Leaderboard

Voting Guidelines Teams were tasked with writing three mashup arrangements of two songs each, one from a Streets of Rage game and the other from an Etrian Odyssey game. In order to make your vote, listen to the remixes and, for each pair, choose the remix that fulfills the following criteria (listed in order of importance): The remix arranges both source tunes in an interesting and identifiable way into one cohesive piece of music. The remix is well-produced within the conventions of the genre. The remix is enjoyable to listen to. Stream the remixes via Soundcloud or Download the Round 2 Remix Pack (MP3). For your reference, here are the source tunes for Round 2. Streets of Rage vs. Etrian Odyssey III My Little Baby Cityscape - Engrave Thy Name and Go Forth Streets of Rage 2 vs. Etrian Odyssey Alien Power Strife - Rapture [Normal Battle: Final Floor] Streets of Rage 3 vs. Etrian Odyssey II Ending Return of the Heroes [Ending 1]

Hello!!! Although I'm quite unfamiliar with this place, it is nice to meet people who enjoy remixing VGMs and OSTs! Although I usually make original tracks, I also make remixes. I met this place a few days ago, and I forgot introduce myself. I hope all is well!

Sounds like we need listening parties for both soundtracks... :-)

Heya! And welcome aboard! :D Yeah, this gives me an excuse to finally go back to some old spoopy compo tracks I've done years past and rework them as well. :P No better time than the present, for sure!

This is an amazing idea! I've got an old MNP that I've been tinkering with for... the last decade? Crap. But it might fit this album, so consider me signed up!

Found myself with a hankering to listen to some of that cool, mellow guitar goodness from Final Fantasy VII: Crisis Core. But rather than listening to the soundtrack on Youtube, I figured I would look it up on here and see what people have made. I didn't find a single song. Like, I'm doing the search thing correctly, right? There are ZERO Crisis Core remixes listed here? Right? Weird, man. Weird. Alan

Definitely loved listening to Klonoa! So many twists and turns in the soundtrack and so much variety!

thank you!!! first post rn but cool beans :D

I never played either game, but I would be willing to help with or participate in any/or of the two. :) I'm sure something from their OSTs would be cool to do. ♡

Larger:

@Guy In Rubber Suit let’s get you on 2004. Wanna avoid any specific characters from games but having people on the art is fine. Just art, and leave space for typography. @CNDR wanted to see a sample of art before you can claim a year, which is why I hid your previous post. We’re also not using season names, we’re specifically saying “Q1” instead of “winter” etc.

Here's a sample of some of my work! I've done some banners for Dwelling of Duels and some personal projects as well. Hope I can get the opportunity to contribute to this project!

Very interesting approach to the arrangement here, let's break it down: Track begins with a pad, bass and an irregular kick pattern (it doesn't bother me as it did other judges though). Things seem to be in E minor here but at 0:26 the B melody from the source enters and there's a big point of contention, since the original is on F major (for this section) and you didn't change the key, which creates a huge dissonance. Of course, write-up shows you actually intended this but I don't think it's effective. Dissonance is a valid tool but I don't think flat out slotting a melody over an unfitting key works without extra effort, it's something you probably need to set up effectively. At 0:49 we move into a new section, with bass and melody on A major, an odd choice after the dissonant part. The beat here is cool though, the hi-hat pattern is very Chrono Trigger-ish. 1:13 seems to be kind of a reprise of the intro that leads into an actual reprise a bit later. A fun drum fill moves us into a new section at 1:38. I like the energy here. The lower of the 2 melodies seems to be playing some liberal variations of the souce and 1:51 echoes one of the chord progressions from the original. A fairly odd synth arpeggio leads into a section with distorted guitar around the 2 minute mark that's basically one riff played over a set of different chords, would've been a good spot for a solo or something of the sort. At 2:27 there's a bit of break/keyboard solo over a static 8ths rhytmic pattern which leads into a repeated arpeggio starting from around 2:45 to 3:01 in a small "drum solo". We then get a reprise of the 0:26 melody but without the dissonance, much more pleasant! Finally, at around 3:35 we reach a take on the source's end of loop section and the track ends. On the arrangement side, this is definitely an interesting piece. Changing Barret's Theme into a "battle theme" is a fun idea. Generally, I think the structure of the arrangement is solid but I have some criticisms. First is the dissonant section. You mention it "compliments everything that comes after it" but I don't really see it, the section right after the dissonance is an extremely upbeat one which is just a big whiplash that makes the dissonance lose purpose. There's some pay-off for the dissonance with the reprise at 3:01 but I feel that reprise would've still worked well without the big dissonant part earlier. Second is that there's a few parts where we basically have a bass part and percussion without nothing particularly interesting happening on top, like 1:01-1:13, 2:03-2:26 and 2:44-3:01. I also have a bit of trouble catching the vibe of the arrangement as it moves from tense sections to very upbeat melodies often. As a positive, I enjoy the general rhytm of the track, it's energetic and fun! On production, there's a big issue with the samples used... they're simply not high quality enough. I won't bet on this but some even seem taken directly from SNES soundfonts, which is a valid approach if you take the time to write and produce them well. Bass, particularly, suffers from this, as the sample picked doesn't really cut well through the mix. Even if you can't find better samples, it'd also be a good idea to invest time into sound design. As an example, the synth doing the backing from 2:27 to 3:01 could really use some effects to sound more interesting. I don't have big criticisms of the mix itself other than sample quality really, the track sounds well. Overall, there's a lot of potential here. Arrangement has interesting ideas but it needs some refinement. Production needs more work, focusing on making the instruments sound better (either by finding better samples or by mixing the existing ones in smart ways to make them better). I'd recommend hitting the workshop on the forums or the Discord and hopefully you hit us with a revision in the future! NO

