Liontamer

The piano chords were pretty muffled, but even so, nothing struck me as off and messing up the listen, so I'll just restate that this is overblown. If anything, the chords shouldn't be so muffled. As for the voice clips, I can do without some of them, sure, but like Gario and the submitting artist said, they're there to tell a story and they worked just fine in that context. Also, I didn't previously notice MindWanderer mention the clips can be spoilers, but people will live and we also have no rule against that.

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

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

https://www.yahoo.com/music/bleeps-pong-mario-game-music-114045453.html http://www.zeldainformer.com/oc-remix-releases-mirror-image-new-full-length-a-link-to-the-past-remix-album/ http://www.pcgamer.com/stranger-things-season-two-features-a-song-from-this-voice-controlled-indie-strategy-game/ http://www.hsuoracle.com/arts_and_entertainment/a-starved-community-thrives/article_c06dec0c-cf02-11e7-94d6-ff28c586e36d.html

Interesting arrangement approach where the piece sounds much more cinematic and potentially uplifting than the source. The constant clicks/pop cited by the other Js need to be removed. You'll have to figure out which corrupted samples are causing these, and then re-render the track. At 1:51-2:11, there was definitely clipping-style distortions occurring, despite the overall volume being low. Volume was pretty low compared to other tracks, so I'm surpised that MindWanderer said things got piercing, but if you turn up the volume just to hear this at a normal volume, the more crowded parts do come off like they're crowded (e.g. 2:59-3:21). The mixing here is off; there's a distinct lack of high-end clarity throughout that may not necessarily be a dealbreaker for people, but does undermine the arrangement. I'll come back to this one after giving it some more time. EDIT (8/25): I'm very sorry for holding this up, Mathieu, as I forgot to come back to it. That said, listening again, I'll just confirm like the others that I enjoyed the arrangement, but you need to fix the production issues. If you could just remove the distortion spots, you'd be in much better shape. Consider also increasing the volume, but watching that you don't leave things too cluttered like some of the densest sections were. Very strong start here; you don't need to change anything with the arrangement, you just need to iron out those production issues, and send it back. NO (resubmit)

Not really a fan of the piano timing, which sounded mechanical. Unlike the real piano in "Children", which sounds lush, the sampled piano was dryer than it should be, so the stilted timing was too exposed. The strings at 1:42 were also an issue, both with mechanical timing, and also because the mixing became cluttered. Also, it wasn't the biggest deal, but your bassline -- while it did register -- was indistinct and pretty much buried until 2:11. The strings and piano being so fakey was more of a problem from 2:11-2:56 when the texture was less dense and you could focus on them more. I did like the different lead from 2:56-3:25 and the chromatic percussion accents were a nice touch. The soundscape wasn't washed out from 3:25-3:38, but watch for clutter there, particularly for that flourish from 3:35-3:38. When the synth strings were more in the background as a countermelody from 3:52-4:20 the background placement served them much better and didn't expose the sample. Arrangement-wise, this is creative, evolving and developed, and Starla's vocals were performed nicely and produced with that lush sound [although too mudded up in some places (e.g. 3:34-3:38)]. I'm gonna be the grandpa and say the piano and string sequencing shouldn't sound this fakey, in that order. Perhaps you might be able to adjust some effects on those parts to better mask the lack of realism, but either way, I'm not on board until those parts are more humanized. NO (resubmit)

Nice sound to the opening piano. The woodwind stuff next had a beautiful tone to it, but was very muddy. Then the soundscape became a little clearer for the orchestration from :22-:36. Overall, the soundscape wasn't too muddy as to obscure the part-writing, but it was pushing up against it during some denser sections. Still good enough, IMO. From :44-:59, 1:28-1:42 & 2:26-2:41, the way the vox triggered made it sound way too stiff and robotic; having the delay in there did help mitigate the issue some, but not enough where it wasn't still a significant drawback. Also, the string articulations were OK, but the attacks from :34-:36 were awkward and exposed the sample. Arrangement-wise, the structure and tempo were the same as the source, but this was expanded beautifully via the new instrumentation. Props on making sure to vary the instrumentation & textures from verse to verse, creating some subtle dynamic contrast and making sure that the track didn't sound cut-and-paste repetitive despite going back to the same melodies and verses. That said, the vox line WAS cut-and-paste territory coupled with the sequencing/timing sounding so robotic, so that's something you'll need to fix as well as vary up. DA's not wrong in feeling the arrangement was nonetheless repetitive; she heard and acknowledged the same techniques I did, so consider adding further personalization to your arrangement via other original part-writing or variations of the theme. DragonAvenger's also dead on that this track also had no real ending. It was a very "OK, I give up" kind of vibe after hitting a known loop point, so write a real ending with an actual resolution to it. Good start for now, Albert, but it does still play it pretty close to the vest and could use even more personalization, though you went in the right direction. Expand/vary the writing further, and also fix up the timing/realism issues with the vox (necessary) & strings (nice-to-have). NO (resubmit)

