Jump to content

Harmony

Members
  • Posts

    1,081
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Harmony

  1. Wow, the balance between the guitar and the ambient elements is beautiful. From the first time that I hear them at 0:48, the vocals work wonderfully. This is especially true when the male ahh pulls the mix back from what sounded like an outro at 3:48. And how sweet is the brief guitar riff at 2:53? Flute, guitar, chromatic stuff…everything screams Seiken Densetsu and which makes it all gel for me.

    While I do agree with some of the criticisms regarding the intro/outro, and perhaps the need for some selective reverb, this mix is very cool and thoroughly enjoyable Zyko. Pulling out a tune like this takes a certain type of musical courage that I think I need a little more of in my own work. I’m not referring to the courage to stand up to the inevitable criticism, or to intentionally keep a guitar “11 cents” out of tune. I mean the personal courage required to have a musical goal in mind, to craft and perform the piece and then to sit back and take it for what it is. I for one would have probably tweaked, equalized, pitch-shifted and quantized my way into a cookie-cutter masterpiece; an achievement that I don’t think should be anyone’s goal.

    Nice work. Zyko ++

  2. Really enjoyed the production on this. The FX and sparse instruments during the first 1:42 really feel like Doom and serve as a good start to the dynamic build that climaxes with the rock section at 2:51. Before 2:51 we get some slick FX on the vocals that really pull together a solid atmosphere.

    The vocals themselves are cleanly recorded and nicely executed. Elsa’s deep, haunting old-English enunciation conjures images of all things Halloween. There’s room for improvement though, mainly in the lower vocal register. Some of the notes sound a bit forced and might benefit from a little pitch correction (0:39, 1:22, etc).

    For sampled guitars, the rock section is awesome. Like TO said, the lead is kind of sketchy but by no means is it bad, especially since it’s shrouded in the heavy rhythm guitar/bass work.

    Arrangement is a problem though. Even though a lot has been done in terms of additions, in terms of arrangement and composition this sticks very close to the original. As an instrumental this would be enjoyable, however the vocals are really the only significant element that saves the first 2/3 of this mix from being a cover. Love the heavy guitar take on things for the ending but I also wish that we had a better resolution after all is said and done. The 5-note piano outro is a little brief IMO.

    Great stuff and it’s close but I’m going to have to b-no this due to it’s overly conservative take on the theme. Definitely a memorable track though.

    NO (borderline)

  3. Good stuff Jredd. I’m really digging the use of some of the samples. The Sonic scratches and the glass breaking first used at 0:45 for the transition are nice touches.

    Unfortunately this is drowned in muddiness and clutter. Many of your synths are fighting for space in the same low register. Try giving some of elements higher pitched parts. You might also consider transposing the entire mix up a few half-steps. That would put a little distance between the bass/kick combo and the melodic synths.

    The cluttered intro goes on for a little too long for such a short mix. It’s not until 0:49 that we get a cleaner sound but less than 20 seconds later it sounds as though you intentionally drop some of the higher frequencies out (1:03-1:18). With the muddiness of the rest of the track, you can’t afford to lose what few mids and highs you have. That sections sounds much better when the percussion comes back with some highs at 1:18. The percussion in general is nice; good variety of sounds and patterns.

    I’m not a fan of the hard oscillating panning on the lead synth starting at 1:20. I think it greatly weakens it’s impact. You also should work on the ending. Aside from it coming about a minute too soon, the water sfx sounds too much like static to serve as a base for the other elements. I like it’s brief appearance in the intro though.

    The arrangement ideas are certainly here but this needs some good old-fashioned polish work before it really shines. Keep working at it.

    NO

  4. Ok, the intro is my favorite section. Before we get the horns, the bassline is thick and the percussion is a little offbeat but slick. Enter the horns however and the heavy compression becomes apparent. If the effect was intentional, it’s not working here. Try applying compression to individual tracks rather than globally over the entire mix. That would let you keep the claustrophobic feel of the percussion and bass while keeping the horns, cymbals and synths bright and loud. For a first cut at revision, I’d take TO’s advice and ditch the compression altogether.

