Harmony

There are plenty of ReMixers who do wonders without a keyboard so no need to beg for donations Sam. Spend the time instead practicing with what you have. Practice adding more variety to the supporting instruments. The strings lack dynamic and harmonic complexity. They kind of just drone along, not changing in intensity (there was a bit of something nice at 1:46) and not contributing nearly as much as they could. The harp does a good job of playing off of the piano and the music box later in the mix although the repeating chromatic melodies get a little tiring past the 2 minute mark. Practice humanizing your instruments. The piano is very plunky and loses the delicate charm that this piece calls for. The consistently long attack on the horn at 0:24-1:42 gives the lead a sluggish feel that doesn’t help the dragging arrangement. You can certainly find better samples for many of the instruments you’ve chosen but it wouldn’t be a waste of time to learn to get more out of the samples that you have. Practice creatively reinterpreting the source material. If I take out the drums and bass from the original then I have something very similar to your mix in terms of composition and sound. Make the piece more engaging by rearranging the melodic sections, building and removing harmony, changing tempo, changing key—experiment. Gotta love the SFX ending. Stop by the ReMixing and WIP forums to get some help with your future submissions. Keep working at it. NO

That first drum beat from 0:17-0:29 has that late 80’s vibe; good stuff. For the genre, this arrangement is good. The melodies are played in a relatively straightforward manner but the mix develops and stays fresh, incorporating solid composition with plenty of well executed transitions. I appreciate the effort to create a dance track without the standard omm-tss played throughout. The percussion does a lot of creative things and when we do get the omm-tss from 3:20-3:34 it falls right in line. On the downside, this mix gets awfully cluttered at points (1:12-1:40, 1:54-2:09, …). Combine that with how loudly everything is mixed and it’s not sitting well with me. Why not put some panning distance between the synths and piano during the chorus sections? Don’t let all of your efforts to create interesting and dynamic synths get diminished by having them blend too much with each other. Other than that, the production is fine. Engaging on the whole and I can’t find a big enough reason to stand in this mix’s way. Like Larry I would have liked more melodic variation but it’s not that large of a necessity here. YES

This is a fun mix with some interesting arrangement ideas. Good job sequencing the piano. It could have been less rigid but the right hand captures the boogie-woogie vibe pretty well. The samples aren’t the greatest though. The piano and the brass section are good for this style but the solo sax, which plays such a key role in this mix, is pretty general MIDI, although I think that its sequencing isn't terrible. The drums need to be a lot more expressive. Their samples aren’t the best so it’s good that they don’t do much to stand out for most of the mix but when we do notice them, as in the drum rolls during the few transitions, they really take the quality down a notch. Definitely hit the ReMixing forum and pick up some better drums (and other samples as well). With the new samples, get a little more creative with the drum groove rather than only switching things up during the transitions. Fun stuff but not developed enough in terms of sound quality or arrangement. Keep working at it. NO

Another enjoyable mix Philip. I love the variety of guitars that we get in this one. From flanged, to clean to distorted, they all mesh well and fit the mood of the piece. The ep/bass solo at 1:57 is a great jam that does a good job of switching things up without straying far from the feel of the rest of the piece. I’m not really feeling the some of the electronica-esque FX thrown in with such an organic piece though. The cut at 2:56 feels odd and the stutters near the 3:00 mark don’t seem to fit either. The reversed FX at 5:16 along with the final section (5:54-end) are pretty cool though. Larry mentioned the lead’s laziness at that point, and I agree, but I thought the sloppy lead sounded pretty pimp in this case, especially with the Overworld theme thrown in over the crunchy rhythm guitars. “Blue Stars over the Fisherman’s Horizon” felt long at 5 minutes and with a similar composition style, slow development and limited variation of key elements, this mix feels long at 7 mins. There are a lot of cool arrangement ideas packed in but somehow it’s just not translating into 7 mins of listenability. One culprit is the percussion which stays way too constant for way too long. The bass solo near 1:57 is a point that needs a change of beat but the entire first half of the mix could go for some variation in that department. Other than varying the drum pattern you could also mix things up by adding some other percussive sounds (shakers, hand percussion, new snares, etc.). Another issue is the reverb which tends to blur the distinct sections and instruments together. Aim for more clarity and the piece will become more engaging. You also might consider playing with the clean rhythm guitar that seems to remain pretty constant in terms of performance and processing. It might be interesting to hear it change along with the other elements during the distorted section starting at 4:55. Why doesn’t that reversed guitar strum at 5:52 start on tempo? Very cool idea but stretch that puppy out and move it so that it’s on beat and it will sound much better. Good stuff but I don’t think its reaching its potential right now. Less reverb, more variety (especially with the percussion), and a few odds and ends as mentioned by the other judges could make this mix shine. Looking forward to the resub on this and also a new mix from you that I hear might hit the panel soon. NO (Please Resubmit)

