ReMix: The Great Giana Sisters 'Synthpop Mix'
Download MP3
Play Preview
- Game: The Great Giana Sisters (Rainbow Arts, 1987, C64)
- ReMixer(s): ezpRado
- Composer(s): Chris Hülsbeck
- Song(s): 'Title'
- Posted: 2007-03-11, evaluated by the judges
From newcomer EzpRado comes coverage of the C64 classic, Great Giana Sisters. This submission required my intervention as tiebreaker, so the panel's decision is well worth reading. Essentially, the piece's detractors felt that it was, quite simply, a little too "vanilla" - that the instrumentation was too ordinary and the arrangement relatively straightforward. The piece that was brought up in a comparison/contrast context was AmberTrance, because its original decision conversation covered some of the same issues. Since the panel itself was deadlocked and I cast the deciding vote, I'm actually going to quote... myself:
"It's not genius, but there are some nice details that I feel adjectives like "average" and "mediocre" don't accurately describe, like the stuttering, distorted FM synth around 1'11" that Larry cited; the production doesn't jump out and grab you, but it's also far from being what I'd call weak. I think most are correct in saying that this lies somewhere around the bar which we've set for submissions, but I'd tend to say there's enough attention to detail, general technical competence, arrangement, and energy to put it slightly above the bar, rather than below it. I was tapping my toe, and I didn't balk at any one particular transition for being unacceptably hackneyed, even if it was something I've heard before dozens of times."
Larry writes:
"The track does feel a bit too samey after a while despite EzpRado attempting to vary things up. The synths, the beatwork, etc. dragged after hearing them used so much, IMO negatively affecting the replayability of the piece. The emergence of new sounds and writing ideas, like the ending section from 4:13-4:44, should have been used earlier in the track to keep things fresh. Could have been stronger and introduced more ideas into the picture over time, which holds it back a bit, but what's here is fairly good. By my call, you squeak by."
Squeak by indeed; however, I'd imagine that most listeners will enjoy this mix just fine. Whether or not the average visitor to this site will like a given piece of music, however, is not an aspect of the evaluation process. EzpRado probably neither desired nor expected his mix decision to be so divisive and hence warranting of all this procedural focus; he just put together a pretty decent Giana mix and sent it our way. Chances are, especially if you dig the game or plain old fun electronica, you'll care less about what we thought and more about downloading and digging this mix, but due diligence requires full disclosure, plus it gives me something to write about ;)
Discussion: Latest 15 comments/reviews; view the This is enjoyable in it's own right, despite how it compares to
judges' standards. It is regrettable the remixer has not submitted
anything since.
- WesternZypher on January 14, 2011
- WesternZypher on January 14, 2011
Straight-ahead fun. It started out a bit slow, and I think it could
have used a bit more depth of field, but otherwise this is a catchy
and enjoyable mix.
If you are feeling down at all, a few listens to this will definitely improve your mood. :-)
- OA on January 19, 2009
If you are feeling down at all, a few listens to this will definitely improve your mood. :-)
- OA on January 19, 2009
I thought the intro was great. The arrangement overall was
fantastic. The "C'MON!!" in the back added a nice touch.
It's a great remix. It didn't seem too linear to me. Overall it reminded me a lot of Rayza's work.
Great track.
- Flare4War on March 20, 2007
It's a great remix. It didn't seem too linear to me. Overall it reminded me a lot of Rayza's work.
Great track.
- Flare4War on March 20, 2007
This is one of the least pretensious remixes I have heard in a
while.
Very listenable and fun. I really love the bounce and the attention to vary standardized and pretty use of tone. I was disappointed when it ended, I was like... WAIT!!! ROLL INTO A 30 MINUTE LONG MEDLEY. But no. I cannot have coital relations with a remix in Four minutes and Fourty-four seconds. I need at least another 15 minutes.
- Trenthian on March 15, 2007
Very listenable and fun. I really love the bounce and the attention to vary standardized and pretty use of tone. I was disappointed when it ended, I was like... WAIT!!! ROLL INTO A 30 MINUTE LONG MEDLEY. But no. I cannot have coital relations with a remix in Four minutes and Fourty-four seconds. I need at least another 15 minutes.