Howdy, Jonpon! This will probably sound like I hated this track: I fully agree with proph's notes. For starters, the instrumentation and production simply aren't up to par. The lack of a rhythmic constant makes the intro difficult to follow. The transformation of "Barret's Theme's" A section melody you've given from 0:24-0:48 is nearly unrecognizable, and the dissonant layers underneath aren't doing the section any favors, either. The rapid descending arpeggios in the intro callback from 1:13-1:38 sort out the intro's rhythm problem, but proph's right that a bunch of parts are just stepping all over each other because they're playing in the same range. It seems like the organ is carrying the melody line at 1:38-2:03? I can barely make out the "Barret's Theme" C section melody; without Nobuo's stepwise figuring from the source material, your interpretation is tenuous. The lead at 2:27-2:44 has another tenuous source connection; as a nitpick, I don't agree with the highly active lead line over the top of a pulsing pedal tone bassline and no other rhythm section. There isn't any setup for the ending at 3:32. It's not all doom and gloom, though. The organ lick of the source B section melody at 0:49-1:13 is solid. The segments that truck along like 2:03-2:27 feel great. The reprise of the A section motif at 3:02 works much better than your first statement at 0:24. There's a cool story behind your arrangement. You've got an arrangement with promise and potential here. If you haven't already, I highly recommend taking this to the #workshop channel on the OCR Discord. It's more active than the forums these days, and the folks there can help you take this track to the next level! NO (resubmit)

I'm on the edge of my seat- the album finally nearing release. I've followed this from the start, and my aged heart can hardly take it anymore! Much love to everyone involved.

Well, look at all the nice stuff Morgan said, it warms a middle-aged man’s heart! We’re glad to have you too. :-) This was definitely a trip on the USS Weirdshit, and I’m here for it. Boy, this gets pretty grimey, and props to Chimpa for her post-production efforts as well; just like the Mario 64 piece that she also mastered, everything sounds awesome on my car stereo, which can’t be taken for granted. (I’ve heard pro tracks that don’t come out sounding full and clean on car stereo, to be sure.) Just voted on mooooooooo.ooorgan’s Super Mario 64 piece before this, which I believe was the second or third track of his that I’ve judged. That said, the dude’s got me trained now: expect a journey and expect to be impressed. YES

How did this get so far down this list without a vote from me? I mastered it, and I probably figured that made me ineligible to vote on it but I think we decided that wasn't the case, so here goes, finally. I apologize for this ridiculous wait time from me. I love this arrangement so much. Mo has such skill at creating an extremely varied soundscape, in every regard: energetically, instrumentally, emotionally, and with ear candy for days and days. No one element ever gets repetitive or outstays its welcome. Mo is a talented musical storyteller. The feel of this arrangement is slow and purposeful, and... HECTIC as all heck... at the same time, what a cool ride. *And the sidechaining in this mix is so good that it brings tears to my eyes* And hey, the master sounds really great too! YES