Good stuffs on the sound quality front. The juxtaposition of light airy drone synths with distorted percussion and SFX works really well. I enjoy the strange FX and subtle groove from 1:32-1:58 and the panned distorted kicks are interesting as well. The loss of the pads from 2:27-2:40 is odd but the vibraphone deal at 2:56 is wonderful enough to let me forget. Arrangement is engaging but as Vig mentioned, this piece noodles. Although there is obviously a lot of foresight and planning on display here, more thought needs to be given to cohesion. No one melodic/percussive section feels well related to any other section, making the piece seem more haphazard than it should. I also think that “Confusing Melody” deserved more attention than it got, it being the backbone of this mix and all. Sure that drone stays with us for most of the mix but why not rearrange that to give the piece more ebb and flow, more rise and fall? Let the note morph from one synth to another. You did this in the beginning where the note started out with an organ then switched to strings. I was hoping to hear it further evolve. Let the note expand to some chord, then fall back to a single note. It doesn’t have to be as intrusive to the ambiance as one might imagine. This mix very much reminds me of Sheila Chandra’s "ABoneCroneDrone" series of songs which each use one root note that evolves throughout the piece with flowing synths and harmonies. Check her out for good ambient music and possibly some ideas for your mix. In the end, this is a cool piece that just needs some work tying things together. I hope to see a resub of this one. NO (Please Resubmit)

Oh I so want to see!! But I don't have Reason SONAR leaves me out in the cold once again...

I think that the mellow piano sample, though lacking the high end sparkle that makes certain samples stand out from the crowd, works with this piece. I understand the concerns about the low end but the sample is cleanly recorded, appropriately panned and dark enough to carry the intent of the piece. The performance is on-and-off to me. There are sections (0:00-0:56, 2:36-2:59) that have a very stately, minuet-like quality that give the theme an elegance impossible on the NES. Unfortunately, that same performance style carries over into sections where a more fluid approach is warranted to keep the piece from feeling plunky and unnatural (1:52-2:36, 3:07-3:38). Try to keep some of those accents in check as well. Subtlety is the key there and while I feel that they are much better handled than in “Where Force Stood Still” a few notes are still a bit jarring (2:15, 2:43, …). The chord at 3:52, along with the 9ths at the end are beautiful. Although the simplicity of the chord structure throughout the rest of the piece compliments some sections, it detracts from others. The left hand during 1:52-2:14 for example is very plain and underutilized. In general, the left hand doesn’t get the arrangement attention that it deserves and I think that this simplicity stems from its close adherence to the source. Greater interpretation and expansion of the original melodies would help in this area. I also agree that this is the best piano mix that I’ve heard from you Bev and the split vote shows how good of a piece this is. In the end though I feel that some sections need a more complex performance, others need more complex chords, while others are nice as they are. If this doesn’t make it this time, hopefully a resubmit will be in its future. NO (Please Resubmit)

For as many themes are here, they are combined quite nicely. The arrangement of each of those sections is great as well. I would have preferred fewer themes and even more fluid transitions but there’s a solid drive throughout the piece that carries us from start to finish without too many hiccups. I don’t think that the harpsichord at 1:31-1:45 is strong enough to stand on its own. The sample feels too flat and buzzy for such a great instrument. However, its return as a supporting instrument at 5:56 through the end is delicate and delightful; easily my favorite section of this mix. What a great way to close the mix out. And what a great way to close out this vote, 3 and 2/3 straight YES’s YES

