hindi trap? the bassline here is really fun. this noodles quite a bit but is recognizable. there's another unexpected break before a short exploration of the opening few bars of the venom stabs, which morphs into a more brickwalled intense section of venom's stab section. there's way too much going on here and it's hard to hear any one thing, but i guess that's fitting for the style. the ending's a bit of a letdown after that level of intensity, but it's a fine ending and wraps the track. this is a surprisingly straightforward arrangement of the venom theme, for the most part. there's some really wild exploratory sections that probably could have been integrated better with more patience applied to the transitions, but what's here is interesting and approachable. YES edit 9/15: listening again with some of the context from subsequent votes. wake and chimpa are right - this is so very hot when compared to other edm. i didn't notice how much the high mids especially were pushing on my ears until i came in fresh. cosigning their votes. NO

fun original. opens with some big, effected synths right in the front of the stereo field. drums are very treble-heavy initially (outside the kick of course) - there's a lot of 10khz+ content in those hats and snare. the beat kicks at 0:42 alongside some sfx. there's not a lot going on initially outside the kit - just bass and an arpeggio stab, and we get a 303 added in after a bit. this section goes on a touch longer than i'd expect given how little's there. we do get a transition into a more chippy, distorted sound around 1:27, and this functions as a break until the drums come out of the closet again at 1:52. there's some pretty hyper bass work initially and then we get a recap of the earlier fairly-thin section from 0:42 (which is the A material from the track). there's another break at 2:35 with the B material, and some sonic theme-adjacent material at 3:00. this builds up and is eventually The Big Chorus at 3:20. i still don't feel there's enough going on in the backing elements for this section - there's nowhere near the intensity or beef of some of your reference tracks for the backing elements. they're very bland and smooth, and that contrasts negatively with the angular lead and aggressive drums. the lead rises to a sustained peak, and then it's done. i think what you have here is a really neat idea. the original's two-phase approach and intense, slow melodic line fits a dnb approach really well, and you've got a pretty solid overall shape for the track with a good amount of breaks and intense sections. what i don't feel is in place yet is the actual payoff sections - almost every section of this track feels like it's missing something. the opening big section at 0:42, like i said earlier, is just kit/stabs/bass, with nothing in the middle of that. similarly, the big hit at 1:40 is the same instrumentation and has nothing in the in-between area until 2:15 - and that instrument is both hard to hear clearly due to modulation on it and is pretty low in itself. last example is the big payoff chorus at the end, at 3:30 - the backing material are these big, bland block chords in pads. this should be the most intense, invigorating section of the song, and most of what i can hear are overly-loud pads. so i think that you need to take another look at each section and find something to make it interesting and compelling. listening again to Hold your Colour and In Silico, each big payoff section that they have in their songs has simple instrumentation (like you have), but each element is uniquely compelling in their own right. finding a way to hit that balance here is what you're missing right now. NO

opens with some filtered arps and wide synth elements - i really like this opening feel. the sfx panned to the sides might be a little loud on headphones. i don't hear any of Howling Gears in this opening section, although the arp is reminiscent of the B section as you stated. same issue at 0:36, i don't hear that pattern either, but i do catch the bassline when it comes in at 0:52. the guitar part is playing something that's reminiscent of the piano in the original after this, but to my ears the piano's playing an octave, and the guitar is playing a maj 6th. 2:35's a big shift, and shout's b melody is indeed present although i don't understand at all how it fits into the setting that's already present when it does come in. it sounds like it's in an entirely different key (the backing elements really look like Bb to me and shout's b melody is being played in Fm). the following guitar-led section is easier to understand and more obviously maps to gears. there's a big dropoff here before it gets back into gears again as interpreted earlier. there's a big filter that hits at 5:11 and doesn't sound like it goes away for a long time here - the bottom end feels like it's missing until almost 6:00 for a few seconds. this goes some pretty wide-ranging places, which is neat. my main concern is the source usage, because i don't hear it in extended stretches of the track. i am gonna need to do some timestamping on this because as-is there's not enough source. ? edit 9/4: thanks to jnwake for more in-depth analysis. even with the expanded source notes above, i just can't grok most of the connections that are called out. i would need more explicit, present instances of source material before i'd be able to consider this one. i also think the track would benefit from some more intentionality in the sections, but overall do agree that the track is generally well-produced and quite listenable. NO

this doesn't even need more comments than the source being not present elsewhere than the opening - this isn't pokemon music, it's an original track inspired by the original. this doesn't have a place on this site. NO

lot of mud in the opening section. vocals are super warbly and have a distorted tone that is an easy tell for ai vocals right now. in general the arrangement is not really based on the original at all, but more the concept of the character. there's also, again, a number of notes that are 2-3x longer than a human could hold. it's a fine original track if you like fake music, but the utter lack of source material means it doesn't have a place here. NO

