prophetik music   Judges ⚖️

opens with bells and some distant strings. big prototypically evil bass synth comes in soon after as well as some limited kit with loads of verb on it. track kind of doesn't go anywhere initially - it's just playing back the bell lead which is basically just arps. guitar comes in at 1:25 and sounds great, as expected. 2:18 the drum rhythm changes a bit and is more intense which is nice, as it definitely was starting to feel a bit stale. i wouldn't have minded a change to the lead when the guitar came in or sometime after. the solo's nice and technical which is a nice change to what we've heard so far. there's some fun harmonized elements at 3:15 which was nice, and i like the expansion of the arps into the guitar lead right after this. that's a nice touch i didn't expect. the bells come back once more at the end to walk through the descending chord pattern, and then we get a less distorted guitar walk through the chords once as well, and it's done. this isn't anything groundbreaking, but it's a fun take on a repetitive original. i wouldn't have minded if the first half was a little shorter, but what's here sounds great and is definitely passable. YES

big guitar intro with loads of reverb to start, but we get the kakariko theme right away in keys with some heavy guitar backing elements. i hear virtually no bass, which is interesting, and the kit is pretty quite. it's very guitar-heavy in the mix. even the melodic elements are minimal. there's a short drop at 1:19 which is a nice choice to break up the post-rock-esque part before it. it builds back into the full band sound with guitar as the lead, before some really intense blastbeat for the B theme of the melody. this part felt over the top, with the happy major-key melody (and the part with the most pathos, as well) being underneath 32nd note kicks. after an extended fade, we get some acoustic guitar playing the same earlier chord patterns with loads of reverb. the lead has the same verb when it comes in, and the wash of sound is pretty if a bit ringy. this last play-through is the ending, and then it's done. the fade-out sound gets a bit hairier than i'd expect, and it does cut hard so it'll need a fade. i think the arrangement's simple but effective, and the performance is great. i'm interested in getting @pixelseph's opinion on the mix before i decide. i think the lack of bass and the guitar being so up front is too much. ? edit 10/29: i really think the bass is a problem, and the overall balance isn't there. NO

some really nice synth pads to start, and a lot of chromaticism in the lead synth right off the bat - a hallmark of the music of castlevania. the bass is reminiscent of Tallon's bassline as well. there's a break at 1:21 with just the bass and kit under a lead line - this needs something else to mix it up, it just sounds unfinished initially. the next section has some really great electric guitar and some sfx elements before the melodic material comes back in. there's some more meandering, and then it's done with a fuzzy fade-out that clips off hard at the end, probably unintentionally. there's some really crunchy chords throughout, at least partially driven by the chromaticism in the main line and the rest probably a result of reverb tails conflicting, but it gets really rough in the last third of the piece. separately - and this is a bigger issue IMO - the piece meanders a lot. there's only really one major break in it, and most of the piece has a very loud lead instrument wandering around without a clear sense of cadence or form. it's hard to follow. being more intentional about framing phrases both in the lead and in the backing elements would help a ton, as would varying backing instrumentation on a regular basis to help box in the lead parts into consumable chunks. i think this is actually pretty close. the lead's personalization is fun to follow and the arrangement overall makes for a nice thing to listen to. cleaning up the dissonance and making the melodic approach and overall song structure a little more formalized will make for a much more listenable track. NO

some sfx and organ/choir to start - appropriately epic concept. the big chord stacks with a screaming synth on top are huge and sound great (agree the synth sounds a bit weird with the slow vibrato). the fast melodic line comes in at 0:31 in soon after. it's a bit buried. 0:57 sounds very dastardly and straight off of Train of Thought, and the siren soon after is great cinema. there's a super fast solo in a few instruments - that synth solo is nuts! the ensemble section after this is a nice tonal change, again very DTesque with the rolling chords going into the acoustic guitar section and then into a half-time section. i think the mix through all of these various sections sounds as expected - there's a lot going on and i can hear most if not all of them fine. the track rolls through a variety of prog tropes that generally feature the original material in a few ways (the work to make the solos outline but not mirror the solos in the original is nice), and we get a huge final chorus at the end starting around 4:09 that is a great payoff. the ending's a little longer than i had expected. this is a really fun ride. there's a load of intensity throughout and the melodic usage is more prevalent than i'd have expected given how much variety of textures you use. i don't have issues with the mix. nice work. YES