The other guys have covered the reasons that I have to put the final nail on this. I love Jazz Jackrabbit and I was excited to see a mix of arguably the coolest song from the game on the panel but it’s not nearly interpretive enough. The mix has a nice thick groove (repetitive though), a dreamy reverb (a little overbearing during the fuller sections), and some decent samples. Throw more of your own arrangement flare into the mix the next time around. Keep working at it. NO Oh and thanks for your website, it brought back a lot of memories. Commander Keen, SkyRoads, Crystal Caves man…Crystal Caves…

First thing that strikes me is the piano’s EQ. To give this piano a brighter and more open sound without taking away any of the darkness, try adjusting the EQ by increasing the 3-7kHz range and slightly decreasing the 600Hz range. It’s not crucial to my decision but tweaking the EQ can be an important affair for solo piano. The theme is well incorporated and expressively interpreted. The performance certainly has a human touch to it in terms of tempo and timing. I’ve got issue with some of the note velocities however. The piece sounds like it was played on a partially or unweighted keyboard, causing some of the notes to be played unnaturally loud or soft. Hey, not all of us have the luxury of a weighted keyboard but if you’re without one that just means you’ll have to spend some time editing velocities post-performance. Also, the sustain doesn’t feel quite right in a few parts. Points like 3:22 have an unnatural choppy feel and the sustain on sections like 3:31-3:40 allows chords to bleed together that really shouldn’t. That pedal of yours should help so keep practicing with it. Larry and Shna covered most of the other issues. I don’t feel that the mix is detrimentally sparse but more interesting composition for the left hand would certainly make for a more rich texture. Overall though this is an enjoyable piece Bev. A little more work here and there would do heaps of good. NO (Please Resubmit)

Wow, I love the source material. In principle I think that the orchestrated approach could be a wonderful arrangement decision in contrast to the metal guitar driven original. I think that a combination of inexperienced sequencing and simplistic execution of some good ideas sells this mix short though. The samples themselves sound pretty decent but the mechanical sequencing takes a lot away. This problem pops up in the choppy harpsichord lead starting at 2:08-2:44. The percussion, starting with the weak snare rolls at 1:01 and all the way through the awkward dry kick from 2:14-end, needs a lot of work. As it stands the drums don’t mesh well with the rest of the elements or themselves so start by trying to make the snares, toms, kicks, and cymbals sound more like they are from the same set. Then you might work on the sequencing and FX processing. There are some solid compositional ideas packed in here. The lead changes often, the mood and tempo shifts are effective and there are attempts at building dynamics by adding and taking away harmonic complexity. Had the actual execution been a little more skillful, this mix has the potential to sound great. Aside from the actual performance, there is the issue of usage of the source. As you mentioned Jahan, you added a lot of original material and here I think it’s overshadowing the source. The source has plenty of solid melodies to run with so you really should have had an easier time incorporating it into this mix. The poor use of the source and the weak instrumentation did this mix in, but not bad for a remixing newbie. There are plenty of remixers that primarily use soundfonts so you’re not alone. You might try stopping by OCR’s WIP and ReMixing forums to see what else is out there. There are some great musicians hanging around those spots that we can all learn a lot from. Keep working at it. NO

There are a few interesting arrangement ideas here, not the least of which is the 7/8 meter. The two themes blend relatively well and I don’t get too much of a sense of the dreaded melodyitis. Good samples are used and they are generally used well. Love the choir. It’s too bad that there is a very washed out lo-fi feel to this mix. It sounds like this has been re-encoded at 192kbps from a much lower bit rate. The tribal drum loop is nice but it never changes, even when it desperately needs to like at 1:48. The most we get is some added cymbal shots which sound odd and dull due to the encoding. There is subtle variety in the various sections, but a single added harmony here or an addition supporting element there isn’t enough to make the kind of variation necessary to pull off a 2:32 mix. This is a fun listen but it would be a lot better with better encoding and more attention to variation, especially of the percussion. Keep working at it. NO

