Leaderboard

Just going to close this out with the same sentiments. Everything until 2:02's a superstraightforward cover with little interpretation beyond the adoption of this instrumentation, which itself is close to the source tune. Reconstruction/recreation's not a bad goal in a vacuum, it's just outside of our interpretive arrangement standards. I linked several melodically conservative arrangements in the writeup for this piece that still manage to still stand apart as distinct from the original music: https://ocremix.org/remix/OCR04414 Piano tone from 2:52-3:09 was too thin yet bright, which exposed that particular sample moreso than any of the other stuff like the bowed strings. That said, the energy of the track's strong and uses the samples well overall; very much a doujin scene-style track. If you're willing to rework the first half, this definitely could have a place here. We hope to hear from you again with another submission, even if it isn't a rework on this specific one. :-) NO (resubmit)

Agreed with Brad that this remix is more of a cover right from the jump, even down to the identical snare tone. The genre, instrumentation, tempo, arrangement, structure, modulations etc. are all the same as the source song. It's a very competent cover! But a cover for sure, all the way until 2:00, right after the original's loop point. The synth solo that follows at 2:04 is sick beyond belief, I love this so much. At 2:22, we are back to the source's chord structure but with another awesome solo (guitar) on top of it. This arrangement really takes off after the 2:00 mark! The soft piano breakdown is excellent, although the piano sounds very stiff and sequenced. After the piano, at 3:10, we are back to the verbatim source cover as in the first half of the piece. As Brad said, ending is solid. Brad is right, this is a super fun listen, and a very good cover, but it is too conservative too much of the time for OCR. If the part from 0:00-2:00 included some variations away from the source song, this remix would be a no-brainer YES vote. I'd love to hear it again with those variations made so it can be posted on OCR! NO

Slow burn 6/8 time, let's go! I'm not super familiar with Golden Sun's OST but every track I've voted on so far has been a real treat. To me, the track's cohesion is not in question - the voice clips (:00 - :30, 4:34 - 4:55) tie the intro and the outro together, the rest of the track courses through the chord progression of the source, and the outro includes the main melody via the chip. I can't count the chord progression as source use since it's too common (i - VII - VI - V, known at the Andalusian cadence). 1:47 - 2:05 is the first time we get some substantive source (the counterpoint arp line), and 2:06 brings the source melody in. 2:26 - 2:35 brings the counterpoint back, 2:36 - 3:12 adds the melody in the low-mid synth under the counterpoint. Lucas's sax (a welcome addition, and a great rest to give it the space!) embellishes the melody line from 3:12 - 3:33, then it revisits the material from the opening minute @ 3:34 - 4:10. 4:12 - 5:06 is definitely from the source, so let's add it up. 1:47 - 3:33 (106 seconds), 4:12 - 5:06 (52 seconds) = 158 seconds, or 41% of the track uses the source. Despite this, I think the callback to earlier material is a strong move, and the instinct is correct. It just isn't ticking the source use box for me. On the production side of the equation, the mix is choked for most of the sections. Multiple low-frequency instruments compete for the limited space (1:28 - 2:25 really defines this for me), which clutter up the groove being established by the drums. While I can hear and feel the drums, it just feels mired by the basses - more sidechaining (either with compression or dynamic EQ) is needed to get that groove back in there! This one is close, held back by a cluttered soundscape and not enough source. For me to sign off on this one, I'd need: the bass frequencies attended to (with more defined sidechaining or EQ), and something to tie the source into the track in the opening 90 seconds. I can only imagine how much time has been poured into this one knowing the dedication and focus you put on your tracks, VQ, and I know you are capable of getting this one across the finish line! NO (resubmit)

