Liontamer   Judges ⚖️

Why u panel dis? I'm not even gonna listen. YES ... OK, wait... [hey lissens] OK, great! YES

I do wish the synths were more sophisticated, but that's not a big deal. The core beats were super repetitive, so I wish the beats got more varied somehow, even in subtle ways; but the way the lyrical delivery never was repetitive helped the track not drag out too much (though it did drag). The mixing of the lyrics was solid but felt like it had too much high end and could have been pulled back just a little; totally no big deal, just a personal taste thing, and the recording & performance were both excellent. Besides the mixing sounding too squeaky clean, you've definitely got the classic 70s-80s hip hop aesthetic in mind with this, albeit with more swearing (hey, hey!). The source returned in the background as a quiet, distorted line at 1:04-1:43 & 2:02-2:40, but it's SO quiet and marginalized, so it's difficult to count that as a meaningful connection. Even on headphones, it's way too quiet. If you bump that up in some way, either in volume or with another synth chorused with it, then I'd be behind this. That's literally the only update I'd like to see with this, to ensure the source tune usage truly dominated the arrangement. The track was 4:15-long, so I needed to hear "Demon Seed" overtly used during at least 127.5 seconds of the arrangement for the obvious source tune usage to be over 50% and "dominate" the arrangement per the Arrangement standards. overt: :00-45, 1:43-2:02, 3:18-3:55.5 = 101.5 seconds or 39.8% overt source usage quiet: 1:04.75-1:43, 2:02-2:40 = 76.25 seconds or 29.9% (very) quiet source usage TL;DR - Beats are repetitive, but the rest of this is strong and we should post this in some form. The "Demon Seed" melody usage from 1:04-1:43 & 2:02-2:40 was so quiet that it may as well have not been there, so please use that more audibly, but watch that that line doesn't sound abrasive if you would just bump it up in volume. Great work otherwise, Isaac! If this passes as is, I won't die, but I feel you marginalized the "Demon Seed" theme for too long here. If you're willing to vary up the beats some as well, that's cool too, but not necessary IMO. Let's please get this posted in some form! NO (refine/resubmit)

Cool to hear a source similar to "Tifa's Theme." I don't go in thinking someone can get a 2:08-long piece passed, and just hope it isn't repetitive and underdeveloped. No worries on that from AJ though. It's melodically straightforward, but beautifully fleshed out. Subtle stuff, but love that dropoff at 1:13 for that understated dynamic contrast before picking back up at 1:31. Didn't hear anything potentially dissonant, just noting. Lovely work, AJ! Please keep 'em coming! YES

All set, @TSori. Email me if you need help getting into your account, since the password matchs the oldest one now.

My goal: authenticity.

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

The drum programming sounded too repetitive over time, which dragged this down. Along with that, I'm not a fan of the vocal mixing, with the drums sort of smothering the lyrics instead of the singing being more upfront; it just draws more attention to the step-above-metronome feeling of the drums. Vocals ain't the best by traditional measures, but the cheese is thick with this one. Whatever vocal layering happened from 2:15-2:22, then later from 3:35-4:00 was just muddy. The bass work was particularly good, but got obscured for the most part due to the mixing. The Bowflex ad at 4:32-4:45 was fun, but the voice work should have been de-essed, so the inclusion felt sloppy. The arrangement was fun & spirited, so it carries this. That said, the mixing lacked clarity, which undermined the writing, and the drum writing droned, which left this dynamically flatter than it should have been. We don't need perfection, but I also don't think it should have been a mixed bag with the production and drums. YES

Not sure why the faux-vox at :20 was so quiet, but it meant that the melody was extremely pushed back for a bit of time. Definitely agreed with others on the dated aesthetic. The textures felt thin, and the instrumentation lacked sophistication and fullness. When the track picked up at :54, that was the height of the dynamic curve here, and the track just hovered there until the end. At only 2:09-long, everything needs to the fully clicking and needs to sound fully developed. The ending at 2:01 was abrupt and there was no real transition or flow to it, plus the track cut off before fading to 0. Just wanted to sanity check this, since I was surprised at the votes just seeing it was by Jonas, but I agreed with the others. The energy felt static, the arrangement was underdeveloped, the sounds weren't sophisticated. MindWanderer's observation that it could have been a piece from the super-earliest days of OCR was on the money. This just needs more everything; right now, it's a concept, but far from developed. NO

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

Yeah, I'm actually surprised by how this stands apart from the source's sound, because after the first minute or so, I wasn't convinced I'd approve this. But due to the new instrumentation, along with the key change and some layering of certain lines, this went well in the right direction The original orchestration added in from 2:40-3:18 was also a very nice touch and combined seamlessly with the source tune. Boo on the cut-and-paste of the opening section at 3:18; I'm not mad, mind you, but it just felt like a low-effort loop point. At least at 3:45, there were some new strings, plus the addition of the delicate piano at 3:57 was good (albeit very distant) for the close. I'm more borderline than the other YES's, but through multiple smaller changes, Ben, you have enough interpretation to stand apart from "Midna in Distress." Nice work creating this more delicate version! YES (borderline)