Very nice arrangement Michael. The two themes flow effortlessly together and I’ve got no problems with the level of rearrangement. I think that some of the ideas get repetitive though, especially considering the lack of variation in the left hand. It only plays repeated patterns of rather simple chords based in C, Ab, Bb and G throughout the entire piece. More complicated chords wouldn’t really help much but those roots have got to change at one point or another. As a result, I feel that the piece plods and points like 2:55, where a huge opportunity for a new chord addition is missed, become disappointing rather than exciting as they might have been. C minor is pretty easy to play in so experimentation is fun and easy to do; try it out. You also might look at moving across more of the keyboard to add variety. Rarely in this mix are you outside of a 2 octave range. Where are the reverberant lows that carry so much depth in a well played piece? The highs that are here are very nice, especially towards the end, but they would stand out much more if the lows were there in contrast at some points. The performance was wonderfully natural with tempo and velocity variations creating a nice flowing atmosphere. I’m wondering how much of a performance purist you are, i.e. how much editing did you do in Sonar after the performance? Most of the off-tempo rolls and notes add a lot of emotion and life to this piece. I’ve never worked with Hubbe but the positive hype sounds to be true. The quality is certainly there but I must mention that the static roll-off from the sampling of some of the notes is pretty abrupt and noticeable, especially on headphones. That doesn’t affect my decisions but it might be worth it in the future to look at using one of the other Hubbe pianos that have a little less of this. Overall a very enjoyable mix with a lot of heart. A YES wouldn’t be wrong but sadly I think the mix falls a little short in the composition department. The beauty of 88 keys of goodness isn’t being fully appreciated. Vary the left hand root notes, explore the keyboard more and this mix will be a lot better for it. Please resubmit! NO (Please resubmit)

Not horrible, but a very standard trance adaptation here. There are a few goodies scattered around to keep things interesting. I like the EQ change at 1:29-1:51 as it gives the kick at 1:51 a good amount of impact by contrast. The supporting synth with the cut/res automation that’s introduced at 2:21 is a cool addition to the soundscape and of course the biggest variation in the mix, 3:27, is welcomed indeed. I wish this had a better variety of sounds and arrangement however. In terms of development and creative ideas, this feels more like a 2-3 minute mix. Once the synth that starts a build at 0:06 gets going at about 0:27, it barely stops for 3 minutes. That wouldn’t be so terrible if the lead synths were more interesting and dynamic than the static stock trance sounds that we have here. Keep working at it Gregory. Experiment with the percussion more. Scrap the 16th/32nd note snare fills and pull an original fill pattern out of your hat. Try a new synth or effects chain. Go nuts! It won't all be pretty but when that’s done, take the best of it and mold it into something wonderful. NO

Tough call here but I’m going to have to go NO. Just as a solo piano piece is challenging because of the need to control the musical atmosphere and progression with only one instrument, mixes of this type need to control the dynamics of the piece with one key element: chaos. While there are many examples of this done successfully, in this mix there doesn’t seem to be a decent amount of control of the clutter’s subtle nuances to successfully differentiate complexity from confusion. The result is a piece that’s a lot less exciting than it could have been. However, this is a fun mix for sure with dynamic percussive elements, sound FX created from instruments, cool wobbly leads and a beautiful supporting chromatic deal that gets pleasantly exposed at 2:09 for the excellent breakdown. The biggest contributor to my vote is the sometimes untamed percussion that doesn’t really seem to lead me anywhere. 1:15-1:38, 3:01-3:17 are examples of it. I’d love to hear this with the percussion reworked as I think a lot could be done with an incorporation of what works here and a few fresh ideas. Good work Dave. I’ll be keeping this not just because I’m a big Mario Kart fan but also because there really is a lot to enjoy here. NO