I'm a not-quite-first-time listener here - I heard this on GameDuels back then. I followed along with the source breakdown just fine, and with these sources brought in, I'm glad that the Knight n' Grail music provided most of the melodic anchoring - they made it much easier to follow. I am, however, going to disagree with the difficulty of following grooves as outlined further up, and that's because the groove does have a downbeat leading into the individual bars. It is tricky to anticipate when there's a change to another time signature shift, though, but it is way less of an issue when most of it is at 7/4 initially. Credit where credit is due with the soundscape - there's a great selection of dreamy pads and synth/keys that send this in a more atmospheric direction, and I am all for the ride. But mix-wise, it's not a perfect one. There is bass, but it's a very light sub-bass - and that takes more of a backseat to the various leads, which vary in panning, echo, and tone. One is a piano that is louder than the others, is hard-panned to the right side, has a high amount of reverb and a pinch of a chorus effect, and dominates over everything else. It works when cooperating with the hard-left organ and has had moments where it allowed the sweeping pads to take more of that front stage. But it's not as effective when it's eating up the soundscape around it and, therefore, adds unnecessary clutter. Now, here's the big question. Is this a dealbreaker? Surprisingly, no. The master has no issues with clipping or over-compression, and the waveform allowed for a consistent level of narrow dynamics without going the whole "waveform sausage" route. This decision is something that I can chalk up to artistic intent despite its imperfections. If it does get sent back, then I wouldn't mind the panning being tighter and some tweaked instrument balancing - but after further deliberation, I see no reason for it not to be posted as it is. We would appreciate a warning the next time you send in something that a previous iteration of the panel had last assessed, just saying. ;) YES

Man, most votes on a track ever? More likely than you think! So the good: this does a very nice job blending the sources, and it uses both in ample amounts (mostly using the C64 source as texture), and I like the soundscape. The production values are decent, as are the instruments used. However, the mixing is dense, and sometimes is easy to lose track of what people should be listening to in the arrangement, with the lead often being no louder than the accompaniment. This leads to a larger issue of the arrangement sounding like it's meandering aimlessly - there's little for the listener to grab as important so the overall arrangement sounds like a bunch of textures and ideas put into one package rather than an arrangement. After the 2:41 there is a melodic hook that's easier to follow which helps the song close off strong, and there's some material from 0:30 - 1:00 that could be used to grab the listener's ear if it wasn't so washed in reverb and mixed to match the levels of the rest of the texture. There are a lot of good ideas here, but I don't hear enough to keep the listener's attention over the textures, and there's too much going on to consider this minimalist or atmospheric music. I *hear* elements that could be used as leads in various points of the arrangement, but they need to blend less with the rest of the texture and not be washed out with reverb as well as be mixed more in the lead to work as such. I hear an arrangement in this, but it needs to be mixed better so that the listeners can hear it, too. I like it, but it needs more focus. Better mixing and cleaning up the likely intentional leads so they don't wash out so much would bring this the focus it needs. NO

There are a few weak spots but overall I really like the texture of this entire track. The hard-panned synth is a problem but it's not present for the entire song so I can get past it. It's transformative, and the contrast of industrial sounding percussion with a dreamier, synthy-er sound on top is nice. YES

One of my biggest issues with this mix is the panning. There's a heavy imbalance here with lots of things basically pushed all the way to one side. Hard panning can work in a mix with strong melodic and harmonic elements, but in an arrangement that leans heavily on undefined ambiance, it makes it difficult to find a focal point and I felt lost for a majority of the time I was listening. Beyond that, the mix itself feels muddy, as some of the other judges have mentioned. I won’t dwell on that, but from an arrangement standpoint, it took me about three minutes to even grasp what was happening. I don’t mind atmospheric arrangements, but this track feels like it’s missing something essential. The hard panning, combined with the mix’s lack of clarity, makes it difficult to interpret the composition. If the mix were cleaner, I might be more forgiving of the arrangement, but as it stands, it falls short in terms of structure and overall cohesion. To improve this, I’d recommend easing up on the extreme panning. This will force a more refined mix, requiring careful EQ and compression rather than relying on placement to create separation. Right now, it feels like hard panning was used as a shortcut to avoid detailed balancing. With so many elements working together, bringing them toward the center will help ensure each instrument is both necessary and properly positioned relative to the others. Or you may find that once you're forced to mix them together, some instruments are doing double duty and can be discarded in favor of a mix that is more effective. As for melody and overall direction, I’m not sure where to steer you. Part of that is due to the chosen sources, but it’s also because the track remains too ambiguous for a clear path forward. NO

