Liontamer

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.

djp's been busy/sick. So I'm doing some themed runs of mixes this month. Perhaps we'll have more activity later in the month.

Everything sounded distant, but increasing the volume a touch made it OK relative to the levels of a typical track. Agreed on the sax placement and energy feeling underwhelming, but that felt more like a balance issue. Didn't feel the key change into "Hopes and Dreams" at 2:53 flowed as well as it could have, but the combination of themes still worked fine. So I agreed with the others that the production wasn't ideal, but everything's solidly over the line with the arrangement creativity and overall mixing. Gimme dat chocolate! YES

There's certainly notable additive writing going on here, but on the whole it feels too similar in tone and structure to the original song without ENOUGH additive components. The wholly original stuff from 1:36-1:50 was nice albeit very brief. At only 2:18-long, there needs to be much, much more demonstrated in the way of development and interpretation for a piece this short. It's a cool sound upgrade approach, and Rebecca's tracks are well-made and enjoyable whether they follow OCR standards or not, but this doesn't pass on arrangement grounds. NO

Comment on each version together in one vote; try to find out the differences; I assume they aren't major. Then we can combine the two threads into one and have 3 NO votes.

Assuming you mean the intro song, I have no idea what it is, but it sounds great.

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.

Wow, that FL Slayer guitar sample ain't getting it done. The beats at :20 were thin, plainly-written, and droning, and the lead synth was super vanilla. Basically, all of the sound design was weak. At 1:38, the arrangement sounded like a cut-and-paste of :20's section. There was no synnergy or cohesiveness as far as these sound working together. To the extent that I was digging your Kingdom Hearts "Dearly Beloved" arrangement, I thought this was poor all-around and didn't have enough effort put into creative sound choices or a developed arrangement. Maybe this genre is outside of your wheelhouse, but there's just 0 polish or sophistication to the execution here. Sorry I don't have any praise for it, but I know you're capable of much more than this, Joey. NO

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

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

Cool to hear this theme done in a such a bouncy style. Good use of the CV 2 GB and NES themes as the introductions to the Dracula X version of "Beginning." The textures were a bit busy for me personally, but the mixing was solid and the elements all sounded sharp. Won't be everyone's cup of tea, but I drink transformative tea. YES

Nice soundscape to open things up; a touch muddy, but purposeful. Some of the instrumentation tilted towards the generic side, but the overall treatment and production of these sounds was solid. Smaller detail, but it's nice to hear breakbeats with a different style of drum samples (first used at :35 with filtering that gradually dropped by :53). I liked how, even softly, there was almost always a line playing both the source melody and countermelody; the instrumentation and textures evolved constantly here, so there was never a dull moment. Very creative arranging, Daniel, and way to get a good deal of creative mileage with such a limited source! Welcome aboard! YES

Just noting that I've only heard the revised version. I was worried about the opening being so similar in instrumentation and tone to the original song, but it differentiates itself a lot once things kick in, as the others said. Loved the section using the more chippy elements the most, first isolated at 2:16. Later, at 3:16, I thought the opportunity was there for a more pronounced dynamic shift for the finish, but the wind-down at 3:44 worked nicely to mirror the close with the opening. Nice work, Brett! Short and sweet, count it. YES

Surprising arrangement approach, but I've been on the panel long enough to know that textural reduction is considered a very valid one. The interpretive aspect isn't lost at all either, which was just as important. Good use of the bubbling SFX, which fit very nicely in the soundscape both in the introduction and close, so I completely disagreed with Gario there; don't really care if it fits a beach vibe just because the word "surf" is in the submission letter. The subtle ramp-up at 2:12 and turn at 2:42 toward a different guitar rhythm and additional line in the background was well overdue, so I'm glad it all finally arrived; I would have felt compelled to reject this for a lack of development if the piece had hovered at the initial energy level and instrument set with a flat dynamic curve for 5 minutes. Everything after 2:42 continued to work well, including the dropoff back to the initial energy level at 3:41 but joined by the bubbling SFX and a more active lead. I could have gone for even more twists in this arrangement, but what's here works for the standards. Good job, Von! YES

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

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

A fair amount of the synth design was generic, especially the vanilla saw leads. There's something about the beats being plodding. The core beats (bass & kicks) behind the :52-1:02, 1:23-2:04, 2:15-2:24, 2:36-2:56 & 3:07-3:27 sections were too plain and ultimately plodding, IMO, and it's like this for too much of the track. The plain writing of the beats was OK from :10-:40 when you opened the piece up with an understated build, but something more creative and varied should have anchored the piece later on. Smaller thing, but the articulations of the sampled plucked strings from 1:54-2:06 just sound too mechanical; thankfully, they didn't last too long. I know they're not meant to sound 100% organic, but the robotic sequencing for a sound like that generally doesn't work. This is going well in the right direction arrangement-wise, and I agreed with Chimpazilla that the subtle differences in the repetition of the verse at 2:25 were a smart idea to keep the writing fresh. Good stuff so far, Erick, but the synth design and beat-writing both need to be more sophisticated. What's in place is creative, but sounds more like a late-stage work-in-progress than a cohesive, finished product. NO (resubmit)

Once you hear the original, you can see why anyone would want to arrange it. Huelsbeck crafted a beautiful ending theme that lends itself well to relaxing instrumentation like Andrew and Stevo employed for the first half. Ramping up the second half was a creative change of pace, even though the first half was so relaxing that I'd have had 0 problem with the entire track being paced that way. Source usage was nice and straightforward, and the arrangement was excellent. Stamp of rubber! YES

I see Gario's point about having issues with with the arrangement and how close it matches the original. Though the structure was the same, I thought this went in the right direction in personalizing the adaptation to rock; it doesn't pass on the level of interpretation in the arrangement for me either, but there are additive writing components and live performance flourishes that deserved credit. That said, I agreed with Gario on the lack of sophistication in the sequenced material. The lack of realism in the brass and bowed string sequencing, and the piano tone were pretty exposed weak points, and that pulled this down below the bar when considering that alongside the relatively close arrangement. If the sequenced/sampled instrumentation were better humanized and/or the arrangement did more to vary from the original source tune, I could pass this. Shinray's a great band, so if they're interested in further polishing this, we'd love to post it in some form. NO (resubmit)