Liontamer

Issues first. The minor guitar mistakes in the back from :25-:27's are a bummer, but quiet and easily glossed over. Same with the brief bow movement that sounded off for a moment at 1:00. Was waiting for that flute from 1:18-1:26 to resolve in a satisfying way before the chorus, and it certainly didn't; odd notes there at 1:21, and unfortunately mixed in a way where all one could do was focus on the flute sounding off vs. the rest of the music. But again, it's in and it's out just as quickly. After that, there were no other major issues I heard, and if there's something else to be criticized by others, it wasn't anything that stood out or detracted for me. That said, those were relatively minor issues for brief moments; yes, they may bother people a lot, especially when the overall performance is good, making the mistakes stand out all the more. But it's not a big deal in the big picture. With the arrangement criticisms on tempo, that feels totally subjective and a "nice-to-have" adjustment rather than something that should have dinged it. That said, I'm a warts-and-all kind of guy regarding minor issues. As long as what works about the arrangement creativity, and production & performance markedly outweigh the negatives on the metaphorical seesaw, I'm down. With this, there were three brief and, frankly, minor stumbles to start, but the final 4 minutes of a 5 minute piece were strong and creative, and the first minute wasn't poor by any means. I won't be mad at all if this is rejected, because those issues were unfortunate and draw attention, but I don't feel enough is wrong with this to reject it. It's making a mountain out of a molehill on some minor performance flubs. YES

Need @Palpable, @OA, and/or @Sir_NutS to weigh in on the updated version to see if the added melodic usage puts them over the top. Will gladly take some other Js voting as well, but it would be good to have at least one more J who voted NO be OK with the changes.

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

Rock. Welcome, @aubreyhodges! Like Gario said, we always love game composers being involved in the community, giving feedback to arrangements of their music, or submitting their own interpretive arrangements. Since you're here, I'll just extend the callout window another 6 weeks to give people a fair chance to take advantage of you checking in on this. You can host/link anything you like from your work on the Quest for Glory series or PM me what materials you'd like us to host, and we could take care of that!

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

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

The electrosynth first used at :40 and then as the lead from :50-1:13 sounds really flat and not melodious, IMO, and was at least somewhat covered up by the other instrumentation to mitigate how grating it felt to me. That said, the balance didn't make sense at it was the melodic lead, yet was being overrun by the guitar chugs and drums. Note the major volume disparity between the leads when it changes from the synth to the guitar at 1:14. That synth worked much better as a quiet doubling and accent part in the backing (e.g. 1:14-1:33), but when it was exposed (2:08-2:37), I wasn't feeling it. I hope a musician J can explain what qualities of that synth might be causing it to sound grating and unappealing, as I'm not just trying to make a personal taste issue of it and thought it clicked better in that quiet doubling role. This is structurally close, and I was worried by the part-writing being so close for the introduction, but after 1:14, I see how the instrumentation and backing writing have differences from the original, so I do like the personalization to this rock approach. From 2:08-2:29, there was a fair amount of muddiness with the backing parts. Just lots of clutter & mud when machine gun drums were added in from 2:49-2:59. 3:08-3:30 sounded like a cut-and-paste of 1:44-2:06's section, but it wasn't too much, so no big deal there. The mixing and lack of clarity in here hurt this, but I think I'd go YES if everything else were on point. I'd say improve the tone of that one integral electrosynth and also do what you can with EQing to reduce the muddiness of the piece. Otherwise, HongYu, it has great energy and is a very spirited rock cover. I wouldn't have a problem with this posted as is, but that combination of smaller production added up to enough where I feel the production merits one more pass before it's over the line there. Excellent potential here! NO (resubmit)

Needs more Tombs & Treasure (e.g. track 6, "El Caracol")!

Hopefully, Alex won't be mad about a rejection on these grounds, but yeah, I had to turn down an otherwise great bLiNd and Chimpazilla collab from even going to the panel for the same reason. I quoted her because I agree with her sentiment; it's a great track on its own, so if you feel no reason to modify it just to pass OCR, no worries. Still great work here, even if it falls outside the rules here; what's most important is making the track how you envisioned it and in the way you most enjoy.

