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.

Man, I really liked the writing of Curse of Darkness's "Abandoned Castle" theme; the instrumentation could have used an upgrade, but good choice otherwise and one I'm glad is now on my radar thanks to Beth. Opening claps sounded flimsy yet muffled and too loud/upfront; we'll see where that goes and if the production makes sense. At :15, CV3 is used, and the track continues to sound extremely muffled; if things sharpen up later, it might make sense, but it's pretty off-putting already. Well, there was kind of a sweep building up to :31 and the lyrics arriving, so things did become less muffled, but the track still wasn't sharp. The vocals at :31 are obviously mixed too loud and upfront; the SotN "Dracula's Castle" line that was used in the background before :31 might as well have been removed once the vocals arrived because it was practically inaudible; too bad, because the writing there was strong. Odd notes around :52 ("morning sun") and 2:26 ("and when you"). Really liked the vocals based on SotN "Dracula's Castle" from 1:02-1:16 though; very nice integration of that theme there. Yipes on that default-y, generic, vanilla SUPAH-saw used from 1:33-2:04; the tone just isn't pleasing or sophisticated. For me, the core beat pattern at :31 eventually and finally wore out its welcome at 2:35's chorus. It really droned and ending up flattening your dynamic curve here; it's almost always the same pattern, rhythms, and energy level. See what else you can do to subtly but more significantly vary the beat writing or instrumentation throughout. Would definitely love to have this posted in some form, but this isn't it yet. The arrangement's creative and interpretive, so the core of it is a pass, but you mainly need more TLC with the mixing for better clarity and balance, as well as less metronome-like beats, and potentially upgrading some of the weaker sounds. I hope you'll take this to someone who can help you raise your production skills through instruction and criticism (rather than just tweak it themselves into a passable state), so that you can keep the skills upgrade for the future. NO (resubmit)

Opening sounds like the "Gaster's Theme" audio was being directly sampled, which I would have preferred wasn't the case, but at least was affected and played with sonically. At :19, I really liked the intensity of the beats, and the constant movement of the sounds around the stereo field is frantic and purposeful. That said, some of the loudest parts seem like they're clipping or at least distorting in an uncomfortable way, and the textures get cluttered. At :39, there's a lack of sophistication in the lead sound; same at :57 with the synth lead paired with the very exposed, robotically timed, and fake-sounding guitar chugs. :59-1:17 in particular was just extremely cluttered with sizzling highs for no real reason; it actually undermines the intensity of the arrangement instead of enhancing it. It wasn't a huge deal to me and may have been purposeful, but the "CORE" lead at 1:16 seemed like it was ducking here and there; not something I was deducting points for, and it fit the overall crazy aesthetic. At 1:36, it sounded like you were copy-pasta'ing the introduction over again, with the transitions at :19 and 1:55 being practically if not exactly the same. More cut-and-paste action when comparing :38 & 2:14, and the rehashing just continued from there. Well, that's a huge disappointment. The return of the sampling of Gaster's Theme at 3:12 had some wild effects on it for a creative finish though. Arrangement-wise, this has great energy, but you can't just go 1:36-long, then basically retread everything again unless everything's really firing on all cylinders with the interpretation and production, and that's not yet the case here. Get more creative with the sound design of the synth leads, humanize the guitar chugs at :57, reduce the clutter and/or frequency overlap causing some sections to sound cluttered, and lastly but most importantly, vary the arrangement more with some subtle variations instead of the wholesale cut-and-paste approach. Great start so far; even if you don't revisit this track, it's a fun arrangement, but just needs better attention to detail. Would love to hear an updated version that got more creative/varied with the 2nd half of the arrangement. NO (resubmit)

Just posting that I'm so glad the McRib is back! I've had 3 since it came back this year, and I'mma have morrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrre! McRIB!

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.

