Vig

First thing I noticed is the mix has tons of information around 500Hz, and not enough above and below. The fast string part is by far the most audible as a result. You need more top and more bottom. The arrangement is pretty cool, if a bit simple at times. Some sections repeat too much without variation, but you do have a lot of transitions. I'd say it needs more variation though. NO

Wow. Cool. This thing is seriously dirty. I think the..idunno, dubstep synth is a bit overpowering at times. And by "at times," I mean all the time. The arrangement is pretty darn cool, but you need better balances among the parts. NO (resub plz)

The strings in the intro are quite bare. Whole notes can't be all you use on a string part, especially if it's the only thing going on. The drums are pretty cool, but this remix is a very straightforward cover. I do like the panning saw synth, but the rest of the track is a little too simple. NO

Yeah, this sounds like a fairly straightforward cover. It's extremely scooped. There's a ton of information below 60Hz, and not much between there and 1.5k. NO

Well how bad-ass is this? I'll tell you: Very. The pace and rhythmic placement is dizzying and electrifying. Great sonics and dynamics. No complaints. YES

That kick has some serious smack. I love the shimmer on the bell synths. The arrangement is great. I'm going to preempt Larry here and point out that the B-section here is a recognizable if rather liberal melodic reinterpretation of the B-section of the source, and not original writing. This is a pretty easy pass. YES

Wow. I mean..the execution is good, but do you know how weird it sounds to have deathmetal vocals bellowing over a happy cheerful tune? It's like being sent to hell and finding that Satan is wearing Groucho glasses; you realize you should probably be taking this situation seriously, but you can't stop chuckling. I can't vote on this yet..I just...my system can't process this.

Hmm. I really dug the intro. Thought the percussion showed promise. However by 1:30 it's clear there's not much variation going on, and the pattern is a bit kick-heavy. Breakdown at 1:45 is really inappropriate, dynamically. And then it's gone. You have some cool sounds you're using, but the arrangement isn't really much more than the original. NO

The gloomy mood is very effective. I really like it. The breakdown at 2:40 is a little clunky though. The pads aren't really interesting enough to be so exposed like that. My biggest issue however is this: I was really surprised that this was encoded at 192kbps. The highs, cymbals especially sound quite crunchy, I was half expecting this to be not much higher than 128kbps. Listening through again, I feel like the mix is just a little bit harsh overall. However, It's not a dealbreaker, so YES

Fun, energetic track. Plenty of dynamics keeping things interesting. A couple smallish gripes. The bass drone you use...it's really a bit overused. Add a little rhythm. Low frequencies can be really tiresome when they are constantly there. The dubstep bass isn't executed very well. Your LFO rates are kind of too jumpy, and not synched sounding. The breakdown hurts the momentum of the track as a result. The other thing, and this is the one that's actually a dealbreaker: the ending cuts off a second or two too soon. Can we get that fixed? YES (cond)

The piano is kind of bugging me. It's really noodly, but it's sequenced mechanically and doesn't sound like an organic improvisation. There's really no need for the piano to be doing that. Aside from that, I'd say the pads are way too bright at times. NO

This is cute and fun, but there are some writing quirks that really could be improved. The writing throughout is quite mechanical. The strings play too many whole notes during certain sections. Just because an instrument is a pad doesn't mean it needs to be rhythmically boring. There are also way too many parallel octaves and fifths (e.g. 1:50, throughout). It makes it hamonically really clunky and uninteresting, and this problem persists throughout. The other thing is that the beat is really generic, really repetitive, and doesn't exactly fit with the rest of what's going on here. NO

You could really spice up the writing if you had the strings and brass parts not play such long notes all the time. A little rhythmic variation goes a long way, especially considering a trombone player isn't going to want to play whole all the time and pass out. The other big issue hurting this track is that the arrangement seems to repeat without tons of variation. You've got to do something to increase the energy, especially because there's so little percussion or movement. NO

Lovely vocals. The first thing that sticks out is that the bells are way too loud. As TO said, the arrangement is very close to the original, and as such has very little in terms of movement or progression. There's no ending, and there's no dynamic curve. You really need to make it your own and add some spice. NO

I pretty much agree about the drums. Not very interesting. A pseudo-dubstep thang like this definitely needs more attention paid to the drums. The Bass synth is too loud. I'd say the whole track is lacking in spatial effects. You do a lot of note repetitions instead of delays and reverbs. Not bad, but it's a bit awkward. NO

Ok. it's not a big deal then.

Everyone else who submits has to wait too. It's not fair to everyone else if we allow him to volunteer a new version without waiting in line, effectively doubling the amount of time we spend on his track because we have to "revote." Your track is supposed to be done before you submit. This is the judging panel, not a workshop. The only way you get to rework your mix and cut in line is if we specifically ask you to (YES Conditional).

Alright. This is fine, it's just so...straightforward. There's really nothing grabbing my attention making me want to keep listening. The lead is really uninteresting and a bit too far up front. You need more nuance and energy with the arrangement and the sound to make this a keeper. NO

Holy crap I didn't hear it at first because it's so low and I'm listening pretty quietly right now, but yeah this is a dealbreaker. Fix that up and get back to us. No way can we pass it like this. NO

Because this is OCRemix, not OCLetsnotmesswithagoodthing. The source is cool. The execution of this remix is okay but it's nothing special; there's no dynamic progression, it's pretty much the same throughout. There's nothing too wrong with it, but there's nothing terribly creative or impressive going on either. NO

Are we doing this now? Allowing people to submit new versions once their shit's at the top of the queue?

That lead guitar is so thin but it has a weird crunchiness to it. The rhythm guitars sound pretty good, but all the leads are a bit back and dark. The arrangement is conservative but well executed. However the breakdown at 3:40 is too sparse. You need a little something like more complex rhythmic playing, or at least some kind of pad to fill it out. Close. NO

Cooooool. I loved Descent. This mix is solid and enjoyable. It's not perfect, so why don't I just rain on your fucking parade. -Some elements were dry, namely some of the synthesizer countermelodic parts in my opinion should have been further back, put there with delays, reverbs, etc. -The arrangement was a bit conservative, in the same key, same style, etc. Although there is enough added that it's not a dealbreaker. -The beat was really somewhat simple; boring even. It was so often just *kick* *snare* *kick* *kick* *snare*. You need some more 1/16th note elements in there to give the mix more forward momentum. Aside from that the track was quite enjoyable on the whole. YES

These guitars are the tits! The drums not so much. Guitars should be up in front of the drums in a track like this, but not quite so far in front. Also, drums need verb. As it is, the track sounds like some killer guitars with nothing else really going on. I don't think you even have a bass in there. It's fine if you want to make a bass part that mirrors the guitars exactly, but you still need that bottom end information....okay I stand corrected: there is a bass, it's just way too weak. More of everything but guitars. NO

Wow, I really like the reharmonization. I wasn't expecting it at all, and it's very emotionally moody. The arrangement kind of loses steam in the middle though. So much so that I had to keep myself from skipping ahead. Obviously the recording quality is terrible. While this kind of trashy piano sound can work as an effect, for a solo piano piece it really doesn't work at all. If you take another stab at it, please record some midi. This type of sparse piece could be really effective if you used a piano sample layered with a soft pad. I think you've got to rerecord it and rework the middle section for this to be passable. NO