Liontamer

Moderators
  • Content count

    11,308
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    54

3 Followers

About Liontamer

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Atlanta, GA

Converted

  • Biography
    Larry "Liontamer" Oji has been a judge at OverClocked ReMix since July 2004, having evaluated more than 4,500 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
  • Facebook ID
    607933576
  • Twitter Username
    LarryOji
  • Last.fm Username
    LiontamerVGF

Artist Settings

  • Collaboration Status
    2. Maybe; Depends on Circumstances

Contact Methods

  • Skype
    LiontamerVGF
  • AIM
    Liontamer87

Recent Profile Visitors

24,664 profile views
  1. Liontamer

    OverClocked ReMix Design ?'s and Issues

    Thanks! Should be fixed within the next hour.
  2. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.
  3. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.
  4. I've been on the panel for nearly 14 years at this point, so I've seen a lot and done a lot to guide this process. I can't vote on everything, so it has happened where I run into a case like this where a track gets rejected and I'm strongly against it. This is one of those times. A word of caution to any current or future Js reading this; provided you really think a submission is good, yet you're thinking the Standards are somehow against it, then the best way to make your case is to refer to and quote the Submissions Standards. That wasn't done here, and it seemed like the initial feelings questioning the dynamics and level of substance led the day, while missing the bigger picture of this arrangement's strengths. Before I get to a vote, let me say that I'll be updating the Judges Panel Wiki/FAQ page to note that we welcome artists telling us if they think we're substantially off-base and appealing a decision, because that's always been our policy even if we haven't spelled that out. If someone gripes in a different way than coming to us, we also will treat that as an appeal, because whenever we're challenged about a decision, we're always willing to revisit it. It doesn't matter whether the artist is calm or upset, and it isn't influenced by whether an artist will submit music in the future. That said, we do take the integrity and consistency of the process seriously. Situations like these can't 100% be avoided, but provided I see another posted ReMixer 3N'ed like this, I'll be more likely to check the track before moving out the decision thread. In this case, the original decision was in 2015, but that doesn't mean it can't or shouldn't be reassessed, either due to stubbornness or how much time has elapsed since the decision. --------------------------------------- Onto the track itself... The track was 2:14-long, so I needed to hear the source tune used for at least 67 seconds for the VGM to be dominant within the arrangement. :20-:26, :29-:34, :36-1:07, 1:15-1:21, 1:23.5-1:28, 1:31-1:37, 1:39-1:54, 1:57.5-2:10 = 73.5 seconds or 54.8% overt source usage I'm likely shortchanging it, but I'm just timing it out to establish that I heard the Tornado Man theme in play for most of the performance. My rebuttal to the initial 3 NO votes: This is not too short. This is not too quiet or sparse. This is not lacking dynamics. I'm not sure how labeling this as quiet and sparse is justified; it's a solo piano piece with a pretty normal volume. Arrangement & interpretation-wise, you have a fast & upbeat 8-bit source tune adapted to solo piano, slowed down, switched to 3/4 time, given a genteel presentation with subtle tempo changes and, IMO, strong performance dynamics. The overall dynamic curve of this piece may be narrower, but there are clearly noticeably fuller (e.g. :21, 1:11) and softer sections (e.g. :00, 1:48) that show off this arrangement as an intimate piano performance. How is this piece not substantial enough when it comes to interpretation of the source tune? It's only 2:15-long, but there's 0 repetition as far as the presentation & performance dynamics, and we have plenty of sub-2:30-long arrangements, including 8 in the past 4 years. It could be longer, but it's not underdeveloped; saying it wasn't a substantive enough approach given what in fact was done is not cut-and-dry, so I'm pulling this back to the panel for more votes. I'm not saying anyone has to vote with me; this isn't me trying to browbeat a change in this vote. However, after hearing this piece, I feel like the panel made a mistake with this original vote and that the Standards weren't properly applied, so, once again, I'm flipping a table. While the original votes will stand, I am calling for the current panelists to weigh in, and requesting a full majority vote of 6 YESs or NOs (i.e. 9 current judges, factoring in the votes here of 2 past judges). YES
  5. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.
  6. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.
  7. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.
  8. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.
  9. Liontamer

    Streaming site?

    Rainwave.cc has dedicated streams for OC ReMixes, non-OCR arrangements, VGM soundtracks, and chiptunes. Enjoy!
  10. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.
  11. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.
  12. Liontamer

    Sonic Spinball

    I'll see what I can do on this one. There are some good Sonic Spinball mixes that should be sent our way. If I knew nothing about OCR's exact catalog, I would have bet my life that we had at least one Sonic Spinball cover, so we need to fill this gap!
  13. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.
  14. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.
  15. What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.