Watching the performance video, it's so weird how this track is played in live, but the timing still feels so rigid. To me, it doesn't sound as expressive as it could be. The very mechanical-sounding drums have a decent tone, but just sound very rigidly timed right from the opening. The drum pattern, also first used at :06, was creatively written, but then just looped and barely varied over time aside from some different fills every few measures. So, when the other judges say the arrangement feels static, the rigid timing and looped nature are big reasons why. Despite the crowding pointed out by MindWanderer, the part-writing feels pretty barebones, probably because the snare stuff didn't quite fill out the background. The texture's decently filled in by the backing guitar part (which was barely audible/distinguishable, unfortunately) and then more noticeably by the added vox at 1:26. The slow tempo of the machine gun drums at 1:41 sounded odd; they're so far forward in the soundfield and crowding out the other parts. Machine gun drums are usually triggered much more rapidly and sound more intense, so this slower tempo just comes off like a lack of humanization of the drum programming instead of a stylistic choice. From 1:42-2:14, the timing of the guitar soloing area also sounded very rigid. The arrangement is fun, but at only 2:21-long, everything needs to be fully developed and clicking on all cylinders. Right now, though your leads and vox sound sweet, the timing sounds too rigid on nearly everything. You also need the backing guitar part to have more presence, need to give the instruments some more breathing room, and should vary the percussion more. Good base here, Julien, but see what else can be done to polish this up. NO (resubmit)

I'd say the stated source connection from 3:15-3:31 was very weak due to the strings and horns being so pushed to the back, but the overall source usage was strong and otherwise timed out as stated in the submission letter, so thanks to Jorrith for being helpful there. Nothing else to say but great job. The usage of the them from "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" was very fleeting, so no big deal there. There was some soft clicking at 2:14 that I noticed, but could be easily overlooked as it wasn't that loud. Other than that, nice work! Without actively verifying the source tune usage in the arrangement, I wouldn't have been able to tell which sections were source vs. original writing, so great job weaving those sections together seamlessly. Y'all come back now, ya hear? YES

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

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

Preview it: http://youtu.be/_fUnmQB2yU4 Download & Knuckles: http://soundcloud.com/ocremix/sets/and-knuckles I'm very proud to announce the release of the newest OCR album: & Knuckles! Knuckles has long been an unsung hero among gamers, and I'm happy to bring him to the forefront for a sonic tour through some of the best songs of the franchise. The original idea for this album was devised only three months ago, but a large number of artists stepped up to the plate to help make this happen even over such a short time. I truly hope you enjoy their outstanding work here. Get ready to not chuckle, and to start flexing your muscles! - Jarel Jones (Arrow) This was my first time doing the cover art for an OC ReMix album and I had a ton of fun! While I'm more into Mega Man these days, Sonic was my first fandom, so it was awesome to revisit and draw it again. Also, c'mon, let's face it, swole Knuckles is awesome. It was an honor to work on this album and I hope you enjoy the art as well as all the crazy awesome music inside. - Tabby Ramsey

The ultimate album. For the ultimate BADASS. OUT NOW! & Knuckles • http://ocremix.org/info/&_Knuckles • http://soundcloud.com/ocremix/sets/and-knuckles Director: Jarel Jones (Arrow) Artwork: Tabby Ramsey - http://digitallyfanged.com

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

From the weird SFX opening to the ambient padding to the synths to the 9-bit stuff, and even Jake's live trumpet, you have a strong, varied arrangement here, Jake. MW's right about the leads from 1:16-1:50 obscruring your backing writing, but it's not a big issue. Good sound design choices overall. I'm not sure why MindWanderer thinks the arrangement here is source-lite, but he's just wrong in this case. References to a source tune are way more involved than just the most memorable & upfront components. Once the music starts at :15, Jake is literally always referencing the source tune somewhere for the rest of the track, even without the source melody. Listen to the original SPC (change the extension to .rar and unpack it, then load track 1-35) and isolate channels 2 (bassline), 6 (sustained note), and 7 (piano). The backing writing in this mix is pretty explicitly derived from all of those lines. For example, let's take the trumpet solo section from 2:08-2:43. Even though the melody's referenced briefly in places, let's pretend that's never there. The entire trumpet solo is on top of the explicit bassline from the source. Because of that direct A-to-B connection with an aspect of the source tune's composition, I count every second of that as valid source usage. In other words, you're focusing too much on using the melody and disregarding other valid areas of source usage. Let's go. YES

Explore the Nullsoft Disk Writer settings some more. In the Covert to Format area, click the button showing the currently selected format, then select MPEG Layer-3 (i.e. MP3) from the Format dropdown. Then select the bitrate and stereo output you need in the Attributes dropdown. The most common stereo setting is 44.100 Hz, so that's recommended no matter what bitrate you choose.