I'm gonna keep it short and sweet. I agreed that this was overcompressed, but it wasn't a dealbreaker, and I disagreed with Gario's POV that the mix was too wet; the style was purposeful and I could still make out the part-writing just fine, so I don't see what the big issue was. The arrangement was repetitive towards the end and could have been more interesting with some more dynamic contrast in the picture, but what's here was developed and varied enough to get by. I thought the changes in this arrangement were substantial enough to stand apart from the original, so I had no problems with the level of interpretation. MindWanderer's analysis on the two songs lining up was helpful, but it's certainly possible to retain the tempo and structure of a source while providing other aspects of interpretation, and that's done here. Nice work, Stam! Count me in. YES

Maybe it's more apparent with headphones, but to me the beats were too overpowering compared to the other parts; until 1:30, there's so much clutter created by the bass and beats. And it's from :15-1:30 and especially 3:01-3:53 where the soundscape just sounds too cluttered, which undermined the attempted dynamics of the arrangement. Perhaps whatever's going on with the lead from 1:45-2:00 is an acquired taste, but to me it wasn't quite melodious there. That said, I liked how you constantly varied the lead sound as you played that source melody numerous times, and it clicked better for me with some of the other lead choices. At 2:00, a change for the instrumentation handling the countermelodic synth would have been nice; that part got overused, IMO. 3:30-3:52 did get repetitive by re-using :30's section, but it was a good, meaty sound; some sort of textural variation earlier there would help it sound more creative and less cut-and-paste-like compared to the beginning. This is a great start, but despite many of the textural changes going on, the overall groove felt too samey. Right now, the core beats and instrumentation were too repetitive. Some more varied beat-writing and swapping out the instrumentation for some of the parts would help keep this fresh. Along with cleaning up/re-EQing the soundscape so that your parts didn't clutter together, that's mainly what I'd work on. Nice work so far, Bo. This was very promising, and I hope you're willing to revisit this one to see how else you can improve the writing and production. NO (resubmit)

Arrangement-wise, this used the theme well in adapting it for a more upbeat genre. Interesting approach going for a kind of grade-up Secret of Mana-style instrumentation. The combination of 16-bit sounds with other instrumentation was good, but the muddy mixing and bland beat-writing ultimately dragged this down for me. The bowed strings at :50 didn't sound good IMO because the attacks sounded slightly behind, but maybe it's just an acquired taste, since the 16-bit tone was at least super-authentic. I didn't feel the buzzy synth in the opening section was as negative as Deia did, but I still agreed with her that it was too upfront and distracting; perhaps pulling it back some would work better. The beats/kicks at 1:17 had beef to 'em, but the writing was really vanilla, so I was waiting for something more interesting to happen with the perc writing. Then the perc writing shifted into something more boom-tss with the cymbals coming in at 1:45, but it's still a pretty basic, too-straightforward beat that ultimately dragged out. Plus, the mixing didn't make much sense, with the beats being nearly the same volume as the lead. When the bowed strings then came back at 2:12, the writing was good, but the part mostly added clutter to the soundscape because a lot of these parts occupied the same frequency range. 3:06's finish had some parts drop out, clearing up the soundscape some. I think the development of the track went well in the right direction, but more sophisticated and varied beat-writing and cleaner mixing would be enough to get this passed, IMO. Promising stuff so far, Jonas, so I really hope you're willing to revisit this again. Would love to have you finally get Legend of Mana up on the board here at OCR, and what's in place now is well along the way and just needs some additional refinements. NO (resubmit)

I've only heard this version, so I'm coming in with fresh ears. Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep. The core drum pattern just droned on and the arrangement -- which I was going to pass until I got to this section -- became very dynamically flat. Production-wise, I didn't have any major issues; the other Js are correct on what could still be addressed, but that would all be in the "nice-to-have" category. Vary up the stale, repetitive backing of the 2:17-3:16 section and you're in business. Nice work so far, Daniel, so definitely stay with this one! NO (resubmit)

In light of the strong arrangement and performance, the clutter in this track wasn't a dealbreaker, but it was a negative for sure (e.g. 1:38-2:08). The timing of the rock from 2:31-2:34 sounded slightly off, but it was brief. Some of the thumps on the acoustic sounded like they were distorted and too close to the mic, but that also wasn't a big deal. That said, I loved the piece, and this was a dense, rocked out treatment of one of the best themes from the Genesis version of this soundtrack. It's been a long time since I heard of Mauricio self-project of ThePlasmas "band", and Nitro Game Injection's KyleJCrb has been a great advocate of his and really put him on my radar as he developed into a stronger performer. It's awesome to finally have you on board with an official OC ReMix! Definitely send in some more of your work, Mauricio, and welcome aboard. YES

He also called you Chimpyzilla later on in his vote. [/shakes head]

