Liontamer

The lead at :22 was getting buried by the ethereal soundscape; it may be a purposeful choice, but the part-writing got swallowed up and couldn't be appreciated. The track could use a volume boost as well, since it sounds needlessly distant. Good additive writing from 2:09-2:50 to provide some much-needed originality. 3:39 also had another smooth segue to some original writing, then flowed into more original writing integrated with variations on the source melody over the core backing patterns of the source at 4:01-4:48. 4:48 went back to the main melody in play, and again the mixing felt odd with the melody pushed so far back; it's not that this can't be allowed, but the mixing's done in a way where the soundscape just becomes cluttered, and there's no line to focus on (even if it's not the melody). This was a pretty subdued arrangement that didn't change the part-writing as much as the mood and balance of things to start, but later on the original writing integration was more substantial (and seamless), and I felt the overall level of personalization/interpretation was solid. I wouldn't mind another pass at the mixing to see if it could be improved, as I shared MindWanderer's criticism about the lead getting buried, but I'm more open-minded as to what the balance can be as long as the track is getting more right than wrong, which I think is the case here. YES

It's melodically conservative, but adds in plenty of personalized Latin spices with this live performance approach. Loved the additive part-writing not found in the original song as well. MindWanderer mentioned the arrangement being too conservative, but to me the overall presentation stands apart enough from the original song via the genre change and additive writing, which I think he undersold. The ending at 3:13 was flat, and I would have liked a genuine resolution. Even the fade-out after the final note felt too fast, but that was small potatoes. Fun energy and nice work! YES

Was waiting to see where the intro would go, since things were pretty repetitive for the first minute. The source tune was more marginalized in the background once the orch stab countermelody was placed in at :41. The chorus at 1:08 sampled "It Takes Two" shouts sounded very stapled on top of and disconnected from the soundscape; they need to be blended in properly as more of a background player. Meanwhile, the choir vox was very mechanical-sounding and mainly added mud to the soundscape instead of effective padding. Whatever line is going on from 1:21-1:36 (brass? strings?) was pretty rigid as well. Didn't notice how beefy the bassline was until 2:30, but it's certainly like that the whole way; good stuff there. Would have been better if the orch stabs and other instrumentation didn't sound muffled and washed out. I could see the hard loop point annoying some people, but I was fine with it; not that this should be a factor, but it stayed faithful to the loop point in the source tune as well. I like the energy here with the xylo opening, and the increased tempo and thick beats all help this stand apart from the feel of the original, so the personalization of the arrangement goes in the right direction. But as more and more elements were added, the lack of clarity in the mixing hurt this; it's needlessly lossy-sounding. Also, I recognize the gradual additive approach here as Gario pointed out, but agreed with MindWanderer that the track ultimately did feel repetitive for the start and could have been cut down. That said, the middle portion did present some new ideas and instrumentation changes. Mainly, the mixing needs some TLC to not allow parts to get buried. If you can brighten this up and ensure the parts are properly EQ-ed and separated, this would be in much better shape. Good work so far, Bass. NO (resubmit)

The rigid string attacks opening things up were in uncanny valley territory, so that's an area of needed improvement. Same with the brass brought in later, but less of an issue. At 1:04, I've heard Justin use these beats before, and to me they lack some punch; would also like to hear more sophisticated writing there, since they sound stapled on top of the other writing and not really integrated. I also agreed with Gario about how they droned. All of the timing's pretty stilted and rigid on this, so while the arrangement's otherwise creative, energetic and strong, the very robotic timing on nearly everything (strings & electric guitar in particular) was too pervasive and should be addressed. Let's get more "surgical" with the timing of this to get it sounding more humanized and better realize the potential of the arrangement. NO (resubmit) EDIT (10/13/20): I purposefully didn't listen to the old version just to come into this track with a fresh perspective and this was just so much more cohesive and well-presented than before. I still think the percussion could be produced to make it more impactful, and the faux geetar grates some, but the instrumentation quality is much stronger and the arrangement has moved into more of a thrill ride kind of territory. Quite the long hold for this one before bringing it back, but well worth the wait now. An awesome return for Justin! YES

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

Why are we paneling Ben again? I ask this every time. YES for SNES ORCH STAB

Wow, nice. The piano that dropped in at the beginning at :14 was silky smoove. I love the instrumental expansion for the start, and the textures were awesome. Ooh, really didn't expect the bitcrushed stuff at :43. Definitely threw me for a loop in a good way. And now I'm smiling and dipping to the beat Thomas set here, really digging the approach here. The string work at :58 was a little subtle under the electronic lead, but the overall mixing was solid, and the interplay between the electronic lead, the string and the piano was nice. When the beefy beat came in at 1:27, I thought the mixing needed some work; it was odd how heavy that beat was, yet the rest of the soundscape felt more dry until 1:41 brought in that countermelodic line. No big deal. There's a relative emptiness during the 1:56-2:25 section that I can't put my finger on, but 2:25 picked things up very nicely and filled out the soundscape with the intensity I'd been expecting before. Strong stuff before winding down with the fade out finish of the opening piano. Aside from some mixing tweaks, what more could you ask for? Great expansion and personalization of the theme. GLL's clearly not been resting in the near-14 years he's been away from submitting music to OCR, and I'm honored to be the closing vote on this one. YES

