*NO* Sonic CD 'Work It (RetroHouse Mix)'

[djpretzel]

Your ReMixer name: Gecko Yamori
Name of game(s) ReMixed: Sonic CD
Your own comments about the mix, for example the inspiration behind it, how it was made, etc.: Had stuff both rejected and removed this year because they're too much like the originals. I took this to heart and tried something different with this mix. About 30% of the original is there, but without deviating from the style of the original too much.
If you do that with Sonic CD (IMO), you take away the very essence that makes it stand out from other game music.

Backup link (Without proper id3 tags):
--
Gecko Yamori

[Liontamer]

Gecko seems to imply that the of the Present version of the theme is what's being arranged here. Listening to all of the "Wacky Workbench" variations from Sonic CD (Japan) however, the pacing and arrangement sound the most similar to the Past version to me, which basically features the same melodic content of the Present version.

The arrangement has some good ideas in that the source melody is placed more in the background from :30-1:01, while Gecko places other arranged ideas in the forefront. 1:02 onward features some pretty straight arrangement until 1:32 gets simpler with the bass thump pattern, but I felt this would have been a good time to get away from that thumping pattern as the foundation of the track, at least until bringing it back later on, like at 2:19. I did like the percussion/cymbal activity that came in at 1:40.

2:18 changes the sounds of the melody a little bit, but overall I felt like it wasn't enough going to make it feel as is the track progressed at all the whole time. The patterns and sound choice vary up a little bit, but even with these variations I don't feel like the overall groove is changing or developing significantly during the whole 3 minutes. Maybe that's an inadvertently inherent bias against the house genre; I wouldn't know. Things certainly change up from 1:32-2:18, but the whole groove is anchored to this quarter note thumping beat that never changes and it fails to really hold my interest for the whole time.

The rearrangement could incorporate some more original ideas, but my vote isn't based on that. I just need to see this track exhibit more noticeable structural variation over the 3 minutes. If the lack of more overt variation and development here is a byproduct of the genre, then I'll be informed by others I'm sure, but overall I just didn't find this mix that engaging so my vote's solid. The groove felt plain, sedate & unchanging, and that prevented it from getting out of the gate to me.

NO

[Malcos]

Hey, I love this old house style!

I do hear a blend of elements from both versions of Wacky Workbench being used here, and I like the original touches in this.

Production/mastering is just right, it's very in your face, with the compression adding that little bit of punch to it - what we've come to expect from Gecko.

The groove didn't change, but I think that the variations here were enough to keep the mix going, and it is true to the genre, very dancy. One could say that this is perhaps too typical of the genre to be on the site, with the breakdown at 1.33 and the subsequent buildup. This might be the one factor that may work against this mix, but not in my mind.

YES

I was trying very hard not to think of streets of rage as I was judging this.

[Vig]

so...the first two minutes of this song are pretty damn good. i think it's a strong remix until the changeup at 1:50. it's a big downer. especially the key change. 2/3rds thru the song it should be getting bigger and more intense, not dwindling. I'd actually like to see this get on, if only to assuage allegations of teknobias, but you really gotta fix that segment. if it were me i'd maybe add another minute on top of that. it's good that you were taking it in a different direction, you did a good job of keeping it fresh, but i thihnk that idea really fell on its face. make it a climax instead and it gets a yes.

NO (resubmit)

[zyko]

i'm gonna disagree with vig on this one. the first couple minutes are great, i was really impressed by the way you put all your parts together - both in terms of orchestration and in terms of structure. this sounds very powerful, indeed and the synths are thick but there just seems to be one dynamic throughout the entire track and i'm afraid that the lack of a climax really does detract a bit from the piece but is generic even for an electronic work and still is functional and impressive. however, i don't think the track can lose credibility as a viable arrangement based solely on its faithfulness to its style/genre

YES

[Vig]

Well...all the techno that i listen to has a climax, the songs just arrive at the climax much more gradually. I dont think we should excuse a mix from being dynamic because it's techno. especially because good techno IS dynamic.

at any rate, the lack of a climax didnt bother me nearly as much as the inclusion of an anticlimax.