    You’ve got interesting arrangement ideas and even more interesting sounds at some points. The chromatic guys playing with the strings and subdued percussion from 1:00-1:30 are really cool. Although the flutes that come in at 1:31 are lo-fi and dry I think they fit pretty well, especially given the odd-ball original tune.

    For only 2:26, a decent amount of variation is packed into this mix. I’d love to hear it resubmitted with a lot more attention given to production and cohesion (the intro doesn’t mesh well with the rest of the mix). Good stuff so far.

    NO (Please Resubmit)

  5. Love it. From the classic piano breaks at 1:04 and 3:14, to the subtle accent of the claves and cowbell from 1:36-2:00, this bubbles over with jazzy Afro-Cuban flare. The drums and bass are rock-solid, especially the bass-work from 3:03-3:13. To nit-pick, I would say though that the global reverb strikes me as a little excessive. I think some of this mix seems to lose a bit of presence as a result (e.g. piano at 0:27, brass at 3:17). In this newest version, the sax does fit quite nicely with the rest of the elements and is skillfully sequenced IMO.

    Excellent work all around. Congratulations on crafting such a creatively arranged, enjoyable mix.

    YES

  6. Nice work Txai. The atmosphere is rich, the instruments are varied and dynamically this piece has a lot going for it. It’s a bit cluttered and unfocused in some spots. You might consider toning down the erratic hand percussion during 2:12-2:26 or scaling back and varying the loud snare that dominates the scene from 3:03-3:44. The break at 2:33-3:00 is pretty slick but would be much better if the performance was more fluid. Although the melodies are interesting during that section, the chromatic and percussive elements get very robotic, especially towards the 3:00 mark.

    The choir vox isn’t working for me but it isn’t the worst choir ever. In general it doesn’t sound like the highest quality instruments are in play here, especially in the intro where they are most exposed, but this is an example of how processing and composition can overcome the shortcomings of a poor violin or weak piano. After a little work this would be fine by me on a sound quality and compositional basis. However, as has been pointed out, the source is absolutely buried. Except for a few melodies that might show up in any song, I honestly can’t find the source at all. So, in spite of how enjoyable this is, I’ve gotta go with a…

    NO

  7. I only have two problems with this song, and both deal with something similar.

    At 2:21 and 2:28, the pronunciation of mana and Flammie, respectively. The first "a" sound in mana and

    the "a" in Flammie were mispronounced ('man-uh and 'flam-ee when they should have been 'mah-nuh and

    'flay-me). This is only a somewhat minor issue, though, when taken with the rest of the piece.

    Hmm. I've wondered about the correct pronunciation of both words. My pronunciation of "Mana" is the one that I've heard most often, although Dictionary.com agrees with you that I am incorrect. As far as "Flammie", in the WIP thread for this song I specifically asked how the word should be pronounced and the only reply I got concerning that was from Keiiii:

    I always pronounced Flammie as 'FLAM-e.' [as opposed to FLAME-e]. In Japanese the creature's name is spelled furamii as opposed to fureimii (fureimu is how they'd say 'flame'), if that's any evidence.

    Certainly not the strongest evidence to stand on but with that and no arguments to the contrary, I felt I had good enough reason to justify being lazy and not changing the way I've pronounced it for all these years :D. Thanks for the criticism and glad you enjoyed.

  8. "take me to meet my mother" is cheesy? Damn, who makes up these "cheesy lyrics" rules anyways? Guess they all need to be about armpit hair and hot-rods...

    and "my baby"

    ...The lyrics aren't important, it's the way they sound that matters.

    Thanks guys. Lyrics are always an individual thing though. Personally I think of them as simply another instrument without real concrete meaning. It's the quality and tone of the words that impresses me. I think that's why many people can enjoy something like "Pillar of Salt" or "Prayer" without knowing exactly what the words mean.

