Forums

Killer track but needs more variation in the back third. NO

This track is easily a 2000s-era-style EDM adaptation, all with filters and gnarly synths.  I approve of the sound design, with synth choices of that era and effects shaping things over time, and those Streets of Rage "uh" sound clips starting from 0:46 and 2:55 made me feel thrilled for apparent reasons.  It's so well mixed to do what it did that I can't find any issues sticking out. Let's see the arrangement, though.  Luckily, whether it's just the bass and some layers, or more obvious uses of the melody, the source quota is evident, and the build up a semitone at 1:32 made a great segue into some modulation before getting into the source's C section.  It's definitely a more vintage approach to interpreting it, and I can be down with it. Of course, there are two weaknesses.  I can live with the weak cop-out ending if that is the only problem.  But the third minute with copypasta is the big sticking point.  I do agree that the section from 2:24-2:54 is too blatant aside from the use of brief harmonies transitioning into the next section, as is the section at 3:10-3:25.  I do, however, approve of overlaying the A section melody and B section arp on top of each other starting from 3:02, which briefly happens before the B section goes back to full force at 3:10.  Eight seconds cut from Mindwanderer's 70 is still just over a full minute of this stuff, so I would've liked to have seen more done to let this section stick around. Honestly, this track is almost golden, but I want another reason to hear that last stretch rather than copying something over with minor layer tweaks. You could change up melodies, add different percussion, or add different pads—anything. I know you can do this, CJ. NO (resubmit)

Man thank you for introducing me to this cool ass source. I've never even heard of this game, and this is an 8-bit BOP.    This is a great mix. I love the vocal callouts, I love the mixing. THe track is full without being overbearing. We've got some good room to dance without the repeats being draining on my patience/ear. We get a nice break at 1:21 for a few seconds as we build back in, with the chiptuney stuff in the ground being fun. And oh look a modulation. Nice.   I'm really not a dance guy, and repetition bothers the hell out of me, but it's funny to me that I'm at odds with other judges on this one re: repetition. Could you have done more with the last third? Yes. Would I have loved to hear that? Yes. Do I think you should do it? Yes. But does it make it so that it doesn't pass the bar for OCR? Nah, I don't think so. It's a YES from me.   If you WERE to try to turn this from a B+ into an A, I would just nod to the comments of the other dance afficionados here - variety, storytelling, and an ending worthy of the first two thirds of the piece rather than the sort of flop-over-dead one that you've got in there right now.    YES

This remix is an absolute gem and has stood the test of time.  It packs emotion and fun into a tightly knit package of musical goodness!  Great from start to finish.

To be perfectly honest it's probably a matter of whether we catch typical AI artifacting that occurs in things like writing and composing (odd patterns in one case, actual sound artifacts typical of generative audio in the other). Not that this should ever be in the rules, but if folk take AI generated lyrics or sound and change it enough to where it sounds completely imperceptible to human writing we're not going to catch it - we're only human, after all - but at that point the artist put in the work to make it their own anyway so I wouldn't even feel so bad about it. If you're gonna put in that effort to try and fake it though you might as well make it yourself, but I'd commend the effort nonetheless. Still just to be safe you shouldn't do it though; we've gotten pretty good at listening to things over the years and catching oddities, or so I'm told. 😉