I never heard the first version, so I'm coming in fresh. The track was 4:15-long, so I needed needed at least 127.5 seconds of overt source usage for the VGM to dominate the arrangement. I didn't count some of the chords Gario referenced, but maybe I'd understand them better if I listened to the source tune more; a moot point anyway, since there was no issue regarding source usage. :48-1:00, 1:13-2:35, 2:38-2:47 (Zelda NES), 2:50-4:14 - 186 seconds I actually would subtract some time with some of the gaps in the piano part playing the source, but it certainly wouldn't be anything that would make it a close call on the amount of source usage. Arrangement-wise, this was more of a rap instrumental in style, so there was some repetition, but the piece certainly evolved and developed over time, so I had no issues there. I could see why some would take issue with the numerous voice clips; I'd be down with some of them being cut out, but it's just a personal taste thing, IMO. I had 0 issue with how the clips were used and didn't feel they detracted from the piece at all; you get used to them over time, and they added variety to the sound, so I think the NOs should work on removing the Octoroks stuffed up their butts. I disagreed with Chimpa on the "heavy dissonance from 2:29-2:50"; nothing's off there. While I like strong basses, things could have been toned down here; that said, the clutter others pointed out wasn't a dealbreaker at all. Nice, chill work, Joe! Let's goooooooooooooooooooooooooooo! YES

Got 'em. Holler if & when you have more updates!

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

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

As of today, I've completed this task. There may be some ReMixes with multiple source tunes or some theme cameos where those tracks haven't been noted in our database yet, so if anyone finds something like that, please let me know!

The version now hosted IS the version you're referring to, which was 192kbps.

That would be too bad, but we actually did what you're talking about. I did the torrent updates in 2012 and 2014, and we upgraded the encodings/bitrates of more than 500 ReMixes. Some of the stuff you linked to were artists creating new or expanded versions of their tracks, which we wouldn't replace the posted ReMixes with, but perhaps djp would be open to hosting alternate versions in a non-featured way. It's never a bad time to reach out to artists again, but I'll clarify that I already did do this work before from 2009-2014, through a mass email to all ReMixers, and a forum thread where some fans also provided better encodings that they'd saved.

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

Thursday, September 28 to Sunday, October 1 Renaissance Waverly Hotel & Cobb Galleria, Atlanta, GA http://awa-con.com OCR returns to Atlanta for our second panel at Anime Weekend Atlanta! Held at the Cobb Galleria (right by the Cobb Energy Center where VGM concerts perform in ATL), AWA is the the southeast's largest anime convention! Spend time with several of OCR's Atlanta community members as we talk about the greatness of video game music! OC ReMix: Celebrating Video Game Music! Panel Date/Time: Sun, Oct. 1, 2PM Location: CGC 106 Panelists: Liontamer! nelward!

I never heard the first version, so I'm coming into this fresh. Production's definitely not an issue now; sometimes the supporting guitar was comparatively too loud behind the lead, but it was nothing dealbreaking or worth timestamping because everything sounded reasonably well-mixed and above bar there, IMO. Strange how I've never heard this source before. Can't say I enjoyed the source tune OR this version of it initially, but that's because it followed the structure of the original which already has some pretty odd writing that never clicked for me. It was a moot point by the 5th time I listened to this and got used to the flow of this arrangement, but I'm just getting my stream of consciousness out there on how I reacted to the source. Dynamically, I was disappointed by this one. Again, I'm always fine with pieces that have a narrower dynamic curve, as long as enough is going on within that curve. I don't mind this going for a laid-back, surf vibe, but it just came off as plodding as well as texturally empty in places, despite the obvious musicianship demonstrated in putting it all together. I'm not saying this needed more grandiose energy anywhere, but the organ line definitely dragged out over time, and the overall energy level felt pretty static. I think one cause for this compared to the original was that -- unlike the source -- your chorus sections (first at :47) kept the same instrumentation and energy level as the verses, so nothing in the composition introduced a real shift in the writing or sound. Not saying you have to slavishly follow the source tune's structure and change the instrumentation for that section, but that was just a way the original song was more dynamic. On the flip side, props for varying up the drumwork so nicely to not let that aspect get stale. That stuff was subtle enough though that it didn't create more overt dynamic contrast within the arrangement, but it was what it was. Boy, those dropoffs at 2:47-3:11 just didn't feel right either, even though that went in the right direction as far as varying the textures. Ultimately, it's seemingly more of the same writing, instrumentation and energy level only minus some parts. By the time the song picked back up at 3:11, the whole piece was dragging, IMO. To me, the instrumentation never changing combined with the flat dynamics ended up killing it for me. I'm unfortunately but initially a NO (resubmit), but I will certainly be listening more to this one, and am open to the possibility that I'm "old-manning" this and not getting it. I'll need to see more feedback from the other Js here, but I will be watching this discussion for anyone to make a compelling enough case for me to flip my vote. It's really difficult to be calling this a NO when the production was so solid, but the arrangement being so samey throughout is nagging me.

Production-wise, the low-end felt like it added some clutter, but it wasn't a huge deal, and the listen was relatively clean/clear overall. If the lead sound had been changed or varied at 2:05, I think that would have made things more interesting in that final minute. I also thought the core beat writing should have varied more as well, since I agree with all of the other Js that the writing of it definitely plodded after a while despite the subtle changes to the beat's tone every few measures. That said, the rhythmic variations to the source tune right from the get-go and the textural variations with the instrumentation over time were both crucial in providing substantial enough interpretation. Regardless of the name attached to it, this could have been more -- and all of us including MkVaff agree -- but IMO it does get it done. Keep 'em coming, Mike! YES (borderline)

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