those exports are low-poly, FYI, larry. source usage is a dealbreaker as liontamer mentioned. melody line on the verse for this track fits less than the vocals on the other tracks. there's a lot of weird transients especially noticeable around the 1:35-1:45 section and again the hats/cymbals sound really janky, they're just noise. NO

man, this could have been really cool if it was not so obviously fake. from a concept perspective, tying an a capella arrangement to luigi's humming in this ost is great. but the words are obviously not written by a person, and the source doesn't come back after the first 30s. NO

not enough source again. there's some fun stuff in the actual vgm sections, even if they're not real instruments. lyrics are better than some of the other tracks this dude submitted (although the whole verse around the 3m mark is nonsense), but i agree they're kind of tired by halfway through the dozen. the section at 3:33 has a bunch of conflicting notes even without the vocals going 110% over a bunch of strings, and that slide at the end is pretty silly. same with the sustain at the end of the song. NO

there isn't enough source to pass the standards. the sax parts sound generated with how buzzy they are. this is so frustrating because they're fun songs to listen to, but the artist is trying to cover up just how much they didn't do. craig stated that he played many instruments and used tools to cover the other elements, and specifically stated he didn't use genai to make the track. i do not believe him and do not believe we should accept future submissions without clear proof that he's creating future stuff himself. NO

i'll note that the 'arranger' explicitly avoided responding about who actually wrote the arrangement. they stated who played the instruments but did not clarify who wrote the overall track's arrangement. the track doesn't have enough source so it's a definite no. separately the text is word salad, like larry said (although the joke about going to call mario at the end is admittedly funny), and all of the overheads for the drums are just static. the guitar work is solid throughout, i'll note, and i liked the aggressiveness of the opening section and specifically the altered chord at 0:24 was a fun idea. it's too bad the rest doesn't have anything to do with zelda. NO

original is one of my favorites from FF7. opens right away with stutter synths and some recognizable samba-adjacent rhythms in the percussion. the cosmo canyon bassline is there as well but not particularly present. the melody line comes in at 0:19 in what i think is an electric guitar, and there isn't a lot of personalization. guitar doesn't have a lot of body to the tone or verb/delay/chorus to fill it out - part of this might be how it's being recorded. the chorus section of the melody line has a lot more going on, mostly in the drums (there's some really sick stuff happening here in the drums). 1:36's got a solo section which is pretty fun. there's a comp section for a bit and then the melodic line comes back in for a recap. there's a fadeout after this repetition of the entire verse/chorus structure, and it's done. the whole mix sounds like it's been recorded on a smartphone - there's a big hole around 2khz across the board, and each instrument sounds like it's missing something. i think the main issue is just the actual mics being used for the recording, or the recording technique. this is a shame because this is a badass version of the theme! there's so much fun stuff going on, especially in the performance. the original plods in a pleasing, old-world way that makes the build at the end of the chorus exciting, but your version has so much more vibrancy to it throughout thanks to the clave rhythms. i'd love to have heard more variety in the stutter synth - it keeps hammering a lot throughout without much change, and there's definitely room to mix up the backing elements the second time through the melody. a real ending would be great. i also would love to hear more personalization of the melody line, as what's here doesn't take advantage of, for example, the long sustains at the end of each line in the verses. and i'd love an ending, although a fadeout is not a huge problem. but ultimately what's keeping this one back right now is the sound quality. the individual instruments simply aren't recorded at a level that would be acceptable for this site. finding a better way to record - or instead sequencing instruments - would be needed. another option is to use this as a template and get some other folks who have the ability to record or sequence elements to replace what you can't do yourself at a high level. what a fun track! i'd love to hear it with better sound quality and a few tweaks to the soundscape. NO

really old school original here, been ages since i've heard it. opens with some wide, very forward saws. there's a lot of verb and this is really blown out so the lead instrument has an overpoweringly present sound that obliterates anything behind it. there isn't any arrangement on this opening section to my ears that isn't in the original - i think it's even in the same tempo. there's a repeat of the main chorus section with the 'kick' sfx playing faster, but aside from articulating it on sixteenths, there's no change again. so again, there's no arrangement here unfortunately. and then the loop cuts as it's about to loop back to the middle somewhere - so no ending. unfortunately this doesn't fulfill what we're looking for in terms of arrangement. i'd encourage you to take a look at our submission standards, notably section 4, and utilize the workshop forums and discord to get some guidance on how to work towards a more complete arrangement that'd fit what we're looking for on the site. NO

