*NO* Mega Man X3 'Anophophora' *RESUB*

Original Decision

* ReMixer name: Jewbei

* Real name: James Joyner

* Email address: jjoyner17@yahoo.com

* Website: http://www.myspace.com/Jewbeii

**This remix was done for the Maverick Rising project. when the project goes live i would like for this to be posted**

First I will like to take a moment out to thank bLiNd & Jade for being so hard on me in helping me to unleash my true skill I really needed it. y'all are like my guardian angels or something haha. It took nearly 2 years but i finally got everything down pact without you guys i dunno what the hell would've happened.

This track was influenced by bLiNd's Jade Catacombs & iio- Rapture (Armin Van Buuren's Remix) I took what I like from those tracks and combined it with my own style I didnt really expect for it to come out sounding very uplifting but im happy that I was able to pull something like this off.

Before my mix Pretension was ever posted I use to doubt my abilities as a Trance Producer and I was very intimidated by OCR's standards but now I know everything will be fine from this day forward. Expect to hear more from me!

Source:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5TanI96EdE

ReMix:

This has been tightened up pretty well, it still feels slightly on the liberal side, but it definitely has a dominant source. Not much else to say, excellent production, great flow, and now with MORE MEGA MAN!

Great work dude.

Yes

Definitely a huge improvement overall in terms of source usage. Love it.

YES

Always wanted to remix this track. Thing about MMX3 music is that it really requires a genre departure. This remix is a lovely track; I love the arpeggiating synth. Dig the harmonic treatment. I don't have too much to say, as it's a fairly simple, if creative trance adaptation. Just wanted to make sure I got in here before Larry says it's too liberal or something.

YES

Is there source I'm missing beyond:

0:28-0:58

1:05-1:13

1:20-1:28

1:42-2:43

This seemed pretty light, guys.

Edit (4/13): If Larry can't pick the source out of this, I don't think I'm likely missing anything more.

NO

It's an extremely solid trance piece but there are large sections where, like Vinnie said, this is pretty light on source. I'm not really one to stopwatch things, but when an entire third of the mix (2:43~end) is basically just non-source trance filler, there's a problem.

As much as it pains me, because I love the source and I love trance, I gotta say NO.

edit: resubmit plz

Track was 4:33-long, so I need 136.5 of overt source usage to pass it for arrangement.

Soundscape sounded a bit full/flooded, and could have used a cleaner sound, but this was strong enough on the production. The arrangement almost was a pointalist style usage of the melody from around :28-1:28.

2:43-onward seems to have a very loose connection to I guess :26 of the source, but there's not much distinct connection to make there or anywhere. I have to agree with the others NOs that 2:43-3:41 sounded like a wholly original section on top on some vaguely similar chords, followed a mirror of the opening to wind things down, also unconnected to the source. The track apparently cut off a few seconds too early from the fadeout as well.

:28.5-:35, 36-50, 51-:58, 1:06-1:27.5, 1:42.75-2:42.5 = 107.75 seconds or 39.47% usage

I'm pickier than Vinnie on gaps, but we pretty much lined up the same as far as what we could make out vs. the source.

Make no mistake about it, I feel >60% unrelated to the source is not good enough for arrangement. You guys YESing this can wave off actually checking how much source material is used, with some references to look at, but when you do, stuff happen like this: "Oh, it sounds alright, it sounds Mega Man-esque," and we get 3 groove biased YESs without enough qualification. I'd love for me to just be missing something obvious, but no one's pointed it out.

It's too bad, because the sounds are pretty solid, the groove is good, and this is obviously put together capably. It's nice in a vacuum. It just needs more Gravity Beetle used in it for a stronger connection to the source tune. I really hope I'm missing something huge here with the arrangement as I'm comparing it, but it just doesn't seem to be the case.

James, don't be discouraged, you're getting to be a very capable producer, so that's not in question. But that's only one half of the equation with a submissions; we do need the source tune to be dominant here, so we can ride with this to the front page where it belongs.

NO (refine/resubmit)

Ok, I gave this another listen. I think having it on repeat sorta melded the opening/ending together, which is how I missed the lack of source for the ending section. I'm taking full credit for missing it, apologies to Jewbei and to you guys for the mix-up.

Regardless, this mix still has a ton of potential, and I'd love to see you refine it and send it back to us. Sorry for the mix-up!

NO (resubmit, please!)

this one doesn't have quite the crisp clarity of some of your other mixes. the bass is a little dry, and the low-end in general is a bit muddy, but otherwise things gelled pretty well, and your synths were well chosen. unfortunately, Palp and Larry are right about the arrangement. if you can pack some more source into this and get it above the 50% mark, you'll have my vote.

NO(resub)