    Just the same, if I had to pick a cheesiest line in "Dragon Song", I'd go with "Fly me over deserts, fly me so far" :D

  9. Thin but decent guitar starting things off…it’s got potential. The bass coming in 0:09 signals problems though. It’s very weak and monotonous. Drums are just about the same. Gotta enjoy the fast synth work but everything is still very flimsy and the intro seems to be over. That same guitar riff plays until 1:20 which gets old. The synth/guitar break section isn’t bad but the weak bass absolutely kills any potential of it being great. Same issues for the repeated last portion of the mix.

    Two problems are apparent: poor sounds and weak supporting rhythms. You’ve got to have a solid foundation before you pour lead synths and guitars into the mix. Here, the repetitive bass and drums aren’t cutting it. Once that’s sorted out, you’ve got to pull off much richer and engaging lead guitar and synth work to keep listeners entertained, even for only two and-a-half minutes. Send in some of your newer stuff if you think that you’ve resolved some of these issues, otherwise…practice practice practice.

    NO

  10. Yeah, the drums panned that far right isn’t a good idea. You typically want something as fundamental as a kick sitting closer to center.

    Other than that, your samples and arrangement are pretty basic. Work on improving your sounds and making better use of what you have to get more creative with the source. It takes practice but you’ll get there if you keep working at it.

    NO

  11. I’ve thought a lot about this mix. Listening casually this mix is amazingly expressive, soothing and unimposing in all the right ways. A careful listen however reveals that this mix is expressive, soothing, unimposing but really quiet ;). Honestly though, I think there is too large a disparity in volume between the loudest sections and the quietest sections. That’s not too terrible a transgression considering all that there is to like about this mix.

    The selection and composition of source material is a real highlight. The themes are made to flow seamlessly together and the arrangement, though conservative in spots, is creative. The performance is generally nice as well. My largest gripe there is that the accented chords during 0:47-1:19 are a bit harsh and jerky. The second part of “opening demo” from 1:20-1:43 is handled much better. Nice resolution with the epic overworld theme.

    Good production and performance plus great composition equals

    YES

  12. Glad to see that the hiss is reduced in this new version. It’s still fairly audible however. I think the major issue is that the hiss isn’t constant so when it surfaces and subsides, it gives a choppy feel to the track. I’d definitely try some noise cancellation on the sax parts but also be sure to fade the sax sections in and out to make remaining hiss less noticeable. I’m also glad to hear some of the reverb toned down.

    I don’t know what happened but in this new version the transition at 0:40 is bad. It’s just a jump into the orchestral section with an audible audio pop. Sounds like you started an audio clip from something other than zero amplitude. Same deal at 0:56. If your recording software won’t allow you to trim audio clips to the nearest zero crossings then make sure to fade the clips in and out to avoid this.

    Great sax solo from 1:37-1:53; definitely my favorite section of the mix. In general most of the performance is good but the timing gets a little loose around 3:10.

    The arrangement of the themes is nicely done and is the major factor in the borderline status of my vote. If the production was improved a little more and the transition smoothed out at 0:40 I’d have much less to complain about. Good work and if this doesn’t make it, go for a resub.

    NO (borderline)

  13. sequencing is epileptic.

    Haha, that's not bad considering the remixer was going for "Schitzophrenic” [sic].

    There are very basic sounds and processing in play here which push this mix below the bar in terms of sound quality. There is a genuine attempt to add personal creativity to the theme but at this point Sid, I don’t think you’ve had enough practice and experience to fully realize what you want to do musically. I will say that I like the beat that comes in at 0:53. With the right processing and samples that could be a hot loop.

    Keep practicing, checkout that campsite that Liontamer suggested, and have fun.

    NO

  14. What? There are 2 seconds of recording noises at the start of the track, guitars sound like static, drums are repetitive, horribly mixed and badly sequenced and the arrangement is nonexistent. The solo guitar is decent I suppose but this is simply a poor cover.

    I checked your other two tracks as well and both have similar issues with the addition of even more clipping. Hit the ReMixing forum for some help cleaning up your sound and keep practicing.