For the record, I've only listening to the remastered version that Brent provided on 3/16. The track was 3:02-long, so I needed at least 91 seconds of overt source usage. The usage of "Alien Forces" started at 1:00.5 and lasted until the end (even though it was quiet & marginalized from 2:23 until the finish), so the source usage aspect was a clear pass and I didn't need to calculate anything. Half-Life 2 "Nova Prospekt" - :15-40.5 (drums with gaps), :41-1:00? (sounded similar, but didn't quite match, AFAIK) Half-Life: Opposing Force "Alien Forces" - 1:00.5-3:01 The arrangement itself was cool; with sources like these, I understand how the arrangement approach was about building original writing around basic patterns and references to the sources. The levels were strange in that the soundscape became fuller at from :41-1:00, but the overall volume was relatively quiet. Yeah, there's bassline resonance from 1:00-1:20 that should have been pulled back, but it wasn't anything that was a dealbreaker for me. I was starting to get concerns about crowding around 1:19 when the lower backing strings sounded very indistinct, and that certainly became more of an issue at 1:38 & mostly 1:58 when more instruments joined in and the textures became very muddy until 2:13. The soundscape was better at 2:14 once the instrumentation changed up. "Alien Forces" is still present through the bassline, but it was marginalized once original writing was added on top at 2:23, making it relatively inaudible. To me, I still hear it and thus still count it, but it would have been better if the presence of "Alien Forces" hadn't (inadvertently?) waned towards the finish. On the seesaw of what works vs. what doesn't work, Brent's got an interpretive, well-developed arrangement with cool instrumentation but some crowding and levels issues. Nonetheless, even though the production wasn't ideal and hurt this one, I gave this several listens and the mixing choices/issues don't drag this down enough to where I'd reject it. Though I understand the NOs fully, I'm on board; let's go! YES (borderline)

Bloodborne "Cleric Beast" - :25-1:33, 3:01.5-3:45 = 109.5 seconds King's Field IV "Dark Reality" - 1:33-3:01.5 = 88.5 seconds Well, that is indeed "Moonlight Sonata" opening the piece, and even when it's more marginalized at :46, it's used as backing until 1:06, and comes back later. I'm not sure why Alex said it wasn't a "Moonlight Sonata" mix, when in effect it is for the start. Bummer, man. Gotta go NO on a standards violation, even though the rest of the arrangement is a YES. By design, where that line on non-VGM source usage is subjective and contextual, but having it reference and arranged used for more than a minute of a 4-minute piece is too much, IMO. 3. Acceptable Source Material 3. Any incorporation or arrangement of source material not from games (mainstream, classical, etc.) should be extremely limited. Just commenting on the rest of the piece, it's strong, albeit with cluttered mixing that could have used more clarity; in particular, the brass never sounded great. It's not enough to reject it on those grounds though, but it's a legit disappointment because I love to enjoy RoeTaKa's work to the fullest extent. The two source themes managed to work well enough, though I'd argue that, melodically, it felt like a somewhat awkward combination, even though the backing writing of each pieced together fairly seamlessly. I'm really glad "Dark Reality" is on my radar now, it's an amazing theme! If we could get the "Moonlight Sonata" material greatly reduced, this would be an easy call, but there's too much non-VGM source usage here. I know Jorito used "Never Gonna Give You Up" for the close of his MMX2/3 mix, but that usage was more limited (and the lyrics weren't using that song's melody). NO

I WTF'ed at the changeup at :56 from the main theme to "Deathmatch"; nothing smooth about it, but we move on... Also agreed with others on the violin sounding too dry but the musicianship making up for it. The arrangement's structurally close, but the live aspect and natural performance dynamics personalized the themes well here. I'm not sure the title theme was even needed if the transition out of it was going to be that abrupt, but it's not a dealbreaker. Otherwise, fun tribute to Eirik Suhrke and a great game; let's go! I hope this isn't the last collab we hear on OCR from Sam and Gabe, who are an excellent duo! YES

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

As I listened to the extended speech intro, it was obvious the mixing wasn't ideal, especially around :34 where the voices were more buried. When the synth lead finally arrived at 1:15, it had such a muddy feel to it; where's the high-end clarity? When Gario mentioned later voice clips being buried and the sound being washed out, the bad omen already sounded right from the beginning that this would be a potential problem. I also agreed with Gario on the drums being weak. While the kick has presence, the core pattern was too plodding overall, which dragged this piece down. I didn't time out the source usage in the arrangement, so I can't definitively speak to that, but I do know the theme and recognize it, so I'm not too concerned on that. It's mainly the production that's jacked, along with the beats lacking sophistication. If you can strengthen those aspects, Nemix, this would be in much better shape. NO