Begins with a heavily modified voice and some static effects. Around 0:30 a bright synth starts playing some scale-ish melodies that seem to hint at the main chord progression from the original (Em-D-C-B). A synth doing a potential variation of the main melody joins in on the second repetition with a kick drum rhytm and then a third synth starts playing a backing melody from the source. Additional elements keep being added over more repetitions, including a synth bass, pad and synth lead. The kick also has a fun effect where it becomes more present over time. It ends up quite chaotic but, as the elements were introduced one by one, it's still enjoyable and understandable. All of this leads to a "break" at 1:47 where there's less elements (hence the break) but the chaotic rhytm is kept. Ironically, less elements highlight some balancing issues. Bass/kick seem to be fighting for space, with the bass suffering the most as it's very hard to understand what it's playing (very wobbly sounding). I think at some points there's an additional synth bass doing some dubstep-ish flourishes but there's so much in there that it's not really easy to hear. Similarly, on the melody side of the arrangement, there's often 2-3 elements all clashing with each other. Around 2:25 there's a rhytm change into a straight 8ths bass line, welcome change of pace. Once again the mix feels busy, even when there's not that many elements there's a lot of clashes and things are hard to hear. Surprise sax at 3:14! Nice performance by Lucas, it's interesting that the sax line is doubled by synths, not sure it's actually necessary (given how busy the mix is already). Things start calming down and lead to a chiptune interpretation of the source for the end, with the modified voice ending the track. On the arrangement side, this is an interesting approach to a very simple source. Original track has only one noticeable melody and 2 backings that provide the chord progression, so it's not much material. Here, you do a nice job of bringing a lot of variety into a source that doesn't really have much. Fellow judge prophetik makes a nice point about how much source is actually on here, but I'd say my take is different. Scales starting at 0:30 seem inspired by the celesta-ish instrument from the source (playing some simpler scales), but we could argue if this one counts or not. However, said melody is played almost straight by the synth that joins at 0:59 until the break at 1:47 (although it gets drowned out eventually). Section starting there also features the same melody and continues there until 2:54 at least (with the main melody also being there from 2:35). Main melody returns from 3:04 and is kept on the sax solo until 3:33 at least. For the next minute of the solo there's not evident source usage IMO. Finally, 4:23 until 4:52 is also clear source usage. I'd say there's heavy source usage from 0:59-1:47 (48s), 1:47-2:54 (67s), 3:04-3:33 (29s), 4:23-4:52 (29s). Adding all of that there's 173 seconds of source usage in a 306 seconds remix, so 56%! As an aside, beyond calculator antics I do feel that the entire remix being based on the chord progression from the source (down to the B major) also helps since, at the very least, it's always echoing the mood of the original. On production there are heavy balacing issues. The track is often extremely busy, at times it feels intentional and it works (like from 0:59 to 1:47) but most of the time it simply feels like a couple elements are taking a lot of space and leave little for the rest. Generally, I'd say the drums are the main culprit, as they're loud and there's also a lot of reverb, which tends to take a lot of room. Bass is also another issue, they seem very mid heavy and that also takes a lot of space from the instruments doing melodies. That said, even if these issues were fixed I think you should also look at the balance between synth parts, there's many of them focusing on similar octaves so balancing them will be challenging. You could consider moving some melodies to different octaves to separate them easier. Overall, this remix has a really cool vibe and a very creative approach to a source that's extremely light on material. However, I think the mix needs a second pass focusing on clarity, right now it's just way too hard to grasp all the different elements going on, with the drums and bass often eating a lot of space. NO

Absolutely beautiful. Also incredible restraint in not just going full on Song of Storms here, hahaha.

OC Records is defunct now. We still sell some older albums on Bandcamp but we don't publish new work.

I say we should give Netscape Navigator 9 another shot.

In the shadows, we stay busy. ;-) Joining us as a Sage, we now have @Treyt, who's shown off a lot of skills, enthusiasm, and potential since his fateful forum post nearly three years ago! We're proud to announce some staff promotions with the twin magic of Sages @pixelseph & @paradiddlesjosh stepping up to become two of our newest judges! We had some fun internally joking that they were a package deal, yet I'm happy to say they both independantly have done well and proven themselves capable to help us out in this new capacity on the panel! We've also honored to have another judges panel addition in @jnWake, who cut his teeth in OCR way back and has massively grown since becoming a Dwelling of Duels regular! All three of the new judges should help us NO every VGM arrangement submitted to us with more speed, politeness, and class. ;-D Be sure to use our resources in the Workshop forums and our #workshop Discord channel and you may just get some feedback from our new staffers!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHmtY14z9kk This song is awesome, and I think has so much potential with updated instruments.

