Vig

This track has a lot going for it, so I hope you resubmit. The textures are great. I think the drums could have a bit more presence and variation, but it's not a gigantic problem. I love the feel and the instrumentation. My main complaint is that the track is really quite repetitive, especially until the (guitar?) part comes in around 2:50. that particular instrument sounds weak, especially contrasting with the beautiful pads and bells. Bring more dynamic variation and you have a killer track. NO

This is a fairly uninspired and straightforward remix of one of the more forgettable tracks in the Megaman soudtracks. At this point it seems like the composers had a sack of cliche's they simply arranged in different orders. EIT! Problems with the remix are that it's dynamically flat and unenergetic, and it doesnt do very much with the source. It's just vanilla. NO

The arrangement was pretty boring at first; harmonies akward and oversimplified, but the energy of the piece overshadows this as it goes on. None of my complaints really hold any weight. gotta say YES

Yeah, I'm hearing nothing but breasts here. This track is no doubt very liberal, but i'd say it's no moreso than some of Wingless' stuff, i.e. "All the Guys in One Girl." I think the biggest thing that throws off the listener is the time signature change. The feel ls entirely different in 4, but in spite of that, I'm hearing the orignal all over this thing. Aside from the melodic fragments that remain, what ties the remix to the original is the melancholy mood, which is quite reminiscent of the original. It's interpretive, it's liberal, but it's a great track with undeniable ties to the original, and I think we should allow it. YES

Would have been nice to give Dan arrangement/production credit.

Wait, what's the fuckin' problem? YES

Um, I'm pretty sure you're wrong, mmk?

larry, wtf?

listen to this then listen to the original. The remix is not as refined or well-executed. There's less going on harmonically, and the instrument textures are less colorful. The change at 1:50 is a step in the right direction, but aside from that 15-second interlude, this is uniformly inferior to the original. NO

that really high pitched...sound plays a lot of bad notes. in fact, pretty much half the notes it plays are off. The whole track sounds like its way back. need to bring up the melody and fill out the soundfield with some pads or something. aside from that, the arrangement is repetitive and doesnt really do anything terribly creative. NO

This is tough for me. The production has some very sweet things going on, and the instrumentation is reminiscent of infected mushroom. My main problem with this track is compositional: the arrangement is fairly limited, and the adaptation to 4/4 psytrance is like jamming a circular peg into a square hole. It comes off as forced and akward. The track would be better off if you wrote an original melody. NO

had to listen to this one a whole bunch of times. There are several points of consideration: -There's not that much to the original track. -The dynamics are fairly flat through most of the track. -okay mainly those two The original track is a very simple phrygian vamp with some very sparse melodic chunks here and there. The remix is not immediately recognizable because it is much much more busy, and the bass line is NOT in the phrygian mode, although the pads are. I'll recognize a note here and there. The more I listen to the remix versus the original though, the more I DO hear the relationship. While it's certainly on the liberal side if only because it's creating so much out of so little, I think it's within our bounds of interpretation. As for the dynamics, the energy gets high quick, and stays there for some time. until 2:30 in fact. Jill mentioned it, and it is a MUCH needed break at that point. Overall, I think the dynamic curve of the song is a weakness, but it's not a dealbreaker thanks to the fact that during the extended periods of high-energy, there are tons of different ideas presented to keep the listener involved. none of the other issues I have come close to bringing the track below the bar. The violin or whatever it is that plays "requiem of spirit" (sort of) sounds dry next to everything else. I have absolutely no problem with the tabla. I think the ethnic percussion is used well and to fantastic effect. The vocals are fantastic. Far from perfect, but well above the bar. YES also: anyone who digs this in the least should check out Shpongle