[zyko]

in that respect i cannot disagree with you. my initial vote was a NO based solely on what i felt was an arrangement compromise. but this does, in the end, sound very nice and it does entertain and the quality is something difficult to scoff at.

i think this vote should go past 5 because it seems like it will be a tight one and maybe that's what we need to really know if this should pass.

all in all, its solid but the lack of a climax (and apparently that anti-climax that i somehow overlooked but now recognize) is a definite issue.

[GrayLightning]

I guess you can take Gecko Yamori out of Streets of Rage, but you can't take Streets of Rage out of Gecko Yamori. The progression, style of this bleeds with SOR. I loved the music of Sonic CD and I think GY did a good job with the arrangement aspect. The blending of his SoR style with the Sonic CD source material works well for me. My main gripe is the horribly bland and downer of an ending. I can see what the others are saying, and I do agree to a degree, but I don't think it's enough of an issue for me to personally request resubmit.

Fun listen, nice arrangement, a YES from me.

[analoq]

Well...all the techno that i listen to has a climax, the songs just arrive at the climax much more gradually. I dont think we should excuse a mix from being dynamic because it's techno. especially because good techno IS dynamic.
this is not techno.
the 'good techno' you're thinking of probably isn't techno either.

i know this is just semantics, but i'm just trying be fair:
i didn't let prot get away with using 'notation' incorrectly, and i didn't let larry get away with using 'atonal' incorrectly.
cheers.

[Vig]

care to give the correct blanket term, then? While telling me i'm wrong might be satisfying, it's not exactly helpful unless you have a suggestion for how i could communicate more clearly.

[analoq]

well, i didn't want to provide an alternative because i'd rather you figure it out yourself than just take my word for it (that course of action is still reccommended).
but since you asked, i generally go by:
'electronic' if it has synths
'dance' if it has a beat
if i didn't know this remix was house, i'd probably call it dance.

cheers.

[Vig]

Why would i bother "figuring it out for myself" if you're the only one it bothers? I hardly consider myself an electeknico expert, so I dont mind if you correct my terminology if are trying to be helpful. But in this case you clearly werent.

at any rate, i put very little value on the classification of music. I think it's very limiting and does a disservice to the music itself. I certainly dont care to spend hours learning differences between the the dozens of varieties of Electeknico that Xelebes could rattle off for me. I don't see the point. My comment remains valid regardless of what you want to call it. Good techno, house, trance, dance, electronica, speedcore, ambient, acid dance, monkeys smashing eachother in the head with rocks, all have climaxes in one form or another.

[Liontamer]

Play nice, kids. Watch the atonal techno notation there.

[analoq]

okay, perhaps i've pushed too hard?
let me try and elaborate.

don't think i'm anal about this stuff. i'm not.
outside of the panel, i don't really care what you say.
but when you misuse words here, it makes the panel look bad, like we don't know what we're talking about.
maybe that shouldn't bother me, but it does a little.

genres are iffy.
there's not a 100% definitive replacement i could give you for what you think 'techno' means and in addition i'm not even clear on what you think 'techno' means.
so i opted not to give a replacement. but then you asked for one, so i gave you my best guess.

it's great that you think genres and classifications do a disservice to music,
but if you're going to judge this stuff, you should at least know what it's called.
you rejected this house mix and misued 'techno' in the same thread. despite this error, i will still trust your judgement.
but gecko will not.

am i still not helping?

[Vig]

I used the term "techno" because that seems to be the word most commonly used to describe the broad category of music the judges are (allegedly) biased against. seeing as how my comment regarding escalation and climax is a common one when judging said broad category of music, i used this example, along with the word "techno" to respond to zyko's comment about genre limitations not only with singular regard to this mix, but in response to the broad and frequent cop out (that some genres dont lend themselves to escalation, climax, whatever)wherever they may be. Doing so was an explaination of why our percieved "bias" may not be that. This comment and my stance is not limited to "house" music, (which IS in fact, right in the title of the mix) so I used the frequently used broader term "techno."

