Vig

funkified. the guitar's clearly bring the thing alive. It's definitely a jam track, but it never becomes dull, it keeps moving. I like the vocal clips, although i think they could have been integrated a bit better with a fadeout, because the fuzz from the samples sticks out when the clip ends. great stereo work, although i think some of the guitars sound a bit dry. i would have thrown on some intense stereo delay on the guitar around (:35) this track definitely keeps you moving. YES i wonder what's so significant about 4:20 am?

enjoyable remix overall. The remixer certainly has a good understanding of dynamics and composition. there are some problems holding it back firstly, the mixing needs work. even in the quieter sections, some instruments arent as loud as they should be, in my opinion. (piano, drums) more objective is the issue that in the louder sections the sound becomes quite cluttered. starting around the 2 minute mark the lead isnt loud enough and the harmony brass is either too loud or too busy. the other problem is that there are a couple of off notes. (2:15, etc) the melody is played correctly, but the busy harmony brass line plays a clashing note. the mix is good, and it could easily pass, buti it's only about 75% there. tweak it a bit and it's gold. NO resubmit plz

:11...what? yeah the problem with this is taht it's very mechanical. it's over quantized, and while the dynamics arent constant thru the song, it sounds like you drew the velocities section by section, rather than note by note. the volume jumps around very suddenly. Feel the love, push out the jive. Play it live, then take five. NO

Yuk yuk yuk!

Zirconium is right...that..percussionesque...sample.. sounds really bad. the trumpet also ought to be louder. the groove in this song is really enjoyable. it's got a good sound. unfortunately the vamp repeats too much. once the bass comes in, it doesnt really go anywhere. oh jeez, a big WTF on the ending. just sounded like it was about to get going. NO

the mastering in this mix is really bad. the levels are all off, the sound is really flooded often times, the leads are too soft, the ...strings are too loud. there's too much reverb in general. needs to be reworked. NO

the piano sample is really bad and the performance is terribly unnatural. in fact, all the samples are really bad and all the velocities are really unnatural. this should have got the form letter. NO

I suppose this would qualify as a "Please Resubmit."

if you're getting antsy, why not vote on one of the four other remixes that you havent voted on?

That's it, larry. We're cutting you back to ONE schala mix resubmit per week, K!??

there are some problems with the mixing. the strings have a very strange attack...the sample just isnt very pleasant. reverb could have helped. there are some drum issues, too much reverb or compression on the kick. The biggest problem is still the arrangement. I told darengen this a few weeks ago when i chose not to resubmit it for him. The arrangemetn starts out alright, but then it completely drops to almost nothing 1/4 of the way in, and spends the rest of the song slowly building, but way too slowly. it pretty much isnt going anywhere. The arrangement is very anticlimactic. Dynamically the arrangement just isnt well thought-out. NO

It was a difficult decision. I would have liked to hear a rerecording because it frankly would have been entirely possible to do a take without slips without losing the desired emotion. however we didnt get a rerecording, and the mix DOES have lots of expression and dynamics that so many remixes lack. A close call, but certainly an enjoyable track.

This was a tough one. first of all, i think the problems with recording quality and sus pedal are completely negligable. second of all, adressing some behind-the-scenes complaints of bad notes or chords...these complaints are frankly unfounded. certain tense intervals are used sparingly and appropriately. To condemn these choices would be to condemn many top 19th and 20th century composers and virtually all the best jazz musicians of the past 50 years. the chord progressions and voicings are really very well done. The chord progression demonstrates a really thorough knowledge of theory, and great tensions are used to very powerful effect. such a display is really rare on OCR, so it makes the problems with this mix that much more painful. The problem being that the arrangement is really poorly thought-out. the first 3/4ths of the mix has a very consistent, very plodding pace. there's nothing wrong with doing a slow solo piano piece, but you need to give yourself more space. relax, take it easy, and mix up the pacing a bit. every beat drops like a hammer, and it gets very tedious. Further showing lack of forthought into the arrangement is the frantic section at 3:08 which comes virtually out of nowhere. no buildup, no preface, it's just there. for some reason. You really need to keep in mind where you want the song to be going throughout the whole take, so you can slowly but steadily build the mix up to where you want it to climax. Don't get me wrong, there IS build in this remix, but it's oh so subtle, nearly stagnant and certainly tedious until 3/4ths thru you it's like you say "OSHIT WHERE DID THE TIME GO? GOTTA CRANK IT UP!" Listen to the Koln Concert by Keith Jarrett. Pay attention to how smoothly he gets from point A to point B. it's amazing then, to realize what a huge difference there is between the two points. you didnt notice as he was building up the dynamics. think through the song a little better, map it out, plan to give yourself perhaps three minutes more..hopefully enough time to better explore your ideas and give yourself plenty of space to build the remix without rushing it. and please, please, please, rerecord and resubmit. NO

What? I really have no idea what you are trying to say here. could you clarify?

From now on i'm calling it polka just for spite.

Thread: "Continue Voting on ANY disputed YES's?" disputed meaning...not unanimous..

I don't mind. However, is everyone going to contest votes they don't like? I don't really feel this is one of those special circumstances. This one isn't that questionable imo. But if you guys want to continue to the vote, that's fine. I believe the policy is if a mix is not unanimous, first to six wins. i dont think a specific request is required. And of course it's questionable, otherwise the vote would be unanimous [/obvious]

Fair enough.

if that isnt clear, or satisfactory, please by all means, out with it.

I used the term "techno" because that seems to be the word most commonly used to describe the broad category of music the judges are (allegedly) biased against. seeing as how my comment regarding escalation and climax is a common one when judging said broad category of music, i used this example, along with the word "techno" to respond to zyko's comment about genre limitations not only with singular regard to this mix, but in response to the broad and frequent cop out (that some genres dont lend themselves to escalation, climax, whatever)wherever they may be. Doing so was an explaination of why our percieved "bias" may not be that. This comment and my stance is not limited to "house" music, (which IS in fact, right in the title of the mix) so I used the frequently used broader term "techno." Perhaps the preceeding explaination of my usage will redeem my credibility in "gecko's" eyes. Maybe, just maybe, the word "Techno" got my point across with regard to a wider variety of musical styles than "house" would have. Who knows?

Why would i bother "figuring it out for myself" if you're the only one it bothers? I hardly consider myself an electeknico expert, so I dont mind if you correct my terminology if are trying to be helpful. But in this case you clearly werent. at any rate, i put very little value on the classification of music. I think it's very limiting and does a disservice to the music itself. I certainly dont care to spend hours learning differences between the the dozens of varieties of Electeknico that Xelebes could rattle off for me. I don't see the point. My comment remains valid regardless of what you want to call it. Good techno, house, trance, dance, electronica, speedcore, ambient, acid dance, monkeys smashing eachother in the head with rocks, all have climaxes in one form or another.

care to give the correct blanket term, then? While telling me i'm wrong might be satisfying, it's not exactly helpful unless you have a suggestion for how i could communicate more clearly.

Well...all the techno that i listen to has a climax, the songs just arrive at the climax much more gradually. I dont think we should excuse a mix from being dynamic because it's techno. especially because good techno IS dynamic. at any rate, the lack of a climax didnt bother me nearly as much as the inclusion of an anticlimax.

See, this is why I don't read the submission emails.

Yeah, it's a real shame, cause this is quite an enjoyable track, but it's definately a cover. NO