Filename says "Cerulean Dre" I was expecting some ill rhymes. The piano w/synth is sequenced too simply. half notes get boring, as do triads. Some of the textures work well, like the bass and th e pads, but the piano and the leads are really weak. the lead doesnt have any punch at all, it's buried under the synth which sounds too similar to the lead. main problem is that piano sequencing in my opinion. NO

quite groovetacular. You've got a decent dance track here, but from a listener's perspective, i think it needs a bit more. the saxophone section is great, the hand percussion section is fantastic. Problem with the track is that the musical ideas are snippets, and seem unrelated. there's a great deal of repetition and not a great deal of development. that and the ending sucks. like what i'm hearing, look forward to more. NO

low-heavy, lacks spectrum color due to a flat high end. aside from that, the sequencing, composition, and instrumentation are all sub-par, and while the track aint bad for a first attempt, you really need to apply some more polish and practice adding some more musicality to your writing. NO

most serious problem to address is the instrumentation. that lead is really crunchy, and the other parts don't add much in terms of color either. Aside from that, it's 1:30, it's mechanically sequenced, and underdeveloped. NO

busy composition which works on an aesthetic level. Biggest problem I'm hearing is the extreme degree of repetitition. This track consists of about two separate two-bar sectons that repeat ad-naueum. The only break is a fairly kick-ass guitar solo, but this is still over the same repeated riff. got to do more to vary it up. NO

the tracks without names are always the best. Hmm..I like the interpretation. I think the arrangement and performance are probably passable, although there are some rhythm issues. I'd say the production needs a bit of work. boost those high frequencies, and do something, anything, about those....trumpets? The balance is off, sometimes the rhythm guitar is too loud. Good start, needs some work though. NO

holy crap, I'm drowning! Someone throw me a rope so I can climb out of the reverb! Larry's right; those drums are awfully weak. The overall mix is skewed, maybe by all the 'verb. Some of the arrangement ideas are pretty good, but then you'll lift a segment straight from the original. I've heard enough. You've got to drop the reverb and fix the mix, bring the harmony parts out, and you've got to fix the drums. NO

Allright, Frank my man! Back at the top of your game. Classy and sexy. Rocking not one, not two, but three different keyboard instruments (acoustic & electric pianos, and B3) and to great effect. This track is immediately recognizable as a Diggi Dis track, and there's very little to complain about aside from the abrupt ending. YES!

oh boy....extended hi-hat intro..always a good sign of things to come. and Dr. Cossack slowly fades in. wow...it never really fades all the way in. There's a good deal of energy missing where the drums and low-mid frequencies ought to be. you really need to fill out the spectrum in a huge way. NO

there's a lot about this track that is quite interesting. The instrumentation is really interesting, and i think the approach you took, of building the track around an interesting instrumentation, has some merit. The crunchyness works, and i love the old indian guy samples. However, the arrangement leaves something to be desired. The groove is way too grating in the beginning to get away with being so repetitive. The track is repetitive in general, and the changes largely come from changes in instrumentation rather than development of musical ideas. NO

production first: there's some resonance in the mid-low range that gets distracting. It would be good to fix this. Arrangement. Larry, you managed to know what I would think, and still failed to benefit from my hypothetical judgement. This song has TERRIBLE medley-tits. There is NO direction at all! skip around the track, it's the same everywhere. As far as piano arrangements go, each interpretation is completely predictable, and to make it worse, none of them are developed at all, and the overall dynamic line of the track is completely flat. This is not OCR quality. NO to the remixer: i'm being overly harsh so the judges will see the error of their ways. what you've done isnt that bad, but you really ought to pick the melodies you really like and develop them, rather than doing the same interpretation over and over again on different melodies.

the mixing is terrible. rhythm guitar should be lower, i didnt realize there were strings until larry mentioned them, and I'm still not sure i believe there's a bass. NO nice guitar work though.

What did I just say about quantized solo intros? akward. After the intro though, the track has a fantastic energy. It's a bit on the repetitive side though. The writing is not at all complex, but given the style, i dont think it's that big a deal. I think you could do with a little more dynamic range. The one interlude is great, but after that it's pretty much straight through to the end. With a little more variation and a little less repetition, this would be a great track. borderline NO