The track was 3:56-long, so I needed at least 118 seconds of overt source usage somewhere within the piece for the source material to be dominant per the Standards: :03-24, :26-1:11.25, 2:33.5-3:48.5 = 141.25 seconds or 59.8% The 3-note progression of the stuttering beat pattern here (D...B-C, first at :03, more easily heard at :07) is explicitly derived from the beat pattern of the source; it's present and heard in the MSX version, but sounds more obvious in the NES version (:00-:03 of that version). Thanks to that backing pattern, the arrangement's pretty anchored in the source usage, even when the melody's not in play, so it checked out just fine for me. I'm not sure why Jorito linked the SCV4 version of "Vampire Killer," as that pattern's not a part of it. But it is in the MSX version, so his classification of the mix being from that game makes sense. There was some muddy mixing here that ends up obscuring the softer synth lines referencing the "Vampire Killer" melody (e.g. the softer lead synths during :25-:55). I would have liked another pass at the mixing to clarify things, but it wasn't a dealbreaker for me. The speech clip didn't do anything for me, but it was well integrated, especially the original writing and ambiance behind the voice clip. Fun dub-wub elements from 1:48-2:18 leading into that final synth build toward "Vampire Killer" returning at 2:33. At 2:56, I would have liked to have heard something different with the arrangement, which finally happened at 3:11 with the electric guitar doubling the chorus; nice touch there to finish with something high energy and different before the winddown. The electric guitar synth sequencing wasn't the best, but that was almost completely mitigated by layering it with the electrosynth and downplaying the need for it to sound realistic. There could be some production things tightened up, and I see why Chimpa went borderline, but it wasn't a huge enough deal for me to go NO on when the arrangement was strong; the production improvements would just be a "nice to have." I really enjoyed Jorrith's take on a classic theme here! YES

Nice job giving this a more pensive feel for the introduction. The move into light electric guitar was unexpected and arguably not the greatest combination with the woodwind stuff, but it clicks enough. Also, props on improving your guitar sequencing and articulations for this piece, which aren't perfect, but were a major, major hole in your game for some of your very old submissions. I wasn't bothered by the panning on headphones at all. Mixing-wise, this wasn't the clearest piece, but the individual elements were discernible and the overall balance was pleasant. With the arrangement, I'm glad Chimpa analyzed things so closely. I wasn't put off by the structural closeness, and thought Alex did a great job with transposing the theme, changing the instrumentation, and adding in comfortably fitting accent instrumentation to change the overall flavor of the theme. Nothing set off any red flags here. Nice interpretation, Alex, and awesome to see another side of your arrangements. Let's go! YES

OK, the different sound to the "Weird Opponent"theme got my attention; it's arguably a (purposeful) barebones sound that doesn't quite fill out the soundscape enough, but ultimately isn't problematic there as long as the arrangement is well-developed. Feeling repetitive at :58 with the main verse again, so I would have liked more pronounced variation there, as well as for the chorus at 1:19; there were some additional elements added in for the second iteration, but the feel was still very copy-pasta. Abrupt but interesting transition at 1:41 to "Buzz Buzz's Prophecy"; that section sounded nice, though was basically a well-done sound upgrade. I thought this did a good job personalizing the sound, but the interpretation of "Battle Against a Weird Opponent" -- while going well in the right direction with the arrangement -- felt too limited due to the cut-and-paste job of the second iteration (:58-1:41). If this were about making a next-gen remake of a theme to plug into EarthBound, this would fit nicely. I wouldn't have an issue if this passed as is, but I believed this needed some additional development and/or more substantial variations. Good stuff so far, Nick. If this doesn't make it as is, I think you have the arrangement skills to add a bit more creativity to the "Weird Opponent" part of the arrangement. I also would have liked to hear something more interpretive with the "Buzz Buzz's Prophecy" section, but it's not a dealbreaker. Definitely don't be discouraged if this doesn't make it; I like your style, and you'll only get better and get some mixes posted if you keep at it. NO (resubmit)

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

Yeah, similar issues as the GoldenEye mix, but moreso. The hats here sounded abrasive, and the organ & choir writing were often atonal. The synth lead handling "Port Town" at :48 was also too shrill; I thought it was a poor choice of lead sound and it combined poorly with the choir, which itself sounded lo-fi and muddy. Dunno what was up with the synth comping-style from 1:33-2:05, but it wasn't musical. This was a more interpretive arrangement compared to the GoldenEye submission, but everything was messy here in terms of execution. It's poorly written and poorly produced, but we've all got to start somewhere. What's important, Xavier, is that you keep an open ear to critical feedback and stay relentless in self-improvement. Make use of the Workshop forums to solicit track feedback but also ask production questions; you need help in particular with pleasing combinations of sounds. NO

I agreed with the sequencing being very mechanical -- especially the piano -- and the drums and organ being very plodding and static. The guitar work is cool, but sounded lossy and distant. Texturally, the instruments aren't properly balanced amongst one another, so you have the guitar sounding pushed back when it should be the lead, while the rest of the sequenced instrumentation sounds thin and exposed. The sequenced instruments also didn't demonstrate creativity in the arrangement, as they followed the part-writing of the source tune so closely. The guitar demonstrates an effort to personalize the presentation of the theme, but not much else. I disagreed on the SFX/voice clips; I thought they ended up sounding tacky, but if everything else had been clicking, it possibly wouldn't have been a big deal. Keep at it with music, Xavier, and use the forums resources here and/or elsewhere to develop yourself. NO EDIT (5/23): Gario's also right that the arrangement uses a lot of the James Bond theme that's part of the source tune (e.g. :38-1:32), which disqualifies the arrangement as incorporating too much of a non-VGM composition.