Perhaps the preceeding explaination of my usage will redeem my credibility in "gecko's" eyes. Maybe, just maybe, the word "Techno" got my point across with regard to a wider variety of musical styles than "house" would have.

Who knows?

[analoq]

k.

[Vig]

if that isnt clear, or satisfactory, please by all means, out with it.

[analoq]

no really, it's "okay"
your last post was enough of a consensus for me.
sorry if i've pushed your buttons.

cheers.

[DarkeSword]

Short but sweet. This song has a nice vibe, cool texture, and great beat. Very groovy stuff. I don't think the arrangement is bad at all; it changes enough so that it doesn't get boring, and it doesn't drag itself out. Solid stuff.

YES

On a side note, I noticed that you mentioned that you took ideas about being too close to the original to heart. Good to see that you can do that without being a primadonna about it. ^_^

[Vig]

no really, it's "okay"
your last post was enough of a consensus for me.
sorry if i've pushed your buttons.

cheers.

Fair enough.

[Liontamer]

6Y, if y'all don't mind.

[GrayLightning]

6Y, if y'all don't mind.

I don't mind. However, is everyone going to contest votes they don't like? I don't really feel this is one of those special circumstances. This one isn't that questionable imo. But if you guys want to continue to the vote, that's fine.

[Liontamer]

6Y, if y'all don't mind.

I don't mind. However, is everyone going to contest votes they don't like? I don't really feel this is one of those special circumstances. This one isn't that questionable imo. But if you guys want to continue to the vote, that's fine.
I felt the lack of dynamics was enough of an issue, in spite of the genre. Would prefer to have some more input.

[danny B]

Alright, this one is pretty borderline for me. It's definately got a mid-90's loop-fabricated house sound to it. Authenticity is not a problem with the rhythm and piano. The sound processing fits with the style and the time period. The filter-sweep analog synths are radical.

However, I must confess that the entire track, to me, can be described as one thing - "ho-hum". It's hard to explain exactly why, but i'll give it a shot. The sound quality is exactly where it needs to be for a house track. No problem there. However, most of the house I have been exposed to, even in the time frame of mid-90's does have an appreciable amount of dynamic contrast. My colleagues are correct in that this mix lacks just that. Even though that in itself doesn't immediatly disqualify it, the other issues contribute to problems that need attention before I let this one through.

The arrangement itself is pretty much what would happen if you put the chord progression from the original into a "house-machine" and pressed a button. It's the original in its most simplified form, nearly straight-converted into a house format. This is not a bad thing for authenticity, but definately for enjoyability. It's commendable that the artist is attempting to be more original in his offerings, but I don't think this one really nails it. There is a lot of information in the original that is nowhere to be heard here, such as the interesting touches like key change and solo passages. The whole thing screams "homogenous". Simple house tracks are not necessarily bad, it's just not something that fits the guidelines here, I think. It's definately a good effort, but i'd need more development either in a musical sense or a timbre-centric sense to give a thumbs-up. Right now this tune is confused over whether it wants to be a melodic/harmonic electronica jam or a down n' dirty house thump-fest.

NO

[Vig]

6Y, if y'all don't mind.

I don't mind. However, is everyone going to contest votes they don't like? I don't really feel this is one of those special circumstances. This one isn't that questionable imo. But if you guys want to continue to the vote, that's fine.

I believe the policy is if a mix is not unanimous, first to six wins. i dont think a specific request is required.

And of course it's questionable, otherwise the vote would be unanimous [/obvious]

[DarkeSword]

6Y, if y'all don't mind.