I see walls of paragraphs all above me, so there's probably no chance I'm getting through this one with a clean vote... not sure how I missed voting on this during the judge test myself! I love the foundational elements of this piece, juxtaposing a deep 808 synth with some very grimy, industrial percussion drenched in reverb and some plectral instruments that feel like they could have been pulled straight from Castlevania. On a conceptual level, we're hitting the right marks here. The end result is washy and messy, but in a way that feels appropriate - the leads don't necessarily cut through, but do they need to? I'd argue that this works perfectly well as more of a vibes-focused track where the melodies are sidelined. The 808 feels rather tame though, like it wants to be a commanding presence that grounds the rest of the ambient elements in something more concrete, but it doesn't really feel that way in the mix. This is common when you have a bass that has tremendous sub presence but little upper harmonics, and can usually be rectified by either adding some subtle saturation to the bass (preferably using multiband saturation so you don't introduce issues with the sub frequencies) and/or by cleaning up competing frequencies in the low mids from your other elements. I would imagine that the industrial/orchestral percussion layers probably have a lot of low-frequency content that doesn't need to be there. Make sure you're low-cutting your reverbs too! Low freqs can build up there and dull the presence of your bass and kick. The muddiness is the only thing that I feel actively detracts from the listening experience - the rest feels like it can be chalked up to a stylistic decision, so I personally side with the YES votes that this does enough stuff right that the bass mixing shortcomings can be a "learn from this next time" rather than a dealbreaker on this piece! YES

You surely picked a challenging source with that Ninja Gaiden theme… After listening to the other 2 sources I have honestly no idea what to expect from this! K, so we begin with the arpeggio from the Ghost Castle source, I like the patches used here. There’s a brief tease of Ghost Castle melody before some percussion elements enter… Here things get tricky since you shifted the arpeggio somewhat unexpectedly to 7/8 (or /4? Whatever). Soon after, the melody from the other Knight ‘n’ Grail joins and I’m surprised that it actually fits well! A similar vibe continues until 1:16 where we finally get a clear presence of the Ninja Gaiden track. The mix gets a little busy here, I assume because of reverb or similar effects. I like that you somehow kept the Ghost Castle arpeggio as background despite the change in chords. Focus returns to Ghost Castle around the 2 minute mark until there’s silence and a neat transition at 2:40, which continues the Ghost Castle melody actually. I wish the bass was louder on this entire section, it feels very subdued in general. Eventually, the title melody returns and eventually the song ends. I feel the ending is a bit anticlimactic, after 4 minutes I was hoping for something more interesting but it kinda just stopped. On the arrangement side this is pretty cool, you do a great job mixing the sources, especially the 2 from Knight ‘n’ Grail. Ninja Gaiden is much less present but I’m not really surprised since that source is extremely odd. I also like that you changed the time signature for your own personal touch, something like that quickly makes the cover “your own take”. Structure of the arrangement also flows well, slowly adding more regular percussive elements and using recurring themes in a smart way. On the production side I think you nail it for the most part, although there's still some issues. I generally enjoy the sound choices in here and there’s clearly a lot of care put into how the soundscape evolves. The moody percussion in the first minute is neat although arguably a little loud. As something to look for in next mixes I think the reverb/delay (whatever you used for ambience) is coming too hot and loud into the mix, which creates a lot of mud and some slightly ear piercing moments. The mud is very noticeable in the Ninja Gaiden section since the guitar arpeggios generate a lot of it. Another issue I found was the bass, I felt I couldn’t really hear the bass but after looking at the EQ curve there’s actually a lot of bass so… I dunno, maybe you didn’t find a bass patch that cuts through the mix well. Consider layering additional patches for this instead of simply pushing the current patch harder. Overall, this is a pretty cool track! I really like the arrangement and although I think the production could be improved (basically, control the reverb/ambience mud and fix the bass), I feel it’s good enough to pass. Like Josh, I decided to come here and split the vote! YES

