Vig
-
Posts
2,317 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Articles
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Vig
-
-
Agree with larry about the trombone in the intro. Doesn't fit well, though it's cool later on. Mixing is great, performances are great.
This is a great example of an arrangement that stays pretty close to the original in terms of structure and form, but adds plenty of personality with careful arrangement and musical performances.
Great track.
YES
-
The orchestration is really pretty messy. The percussion, strings and brass are way too busy all at once, and it's just a wash. For one thing, you almost never would hear percussion so busy for so long in orchestral music. It's also mixed way up. The timpani drowns out the strings. I'd start by overhauling the percussion.
NO
-
Cool energy. However, the leads are buried. This is partially the mix, but I think it's also the sound design. Your lead synths don't cut, they are a little too washy. I really love the arrangement, but the leads are buried, and the mix needs more meat and body.
No
-
I can't begin to list all the things wrong with the title of this track.
Anyway, this track is very lo-fi, which is cool in small doses, but over the course of this track I admit it gets a bit tiresome. The kick needs more punch, the bass needs more beef. The snare is also really weak. For this genre the drums and mixing in general are really important, and this track is just lacking in energy.
NO
-
Is my download screwed up, or does this track start too late? It just cuts in in the middle of a note.
Really dig the triplet feel; was not expecting it, and it was a pleasant surprise. I'm really digging the vibe. It's very moody and slightly disconcerting in a mysterious kind of way. Biggest problem I'm noticing though is that It's awfully repetitive. The drums and rhythm section in general don't change a lot at all, to the degree that the melodies just sound slapped on because they aren't interacting with the rest of the instrumentation.
Great vibe, needs some help in the groove arrangement.
NO
-
Short and sweet. I didn't even really notice anything about the mixing the first time around because the arrangement had me so captivated. The artist has managed to successfully blend pitch dark harmonies with electronic elements. Definitely one of the more evocative submissions I've heard in a while. Tense.
YES
-
The intro could have been half the length. Should have been half the length. It's an unaltered cover of the original, and the marimba doesn't really keep my attention past the first few bars.
Other than that the song is great. Pretty well mixed, conservative arrangement, but accentuated with nice performances. What happens at the end though? There's no ending. I think you should really add a vamp out, or something to bring down the energy. Maybe one final verse after the flute solo. It sounds like you cut out in the middle.
You've got a great start here, but you need to trim the intro, and add an outro.
NO
-
The intro is not great, mostly because of mechanical sequencing. But then the cross stick came in, and that WAS great. The lushness of the soundfield is so juicy and sweet.
Sometimes it gets a bit crowded with the rumbling underneath. Short and sweet..
Man I really want to pass this, but the intro/piano is so mechanical, and because the song is so short that ends up being a sizable chunk of the experience.
Please fix it up, cause you've got some really nice stuff going on.
NO
-
So what's really distracting me in this mix is the bass. I listened to this and the OST back to back, and the OST bass sounds way better. Here's why: your bass is playing an octave high, and there's a ton of energy in the 100-200Hz range, which is too high. try dropping the bass part by an octave, that might fix the problem for the most part.
No
-
I'm not terribly familiar with the source but I was able to recognize it peppered throughout.
Look. This track is really freaking good. This is what metal is supposed to sound like. It's crisp and full and dynamic and it never gets boring. This is an easy call.
YES
-
The new kick is still not genre-appropriate. It should have more body and less attack. But whatever, I'm not gonna call that a dealbreaker.
I really like the writing and the energy. I think where this track loses steam is that the arrangement goes on too long with the same groove. You use similar ideas to mix it up, such as stutter edits, filter sweeps, shredding solos, etc. These ideas are all cool the first time I hear them, but then you keep using the same few ideas, and they get predictable and lose their impact. Close, and this track has a lot of potential, but I would get rid of some of the ear candy and make sure the arrangement keeps your attention.
NO
-
Dig the arrangement, though it loses some steam at the guitar solo. You could interject with more elements in the background to keep things moving a bit. Once the drums come back in the guitar is buried.
I think the arrangement is rock solid, but the mix is a wash of midrange. I think this is mostly a guitars + reverb issue, but there are lots of steps you could take to carve each part out a bit better. You've got so much low-mid information: guitars, accordions, harp, flute, etc. I'd also consider beefing up the 70-120 hz range of the bass.
Please tweak the mix a bit? Great track.
NO
-
It's a closet; start by hanging some clothes then see how it sounds.
-
I'm not too down on the mixing like larry, but I do think the arrangement is a bit cluttered at times, while other times there are stark breakdowns that kill the momentum. I think more attention needs to be paid to where the song is headed.