ooh, the percussion and guitar right away is nice. i wouldn't mind the guitar to be a bit more forward in the mix, but it's a nice sound. as it gets higher in the instrument's register, it's clearer and more balanced. violin really slots in nicely next to the other instruments. the countermelodic elements in the guitar around the end of the second minute are nice as well. overall this is an enjoyable take! i wouldn't have minded hearing a touch more personalization in the melodic material especially! there's some fun stuff that could have been done using the violin and guitar's unique characteristics. i also wouldn't have minded a more solid ending. lastly, there's definitely some pitch issues here and there that maybe could have been addressed, but they do lend a more live feel to the arrangement. i think what's here is definitely above the bar. this is short and sweet. YES

boy, do i feel this. some of the stuff i did in high school is far more creative than anything i have done recently. samples in the opening definitely are not as good as most of what we interact with nowadays. i'd argue they're not even as good as what we heard in Chrono Symphonic, and that was almost two decades ago. so that's a concern. there's some heavy panning used as well which is very noticeable on headphones. arrangement of the opening section is cinematic and approachable. i got a little confused with what was going on around 0:38 with the rippling, before i realized what was going on. interesting transition concept! the beat and where it settles is pretty dull-sounding - there isn't much body in the upper ranges like i'd expect to hear - and the strings especially sound so oofy that it's hard to tell what pitches they're playing most of this section. the lead that comes in after this is much more forward and easier to understand. there's a chippy break at 1:55 before we get the spurs again, and the approach for this section is similar to the first. the soaring string line at 2:38 is really nice - this is imo what these strings would be best for, not the active movement that was used earlier where it was tough to hear the pitches. by the 3:00 mark we're back to more traditional orchestra (trad-orch?) for the scoring, and the pitched snare is immediately recognizable from Reason. i like the transition back to more synth elements that comes in over the next minute. 3:49 is a recap of the earlier melodic material with the brass leading the way - the trumpet sample really works well with the gating effects you're using here. there's a fake ending before one last blow, one last bit of chips, and then it's done after a final hit. this is a neat idea, and i definitely see what you're going for around the concept of using electronic techniques with classical framing. and i think there's a lot to like about this track. however - both the orchestral instruments and the beat (kick/snare) sound extremely dated. i'd go so far as to say that we could never pass a track with such extended sections of orchestral instrumentation that's so far below 'free sample' range of what's available today. there are some times it works - like the soaring brass and string lines in the electronic sections, which don't rely on clear attacks - but the rest of the time it's so rough it's hard to hear what it's trying to play. additionally, the kick lacks body and tone and the electronic snare used is just static - there's no verve to the samples used nor the mixing of it. this is probably a lesser concern to me than the quality of the orchestral samples. along those lines, the mix itself (once it gets into the electro sections) has a lot of sub-20hz content that's making it hard to make out the bass instruments most of the time. i recognize that the orchestral instruments aren't dealbreakers across the board, and i also recognize that there's a lot of places that they're not an issue. but i don't see a way for the big blocks from 0:00-0:40, 0:56-1:25 and 2:50-3:20 to be passable given the expectations around classical instrument usage. i love the concept! so this is a bummer. but i think it'd need some real reinforcement before it'd get posted in 2025 as opposed to 2007. NO

opens with some filtered chords that have some interesting delay effects and length definitions. the blues notes in the opening aren't my favorite given that they're already in detuned instruments - there's several that just sound incorrect as a result. melodic content at 0:45 is in a brushy, loose string synth. there's some audible crunchiness in here that doesn't sound super intentional. i like the bass movement in this section, but found some of the sustained chords in the keys to sound a bit weird. the ride cymbal at 1:13 doesn't seem to be in the same sound space as the rest of the kit. separately, the b theme section around 1:16 really doesn't feel like it's fitting the underlying chords - some of that might be due to detuning, but it sounds off quite a bit. same with the keys interlude right after alongside that arpeggiating synth. 1:42 brings in a solo section that sounds very good - i particularly liked the slide at 1:54. there's a bit of a pause coming out of the solo before it gets really busy again quickly. the keys at 2:18 are interesting in how out of time they are initially. there's a sustained outro featuring some of the initial melodic material, and then it just sorta ends without resolving. i struggled a lot with this one specifically because the detuning is so noticeable alongside a lot of the blue notes. there's a lot of crunch to the harmonic aspects of this mix (separate from the audible crackling i heard around the 0:50 mark). there's several parts where the chord structure and melodic elements don't appear to line up even beyond that, as well. i think the overall song shape works, and i think that the concept is interesting - but i don't think i can pass it with as much dissonance as i'm hearing. NO