First-time listener here as well! There’s no question that all 3 sources are represented in this remix. Opening (:00-:1:32~) arp is from Ghost Castle over the bass movement from Aquaduct, melody is from Title Screen. Dominant melody seems to change hands when the sections change (1:33, 2:08, 2:41, 3:12, 3:41) which helps keep all three sources tied together rather than getting into medley-itis. Outro blends the Aquaduct arp under the Ghost Castle melody; percs hint at the Ghost Castle ambient chip noises. Melodically, Knight ‘N’ Grail feels more dominant than Ninja Gaiden here, though structurally the arrangement and style are more Ninja Gaiden. I’m leaning more KnG here as far as dominant track, specifically Ghost Castle as its arp and melodic sequence feature most prominently across the runtime. The remix opens with the synth arp which has the focus for the first 30 seconds until the plucked synth comes in with the melody. Starts in 6/8 until around :14, when everything swaps to 7/4. 7/4 can be a tough meter to grok with a perceived lack of backbeat - the clap on 2 and 6 helps alleviate this, giving it a 2+3+2 feel. Title Screen melody over the top of the 7/4 around :30 was done by displacing the pick-up in the melody by a beat; love the ostinato line at the end, though the delay masks the playing more than it enhances. This also is where the panned-lead issue the other Js brought up begins. Counterpanning the delay from the pluck to the left channel is one way to address this, though centering the pluck and ping-ponging the delay right-to-left also works. Aqueduct shines through around 1:16; plucked synth takes the Aquaduct arp and a pad takes the two-note lead line movement. The percussion brings us to a 4/4 feel, building the claps to move to syncopated hits and a backbeat snare after 1:41. Energy picks up here thanks to the percussion and bass at 1:50. Section at 2:08 drops the bass for a round before coming back in around 2:23 an octave up. Filter synth has the Ghost Castle melody, the pluck enters with the bass for a countermelody. We get a fake-out drop at 2:38, swapping back to 7/4 but with a 2+2+3 feel this time. New warbly piano seems to have the melody here while the pluck takes a deserved breather. Bass maintains its upper octave work throughout. 3:12 seems to be the climax of the piece, pluck returns with the filter synth halfway through. When the outro arrives at 3:41, percussion and bass settle down to land the plane. This is a clever arrangement and a lot of attention has been paid to balancing out the sources. I am in the same boat with Hemo, Chimpa, and Proph, however - the panning on the leads is not helping this piece. Having a melodic phrase front and center gives the audience something to focus on, and especially when you've got a tricky odd-time rhythm underneath, it's all the more important. Bringing whichever instrument you want the audience to focus on back to the center while keeping the counter-melodic voices and FX to the sides gets this over the bar for me. NO (resubmit)

First, thanks for adding the source breakdown. That made identifying source usage and analyzing your arrangement much simpler. I’m not making the “Aquaduct” connection underneath the “Ghost Castle” arp until the bass starts the slides while the “Title Screen” melody begins to play. Still, each source is clearly represented throughout your track regardless. Proph already included a play-by-play outlining the arrangement and source usage above, but I’m including my own here. The track opens with the arp from “Ghost Castle” atop mechanical noises and bass sustains. As the other Js have noted, the bass is noticeably tamer than I’d expect for a track in this style. I didn’t have an opportunity to listen to this one on the first go ‘round the panel, but my understanding is the bass was too loud the first time through – seems like you overcorrected here, but I can hear it well enough. There’s a two-beat break and a shift from 6 into 7 at around 0:14 when the arp synth is joined by strings and claps. There’s some filter automation on the arp layers around 0:30 when a plucky synth adds the “Title Screen” melody into the mix. Around 0:45, the pluck synth’s pattern complexifies as the bass adds portamento. There’s a gradual release of energy around 1:00 as the plucks give way to the “Ghost Castle” arp. There’s a bar of 8 subtly thrown amongst the 7 and the extra beat seems to help this spot breathe. At 1:16, there’s a shift into “Aquaduct” and another meter shift into 4/4. The “Ghost Castle” arp gets molded to fit the 4. Excellent restraint on the percussion until 1:33, after the bar of 7, when the beat drops. There’s a mix imbalance in this segment as the pluck synth on the right overpowers the pads on the left until 1:33, where the plucks fall below the pads (note: from my listening experience, this is more pronounced in speakers or monitors than headphones). Hemo’s right that the pluck here is too hot, I’m hearing around 3.5 kHz – if you cut about 2-3 dB around with a medium Q, that would mitigate this issue. The drum groove intensifies at 1:50 with the return of the claps and some hi-hat drills. I’m actually on board with the drums mixwise here; to me, each part’s audible and in its lane. The claps are being used more like claves or a cowbell than like a backbeat layer here, which is probably going to throw some listeners for a loop and cause them to lose the beat, especially once this little foray into a 4/4 groove is over. While an unconventional use of the palette, this part writing choice works in my opinion because the snare is capable of holding the backbeat role without the clap layer. Back into 7 at 2:03 where the “Ghost Castle” arp returns and we get the melody from the same source – as an aside, the arp up to this point has been incredibly helpful for keeping track of the pulse against the intricate drum patterns. The plucks counter at 2:22 with a variation of the arp pattern. A break in 6 at 2:38, and then we’re back to 7 with the “Ghost Castle” melody in the plucks. The descending “Aquaduct” motif returns at 3:12 and flows into a recap of “Title Screen” at 3:27. The drums begin simplifying at 3:42, as does the pad running the “Title Screen” melody, and it feels like the energy is dragging here more than is necessary. But here comes a strong ending at 4:13 and we’re done. Is there a perceived lack of dynamics? The other Js have certainly made a good case for it, but I say Larry’s got the right of it with this track having a narrow dynamic curve. The meter swaps like the bar of 7 around 1:30 and the pause in 6 at 2:38 work wonders for managing the pacing as the track moves through the sources, and I feel the textural shifts more than make up for the slow burn in terms of track energy. As for the production side of things: as noted above, the right-panned plucky synth causes some panning imbalances. EQing the pluck could provide some more arrangement clarity in sections like 0:45-1:00, 1:33-2:03, and the return of the “Title Screen” motif at 3:12 – you might even have enough headroom left over to bring the bass up a couple dB. As it is, I’m not hearing clipping, pumping, or other overcompression artifacts, so this isn’t a deal-breaker for me in the grand scheme of things. I’m going to split the panel here with my first vote: I buck these NOs, too. As Larry mentioned, this one takes a few listens to grok. The production issues noted above are certainly worth exploring, but the arrangement is cohesive and there’s lots of creativity shining through on it. I say this is above board. YES