I don't mind. However, is everyone going to contest votes they don't like? I don't really feel this is one of those special circumstances. This one isn't that questionable imo. But if you guys want to continue to the vote, that's fine.

I believe the policy is if a mix is not unanimous, first to six wins. i dont think a specific request is required.

And of course it's questionable, otherwise the vote would be unanimous [/obvious]

No, we never decided on that policy. The policy is that if a judge feels very strongly about a mix either way, he (OR SHE/!?!) requests for a 6 vote.

[Vig]

Thread: "Continue Voting on ANY disputed YES's?"

if any 4Y mix is disputed, we should leave it on the panel in order to reach a more solid consensus with 5 but preferably 6 YESs

disputed meaning...not unanimous..

[Digital Coma]

1) No such hard-line policy was ever actually agreed upon. Make-believing it was in #ocrjudges doesn't count.

2) Just call it electronica.

3) Aaron, you might want to actually vote on the mix.


As with GeckoYamori's other work, this shows good mixing and production. But even though originality is at least attempted here, this is similarly an embellished step-down from the source material. Repetition, lack of dynamic contrast and development, and a terrible ending - style notwithstanding. There's absolutely nothing wrong with arranging a song in the same 'style' as the original, but there is a problem when the arrangement is weaker compositionally and just less solid.

NO

[Israfel]

Gee, sounds like Streets of Rage. I hate voting on electronic dance tracks, it's just not a genre I'm too familiar with, but nonetheless, here we go.

There's been some complaints in regards to form and development, but I'm not really hearing it with this piece. The form seems rather like a straightforward ABA affair and all the musical ideas presented are adequately explored, in my opinion, and as such I feel that the short length is justified.

And I agree with some of the others in regards to the overall high quality of the mixing and production. It's not really my sort of thing, but it seems to me like a well-made and above-average mix, so:

YES

[DarkeSword]

Make-believing it was in #ocrjudges doesn't count.

...psst...nobody said anything about #ocrjudges...

:P

[analoq]

2) Just call it electronica.
that is bad advice because in numerous contexts 'electronica' does refer to certain subgenres of electronic music.
i'd recommend sticking with 'electronic' and/or 'dance'.

3) Aaron, you might want to actually vote on the mix.
i deserve that.
guilty as charged...

i've been listening to this remix a lot, and while i don't think it's particularly good, there's not a lot that's "wrong" with it.
the translation to house is alright, but it sounds a bit too "clean" -- it seems lacking in grit for a good 'retro' sound.
but while it doesn't quite get that authentic sound, it still sounds good enough.

it's very cheesy, but it's a decent interpretation.
yes

[danny B]

I was under the impression that it wasn't whether it got 6Y or 6N first, but an actual majority of all the judges. As long as this many people are voting, might as well go all the way, i say.

[Vig]

From now on i'm calling it polka just for spite.

[analoq]

I was under the impression that it wasn't whether it got 6Y or 6N first, but an actual majority of all the judges. As long as this many people are voting, might as well go all the way, i say.
alright, fine with me.

[zyko]

i think this genre-based rating is getting ridiculous. lets just judge whether its good music or not and leave it at that

[GrayLightning]

I agree with zyko, but the only time genre ratings or parsings need to be considered is that different genres have different rules.

[Liontamer]

I'm definitely satisfied with 6Y here. As I said before when offering this idea, we use it "as long as any NO vote make it clear that they strongly disagree with a mix's passage." It's not enough that a vote simply have some disagreement, but that you actually ask for the additional votes.

We won't always have 12 active judges; since reaching 6 on either side is the aim of these vote extensions when someone's particularly unsure of a mix, let's lock'er up, boys. If Wing or zirc feel like voting, they're welcome by all means. In any situation like this, you're welcome to voice yourself after 6Y or 6N has been reached, but you already get more than a few days courtesy of the extended voting.