The muddy strings and clipping of the intro are not a good way to start things off. However once some percussive highs kick in at 0:45, I find myself enjoying many sections of the rest of the track. The switch to 4/4 orchestral rock gives the Magus Battle theme an enjoyable drive but it’s nothing too expansive in terms of arrangement. Not a bad arrangement overall though, even if a little long-winded. I would reevaluate how important 5:12-6:32 is to your intentions Jeremy. It seems excessive and doesn’t really add any interest to the mix besides the appearance of the piano as a key player, which could be achieved earlier. The fuller sections are nicely done and seem to be well balanced, if a little distant because of the reverb which I think could be slightly toned down in those sections. The sparse sections, which are compositionally great to have, unfortunately highlight the low quality of the samples and/or the mechanical sequencing (2:07-2:16, 5:13-5:42). The bass solo later on is a major offender in this area. The section from 3:25-4:02 is relatively well done though and although it’s simple I particularly enjoy it. Aside from the sample quality, which with good sequencing would be passable, there are some consistent sound quality issues here that make this difficult to pass. The low encoding hurts so try for a VBR encoding next time. Taking a look at the mix’s waveform, it’s completely flat for most of the mix; the peaks are hacked off. This means you either mixed everything very loud or compressed (limited) heavily. Either problem isn’t necessarily a bad thing but waveforms like this can point to serious clipping of your precious audio, even if it’s not audible. In this case however it is very audible, especially in the less cluttered sections like the intro or 2:02-2:16. Can’t forget the clipstravaganza at 3:04. Be sure to keep a watchful eye on those levels in the future Jeremy. A fun mix for the most part but there’s still work to be done. NO -------------------------------------------- LT Edit: After the decision was released, Harmony gave some extra comments in the mix's WIP thread that I thought would be useful to LeonHeart if he considered a resub. Since the WIP thread will eventually be pruned, I've pasted Harmony's additional comments from 7/27: I genuinely enjoyed most of your mix but sections like 0:00-0:43, 2:02-2:16, 5:15-5:24 are pretty poor. Either the sequencing is very mechanical or the samples are too exposed. By mechanical I mean that every note is perfectly in tempo, the note velocities are very similar to each other and the lengths of the notes are very similar to each other. Computer precision is great for some things but not for music of this type. To make a piece sound more natural you have to vary these factors keeping in mind the way that a human would vary them. Listen to your bass solo and then go find a CD with a real bass solo in it. C’mon now. The piano, bass, drums and some strings suffer from this in your mix. Look for a ‘humanize’ function in your mixing program that might help you with this. Otherwise, if you’re recording parts live from a keyboard don’t quantize 100% or you’ll loose some of that good natural feel. If you’re sequencing with only a mouse, you might try not turning your snap-to-grid feature on in the piano roll or at least editing some of the notes with this feature off. Some main samples are also pretty sub par. The bass solo sounds like SoundBlaster default, the orch hits are weak, the solo strings are only ok and the guitar solo isn’t too amazing either. When these elements are combined I absolutely love the sound but alone (exposed) they just don’t work. You might want to hit Hammersound.net and get some new soundfonts (for free) or SampleArena for new samples (yep, for free). Those are my favorites but the ReMixing forum is a great source to find lots of links to other good sounds (for free). The drums are cool. Clipping. If this was the best mix in the world I couldn’t pass this because it clips left and right. Clipping is when your volume levels go above a certain threshold and the wave is truncated (cut off) usually resulting in a buzzy sound rather than whatever sound was supposed to be there. When judging this I took the time to load your mix into CoolEdit to get a detailed look at your waveform. Looking closely, instead of many of the waves being shaped like smooth curves, they are hacked off at the top and are completely flat. That means some of the audio is clipped. Of course you don’t really have to go through all of that to see it because the clipping is pretty obvious (3:04 for example). To prevent this, watch the volume levels meter in your mixing program during playback. Usually if this meter goes to red then this indicates clipping (or very near to it). Some meters have a section beyond the red that gets highlighted if clipping actually occurs. Either way, don’t let this happen. Turn the master volume level down. If you are using a compressor make sure the compression ratio isn’t too high. If you are boosting the overall volume levels of the final mix then make sure to only ‘normalize’ it so that you don’t get clipping from that. Yep, that’s all’s I got for now. You can PM me if you have any specific questions. Hopefully you’re not discouraged Jeremy. This mix is good stuff but as with anything, there’s room for improvement. EDIT: Apparently SampleArena is temporarily down so try SynthZone. They've got a good list of sample/soundfont/synth links to sift through.

