*NO* Super Mario 64 & Jazz Jackrabbit 2 'Medieval Koopa Jam'

ReMix: Medieval Koopa Jam

CONTACT INFO

ReMixer name: DaMonz

Real name: Emery Monzerol

userid: 31308

SUBMISSION INFO

Name of the games arranged: Super Mario 64, Jazz Jackrabbit 2

Name of the arrangement: Medieval Koopa Jam

Name of the individual songs arranged: Koopa's Road, Medieval Jam

Link to Koopa's Road: http://youtu.be/0rygsWPCjNQ

Link to Medieval Jam: http://youtu.be/gtJyq0STBu0

Comments: So I've been hearing some kids complaining about the fact that OCR definitely lacked some "techno shit" tracks. Like, you hear this all the time "yeah OCR has almost everything, but they NEVER post techno shit. I want more OCR techno shit." So I thought "hey why not make some good techno shit for OCR?"

Ahem. Yeah. This is way out of my comfort zone, but it's been really really fun to make. Once again, big thanks to the WIP boards. And BIG BIG thanks to WillRock, he helped me tons with making this sound right.

Anyway, I hope you like my "techno shit"

I think I've got lots of original stuff in there, but here's a quick source breakdown so you know which part comes from which source:

0:00-0:27 original intro

0:27-2:00 is from Medieval Jam

2:00-3:16 is from Koopa's Road

3:16-4:29 is from Medieval Jam

4:29-END is from Koopa's Road

Thanks again for your time and energy! Happy Judging!

I'm not sure what the kids are saying these days, but I like EDM. The problem is that many young producers use "techno" as their excuse for repetitive lazy writing.

This track suffers from that to an extent, but it's not too bad. The drums in particular are extremely repetitive. I love the conga/tabla you use, but your kick is absolutely unacceptable for this genre. It's barely audible. The hat is very repetitive. something you hear in all good techno music is a lot of dynamic instrumentation and drum parts.

You've got some great melodic writing here, but the rhythm section is for the most part a copy & paste job.

NO

First of all, great choice of sources to mix together. I'm not sure how you saw the connection between the two, but it fits quite well. I agree with Jesse that the drum writing was repetitive, but you had enough filters and dropouts in the percussion that, combined with the melodic elements, I was engaged the entire time. The hand percussion was an especially good addition. True, the kick could have been improved, having almost no high end, but had enough oomph to carry things. I dunno, I'm not seeing much here I don't like.

YES

I'm with Vinnie on this one. I definitely agree that the percussion writing is repetitive, but I think there's enough going on elsewhere and there are enough effects that it is forgivable in the big picture. Definitely something to work on the for future, Emery, but the writing in the other parts is pretty great, and the combo of the sources works quite nicely. I dig.

YES

First of all, great choice of sources to mix together. I'm not sure how you saw the connection between the two, but it fits quite well.

/raises hand

Oooh, oooh, call me! I might have an answer! It's possible Emery made a conscious or subconscious connection due to...

http://youtu.be/gtJyq0STBu0?t=1m28s - 1:28-1:41

=

http://youtu.be/a1YhYv6-_Os?t=3s :03-:17

It's worth a guess! That common thread wasn't really explored in this arrangement, but it was cool to hear Alexander Brandon had employed that pattern in JJ2 after Koji Kondo used it in Mario 64. The sources are distant cousins!

I thought the percussion groove at :27 was VERY flimsy, so I'm actually more in Vig's corner on this one. The arrangement is nice, but a lot of the backing writing sounded too obscure, and the kick really was a weak link and undermined the energy inherent in the rest of the writing. I also thought the mixing should have had more high-end crispness to it; this all sounds distant and lossy right now. What's here, while kind of muddy, is barely serviceable enough, though a higher encoding may also help a little. It sounded like something dropped out during the 3:44-4:00 section that made things sound a little less muddy, but it was short-lived.

Anyway, short and sweet. 1) Beef up the sound of the core beat first used at :27 so that it's less flimsy/bland, 2) sharpen the mixing so it doesn't sound quite as lo-fi, 3) Stop submitting at 160kbps. It's gotta be either 192kbps or VBR1.

Love the arrangement, Emery. Now we just need the other half of the equation lifted up a little bit. I won't die if this makes it as is, and I hate to vote NO, but I genuinely feel it's slightly below what we should accept and that sometimes smaller details can really add up, especially listening through a 6 minute-long piece.

NO (resubmit)

Got an update from DaMonz here - REVOTE:

Got an update from DaMonz here - REVOTE:

The panning's too wide. Though it wasn't a huge, HUGE deal, and I didn't notice that issue in the previous version, the extreme panning does make the parts harder to make out on headphones.

The core beat/kick still is weak.

I'm not sure if the tempo slowdown around 3:36 is new; I don't recall it from before, but I'm not feeling the way tempo shifted; there was no point to it because it was the exact same writing, just barely and briefly slowed down, with otherwise 0 meaningful variation

Dynamically, the second half is a rinse/repeat of the first. The transitions between JJ2 and SM64 were slightly different from the first half, but the way the energy level changes and the way the instrumentation/textures sound is basically just repeating things and staying in the same gear. Yeah, the final section of Mario was maybe a LIIIIITTLE more intense than prior iterations, but it's not particularly different.

Unfortunately, I find it a little funny that I like the arrangement a bit less now, having heard this revision. Adjust the panning so it's not as drastic, beef up the beat, and try to introduce more obvious dynamic contrast into the song through more distinct changes in instrumentation, textures, rhythm, or intensity (just something so the overall energy level doesn't hover in the same place).

Still a NO for now, but this still has good promise and can be lifted up above the bar.

Ok so the intro is pretty cool. This kick is really really weak. That needs updating. The sources you've picked are really really cool btw, just saying . The leads at 1:20 are too wet in delay. Its undermining the melody and creating a bit of mud. The hand percussion after the lead section is really cool. That lead at 2:13 on is too loud. Also quite strongly panned later on - seems to be automated. Also, your leads have too much delay, the delay is feeding back into the original signal at times. The arrangement is ok, its a little static in texture, and the tempo change could be replaced with a nice breakdown, but the idea of the tempo change is a nice one that we don't see often. I'm not sure its pulled off well here tho. Lead, kick and mixing problems are adding up to a borderline no for me tho. Its close but it needs a little more TLC before I give this the pass myself.

Keep it at bro!

NO (resub)

I can hear both sides of the vote swings here. Drums could definitely use some variation from the core pattern here. Really didn't see a significant change (beyond dropping/adding elements) until 2:56 and that was pretty short-lived before it came back to the regular pattern.

I actually liked the idea of the slowed down section at 3:45, I just think the execution was lacking. Instead of just slowing down the existing elements, try breaking down to a half-time groove and get some nice bass work going and it'll rock hard.

Synths overall are cool and had some neat writing to close things out at the end.

Arrangement is great. Good usage of both themes and working them in together.

Funny, part of this reminds me of some Unreal Tournament music, which makes sense given the composer.

What you've got here is good, and I think falls in the borderline category, but there's also a ton of potential in the track as well from a production perspective.

NO Resubmit, please

I was digging this up until the inexplicable tempo change. It's such a weird thing to do in a straight up four-on-the-floor dance track. It's a gradual change and it's not jarring or anything, but I don't understand why it's there in lieu of an actual b-section breakdown.

I like the synth design and the overall energy of the piece, but I feel like it gets a little static and auto-piloty around the fourth minute. Would love to see this on the site but it needs some variation in the middle that's not just a tempo change.

NO, resub