I honestly don't recall listening to this, I'm sorry but I just don't remember it. Ghost Castle's arp immediately cuts through and is recognizable. The melody from Ghost Castle that appears later on 0:45-1:00 is barely audible. During that part, I find that the right-panned synth pluck sound is overwhelming my focus and is distracting. I suspect this is for a few reasons: one being that it's panned (not hard right, but might as well be), and the second being it's frequency range is in that mid to high-mid range (~1.8k-2k kHz) that cuts through. I question if the synth pluck was supposed to be the melodic focus or not. It also helps when the melodic focus is center panned or close to center. And if you drive our ear to a melodic focus better, it would help alleviate the "wandering" sound that prophetik and Chimpazilla pointed out. No concerns an amount of source used here, adequate but not necessarily the smoothest listen with the time changes. There's a large lack of dynamic changes through the track that is making it tough to sit through. Yes, there are textural changes that help propel the piece forward with parts dropping out and being re-added or changed as it goes along. However, some softer or louder parts would help greatly. This by itself is not a dealbreaker and does not need to happen, but would improve it should you choose to revisit it. I feel like this one is close, but would need another go to pass. At a minimum I want to see a mix that let's us know what to focus on as a listener, and less distracting panning. NO

When the volume's up, this does still feel muddy, and I see how the delay/warbling effects can feel disorienting; I'm OK, but I can see why others would take issue with it, and those effects could be reduced without removing the overall sound it's meant to create. I like a fair amount of the sound design, though this still has a stilted feel, not helped in part due to the underwhelming claps, e.g. 1:42-2:38, as well as the bassline now getting pulled back too much, though I do hear it well enough that's it's genuinely contributing. It's not the most sophisticated piece, but my reservations weren't on the arrangement last time around, they were about the imbalances between the parts and that causing the piece to feel too meandering and unfocused. The finish didn't need to be grandiose, but it was flat and underwhelming; I'll chock that up to personal taste and not let that strongly color my opinion I understand the comments on the perceived lack of dynamics, but there's enough going on within a narrower curve, mostly from textural changes. Nothing about the rhythms and time signatures was throwing me off; for whatever reason, the busyness of this ultimately feels grounded to me, perhaps because I already heard the previous version. Same with the panning, nothing felt mishandled there to me. Arrangement-wise, very transformative and it creatively invokes the three source tunes, so I remain on board with it on that level. The sound design could have been more sophisticated in parts, but I want to be very careful that we're not too subjective here, when IMO this is OK with the production. I'd recommend looping this more and familiarizing oneself with the flow of it; to me, the writing's solid and I can better follow along with it now that the mixing isn't so odd. It's a solid mood piece and an overall cohesive enough piece of music to me. I buck these NOs; this is arguably too selective instead of permissive and what's here may have flaws but is more than cohesive enough to work, IMO. It's improved enough mixing-wise to push it over the line, and as much as I'm addressing potential issues, I want to be clear that the arrangement structure and creativity is actually there and the overall sound design and production are good enough for a hobbyist bar. YES