Being around my old roommates and their FF love I’ve become pretty familiar with the source through osmosis. That being said, I’ve got no problems with the arrangement. At times the combo of the entrancing vocals, the modified time signature and the slick percussion overshadows the theme and allows me to forget that I’m listening to a remix, but honestly I feel it is well incorporated throughout. The reverb drenched synths create a flowing backdrop for the vocals and percussion which drive things along quite nicely. The production is high quality, and in the end there’s nothing in the newest version that warrants a NO, however there are some issues that concern me. While Jill’s vocals are beautiful, they are mixed a little loud and high for my tastes. This produces some sharp S’s and T’s (0:43, 0:47, 1:56, 1:59,…) that I feel sometimes make for a harsh listen and at points don’t mesh with the flowing pads and soft piano. There is also a mid-heavy feel to the vocals that is especially present in the sections with lyrics as opposed to the ambient oohs and ahhs, which are very hot and fit well. In the end, as zyko said, some of my problems come down to me projecting how I would have mixed things in this mix. All-in-all the vocals here are a wonderfully effective carrier of the haunting melody. Great collab. YES

Voting is resumed. Patrick has submitted a revised version which is linked in the original post. My vote is pending a review of this new submission.

Yeah buddy, this has a great organic, Latin, New Mexico mesa vibe. From the acoustic bass to the classical guitar and pan flute this tune is sailing straight for a YES. There are a few stumbling blocks however. Most notably is the desperate need for compression of the guitar parts. The volume jumps all over the place in many unwarranted spots (e.g. 1:16, 3:13); in a word it’s “punchy.” With guitar it’s an especially easy problem to fix since the dynamics are as much a result of the timber of the notes as they are a product of the volume, thus you don’t need to worry as much about over-compression killing a dynamic solo for example. All-in-all, compression would give this piece a much more polished feel. Ah but this is discussion for what will hopefully be one of Zircon’s next ReMixing Tips tutorials on mastering. Another issue is the reverb, which although it may be thematically appropriate still doesn’t give it permission to wash some of your sounds out. The first two minutes were quite nice having a very airy feel but when the percussion entered at 2:14 I was ready for more instrument distinction; a change of texture. To your credit Don, clutter was avoided and reverbed or not the elements remained clear enough and certainly enjoyable. The arrangement, straightforward as it is, is very slick as the style of this mix meshes very nicely with the original. Good stuff but work on the relatively minor mastering problem for your future mixes. It can only make your creations sound even better. YES

source: http://www.zophar.net/gbs/dkland.zip (track 6) This track has been on my playlist since it debuted in the WIP forum and if you hurry you can still catch my longer reviews of the mix there. The short version is that we have utter slickness here indeed. The samples are amazingly clean (I’m in rainstick heaven), the reverb/delay and processing in general is crystalline, the mixing is wonderfully balanced and the groove is infectious. I love that the phat bassline is highlighted by the brief break into original material at 1:45. I’m somewhat disappointed that the bass alone drops back for it’s solo crescendo at 2:36 though. It leaves the other elements without a floor since they don’t similarly scale themselves back. The arrangement is certainly questionable since the composition is absolutely identical to the source in some sections. During those sections though, I feel that the alterations in the melody and it’s timing, in addition to the beautiful additive goodies such as pads and percussive FX, provide a good amount of variation from the source. Couple that with the sprinkling of original material (1:47-2:02, 3:25-3:37) as well as the decent variety of leads, and the arrangement is a go in my book. Great work Patrick. It really sounds like that practice with Logic has paid off. Keep working at it. YES

Whoa, the kick has certainly been toned down from the original version but now it feels absolutely lifeless. For the driving vibe that they are after they’ve got to have a certain punch. For this mix, that's not the real problem child though… What’s up with the droned notes? I swear some of them go for almost the entire mix and by 1:17 when the melody enters, the confusion that they create is absolutely unbearable. Without them I would probably say that this mix needs tons more variation and creative use of the source, as the KI melody is basically played verbatim over the muddled pads. Hit the ReMixing forum and ask around about cleaning up your sounds. You can keep a spooky atmosphere without the pad jumble. possums NO