NO
-
-
Just for the sake of being different, I'm going to not complain about the mechanical sequencing and instead cite the fact that this sounds a whole lot like the original. Same tempo, same feel, the main difference is that there's no instrumentation beyond piano.
Despite that, I'll say that you do some pretty cool part writing. Your harmonies are really cool, well embellished without being over the top.
NO
-
Much appreciated guys. This year was extremely busy working on Zedd's recent debut album Clarity, and it was really a pleasure. In my free time I've managed to finally finish two videogame remixes (for the first time in years and years) plus a number of original tunes, so I look forward to showing my face around here again in the near future.
-
The production is really slick and the groove is really cool. The problem is that the original is really not super relevant to the track. You've slowed it down from the original, and honestly the chords and melody are sluggish and out of place at this tempo. The track would probably be better if you subbed out the original song for some original harmonic and melodic material that you wrote yourself and that fits better to the pace of the track. As it is, the chord progression is plodding and the melody is pretty forgettable in this context.
NO
-
Oh my, so many YES BORDERLINEs.
Groove is cool except for the piano. It's not in the pocket rhythmically, it's mixed dry and forward so it sticks out in a bad way.
The triangle lead is too static and piercing a sound to be playing so many sustained notes. The bass is also pretty generic sounding, but that didn't bother me as much.
I really dig the reharmonization and the trumpet. More trumpet, less boring triangle.
Okay now I see why there are so many close votes. There are several really great harmonic ideas, but the arrangement as a whole is a bit straightforward and unvaried. The trumpet is really cool, but the triangle and the piano are pretty bad.
I think you gotta swap some sounds and make the piano groove better.
Great start though.
NO
-
Crazy writing. Love the melody and chord progression. Great foundation, but you've got some serious medlytits going on. The drums never change even from section to section when you're changing songs entirely. There's no rhyme or reason to the different sources. It just goes from one to another with no overall flow.
NO
-
The panning in the beginning really threw me for a loop. The flute in the very beginning is too quiet and dull, and should not be panned so hard left. Reverb that only comes out of one channel sounds extremely unnatural, which doesn't make sense for this type of song. The violin lead has the same problem. You're going for an organic orchestral sound; you really shouldn't be hard panning things.
The mix suffers from various elements being way too emphasized while others are tucked too far back. I'm not sure what's going on with the piano breakdown, but it needs a bit more context.
A song is like a story; you want it to go places, but you want to have some idea how it got there otherwise you're David Lynch.
NO
-
Some mixing gripes first,
Snare is dull. No snap or body either. The bass is boomy without having any sub. The guitars are also pretty boomy to the point of smear. the drums and guitars sound somewhat muted because they are wet and a bit dull, but then you have the piano come in dry and in front and it sounds jarring. There's really just way too much low midrange in this song in general.
The arrangement is pretty good if not for a bit of medlytits, but solid. Timing issues pervade though.
I'd really like to hear more cohesive mixing.
NO
-
I think a brighter reverb is in order. Maybe just cut the verb return around 250Hz. I like the body of the piano but the reverb gets really muddy.
The arrangement is pretty cool. Tells a story. Perhaps a bit long but It's a cool track.
The biggest problem with this track is the timing and phrasing. The timing is extremely choppy and inconsistent. I appreciate that it wasn't performed to a click, and the tempo fluctuates on purpose, but even taking that into account, the rhythm is quite out much of the time. Perhaps a little manual quantization could fix this problem without sucking the life out of it?
NO
-
There are some mixing issues, but I think the main problem holding this one back is the lack of dynamic like Palp said. The form is better thought-out than many medleys, but the energy is near constant, which makes the individual sections unmemorable. In a case like this you might be better off using one source melody and spend more time playing around with the energy of the track than worrying about combining sources smoothly. This track is plenty smooth, not very dynamic.
NO
*NO* Turok 2 'Port of SHRED - Turok Meets Metal'
in Judges Decisions
Posted
I remember this game. Isn't this the one where you have that gun that shoots a bug or something that burrows into the guy's skull then explodes?
Great arrangement. Lots of energy, never gets boring, and your guitar chops are awesome. What's killing this mix is the mixing, particularly the guitars. There's way too much low-midrange mud. You need to bring up the presence in the guitars and trim down the lows. Play this mix back to back with a really good metal mix, like some Opeth or something, and it's easy to hear what you've got to tweak. As it is, it's just so muddy, but I would hate for a track this tight to not get on the site.
NO (please resubmit with mix tweaking)