    NO

  15. The source offers a lot of material that I’m not hearing transferred to the mix. While it’s not essential to me to even use most of the source material, this mix essentially remixes only the background synth melody and doesn’t make significant use of the source lead melodies, the numerous key changes, the source’s bridges or other supporting melodies. In short, this mix is only loosely tied to the original, especially when the beats and unrelated FX start to take over the sound scene after the intro.

    But the beats and FX are hot and I appreciate the work that went into putting that together. I like the ambient break-ish intro through 0:48 followed by an effects extravaganza through 0:59. The use of the source in the intro was decent, with a steady build from the slow traditional feel of the original to the fever pitch vibe of much of the mix. 1:00-1:59 has a tenuous hold on the source melody with only a single synth in a sea of effects and percussion reminding us that this is not an original piece. Similar situation with 2:00-2:54, except the theme isn’t played as conservatively. That’s great that the melody gets some remixing attention but I think it also weakens the ties to the source during that section. Correct me if I’m missing something but the entire last minute is original beatwork. Good beat work mind you, but not remixed material. Love the outro where the very slick coughs from the intro return, this time more prominent and ominous.

    Great stuff but I need a better infusion of the source material to pass this. Spend as much time on melody and harmony as you do with percussion and FX and you will be golden.

    NO (Please Resubmit)

  16. Fun stuff but I agree that there are some big problems that will keep this from passing in the shape it’s in. At some points, sloppy timing, bad intonation and poor mixing make this sound like a recorded practice session rather than the final mix. As Paige mentioned, your performances sound decent enough though that under the right recording circumstances and with good post production work a lot of those problems would probably disappear. I’d also like to hear some better transitional ideas rather than cold stops and repeated simple drum fills between iterations of the theme. Once might work, but in this version we have a lot (0:47, 1:04, 1:23, 2:00, 2:18, 2:42). I appreciate the "sega" intro but I don't think the verbatim soundclip works with the style here. You guys might try to make it your own by performing it with your instruments or something to that effect. Finally, there’s the disturbing fact that the piano and bass get stiffed out of solos. Not…cool… ;)

    Enjoyable work guys, I wish I could see it performed live. As for this mix, work out some kinks or re-record and send it on back!

    NO (Please Resubmit)

  17. Nice. I’m a becoming a huge Regina Carter fan but sadly her work and that of other jazz violinists often goes underappreciated, even in the jazz community. It’s always a rare pleasure to hear a good jazz violin performance. Great work po! .

    The rest of the instruments are nice as well. Very thick bass, great piano sample, and groovetastic Rhodes. The percussion leaves something to be desired though. For a hi-hat that is as repetitive as this, I’d like to hear much more interesting samples and processing. What’s here gives off a slight metronome vibe that is especially apparent when exposed at sections like 2:24-2:40. Still, I think the other elements overcome the shortcomings of the percussion.

    Larry covered my views on the piano solo at 2:06. It was ok but could have been better, especially stacked in the same song as the wonderful violin solo.

    Skillful arrangement of the source, great atmosphere and solid production make my vote easy.

    YES

  18. I’m with Larry, the source is awesome. Now that that’s out of the way, this mix is pretty slick itself. I don’t think it’s quite up to par yet though so I’m going to close this one out and ask for a resub. The major problems that I’m hearing are:

    1) a very close adherence to the source

    2) poor instrument balance and separation

    3) lack of appropriate EQ on certain instruments

    #2 and #3 I’ll comment on here since they’re easier to fix but once those are improved, I’m sure that #1 is going to be a large factor in my vote on the resub. I appreciate the effort that it takes to cover a complex piece like this but I’m not hearing as much creativity in composition or arrangement as I’d be comfortable with calling a “ReMix.”

    You really have to give your guys some sonic space here. That’s part of the fun of composing for an essentially fixed number of instruments; you get to choose seating assignments! Right now you’ve got everyone standing in the middle of the stage, people are tripping over each other’s cables, horns are blaring in the piano player’s ear and toes are seriously getting stepped on. Pan the brass to the left side of the stage, keep the bass relatively centered, move the guitar guy towards the right and give him some company with my man (or girl) on the keys. I know what I’d like but you need to experiment. Your drums have some nice wide individual panning on the toms, cymbals, etc. That’s cool but personally in a jazz setup I prefer not to hear the drums spread so widely across the stage. There are many choices to make so play with the positioning until sections like 1:01-1:30, 1:47-2:16 and 3:48-4:16 sound less cluttered.