- Trenthian on March 15, 2007
Fun. That's the best description I can think of for this remix.
It's just a happy little tune. The one thing that I heard almost
instantly is the closeness between the Drum track/loop used here
and the one used in the intro of Tiffany's, "I Think We're Alone
Now". Now that brings me back... Actually this song reminds me of a
couple of 80's songs at different points Though most of the names
of those songs exacape me at the moment. Nice.
Ryan
- Random Hero on March 14, 2007
Ryan
- Random Hero on March 14, 2007
Beginning isn't great, but as people above have pointed out, once
it gets going it gets going.
Harkens back to the style and sound of many of the older mixes on the site, which can be a refreshing change from the overwhelming... well, 'newness' of many newer remixes.
- micuu on March 13, 2007
Harkens back to the style and sound of many of the older mixes on the site, which can be a refreshing change from the overwhelming... well, 'newness' of many newer remixes.
- micuu on March 13, 2007
Really, only the beginning was kind of...bad. As soon as the
distortion came in it was about 250% more enjoyable. I was
afraid the arrangement was going to be really stagnant, but I'm
surprised. It reminds me a little of Alexander Prievert's Bloody
Tears Inspired mix. And that's REALLY a good thing. Fun
semi-generic electronica indeed.
- Audity on March 13, 2007
- Audity on March 13, 2007
Nothing wrong with your opinion on this mix. I just disagree that
we've rejected arrangements that were "significantly better" than
this. If it happens, it's rare and the production has to completely
suck. That or it's just a violation of our standards to begin with
(eg. Shnab's chiptunes, while great, are basically against the
rules).
- zircon on March 13, 2007
- zircon on March 13, 2007
zircon;244986 wrote: So can you cite those other mixes rejected with "significantly better arrangements"?
http://remix.thasauce.net/
essentially. I'm not even that big of a fan of r:ts. I'm just not a big fan of this remix.
it strikes me as awkward that it seems like the song meets 45% of the site's standards in production and 55% of the standards in arrangement, and it is accepted, where as songs that meet 30% of the standars in production and 90% in arrangement are routinely rejected (or vice versa, in fact).
My criticisms don't stray that far from half the panel or even your own, zircon. I've reacted kinda harshly towards this because it contains so many defaults that *I* can recognize, which means something because I don't know crap. If this viewpoint is wrong and I'm missing something, fine. But it's still the way I see it right now.
- PassivePretentiousness on March 13, 2007
Wow, I wish that you could upload songs to ddr and make your own
step pattern to them. This would be the perfect song to do that
with. Yes, I play ddr. As stupid as you look on it, it is a great
exercise, a great agility workout, and its fun. Song was really
catchy and I am not a big techno kind of guy.
- Thin Crust on March 13, 2007
- Thin Crust on March 13, 2007
PassivePretentiousness;244772 wrote: I don't think I've heard that kind of base on ocr in about three years. You could actually say that about half the synths used. That doesn't make it bad per se, but I have no idea how it passed in comparison to umpteen rejected mixes that had slightly worse production and significantly better arrangement.
I also don't agree with djpretzel's compliments regarding the stuttering. The synth is too quiet to hear the effect properly, and it only compounds the volume level issues.
So can you cite those other mixes rejected with "significantly better arrangements"?
- zircon on March 12, 2007
Catchy, and makes a nice addition to my OCR collection. Can't say
it's ground-breaking, but it's definitely enjoyable.
- Citan on March 12, 2007
- Citan on March 12, 2007
I don't think I've heard that kind of base on ocr in about three
years. You could actually say that about half the synths used. That
doesn't make it bad per se, but I have no idea how it passed in
comparison to umpteen rejected mixes that had slightly worse
production and significantly better arrangement.
I also don't agree with djpretzel's compliments regarding the stuttering. The synth is too quiet to hear the effect properly, and it only compounds the volume level issues.
- PassivePretentiousness on March 12, 2007
I also don't agree with djpretzel's compliments regarding the stuttering. The synth is too quiet to hear the effect properly, and it only compounds the volume level issues.
- PassivePretentiousness on March 12, 2007