I'll co-sign with Gario that the production was fine for the piece (vis-a-vis the standards). Hate to sound like I'm nitpicking a small detail, but, while I didn't mind the guitar panning, I agreed with the others that the guitar and chiptune merely doubling the same lines for the entire track was disappointing as far wanting to hear more development and variation of ideas in an otherwise-cool concept piece. Could have used warp pipe jingle at 1:15 to transition to the Underground BGM; what's here right now is just an abrupt cut. Total agreement there. There's nothing really there for that section except a slightly faster retread of the 1-1 theme; I get how it's holding just a simple tempo increase like the original song does, but for the arrangement standards here, we're looking for something a little more substantive, so consider what else you could do there so that final section stands more apart creatively from the first one. Great potential here, Mike. The standards here push for a little more variation within such a short arrangement at only 2:31-long, but this is definitely creative and well in the right direction. If you're willing to revisit this one, we'd love to post it in some form, it would just need some sort of continuity or legit transition point between the Overworld and Underworld themes, and some more variation in your treatment of the Overworld theme. If you'd rather leave this piece as is, that's no problem, but I hope you'd be willing to submit more works of yours down the line. Cool stuff so far, but develop the writing/arrangement a bit further! NO (resubmit)

The recording quality's not the best, as you mentioned, but the arrangement's a solid piano cover with good live performance dynamics to help set it apart from the original. It's short, it's bread-and-butter, but it's not repetitive in how it's performed, so it works. Count it. YES

Opened up pretty interesting. The lead sounded like it should have been in the foreground more, and the growling lyrics at 1:15 sounded needlessly distant; IMO, the vocals should have cut through more into the foreground. I would have liked them to be more understandable as well, but that's just a personal preference thing, not something influencing my vote. After the percussion dropoffs at 1:01 & 2:45, the organ sounded OK, albeit distant. The soundscape started feeling cluttered and muddy at 2:58, and moreso at 3:11 with the return of the percussion. The part-writing all sounds good, but the mixing needs to be cleaner so that you can hear the instruments more distinctly. Re-EQing this piece to give it more clarity would take this a long way. I could live with the current volumes for the parts here as long as more clarity was achieved. 3:50-4:41's section was a great rhythmic changeup from the flow of the track before this, so nice job giving this a good shot of variety. I liked the vocals returning at 4:51 for the finish. I see where MindWanderer's coming from in criticizing the lack of dynamic contrast, but I felt the deliberate pacing and shifts within a more limited dynamic curve were perfectly reasonable. I've heard melodic rock tracks with more of a droning style of pacing, where the dynamic contrast is more subtle. For example, I heard noticeable changes in the energy or textures at :22, :35, 1:01, 1:15, 1:40, 2:19, 2:45, 2:58, 3:10, 3:24, 3:50 (extended soloing), 4:29, 4:42 and 4:55. Some of the changes were more understated, some more distinct, but within a narrow overall curve, I felt this piece had lots of development and shifts to keep things varied and fresh. Having made my own mistake with this line of thinking before, I'd argue not to miss the forest for the trees and appreciate how this track works in the big picture. On the arrangement side, Karlyn, I have to give you major, major props. After hearing the source tune, you really fleshed out the instrumentation compared to the original. If you gave me both tracks and I didn't know any better, I would have thought YOUR track was the original song, and the source tune was an attempt at a mellower version (with weaker instrumentation, no hate). You really made this theme a natural fit for doom metal, and it's an awesome approach. The arrangement doesn't need a thing changed with it. This is nothing but a strong, creative rock arrangement that could use one more pass at the production to sharpen it up. We absolutely need this posted on OCR in some form, so definitely please do not drop this one. It deserves a place here. NO (refine/resubmit)

Sounds like 1:33 was a loop of :12's section. Annnnnnd... this arrangement essentially just repeats wholesale three times. Well, it's a Tim Follin track, so I love the source already, but this is just an uninterpretive and repetitive cover, so it falls outside of our arrangement/interpretation standards. Try to do your own thing with it beyond adapting it to synth and adding in some basic orchestration. Here's an example of a Silver Surfer cover of the other stage theme that's more personalized with live performance flourishes, more expansive instrumentation, and some brief original writing ideas integrated with the source tune: http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR02492. In other words, it's always possible to have a melodically conservative piece on OCR, but you need to personalize, develop, and vary the the arrangement way more than what's here. NO

I didn't hear the previous version, but I had no major issues with the mixing here. Like MW says, there are some hot spots, but it's certainly nothing problematic. The lead synth at 1:09 is super-generic, which I can live with, but arguably too rigid in the timing. Some more creative processing with and/or variation of the lead would be an meaningful improvement. 2:16's section was more unique in the treatment of the source melody, so that was my highlight of the arrangement. Nice use of the dulcimer with the original writing ideas as well; difficult to go wrong using the dulcimer. No issues on the treatment of the source tune, which was heavily referenced and treated creatively. Onto my main issue, which became a dealbreaker: practically all of the backing percussion writing feels too static, looped, and repetitive; how about some velocity variation somewhere? If you can improve that alongside possibly making the melodic synth lead more sophisticated and varied, I'd be fully on board. It's good stuff so far, Jeff, even if I can't fully support this version, so if this version doesn't make it, it's still very viable. Would love to see an improved version of this posted. NO (resubmit)

Nice job always keeping the source tune in play, even when your original writing ideas took the forefront. Awesome! YES