Vig

Nice demo. it doesnt go anywhere, unfortunately, and it relies too heavily on sample quality. the samples are the biggest thing going for it. the composition is very straightforward. pretty much no new ideas, and no direction. NO

okay. the vocals. let me say i think you have a good voice. certainly better than mine. but there are some aspects of the vocal part that dont work so well. it sounds like oftentimes you will just slightly miss the pitch, and on the longer notes you start the note off and then adjust the pitch as you hold it. the intonation is a persistent issue. it sometimes sounds like you are singing below your range, and it sounds strained. the last vocal problem is that the backup vocals are usually a bit too prominent and busy. they sound right up front with the lead, and it is sometimes overpowering. the backup vox also often sings some harmonies that seem...forced or unneccessary. these problems alone arent huge, but they make the vocals sound a bit amateurish. the instrumentation is pretty good, but it has a few problems. that saw synth can get grating, especially at sections like 2:35, which i find to be horribly aggrivating, all the way through 3:10. very little musical value here. apart from that, the drums are pretty constant thru the whole song; i would have liekd to hear some dynamic change in the quieter sections. it's a good idea and a decent mix, but there are some problems that need fixage. plz resubmit. NO

very slick. unfortunately it has very little to do with the original. damn shame. NO

pretty good. Definately not groundbreaking in any way, but it's built Ford tough, that is to say, it's a solid thang. hope to hear zircon branching out in new directions and taking more risks in the future. YES

Shortest liontamer vote ever.

perhaps a no override?

the intro doesnt have me jumping up and down with anticipation. there's NO harmony and the string sample is ugly. if you want a solo piano section to be effective, you need harmony. this mix contains just about every techno remix cliche that i can think of. there is a basic lack of harmonic sense in the bassline. there is no depth, it's just an ugly one note bassline with sections of the melody pasted over randomly. this should have got the form letter. NO

excellent. the samples arent great, but the execution is. the samples are clearly secondary to the singing, which is excellent. The interludes between verses are well-composed. this mix is damn good. YES. but i'm not entirely satisfied with your translation maybe i'll come up with my own.

this is definately a close call. the flute isnt well recorded, but it's cool nonetheless, as are the vocals. i think the song is about 80% there, but i have a few complaints. the lesser of which is that the piano plays a note that i really dislike at around 2:30. i know it's in the original, but in the original the major change is supported by the harmony, here, nothing. my bigger suggestion is that the development of the track be more upwards than linear. sure there is a dynamic expansion, but it seems like the mix switches from one idea to another, never building upon the ideas. for example, the flute is abandoned after 2 minutes and never heard from again. if more previous ideas were used throughout the mix, at least during the climax, it would have been more...well...climactic. as it is, the climax is a bit disappointing. it would be better with the flute, and perhaps busier strings to fill up the space. i think it's good, but i think it could easily be better. NO

this is by no means terrible, it's relatively easy on the ears, but there are some simple problems that give off an amateruish impression. the trumpet in the beginning hurts, the synths arent bad at all, but the bigger problem is the arrangement. it seems thin in most places. you sound like you're trying to create a denser scene, and the instrumentation sounds thin. as far as actual composition of the song, the formula of the song seems to be, "play 4 bar theme....repeat....change lead instrument, repeat, change 4 bar line, repeat. change lead instrument...repeat. that combined with a couple of bad notes equals a NO

THe playing is pretty decent, although some of the improvization rubs me the wrong way. As it is, this can't pass because the arrangement, while polished, is too straight forward and short. develop more please. NO

the arrangement IS pretty damn good..the execution is a bit off.. The most obvious problem is the samples, which are ungood. We dont demand gigasamples, but we need a bit better than this. the instruments sound lifeless. contributing to the above problem is that i think the tempo of the song is a bit too high...either that or the instruments are just sequenced too frantically. a real piano can only play the same note in succession so quickly...lots of instruments, the piano, drums, mallets, play very fast parts that sound quite robotic. i'd be interested to hear how accurately those parts were sequenced pre-quantization. i'd like to hear a resubmit, but for now my advise is slow it down, get some better samples, and work on making your sequencing sound more natural and human. NO

i liked the extended introductory section. the acoustic guitar works well, the piano that comes in works well..at the 2 minute mark i have the impression that this is going to be a really epic piece. the metal section comes in with little preface...the drums are REALLY weak. i think for this section you really need to kick up the bass and drums and rhythm guitar. The drums continue to sound terrible. this is partly because of the sample, but the sequencing is also quite unnatural, especially during the metal sections. the drums definately need some tinkering. on the whole i think the song dies out early and kind of fizzes out at the end. the drums just disappear. the swirling distortion guitar is cool but it isnt utilized well. I feel like this song has the opportunity to pick up lots of power and momentum that it just doesnt take advantage of. It could be really epic, but for now, NO, listen to http://www.ocremix.org/detailmix.php?mixid=OCR00744 (which this mix reminded me of) work on usuing and building upon your momentum, and resubmit.

<rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrip>

Holy excessive reverb, batman! it's really just too much. the instruments are muddy, mushy, dirty, all other things wet. aside from that, the arrangement is awfully repetitive for a mix that's less than 3 minutes long. there's a rather lengthy intro which i would consider quite empty...not minimalistic, which usually implies the presence of effective melody or atmosphere or something, it's just empty. you need to come up with some new ideas to make the mix more interesting. and please cut down the reverb. NO

This is a painfully obvious NO the problems with this mix are so glaring and crippling it pains me to have to list them. I think i'll do it in order of appearance, K? 1. The saxophone is VERY flat. It just hurts to listen to it, the whole song thru. Guys, next time you record something, remember to tune up first. 2. The guitarist has poor tone. aside from possible equpitment shortcomings, this is mainly the result of the guitarist picking too stiffly, like he's trying to kill his guitar. ick. it's especially evident in the begginning. 3. The bass consistently plays a bad note every time thru the verse. the first time is at :32. It plays a blues change, it goes to the 4. The rest of the band, and the song, do not. The bass player makes this screwup each time through the chorus. it's embarrasing. 2.5. The guitarist has no rhythm, and makes LOOOTS of rhythm and note clambakes like at :34, :36, :47, etc. 4. The organist has really bad timing. I would say he struggles to stay with the drummer, but i dont think he's really trying. Maybe that's harsh. He's not ALWAYS off, but there are some egregious offenses particularly around 1:41-2, 2:37, 3:04. Aside from the clear mistakes, the rhythms he comps are often poorly chosen and repetitive in my opinion. 1.5. The sax plays notes incorrectly and at the wrong time. :54 (slip) 1:08 (wrong note [repeated mistake]) 2:15 (off rhythm). Really just needs to tighten up. 2.75. The guitar solo is really sloppy. i refuse to believe that this only bothers me because i play guitar. i mean, 2:29, 2:35, 2:52, 3:00+, come on! off rhythm, off pitch, repetitive bends, doesnt hit the notes, please tell me i'm not the only one who hears this! I wont even get into my qualms about production or arrangement. This mix has serious performance problems. The sax and guitar need to tune up and tighten up, The bass player needs to wake up and stop hitting the same WRONG change every damn verse, and the whole band needs to play the way a BAND is supposed to: TOGETHER! I really think larry should reconsider his vote. This kind of sloppy performance has no place on OCR.

Big ouch, right there. And it shows. repeats with little thought put into arrangement. NO

this is a damn shame, because the performance and recording are top notch. but it's a cover, not an arrangement. damn shame. NO

the biggest problem with this mix is clearly the sound quality. GM just completely ruins it. It's a ballad and it relies on harmony and beauty rather than complexity. As of yet, the beauty is an issue. I think the arrangement is good, the only slight changes i would make are to add some kind of ambience or low-level strings to the middle section with just piano and violin, and to generally punch up the energy past 4 minutes. i think these changes could be quite easy. The sound quality is definately holding it back. Please get someone to take the midi and rework the samples. NO

this mix is full of all kinds of techno remix cliches. i dont really see the appeal that everyone else sees. There's nothing wrong with making a techno mix out of a song of a completely different genre, but there was very little effort made to make the original work in a different genre. this mix is essentially the original with a techno beat. it's really very little more than that. there are some interesting synths added, but there's no arrangement. original chords + 4 on floor + groove synths. you could superimpose any chord progression and the piece wouldnt lose anything. arrangement please, not original with tacked on drums. NO

cool stuff, but barely has anything to do with the original. NO

this is a YES great arrangement. Everything comes together quite well. The dynamics are masterful, the instrumentation is arranged perfectly to fit the mood, and the harmonic alterations made to the original are subtle yet smart enough to make the song profoundly emotional. Great work. My biggest complaint is some of the mixing is a bit unbalanced, the lead brass could be more present. oh well.

ok. so this mix is six minutes long. perhaps four of those minutes are exactly the same. the 1/8th note pulsing thing gets reeeeally annoying. but it's inconsequential because really, the mix just doesnt have enough ideas to pass. the title theme repeats...and repeats...and repeats...nearly identically through most of the 6 minute song. it never goes anywhere. not to say the mix is all bad. The bassline is funky fresh, and the ELP and strings interlude is excellent. but in order to pass this thing needs to do more than merely slapping these ideas together, it's gonna need some kind of direction. NO

the recording is good. the EQ is not. the top is definately absent. This is particularly noticeable during the guitar solo. aside from the EQ, the arrangement is a little bit straightforward. the song is only 2:42, and yet the form repeats twice almost identically, then there's a completely unspectacular guitar solo, then end. nice demo, lets fix the eq and introduce some slightly more sophisticated arrangement ideas, then we'll talk. NO

way too much reverb. on top of that the mixing is unbalanced. the flutes are too loud, i cant hear anything else. clipping at 1:15. the strings in the back play a cool rhythm part, but i cant hear it most of the time. all the samples sound bad because of too much reverb. especially the percussion. i think that's enough. NO