*NO* Portal 2 'Motion Sickness'

ReMixer & real name: Eino Keskitalo

e-mail:

forum id: 20708

Names of game arranged: Portal 2

Name of Arrangement: Motion Sickness

Names of song arranged: Reconstructing Science

Source:

This is a tweaked version of my PRC220 entry. (http://compo.thasauce.net/rounds/view/PRC220). I got lots of great feedback from the competition & in the workshop, especially Gario and timaeus222. Fun side note: I did music for a game jam game just before the round (

) and used that piece as a template to get the compo submission done quickly. Polishing the mix to this point took the usual two years, though.

Arrangement-wise I've taken the basic 8-note melody/figure and based the bassline on it (I've "shifted" it to the offbeat, rhythmically) and built from there. I introduced a bit more obvious/conscious source connections thanks to Gario's workshop mod review. The title is a bitter one, I would love to play Portal 2 (co-op!!!), but I get motion sickness from the game.

Some source breakdown follows. Here's the bits I've used from the source:

0:51-1:05 "half-time" main riff

0:00-0:07 "fast" main riff; the variation/ending at 0:05 is only referenced once at a bg melody.

0:29-0:36 background stuttering melody-ish support bleep

0:22-0:29 bassy line

0:00-0:08 revving up, no source

0:08-0:23 stutter support bleep

0:24-0:53 bass line made from the half-time main riff, stutter support bleep

0:53-1:08 bass line made form fast main riff, slow square wave bleeps use half-time main riff

1:08-1:10 actually has a quiet "ticking" line based on the fast half-time main riff

1:10-1:19 half-time bass line with original lead

1:19-1:24 the above continues, with secondary melody based on the fast main riff (from 0:02 and 0:05)

1:24-1:26 ticking

1:26-1:40 square wave lead plays the half-time main riff

1:40-1:48 in addition, the ticking plays the fast main riff

1:49-1:56 in addition, the filtered saw lead is based on the bassy line from source

1:56-1:58 it's the ticking!

1:58-2:13 original section, though there's some ticking and stuttering in there from the source

2:13-2:43 the fast bass line + the half-time riff on the square lead; original leads, ticking & stuttering from source in the background

2:43-> the ticking.. THE TICKINGGG

Yeah. Cheers!

Source:

Edited March 17, 2015 by Liontamer
closed decision

Ok so I just now got the title, "Motion Sickness." I'm super familiar with this source as my son plays Portal 2, but I can't even watch him play it because I also get motion sickness from it! Glad it isn't just me (and my advanced age... haha).

That said, interesting track. I like how you've used the 8 note source as the bassline for a good part of the track. However I think the mix can be tightened up some. I don't think your snare timbre is working, maybe it's just me but I feel like it takes up too much space and it is mixed too loud/dry also. I'm finding it quite distracting.

I don't find a lot of leadwork to grab onto for the first 1:11 of the track, the lead is very sparse during the first 1:11, just a blip here and there. I like the leadwork you've done from 1:11-1:26, that's the best part of the track for me, even though the melody there is a bit scattered and lacks contour. I sort of wish that original soloing idea went on for a little longer before the 8 note pattern becomes the lead. The section at 1:59-2:15 though, I'm not sure what's going on there and it feels like filler and overly random. Hhhm. In fact I feel like the leadwork from 1:59 all the way to the end is quite directionless.

Ok so to summarize, I think that snare needs to be tamed, and some of the lead writing needs to make a bit more impact and a bit more sense melodically. Otherwise this is a cool idea for this source. It's a tricky source to remix for sure since it is so rigid.

NO (resubmit)

I feel that most of the strength of this arrangement lies in how you adapted the source tune into so many melodic contexts and got so much mileage out of essentially 8 notes of material. I like the Deus Ex-esque vibe you chose to go for, and the chaotic melodic crescendo you ended the song with was actually a pretty nice touch in my opinion - it didn't come across directionless to me, as Kris said.

I will concede that 1:59-2:15 felt pretty out of place, but no big deal for me. The snare was a bit up-front and loud, it sounded like you were going for a chopped breakbeat sound with that but I don't feel that it totally worked. The last crash at 2:46 was a big letdown, I think if you replaced that with a crash with a longer reverb tail and let it die down more gradually, it would feel much more natural.

Overall, I feel that this is competent enough to get by despite the aforementioned issues. It's a close call and I would love to hear some simple improvements, but I'm comfortable giving a nod to this one due to the strength of the arrangement. We'll see how this goes!

YES (borderline)

This sounds like it's missing something to make it sound fully cohesive. I'm not against robotic timing for a purposefully mechanical song, but there's still something lacking expressiveness with the leads, e.g. the bassline brought in at :25 and the lead at :53.

Also, there's a lot of volume, but not a lot of balance. EQ-wise, there are frequencies mudding together all over the place, which makes the soundscape sound lo-fi and cluttered.

I agreed with Chimpa on 1:59-on just sounding directionless with too may things going on; the timing's stiff, there's no clear lead and no clear background players (all the parts are at similar volumes & overlapping ranges).

It's an interesting, cerebral arrangement, but the mixing needs more work. Even though you've done some creative sounds & effects with the tools here, this could also afford to sound more unique with the overall sound design.

NO (resubmit)

Kris hit the points I wanted to note, the snare doesn't feel like it's fitting into the soundscape you're going for here, for starters. I think she nailed that on the head that it's a bit too loud and is taking up a bit too much room for what it is. I do also agree that some areas sound pretty cohesive, like the 1:11 section, but others aren't quite doing it (1:59). I also liked what was going on at 2:24-end, so nice work there.

I think it needs a bit more polish before you're good to go here, but you're definitely on the right track.

NO (resubmit)

Definitely agree about the snare. It's a weak sound and should be tamed a little bit. In general, I think the mid freqs should be tamed. The mixing had an irritating quality to it but may not be too difficult to fix. There's also some EQ smoothing that could be done. Very close, I hope you give us another version of this!

NO (resubmit)