I didn't vote on the previous version so I'm coming to this fresh. From 2012-2025... that's a loooooong time to work on one arrangement! I am a huge fan of unique and varied time signatures. In this arrangement there are many changes in time sig which leaves me unable to find the beat consistently, leaving me feeling disoriented. There isn't a kick in some of the drum track, and in some sections there is only a top loop. At 1:33, a trap-like drum groove begins, with the kicks and claps each playing a busy and inconsistent pattern, and I am more rhythmically confused. None of this is "wrong" technically of course, but for me it means I cannot connect with this arrangement rhythmically at all, it's more of a random-sounding mishmash of instruments and drum sounds. Just trying to get a grip on the time signature changes, I hear 6/4 from 0:00-0:14, 7/4 from 0:14-1:00, 4/4 from 1:00-2:07 (at 1:33 there is one beat dropped, again at 2:07, giving one measure of 7/4 each time), 7/4 from 2:07-4:16 (outro). That is a lot of time signature change and most of it is not signaled at all, nor is it supported well by the drum groove. I agree with prophetik that lack of melodic/motivic content is hurting this arrangement, it makes the ideas harder to follow. Combined with the changing time signatures and busy/random drum track, the lack of a lead melody to focus on makes this even more nebulous for me. When there is a lead instrument such as at 0:30, it is hard-panned to the right. I'm not a fan of hard-panned leads, especially when there is not a countermelody or something to balance it on the opposite channel. The arrangement feels repetitive as it moves along, as the soundscape and instrumentation stay roughly the same throughout the piece. The drum sounds and writing stay the same during most of the arrangement. I don't feel like the trap kick, snare and clap fit well with the rest of the instrumentation which is more dreamy and whimsical. The drums are mixed very quietly with only the snare sounding audible enough to me. I really like the transition at 1:16 and the chords and arps that follow until 1:33. That section is beautiful and mysterious and feels cohesive to me. The delicate simple pattern in the background is keeping the rhythm for me and I can follow well in that section. The mixing isn't too bad overall, other than the kick, clap, percs and bass being too quiet in the mix, and again I'm not a fan of the hard-panning of the prominent plucky elements. There are many good ideas in this arrangement and solid synth choices, and I like the combination of these three themes, but the arrangement doesn't feel fully realized to me yet. I'd like to hear some more variation in the soundscape, even some unexpected ear candy or filter effects would help break it up. I'd like it if the drum sounds and writing made a bit more sense with the rest of the writing and instrumentation, and I'd really like to hear the drum groove support the time signatures rather than make them harder to follow. Some better transitions into and out of the various time signatures would help. The drum elements and bass should be brought up louder in the mix too. NO

opens with some wide synths. the kick rhythm is a little confusing as there's no beat here to hang your hat on, so it's not clear where the down beat is initially. the melody comes in at 0:24, and you're right, it is questionable. polytonality is a technique i recognize, but it really doesn't work here - it just sounds off-key outright. 0:49 is where the track seems to be more settled. there's a recap of the beginning with some low synth blurbs at 1:13, and those synths kind of step on each other since they're all in the same freq range. the beat picks up at 1:38 and this has a pretty neat vibe once it gets trucking. i'll admit i don't really hear the original in this section. 2:27's lead synth doesn't really make a ton of sense to the rest of what's going on around this section, and it's so highly embellished i definitely wouldn't have caught that it's a reference to the opening without calling it out. right after the main riff here, the track just continues hammering that one note for a pretty long time without significant adds. the melody comes back finally - again, pretty heavily ornamented - and then gets some weird notes around the 3:28 point before the track is suddenly done. so right off the bat - i think that the arrangement has legs. you've got some really creative concept work behind each part of the track (to be honest, probably too much - if a book is needed to understand a 4-minute piece, you're not doing enough as the arranger). there's a lot of padding that can be trimmed, and you need to work on transitions and the opening sections so that they're approachable and understandable. that said, the instrumentation isn't close to being there. if this is supposed to be using some retro sound chip, ok, but evaluating this as a pickup piece of music, the audio quality isn't up to par. there's buckets of free stuff that's better across the board out there, and separately there's a lot of mixology you can do to get better sounds out of the instruments you're choosing. i think that some serious time in the workshop discord would help a ton on this, and i think that some time spent finding ways to get better sound quality from all of your instruments is helpful too. you can do nostalgic with real synths and make it sound like a modern song still. NO