Love the intro. I was hoping for a “this is the end” outro but alas ‘twas not to be. Man, the SFX almost never let up. They are generally interesting but their relentless assault puts much of this mix right on the border of clutter. Honestly, their biggest crime is smothering the lead. Their accomplice: many of the other supporting elements. I’m going for a resub on this to give you a chance to clarify or intensify the melody in a few places: 1:02-1:18, 3:32-4:19. The last section that I mentioned is great but it feels like an unused backdrop just waiting for the classic Zelda them to bust in and lay down the melodic law. The vocal breakdown is pretty slick and really highlights the cool compression on the drums. I could have done without the phaser-like effect on the lead vocals though. Your voice sounds strong enough that it doesn’t need to be hidden behind that type of processing. A similar yet much clearer effect could be achieved by cutting the vocal EQ highs and lows while maxing out the mids giving you a static flanger/phaser feel. Slight clipping on that last Ahhhh, but nothing too terrible. Good work not milking the theme as is easy to do with such a great source. You might consider decluttering (uncluttering?, anticluttering?) some of the busier sections but certainly work on bringing more presence to the thematic lead. If this doesn’t pass as is, I’m looking forward to the resubmission. NO (Please Resumbit)

That intro is hot stuff. It really takes you down through the depths of something that I would care not to dream about before exploding into the all out-guitar assault. The familiar Doom themes makes their presence known without being covers and a good amount of original material is incorporated to keep the sounds fresh. Rounding out the straight crunch of the rhythm guitars are some truly killer artificial harmonics wails, crazy solos, interjection of some slick synth/processing work at 1:12, 1:37, 2:20, etc. and a seriously hyperactive (in a good way) double-bass. The general muddiness on this track is bothersome. It’s a great relief to hear the screaming lead come in at 1:49 to provide the first solid high frequencies since the screams in the intro. I can’t tell if the encoding or the mixing is the bigger culprit but my vote is pending a better encoding to make sure that the bulk of the mud can be eliminated. That harmonics shot at 3:30 would sound so awesome with the highs that, say, 160kbps could offer up. Good tribute to a good game. Thanks for sending this our way Mick. YES

Pretty cool source material. Pretty cool mix. The mix has a great chill vibe that’s carried by the slick beat and dreamy delayed synths and piano. Although the bassline is cool, it’s much too present and for much of the mix it feels like it’s sitting on top of, not in line with, the supporting sounds. Consider toning it down with a volume adjustment and perhaps a little reverb. Good composition with a catchy hook, clear bridge, decent dynamics throughout, and a well-timed end. Unfortunately the slick beat, the cool baseline and the solid composition all come courtesy of the source tune. Unfortunately, I can’t pass this because of that reliance on the source. I like your sound Crono. Work on mixing some of your own creative melodic/rhythmic ideas into the source and you should could turn out some quality remixes. NO

Very engaging, although not too large a departure from the original in terms of genre and instrument selection. In fact, the supporting string/snare combo is a dead ringer for the source in many spots. This is no source knock-off however. The interplay between the horn and string leads (0:03-1:20, 4:06-4:33) adds a wonderful vibrance to the already spirited source and the well-timed tempo and tone changes that are quite skillfully weaved together, form a dynamically evolving piece. Big pluses. With the difficulty involved in sequencing any solo instrument, let alone brass, I commend the sequencing of the cadenza. The samples are fine and I’ve got no beef with them or their use. There’s an odd resonance/note at 0:47 which bugs me every time I hear it, but that’s nit-picking. I would have liked more action in the lower registers, other than the percussion and occasional brass note, which I think would help with the wingless’ hollow feel. I love the rich reverb used which brings a lot of mood to some of the lower brass notes. Also, the sprinkles of bells, timpani, cymbals, chimes and other orchestral goodies all act as great highlights to the more dominant elements. Good stuff DZ. YES