Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About Liontamer

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Atlanta, GA


  • Biography
    Larry "Liontamer" Oji has been a judge at OverClocked ReMix since July 2004, having evaluated more than 5,000 submissions. Reporting to site founder David "djpretzel" Lloyd, Larry is responsible for primary submissions evaluations, informational database maintenance and other otherwise sundry & unsexy tasks at OCR, becoming head submissions evaluator in June 2006.
  • Real Name
    Larry Oji
  • Occupation
    Community Manager & Judge, OC ReMix
  • Twitter Username

Artist Settings

  • Collaboration Status
    2. Maybe; Depends on Circumstances

Recent Profile Visitors

38,070 profile views

Liontamer's Achievements

  1. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.
  2. Some from Mazedude! One from Rux Ton! Some from Emunator! And a pair from jmr! The AlmightyArceus!
  3. Since we don't publish ReMixes or albums to Spotify (since it's a commericial platform and we don't own the music or do song licensing with the game companies), we need to offer a curated playlist with whatever OC ReMixes are available via other publishers. Do you have some to offer for inclusion on this playlist? Please share any & all Spotify track links of OC ReMixes, whether they're yours or others, and we'll pull something together!
  4. You're correct on both counts. We do have stuff that extensively uses sampled lyrics from original songs, but those are grandfathered in and wouldn't be allowed these days. Let's find you a vocalist, Robbie!
  5. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.
  6. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.
  7. I appreciated the concept here. Slowing down the original a bit and giving it an orchestral sound was a great idea. The drumwork that came in around 1:41 was a mistake, kind of like putting a hat on a hat; it wasn't necessary and didn't make sense with the initial arrangement concept. More subdued percussion could have achieved something more intriguing and complimentary with the orchestration.
  8. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.
  9. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.
  10. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix here.
  11. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix here.
  12. After this reconsideration, we've clearly concluded that we're not accepting this submission. In the thread thus far, prophetik said he agreed with MindWanderer that this didn't meet 4.3 of the Submissions Standards. DarkeSword was saying 4.3 didn't apply here, but DarkeSword & Gario said it failed 4.1. We then talked extensively in #judges about how to address this and came to a consensus. I'll do my best to summarize the conversation here with key excerpts (edited for clarity). Regarding section 4.1, we concluded that the format of story narration or audio book isn't accepted as a "genre of music" due to the focus of the experience not being its music: Regarding Section 4.3, and its purpose, “dominant” refers to the expectation that the arranged VGM is the “most important, powerful, or influential” component of the presentation; this would apply whether it's contrasting 1) the amount of arranged VGM vs. non-VGM composition or, in this case, 2) the arranged VGM vs. the non-musical story narration as the primary focus of the audio. With this piece, djp felt the approach did conflict with both mentioned parts of the existing arrangement standards -- primarily 4.1, and then 4.3 to a lesser extent -- then suggested added clarification to the Standards to address this: DarkeSword emphasized that the Standards issue here had nothing to do with acceptable source material (Section 3) but rather whether this arrangement format was permitted (Section 4): DarkeSword proposed an added clarification point excluding narration/voiceover-focused content by name as part of section 4.1, which djp and I edited. As this submission conflicted with two aspects of the current arrangement standards, this added point isn't a new exclusion, but now codifies the reasoning behind not accepting this type of presentation. I also added "rap" into 4.1's examples list of acceptable genres to make very clear that it remains an accepted music style. Usage of lyrics with rhythms and/or musicality (e.g. beat poetry) that integrate with the music is (and has always been) allowed. We then had the panel weigh in on the final wording, which was accepted by the entire group: The revision of section 4.1 is now live in the Submission Standards: 4. Arrangement 1. Arrangements in any genre of music (e.g. techno, jazz, rap, rock, classical) are acceptable, so long as the genre itself does not conflict with any other arrangement criteria. Submissions must have a primary focus on musical elements; this excludes extensive focus on narration/voiceover (e.g. audio drama, audio books).
  • Create New...