when this came up ~18 months ago, i voted on this with primary criticisms being the balancing, frequency overload in the low mids, and the arrangement feeling meandering due to lack of dynamics. opens with the ghost castle arp and a ton of really fun sfx work. some very industrial stuff is going on pretty far away, and the title screen's surprisingly chromatic melodic line comes in at 0:29. it's neat how well that works among a very spare background. the riff at 0:47 goes on for a long time and gets a little tiresome fairly quickly (that synth's delay effect was cool in small doses but is irritating with longer lines, especially since it's in one ear hard). percussion drops a bit going into the textural shift at 1:16 - there's some new drums here as well, which are pretty hard to hear (especially the kick). the aquaduct arpeggio with the delay effect is back in the right ear and it's way louder than everything else. it gets toned back later which is good. this continues to wander around with the aquaduct theme in the front for a while. i found this section to be lacking in direction still. there's a simplification at 2:07 alongside a time signature shift, and we're back to just the kitchen sink effects alongside the ghost castle theme for a bit. this section is neat with some of the counterpoint between the melody and counterpoint, but it feels underbaked both because of how thin it is here as compared to the drums chiming merrily along, as well as because it's the same synths as most of the rest of the song at roughly the same volume. it's hard to pull out that this is more or less important than other sections. i still find the transition at 2:37 confusing as well - it really sounds like the song suddenly ends, and there's no real prep or anything set up to come out of it either. the synth work immediately following that break featured a few shifts that i found made it easier to pick out what was the most important. the texture here also feels more fleshed out. i didn't like that the lead instruments for this section were mostly in the right ear instead of centered. there's some fun stutter effects on the leads later on also that i liked. i don't think my opinion on this has changed yet. i still don't like the weird cut at 2:37, i still think the middle third drags, and i still think the lack of dynamics is a negative throughout. i don't remember the panned lead instruments before, but i find that to be irritating as well (i found myself turning my head regularly to the right to 'hear' the lead better) - in fact i think the piece is over-panned throughout. from an arrangement standpoint, i think that you would be well-served by being more intentional bringing out the melodic lines you're trying to have us trace. you've got three sources, and tbh i think they work really well next to each other, but with that comes an imperative to be very intentional about how you emphasize and define what's where without losing the general song-form structure that you're using. the story here isn't as clear as it should be, and a big part of that is that the natural ebb and flow of a track isn't here due to there being little dynamics. i'm fine with a track that doesn't have a clear melody, but what is melody should be cohesive and readily apparent, and that's not happening here right now. i do think you've fixed the mix a lot - i remember before the bass being totally overwhelming above everything else, and then all your instruments were very tightly mashed against each other. i think the bass is probably a bit overcorrected, but overall i found the mix to be passable aside from the panning stuff. my concerns are mainly with the song form and arrangement elements. i have a lot to say here and it probably sounds like i hate it. i don't! i think there's some really neat concepts here, and a lot of overlapping back-and-forth stuff that reminds me a lot of old-school remixes that i loved. i just...i got done with the full listen a few times and just didn't remember a thing that happened in the middle of the piece outside of that panned synth being so annoying. that's not a good thing given the interconnected nature of this remix. the track doesn't go anywhere for an extended period of time. i actually think this is a fairly straightforward fix - just cutting some cruft out of the middle and emphasizing your melody more via non-delayed leads is probably enough. NO

your journey sounds significant, meaningful, and life-changing. i'm glad you're in a better place now. opens with a filtered flourish and some pretty wild sfx, and the track starts at about 0:27. there's a really chillout vibe to this initially. i like the choice to use detuned synths to fit the spacey feel. beat hits at 1:39 and there's all sorts of fun ear stuff going on. there's a lot of higher freqs that were a little much for my ears - mostly overtones, but the cymbals and snare both felt really bright. there's a pretty wild solo at about the 2:27 mark, and we finally get a break from the pretty thick beat at 3:15. there's some new percs that come in soon after - the contrast between the fairly clean percussion and the heavily filtered backing pad is distinct but a fun combination. we get some new stuff at 4:03, as there's some new ear candy in the build up to 4:27 and then to 4:36, and the increase in energy at 4:36 is great. you do a great job keeping a fairly static melodic line fresh and interesting through several minutes of consistent usage. there's a recap at 5:20 of the earlier vibe with some extra bits on top, and then we hit the outro material. a few pads after the 6 minute mark and it's done. this is a great arrangement! there's loads of unique stuff to keep it moving throughout. i think that i personally found the 2-3khz content in this to be bothersome on my headphones, but i don't think i'd have the same feel on other listening methods. i really appreciate the breadth of content throughout. nice work. YES

Hello! Posted this thread over 2 years ago ... right anyway, yes I am still writing this, I am having problems re writing chapter 3, as I intend to re write the first 3 chapters and work on 16 before posting 16 and the re written first 3 chapters all at once.