My wife Paige is doing a Reddit Author Spotlight to talk about her self-published children's book & comic book, Miu and the Tres Leches Bandit. I'm in it too! Please support her and hit Reddit to ask her some questions RIGHT NOW! • http://reddit.com/r/books/comments/4kdxq5/hi_people_in_the_computer_im_pl_rohe_a_firsttime/ Learn more about the book at • http://miuthekitten.com You can buy the digital book on Amazon and ComiXology • http://amazon.com/dp/B016HC5JC8 • http://comixology.com/Miu-and-the-Tres-Leches-Bandit/digital-comic/313102 She used some chill OC ReMixes and VGM as BGM (lovingly selected by me) while working on the book, so it's VGM-powered. http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR02467

For a 3:24-long track, I needed need 102 seconds of overt source usage for the source to be dominant in the arrangement. :27-1:38, 1:49.75-2:10, 2:21.25-2:24, 2:42.25-2:59.75 = 113.25 seconds or 55.5% As far as source usage, there were some more tenuous connections after 2:24 when the piece focused on soloing, so it was actually closer than one would think. Luckily, the string backing from 2:42-2:59 was derived from the backing strings of :15-:18 of the source (then :28-:31 of the source for that last flourish), so that put the source usage over the top. Just impeccable arrangement and musicianship all-around, and an amazing take on "Judgement Day," there's nothing else to say. Nice work from this collective within the Materia Collective! YES

Opened up pretty creatively, taking the theme into a more militaristic orchestral approach. We'll see where it goes. Interesting drop-off at :56 shifting to the harp, then a clap groove starting up at 1:15; didn't expect that. The phasing effect from 1:34-1:39's not executed well -- it sounds more like unintentional ducking -- but that luckily didn't last long. Actually, no, the ducking continues all throughout the new set of beats up until 2:15, jeez then again after the brief beatdrop until 2:35. The way the lead synth ducks from 2:17-2:32 sounds brutal; if this was intentional, it's not working the way you want it to. That definitely needs to be fixed. Jeez, then AGAIN with the lead ducking at 2:53 because of those kicks. The harps and strings are just being pushed back every kick. Well, the ducking was already a dealbreaker, but you need to find out what's going on with that, because it's pretty persistant throughout the track. Arrangement-wise, this also ended up disappointing. It started off promising in the sense that a lot of creative ideas and pivots occurred with the writing, and things are definitely interpretive and creative with the handling of the source tune. But then after the groove built up at 1:41, we basically heard that same core groove and pattern at the same relative energy level for the rest of the 3+ minutes, and the ideas became very static and repetitive. You are varying up the leads and textures some during that period, so I'm not trying to undersell what's there, but the overall dynamics of the piece flattened out pretty much after that. A decent & promising base, but you'll need to eliminate the constant ducking, and also introduce more dynamics and/or instrumental variation of the groove in whatever ways you can after the dance groove starts. NO

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

It's awesome to hear another sub from Erik S, who I'm a fan of. The intro is a spirited cover that's structurally close, but the different rhythm to the beats at :12 helps set it apart. By :57 with those beats coming back, I was already tired of them in the sense that they feel very auto-pilot-like; not varying them up enough has flattened out the dynamic curve of this piece a lot. Pretty flat ending at 2:36 as well. This is an awesome source tune theme, and I love Tim Folllin's work, so I love that you arranged it, but beyond the new rhythm to the beats (which later became too repetitive), there's not much interpretation to the source tune beyond a richer sound palette. I absolutely love your previous posted OC ReMix, Awesome "Game Over (Cheeze Mix)" -- it's legitmately in my personal top 5 OC ReMixes ever, so definitely don't take a NO vote as a sign of disrespect, but I think there needs to be more melodic interpretation, more drastic instrumental differences, and/or more dynamic contrast & variation in this arrangement. Right now, it's a fairly short, underdeveloped cover, and just based on your Awesome mix, I know you're capable of more creativity and development. NO