Hi, I've been listening since 2003-ish, lurking since 2006-ish, and am re-vitalized to start getting involved by my most recent Magfest trip. Hope to do some things, make some happies.

original's pretty upbeat in its own right. opening is very similar to the original, right down to the drum beat, tempo, and lead performance. this goes on for quite a while - i A/B'd the entire length of the original on this track and indeed it's the same across the board. so this already isn't something that we'd really have a place for given the lack of original arrangement over the first half of the track. right at 2:00 we get a new section, which is clearly inspired by but isn't really arranging the original. it's a sick synth solo though! i'd like to hear more verb on it, it's pretty dry right now. guitar has a note or two that's funky in the chord that it's over, and then hits a fun chord at 2:47 before a hard cut break to the piano playing the melodic material (in a non-idiomatic way, you really should find ways to break up the left hand's block chords and velocitize the entire thing). there's another run-through the original's last section and opening, and it's done. ending is solid. i think this is a fun listen! i'd be happy to find this on youtube somewhere, but it doesn't meet the standards for arrangement that we require here. this is more of a cover with a little new section in the middle, which is hip in and of itself, but we'd expect more adaptation of the original's melody, chords, or other elements. i don't think this track would fit here without extensive modifications, but maybe future arrangements would fit more! take a look at the submissions standards i linked above (section 4 is the big one for you, the rest aren't as applicable for this) and hopefully we'll hear from you again. NO

boy those pads in the original are noisy. opens with a heavily modified voice clip and some swelling noise pads. we start to get the chord structure outlined at 0:48 in the plectral bell instrument. there's a lot of sound design going on in the build that starts at 1:10 - it's mega buzzy, but there's some really neat sweeping concepts coming in there as it gets bigger and bigger. percussion doesn't have much in the way of body in this build. 1:28 it starts to feel like it's arrived and the bass switches to a more consistent rhythm. bass elements in here are pretty dense and overpopulated so it's hard to really feel a beat. there's also not really that much that's the original in this entire first two minutes that's not just the chord structure. we get a big shift at 1:47 in timbre. bass element has a ton of wooble on it so it's hard to really hear what it's playing. the timbre shifts again significantly at 2:25, including more trance hats and a big snare alongside some more heavily automated synths. i hear the first melody that i've heard in the entire thing at 2:35 in the low synth element - lots of movement on that tone which is neat. it's immediately buried under the ascending line that comes in right after that. we do get a bit more at 3:03 before another big shift to the sax. the stuff in the lower octave is a bit blatty but this setting works well for lucas's tone. i like the duet section as well as doubling his lines with the synth. the sax lines are heavily modified but do outline the melodic material roughly - it's pretty transformed however. the chorale section near the end around the 4:00 mark is a neat idea to layer into this - logical progression to get there but also very different from most tracks in a similar style. there's some gameboy stuff and then an outro with sfx. overall i think the first third is heavily disassociated with the rest of the track. everything before about 1:47 really feels like a totally different track other than the chord progression. i also wasn't really feeling the initial section at 1:47 - the bass is so hard to understand what it's doing due to all of the pitch modulation on it, and there's so many bass instruments that it all just gets lost. once we're through all that, the track really starts to find identity once it starts to get melodic material around 2:30. from there on out, i think there's a lot more cohesiveness in the approach and you scope through a bunch of different timbres without losing the voice. so i do think that more work is needing to be done on the first two plus minutes to tie it all together more. i believe that not bringing the melodic material in until well after two minutes in is part of this - you need a common thread to tie it together, and the ascending scalar riff you use mostly in the middle of the track doesn't seem to be enough. to be clear - there's not 50% source usage in this track. i am not going to count a four-bar descending chord structure as source, it's too common of a progression. i hear melody at least occasionally between 2:35-2:55, 3:04-3:33, 4:12-4:24, and 4:33-4:52 (78 out of ~304 seconds, 26%). i'd consider additional connections between 2:35 and 4:52 if i was feeling really stretchy and positive, but most of this is chord-based and not melodic or motivic. to pass, i'd want to hear at least one clear declaration of the melodic material earlier in the track. if you'd submitted just from 2:35 onward, i might consider that enough source, as a rough example. overall i also hear a ton of conflict in the lower ranges. there's a lot going on next to one another all the way through the freq spectrum, but especially down in the bass elements. i think this is a lot closer for a first shot than most of your tracks have been! but it's still not there yet. to recap - EQing, cohesiveness, melody usage. NO