really pretty opening. there's some beautiful turns in there. theme comes in at 0:33, and the left hand voicing here is poignant in its simplicity. i wouldn't have minded some more rich voicings in a few places initially - 0:59's progression is a little too barebones and tight alongside the melodic line. when we get more full in the voicings at 1:24, that feels really nice, and the continued movement fits the character a lot. 2:11 is nice because it starts to introduce a bit of rhythmic flexibility into the piece - until this point, everything's pretty boxy in terms of time measurement, so the change is nice. the intensity continues to ramp up through about 3:10, and then we get one last representation of the melody up high before it's done. i might not be as high on the overall arrangement as the others, but i feel the performance is excellent and certainly the arrangement itself is sound. nice work. YES

opens with some nice electric guitar. keys in the background are pretty far away. lead guitar starts with melodic content around 0:14. it's much louder than the background keys (or are the keys just very soft?), and there's some pitch issues with the B especially. the guitar goes through the melody in a straight line for the first 90s or so, and then we get a textural change at 1:32 which adds some plucks and harmonies. notably there's a harmony line hard panned into the right and left ears all the way, which is a bit confusing on headphones. it goes through the melody again in a straight line. there's a flourish and some strings near the end around 2:35, and then it's done. this is a pretty conservative arrangement overall. it's basically the original twice through with little to no added content outside of that. that can be enough, but i'd expect to hear a more interpretive representation of the original - through melodic additions, countermelodic rhythmic and harmonic elements, and backing elements. there's not a ton here that isn't in the original (in more complex and engaging forms, too). combined with the pitchiness of the guitar (note that the issue is both that the root note is out of tune, and separately that your vibrato is so fast it doesn't always sound intentional) and the hard panning which doesn't need to be so wide to do what you're looking for, and i think this needs a bit more time in the cooker. there's good bones here for sure, but i'd expect to hear either more harmonic complexity or a more personalized melodic component to get away from 'cover' territory. NO

opens with light strings and some winds for the melodic movement. the original's tempo feels a touch slower and definitely has more push-pull than this one does - the couplets here are closer, which condenses the piece's feel more than i'd expect. dynamics on a per-instrument basis are very good early on. the light gong usage at 0:33 is really nice, very subtle yet expansive. 0:51 is the shift from the early couplets to the block chords in the original. i did not particularly care for the scoring of these chords, especially the high violins. this is very uncanny valley (violin harmonics usually wouldn't move in chromatic patterns like this, especially back and forth) and the spacing of the chords is very wide and unsupportive of most of the middle ranges. the original's blocks are very effective at increasing intensity through simplicity, and i don't feel that the representation here does the same thing as well beyond just playing louder. 1:07's where the 'melody' comes back in. this is a lot of block chords with the main movement being in the melody line and in the countermelody in the winds and harp (a synth in the original). the big, uniform block chords serve to metastasize the energy somewhat instead of either leading somewhere or establishing a drone like the buzz in the original. the addition of brass at 1:32 is a great payoff cadence, albeit very sudden and unexpected based on the scoring to this point. there's some echoes of this idea, and a final chord. this is a difficult vote for me. i feel strongly that it's pretty hard to represent a track in a similar genre and feel, and if you're going to do so, you need to add something truly significant that doesn't exist in the original. i don't feel that's what's going on here. if anything, i'd argue that the opening section especially does not have near the same nuance and subtle character that the original's opening does, and separately that there's little outside of the ending echo section that doesn't exist in the original. lastly, this is essentially 95s of music, which condenses the original's spacing - which you called out as being a key thing you liked about it - down quite a bit. i think that's in conflict with your stated goal. a yes vote here is a tough definition (like i said, i found this one very difficult to put into words). as it is, reducing a ~3 minute original to roughly 1:30 with some falling action at the end is a tough sell. finding ways to add some extra breadth (and breath!) to the work would help a lot, and separately approaching it with a more interpolative eye for countermelodic, harmonic, and rhythmic material would really help to expand the perspective and body of the work. it's definitely possible i'm too in the weeds here. it's a beautiful piece to listen to. some of the scoring decisions are fantastic - the brass fanfare, the addition of harp to the winds at 1:07, the scoring of the final chord with the brass where it is, the gong usage at 0:33. i just don't think there's much pipko in it right now from an arrangement perspective. i don't even think there's as much 65daysofstatic in it right now as the original. NO