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

Wanted to hear something more going on with the arrangement at 1:41 when the verse repeated, and that thankfully came through towards the end of it with new instrumentation ideas. At 2:41, there was more meat added into the soundscape via more new instrumentation; would have also like to have heard some other type of rhythmic or tempo change or melodic interpretation there as well, because dynamically things were relatively similar, but that's not to say there was 0 dynamic contrast. That last little held woodwind note at the very end should have tapered off a little more softly, because it felt like it cut off abruptly, but no big deal. All in all, a solid, melodically close arrangement that focuses on personalizing the track through lots of well-done instrument changes. The arrangement could have been more dynamic, but what's here still gets it done with enough interpretation. YES

Yeah, I agree with MindWanderer that while this was melodically conservative (too much in places), the overall approach was interpretive enough. In adapting this to orchestral, Rebecca included a lot of subtle original part-writing and grace notes. I would have liked 1:35-3:27 to stand apart from the original more, including some of the supporting part-writing also being close, but the additive parts within genre adaptation did provide some differences to let this still feel subtly militaristic but less like a march. The final 2 minutes definitely saved it and pulled this back from the concerns that the overall presentation wasn't interpretive enough. Keep doing your thing! YES

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

2ND EVAL The piano opening things up sounded very mechanical right from the start. Beats at :24 were super-thin and sounded too clean compared to the effects on the piano. IMO, there was no synergy with the piano, keyboard, faux sax, and beats. I did like the piano picking up at 1:33; again, the piano sounded rigidly timed, but the writing there was creative, and you did a nice job gradually increasing its intensity. The beats came back in at 1:56. It was only at 1:56 that I ever noticed this track had a bassline; it barely, just barely registered, but it was so subtle that it doesn't contribute anything; give that some more presense. Basically lots of quasi-comping on top of the sparse backing writing until 2:41 picked back up with the melody invoked. Well, I didn't think the combination of instruments clicked for the first 90 seconds, and without some lyrics though, this ultimately didn't sound substantial enough as a standalone piece. The timing shouldn't sound mechanical on anything, and the instrumental could use more meat on it. Needs work to polish up the execution and thicken things up. I'd also argue you could get rid of the first 90 seconds and just develop with more ideas after things fill out more.

Nice and heavy intro with CoD's "Abandoned Castle." Not feeling the instrumentation at :35; not sure why the synth piano-lead sounds flat, but it's in uncanny valley territory, i.e. the tone sounds good, but the articulations sound rigid. The backing bowed strings also felt the same way; not totally exposed, but still a stiff, uncanny valley sound. The mixing was also cluttered, but reasonably solid. In the grand scheme of things, none of that meaningfully dings the track on a production level. I can see the argument about the change of themes at 1:05 feeling disjointed, but IMO that's only because you know the themes are different. A 1:04, the theme change had a quick transition sound and flowed together just fine and had I not known there were multiple sources, I could have believed it was structurally from one composition in the Castlevania series. On the flip side, something with the chorus writing from 1:20-1:34 also sounded flat; I'm not saying to slavishly hold to the melody as it sounded in the source, but that was melodious while this didn't present any contrast from the verse before it with the tone of the synth. Really flat transition to CoD's "Abandoned Castle" chorus at 1:34; that was a chance for some dynamic contrast, and it just didn't happen. That change DID feel abrupt. As it quickly moved onto focusing on that theme, there was some great energy with the treatment of Castlevania III's "Beginning" from 1:44. Much like how I thought the transition at 1:04 worked, the shift back to CoD's "Abandoned Castle" at 2:16 was also seamless. But then you have transition spots like 2:30, 2:37 (I'll live on that one), 2:53 & 3:06 in pretty close succession that all felt very jumpy. I did enjoy the subtle source tune interplay after 3:06, and the energy of the final section and the close were great. I'm one of the more permissive judges when it comes to transitions, so I was expecting to roll on the YES side, but I'm with the NOs that there are too many jumpy transitions where the flow of the piece felt disjointed; it's definitely not just from recognizing which themes are which, as we have multi-source medleys with lots of theme changes that click better than this. I hope Andrew would be willing to take another look at this to see how to have this flow together more, since the performance and production are strong. NO (resubmit)

I'm with MindWanderer. The arrangement's strong, but the mixing's too cluttered. I've tried giving it the benefit of the doubt, but I ultimately agreed that it's not mixed well. I'm not against power in a rock track, but every section with the source melody or the backing chugs in play was too cluttered, and that's a dealbreaker. The synth at 2:42 & 3:21 did step over the guitar, and the sequencing was really stilted there as well. Dustin's usually got things on pretty solid ground, but there are just too many sections where the mixing is sloppy. NO (resubmit)

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

Much love to Mazedude for helping us eventually fill this request! http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR03616

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.

What did you think? Post your opinion of this ReMix.