    Why should you worry about panning in your mix when the source doesn’t seem to do much of that at all? Well, the elements in the source are much better balanced in terms of volume levels than in this mix. Staring things off, the trumpet at 0:30 is too loud and is in need of some reverb to help it mesh with the pads that are supporting it. As TO mentioned, the predominant synth during 0:45-1:30 is loud, dry and sitting dead center. I think a spot of reverb and a new position on stage is a good idea. I love loose performance of the clean guitar that comes in at 1:01 but you’ve gotta pan him away from the piano. The two are fighting for space and they would be much more complimentary to each other if they each had room to do their thing.

    I actually like the balance during the first part of the chorus section at 1:30. The horns are a bit loud but they work for me. The guitar at 1:47 is too loud for the remainder of the chorus. Even when things calm back down at 2:01 the guitar stays at this volume which is even more problematic without the horns to help balance it. I agree with Larry that the horn shots are dry and loud from 2:07-2:17. Additionally I’m hearing some clipping on the horns around 2:08 and an audio glitch near 2:23, but that might just be me.

    Great piano work at 2:17-3:00, although with the piano exposed, its lack of high EQ becomes apparent. It’s not too bad though. Nice sax solo as well but tone the volume down a bit, especially at 3:00 where it absolutely overpowers the piano. The guitar at 3:02 needs some compression to keep it’s volume levels in check. I understand that you should want to maintain a dynamic improv feel but here the guitar is a little too jumpy to me.

    The bass is understated throughout. Give it some punch by pushing the volume up a little, increasing the low EQ on it and possibly bringing some chorus/reverb into the picture.

    For the most part, the performances are pretty nicely done which means the hard part is potentially over. Just work on the issues that have been mentioned and go for the resub. Great work from all involved.

    NO (Please Resubmit)

  19. I’m real a fan of the approach Robbie. I don’t think I’ve heard this awesome theme taken so far down epic-melodrama lane with any level of success. I’m loving the mood setup by the intro sample but the piano hurts. The compression is cool but if the poor EQ is part of your effort to make the instruments more other-worldly, I don’t think that it was the most effective way to accomplish it. I’d like to hear a less muffled sound there and in other spots when the piano is exposed (e.g. 2:46). Nice job on the intro in general though.

    When things get moving at 0:57 (after a simple but slick effect at 0:53) I don’t particularly enjoy the washed out nature of the soundfield. It was fine for the amorphous intro but from 0:57-1:50 with everything so heavily reverbed, the atmosphere is too indistinct even for the melancholy vibe that you are after. The lead synth is too wispy and reverbed to provide the kind of melodic anchor that is required there.

    The layered lead synth that comes in at 1:50 is hot though and does a much better job of contrasting with the supporting elements. It cuts through the drama like a good guitar solo which makes everything seem to work together more effectively during 1:50-2:45. Still, there’s the issue of clutter and sound separation that has been mentioned. I think that can easily be affected by toning down the tail on the reverb and bringing some wider panning to the game.

    Interesting thought with the quarter-note piano stutters but IMO the tempo is too low for that to work effectively. I think making the stutters eighth notes and staggering the velocity up and down between each would work a little better to keep the flow.

    Again, even with the prominent piano/synth lead, 3:00-3:40 feels washed-out and cluttered. Centering the wooshes (3:14 and 3:28) and their aftermath only adds to the problem. I love the effects and the layered melodies in this climactic section but they feel jumbled together.

    Very nice concept and decent execution. The major hangup for me though is the lack of clarity in the soundfield which I think primarily stems from the generous helping of reverb on just about everything. A vocal version definitely would have been cool, but I hope your data loss doesn’t prevent you from cleaning this up if it doesn’t make it this time around. Enjoyable but...

    NO (Please Resubmit)

×
×
  • Create New...