This one's certainly resolved to me, and while I didn't vote YES on it, this is nonetheless an enjoyable mix that lots of people out there will enjoy and that we're collectively down with. As far as I know, this is a mix that exposes people to another genre of music not covered on OCR and thereby adds something I feel is important to the site, so thanks to Dan for bringing some house material our way.

[Vig]

I agree with zyko, but the only time genre ratings or parsings need to be considered is that different genres have different rules.

What? I really have no idea what you are trying to say here. could you clarify?

[GrayLightning]

I agree with zyko, but the only time genre ratings or parsings need to be considered is that different genres have different rules.

What? I really have no idea what you are trying to say here. could you clarify?

I mostly meant even though OCR has one main, clear standard there are special considerations that we do and have taken into account in the past. As far as technical or compositional judgements - one can't hold one singular technical standard for avant garde vs orchestral or one can't judge a rap mix's compositional content with say symphonic because different genres have different rules. Every genre dictates some different compositional, instrumental, etc. choices.

As judges, part of the decision process is to distinguish criticism of a mix rather than criticism of rules that apply to a given genre. So in that sense, I mentioned that genre distinction is sometimes necessary.

[danny B]

I'm definitely satisfied with 6Y here.

I'm not.

we're collectively down with [the mix]

No we aren't.

[analoq]

if the 2 remaining judges vote no on this mix then it'll be a tie that djp will have to break.
you can open the thread back up and try to get wingless and zircon to vote on it if you feel this mix deserves that kind of consideration --
i mean, you're a judge. you can do whatever you want. ;)

cheers.

[The wingless]

I'm not a fan of this song.

I think it's far too repetative, which gets into arguements of what are the trademarks of the genre (if we are to assume this is textbook techno). Not a whole lot of variation/development. Plus, on the purely subjective end of things, I just don't like it, especially relative to the complexity/tightness of the original. Whenever you remix a "fully-realized" song, such as a Sonic CD song, I think it has to either A.) outdo the original or what is more likely B.) reinterpret it in a way that is enjoyably unique. This song does neither of these things for me.

So if I had my way, it'd be a NO

STOP THE PRESSES, BITCHES!

[djpretzel]

Alright, let's track down zircon...

Regarding the electronica/genre thing - my take would be that very few people on the planet Earth can reliably, unquestionably, and correctly label every last sub-genre of electronica (or whatever you want to call it). If the panel's respect and reputation hinge on us being able to truly tell the difference between techno, house, garage, two-step, jungle, d'n'b, happy hardcore, etc., etc., I think we should just give up now.

In other words, we're bound to get this wrong. I know plenty of my write-ups do. I consider it a different issue from 'notation', as electronica genres are COMMONLY screwed up, inconsistent, etc., whereas personally I had NEVER seen the word notation being used it was.

Aaron's very short, concise sentences sometimes make it seem like he MAY be condescending or trying to make someone look bad; I rarely interpret them as such myself. I think we should give people the benefit of the doubt. He's a pretty laid back guy, and I think his intentions here were good, if in my estimation potentially futile. I doubt that as he typed he laughed maniacally at how bad he was making anyone look.

We can as a panel TRY to avoid using the wrong electronica labels and aim for internal consistency - I do think that's admirable - but since I've seen so many mistakes in the 'professional' world, I have to wonder how much respect a flub here or there will truly cause us.

In summation:

1. benefit of the doubt is all-important
2. electronica genres are vague to begin with
3. I will tiebreak if zircon NOs
4. someone wake up zircon

[zircon]

I listened to this first before hearing the originals, and I was leaning yes at that point - Gecko's overall production values are always strong, with some tight synths, percussion, effects, and accompaniment. However, after hearing the originals, I'm inclined to say no. Gecko's style has never been to stray far from the original, and there's nothing wrong with that as he makes some of the most enjoyable mixes around. Nonetheless, this particular mix is too close for comfort. It's not just the arrangement of the mix either, which is relatively close (including some small variations), but also the instrumentation. The timbre of Gecko's sounds is more like an update of the original sounds, like the synths, organ, hats, snare, and kick. It's one thing to have a close arrangement and make up for it by overhauling the execution of the original, but it's another thing when both the arrangement and execution are close.