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

Negatives first: some of the bowed string articulations, particularly from :53-1:05, and then 1:36-1:43 & 3:16-3:23 when they were higher and louder, just sounded too stiff, fake, and exposed. Little things too like the awkward note change at :47 that exposed the sample. I think if you keep at it with your orchestration, you'll probably look back in a few years and blanche as far as letting finer details go like that. When they were more of an accent in the background with lower notes during the heaviest sections (e.g. 1:43-1:55), they sounded decent but were too crowded out by the electric guitar, IMO, and still sounded robotic. I can see why the mixing wasn't quite a dealbreaker for other judges in light of the arrangement, but I would have preferred another pass at it, as the densest sections seem overcompressed and the drum and string writing sounded very muted and squashed there. Positives: Really enjoyed the introduction up to :43, as well as the first section of guitar work in the lead from 1:05-1:30. All of the sections using the synths and piano sounded pretty solid (though the piano was noticeably stiff). From 2:08-3:10, the extended dropoff and rebuild worked very nicely, and here the textures sounded cleaner and with more room for the parts to breathe; no issues with clarity amongst the various parts there. IMO, this needed some more production tweaks to get the string work sounding better and clear up the densest sections so that they were less lossy and compressed-sounding, but this was a solid arrangement. NO (resubmit)

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

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

You have to have contributed an OC ReMix or been the original composer of a game in the database to be listed under Artists. We'll also be adding in musicians and visual artists who don't have posted ReMixes but have contributed to OC ReMix community albums.

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

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

I have no idea what language this response is in.

Pretty loud, but good energy. The synths here sound so generic, but otherwise this had a fun DDR feel to the arrangement approach. If only the soundscape wasn't squashed, like the others mentioned. The beats are fairly thick, but the bass kick pattern being so droning and plain was boring. Criticisms aside, I thought the original grace notes (e.g. :16-29 and more later on) were good. Melodically, it's not very interpretive, but the genre adaptation here works fine. The piano accents first used at :43 should have been more upfront, but were a good writing touch. With the verse again at 1:19, the writing was being recycled, but I thought the genre adaptation was good, so it wasn't a NO on arrangement yet, but something to watch for, so I see what djp was saying about this being repetitive. The synths were more exposed at 1:45, so the attacks sounded awkward until 1:58, but overall it was a good dropoff section, particularly clearing out the beats from 1:57 and going for a gradual rebuild until 2:24. I thought this was all well-done. Everything past 1:45 made a stronger case for the arrangement being above the bar. Good new original writing at 2:24. Though the electric guitar sample at 2:36 sounded pretty fake, it was produced and presented in a way where that didn't matter. I thought the track shouldn't have gone back to the bass thump being so droning and constant, but it didn't undermine the dynamics enough to affect my vote. At 3:02, the verse was a copy-pasta of the opening verse at :16, but it was only until 3:15 and more countermelodic writing had been added, so there was at least some difference. Really liked the interplay of the synth lead with the original writing underneath from 3:14-3:27; I see the ending being sudden, but that section at least provided contrast to what came before, so to me it felt like the track was winding down, and I didn't have a problem with that ending -- that felt like a personal taste criticism. We've had other submissions where I felt I couldn't make out the part-writing well enough due to overcompression or overcrowding, and I just wasn't having enough of a problem with that despite observing similar issues to the NO voters, though it was on the borderline. I think the production could be improved, but the arrangement's creative enough and the individual elements distinct enough (despite some squashing) that I could live with this as is, and think it's OK. I definitely have no problem with the NO votes, and think they make a perfectly reasonable case, but I think comparing what works (arrangement creativity, energy, overall dynamics) vs. what doesn't (generic synths, observable crowding/squashing) tilts toward a YES despite the meaningful issues. I would have liked for the piano and guitar samples to not sound so fake, but the overall flow and style of the track was fine, and most importantly, the arrangement was creatively developed and reasonably executed. Not the strongest YES, and I'd love for this to get some tweaks and improvements, but I didn't think the volume or compression were dealbreakers and I'm not making the perfect the enemy of the good with the arrangement turning out to be solid due to the second half. I'd go NO if I couldn't live with this version as is, but I can. YES (borderline)

That was just on his website. He later emailed on 9/27 saying he then did want to remove everything, so we did. If there's a track of his you want, check his site and social media links.

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.