~3db headroom. big bass blats to start, and we some melody right away at 0:13. there's a big build into 12/8 and another restating of melodic material at 0:48. this is pretty banging to start, so the break at 1:15 is nicely timed and fitting for the song form. i liked the arp that was in this section, it's really uplifting. there's a big build into 2:03, when the kick returns. most of this section i didn't map to the source, but i did catch some at 2:30 for a bit. there's another riser build into 3:01's melody blurb again, and after two play-throughs of that, this is done. this is a pretty straightforward festival/club approach to the melodic material. there's a lot of stutter synths, a lot of time spent on the riser builds, and tbh not much spent on the source itself. i heard overt source references from 0:13-0:27, 0:48-1:15, 2:30-2:38, and 3:01-3:28. that's 76/212 seconds, for about 38% source. and that feels right too - most of the track isn't referring to the source material. please refer to the submission standards for info around source usage. unfortunately that isn't enough source overall. i'll check with the remixer to confirm i'm not missing anything, but barring any changes this doesn't meet our criteria for the site, unfortunately. NO edit 9/23: remixer confirmed that the source listed above is correct. so there's not enough source to my ears.

my vote last time centered around issues with mastering, specifically the vocal effects chain and the drums. opening still is intense and a cool idea to intensify over time. lead guitar in the intro is very loud, and stays loud - for example, at 0:40 it's louder than EK, and at 0:50 it's louder than the drums (in fact i can hardly hear the drums there). this is the case for the whole song to my ears. separately there's still a ton of pressure in the mids. it feels to me like there's a lot of mid content in every part and it's all conflicting. compared to some reference tracks and the original, i think this is primarily the guitar being too present in the range that the vocal fundamental is, and not below it. the unison part is a lot better, that went from being a lowlight to a highlight for me. and to be honest, this is a lot better. it's not perfect when compared to pro-level stuff in this genre (of course!), and we are a hobbyist community. so i'm not sure right now where i settle. i'm gonna come back in a few days and listen again. ? edit 9/27: it seems like my initial impression, which was that the mix isn't there, is where i am gonna land. NO

starts with original audio and some new, updated bass and drums from the sound of it. there's a unique melodic line added the second time through which unfortunately is out of tune from whatever intonation the original is at, a solo the third time through the chord pattern, a repeat of the out-of-tune section, and it's done. there's no ending to speak of, just an end of the loop. this unfortunately isn't enough arrangement to pass our submission standards. most of what's here is what was in the original track. i liked the concept of adding the big arena drums and a fat, aggressive bass to the theme, but you'd need to do a lot more to make this less what Uwabo did and more what you're making. getting away from sampled audio is a good first step, and then personalizing it more beyond just repeating the original several times in a row is another. i'd encourage you to visit our workshop forum or the workshop channel on the discord for some more direct feedback. NO

i suspect this may be using suno. i will ask before listening to a 12 minute piece. edit 9/15: sure looks like it. NO

opens with a swoopy sfx into some big orchestral elements led by trumpets. this is pretty straightforward to my ears - it's the original midi with a few modifications (mostly in the percussion), with acoustic instruments instead of the original synths. it's slowed down a bit, but that's the only interpretation i can hear. the whole track is pretty blown out too - it's very loud and the instruments don't really have any volumization or velocitization done to them. this doesn't fulfill our submission standards for arrangement unfortunately - it's more of a cover. please consider visiting the workshop discord channel or the workshop forum here on the site to get some more feedback. NO