i really prefer the normal too-many-words writeup from lucas =P opens with some spanish-style acoustic guitar and shakers, and gets to the melodic material at 0:40 alongside the addition of hand percussion and rhythm guitar. the backing elements take a few seconds to get settled in and are a bit shaky for the first ~30s, but they lock in around when the harmonized melodic elements start around 1:05. the rhythm guitars are also heavily panned which is more noticeable on headphones, but overall the band sound here is fun. the strings that come in around 1:32 are really nice and subtle, and add a surprising amount of warmth. 1:57's a recap of the Velvet Room theme section from the original, and i like the tremolos on the sustains as a method to convey the held notes. there's a nice break around the 2:48 with just the earlier strings (they sound a touch behind the beat when they're isolated like this), and the following chorus functions well as a build (the marcato strings help here) into the solo section at 3:40. sounds like dueling solos to me which is something i have always enjoyed. there's one more recap of the Velvet Room theme, and a sustained chord for the end, and it's done. this is a fun ride! the simplicity of the instrumentation really shines out here and allows the performances to be the main focus. i thought the rhythm guitar was slightly ahead of the beat throughout, which made slower attacks in the strings and the groove of the drums to sound a bit weird sometimes, but overall this is a really enjoyable take. i particularly liked the way you were able to use several different sections from an original that is pretty long and has a lot of variance between sections. nice work. YES

opens with the descending arp of the original in a funky 80s-feel synth. beat comes in at 0:15, and i can definitely hear where you're trying to go with this. the piano that comes in at 0:27 is painfully square and robotic unfortunately, and the sample isn't great either. the offbeat pops fit the concept well though. melody comes in at 0:39, and there's some nice panning on it to help it feel more organic in the way it moves. the backing is very static until 1:24 when there's a short break - i'd have liked to hear more to mix it up, especially given that there's only a few instruments playing and not much to keep it unique. the chorus uses a new beat which is nice, but the piano especially is starting to really grate as it's doing the same thing most of the time and it's tiresome to listen to. the piano solo at 2:13 is nice. there's a percussive element in the left ear that is notably far away from anything else in that side and it sticks out a lot. there's another chorus, and what initially feels like an ending until it's made more obvious that it's a transition into more of a shuffle. 4:02 brings in a lot of other elements that don't really get explored much. there's some distance put into the overall tone, and then a single chord finishes the song off. it really seems like you approached this with a goal of simplicity and a patient approach, and i think that's a cool idea for this. i really think this is too stripped back, and separately what's here isn't used to full potential. i think that adding even a single countermelodic element would add a lot to the work overall, and separately (and more importantly) there's so little personalization or velocitization applied to anything outside of the synth blats throughout. the block chords in the piano for example don't change dynamics or approach ever throughout, and the lead instruments also do not have clear examples of velocitization outside of one specific color note in the piano solo. along those lines, each major section has a clear sound that's established in the first bar which doesn't change throughout that entire section. it's too repetitive and it becomes very obvious very quick. i think there's too much repetition throughout, and not enough personalization especially to the backing parts. this needs another pass. NO

really neat original. that short synth tone is really unique. opens with some bells and ambient synths. it doesn't sound like most of the things being played are the original, but rather following a similar structure. the beat comes in at 0:28, and the strings that eventually come in also are outlining a descending pattern that isn't the same notes or particularly close to the original. same with the eventual synth arp. beat drops around 1:22 for a bit, but comes back unchanged. there's a recap of what just happened, and the opening bells come in too, but still no source. we get something that's again reminiscent of the original at 2:03, but all that includes is movement from the 5 to the b6 and b7 - none of the 5 b6 4 5 pattern that permeates the original, and also none of the little 7-8 lick that stands out in the original as well. we get another break at 2:44 with some choral elements, but the same taiko and synth elements in the background are still there. we do get some more unique strings after this when the same beat comes back in again, but nothing from the original. there's a fun stutter effect in the strings near the end, and then it's done with the arps fading out (over a very long time, this probably should be shortened by half if not more). unfortunately this doesn't really appear to be a remix of the Cradle Under the Star theme, but rather something inspired by it or reminiscent of it. there's no actual original material that i can hear in the track you've submitted. so that's a dealbreaker right there. separately, it's really obvious in here where you copy/paste each individual element's block of material - the synth does the same thing every time it shows up, the beat is the same, the taiko element is the same, etc. even the fake scream transition sfx is used repeatedly. that much repetition becomes really noticeable really quickly when you listen to something more than once. spending the extra time to make each entrance of an instrument unique is absolutely worth it. if this was a complete arrangement of the original, i'd probably still reject it due to how muddy and overly dense the representation is, and how much repetition is used. i think that the original's neat and there's definitely legs for this style of arrangement. trimming the fat and making it more clearly related to the original will definitely help craft a better overall product. NO