Liontamer
02-09-2009, 09:23 AM
Remixer Name: Parsec
Real Name: Mark J. Hadley
Email Address: parsec_productions@yahoo.com
Userid: 21993
Game arranged: Final Fantasy
Song arranged: Temple of Fiends
Title of mix: Ruin of Fiends
--------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.zophar.net/download_file/13796 - Tracks 12 & 1
On the first listen, something about this was nagging on me as to why this shouldn't make it. The soundscape being so murky was one thing; seemed purposeful, even if the effects seemed overboard. There was some distortion caused by the piano, briefly around 1:32 and reappearing en masse from 3:20-3:38.
I do like the combination of both sources together, but beyond a certain point, the ideas got old. 2:17's section felt extremely retreadish compared to :41's section. The countermelody was written different, but the rhythms and sounds were basically the same and thus didn't sound much different. Melodic variation would have helped keep this fresh. 3:06's section was a retread of the piano countermelody of :41's section as well.
More variation & development can get this to the promised land. Potential is there.
NO
Real Name: Mark J. Hadley
Email Address: parsec_productions@yahoo.com
Userid: 21993
Game arranged: Final Fantasy
Song arranged: Temple of Fiends
Title of mix: Ruin of Fiends
--------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.zophar.net/download_file/13796 - Tracks 12 & 1
On the first listen, something about this was nagging on me as to why this shouldn't make it. The soundscape being so murky was one thing; seemed purposeful, even if the effects seemed overboard. There was some distortion caused by the piano, briefly around 1:32 and reappearing en masse from 3:20-3:38.
I do like the combination of both sources together, but beyond a certain point, the ideas got old. 2:17's section felt extremely retreadish compared to :41's section. The countermelody was written different, but the rhythms and sounds were basically the same and thus didn't sound much different. Melodic variation would have helped keep this fresh. 3:06's section was a retread of the piano countermelody of :41's section as well.
More variation & development can get this to the promised land. Potential is there.
NO