I like the style, I like the production, I like the sound of the mix in general, but it's simply not enough of a reinterpretation. Switch up the sounds more and throw in some new sections or add more variations and this'll get a yes from me.

For now, NO

[The wingless]

SUDDEN DEATH!

[Malcos]

Er, HELLO!!! Any progress on this AT ALL? Is this just gonna sit here forever? *hyperventilating* Ok ok, gotta calm down...

[Vig]

if you're getting antsy, why not vote on one of the four other remixes that you havent voted on?

[djpretzel]

Alright, looks like I get to be the bad guy.

Not every mix can or should make it to a tiebreaker, where I get to execute my semi-vice-presidential status as the final vote. When one does, it's obvious there's a lot to like about a mix, but it's also clear there are some shortcomings.

I essentially agree with the mix's advocates that the mix has strong production values, does a fair amount of instrumentation/adaptation (a step in the right direction for the ReMixer, who has already got the production side of the 'ReMix equation' down), and is catchy and chooses a well-suited genre.

I also agree with the mix's critics that the piece is a bit repetitive, a bit bland, that while it does make some changes, the arrangement is still fairly close, and that the ending is lackluster.

I don't have issues with this mix qualifying as what we call a 'ReMix' - I think it can safely fall under that umbrella. However, personally, I think the piece sounds a bit tentative, hesitant. It sounds like a ReMix waiting to happen. We certainly as a panel pass things that still have issues, but we're trying to do less of that and encourage more resubmissions for pieces that are 70-80% there... but not quite.

In general, I feel like the mixer has done a better job with interpretation, but that the mix doesn't compare well to his other material in terms of execution. It's not as memorable as GY's other stuff, which you could play and then have in your head for the next hour. I feel like the structure, length, and changes made all seem slighter than they should be.

None of these comments I'm making are 100% absolutes. They're just the best way I can articulate why I think the judges who voted no might have felt the way they did. Perhaps Gecko will disrespect the panel because we mistakenly called the mix techno, and henceforth disregard any constructive criticism, but I don't consider the mix representative of his best work, although the direction in adding a bit more interpretation is positive.

Placing myself in his shoes, I don't know what I'd think about getting 6 yesses and 7 nos from the panel. Clearly, a good number felt the mix was ready for primetime, and a single vote could have swayed it. Not exactly a mandate that the mix ACTUALLY has any serious issues. And I don't think it DOES have *serious* issues - I just think it has enough significant flaws to not tiebreak towards posting it.

:arrow: I'm sure OCR listeners would enjoy it
:arrow: I'm sure there are mixes currently on the site that it compares (very) favorably to, and
:arrow: I'm sure that GY has talent and used it in the mix's construction.

None of those truths, however, change my concurrence with the no votes that the mix has some issues that would be much better resolved before being added to the site. I hope that this very close vote serves as a source of encouragement rather than discouragement, and I'm a fan, regardless.

No.

Hopefully, the mixer can direct any frustration towards me, and not the panel. I'm also fairly sure a resubmission that took any number of the suggestions involved into account would be passed. In a perfect world, people would analyze panel decisions each in their own private sphere or vacuum, instead of comparing the decision to others, which to some may seem unfair or unequal in the criteria/standards used.

[DarkeSword]

For anyone who loves to follow the dramarama of the Panel (;)), Gecko IMed me today wanted me to just mention that he respects the Judges' decision, and that he's not angry at us. And I quote:

Mr. Gecko: yeah, i thought you might add to the judging thread that i'm not pissed off or anything as djpretzel seems to imply, i still respect the judges' decisions
Shariq Ansari: oh that's good

So fear not. Gecko isn't going to quit OCR in protest. :P

[Vig]

I suppose this would qualify as a "Please Resubmit."