Liontamer

GET ON IT

No problem with that title.

NOTE: We'll need to get an encoding in 44kHz stereo instead of 48. The mixing was definitely not ideal (the bassline in particular sounding boomy and muddy), and there was a distinct lack of high-end clarity throughout. That said, the arrangement & performances were both very strong, spirited stuff, and the overall production was solid enough where the issues aren't dealbreaker ones. I agreed with Chimpazilla on the panning being too wide. However, it was good that, most of the time, the wide panning wasn't disorienting on headphones because there was a lot of call-and-response work that occupied both sides, rather than only one side being imbalanced for long periods of time. Overall, nothing but fun with pretty good execution! Nice work, LBC bros! YES EDIT (3/3): This remaster sounds distant; the arrangement's too strong, but I'm actually a weaker YES on this version. Still YES though.

It's a cool track, but I'm going NO at the moment. Production-wise, it's very muffly & muddy during the densest parts (e.g. 2:09-3:01), the phasing/skipping from 2:09-2:54 sounds like a rendering mistake instead of a feature, the voice/SFX clips are too lo-fi (a minor point), and 2:09-2:48 sounds as if the melody was simply sampled directly from the Game Boy audio. Arrangement-wise, there's definitely some things in the right direction of the Standards, particularly the bassline being an arranged part of the source, and the rhythmic adaptation to trap. That said, the chippy lead sounds so much like the original, and there's not much interpretation of that. This does some good things in the adaptation to trap, I just felt there should have been more melodic interpretation, and also less direct sampling of the original audio. NO

Opened up pretty similar to the source, though with different instrumentation. The vox being so similar (though better) in tone was a negative, as far as a lack of interpretation, but let's see where it goes. Shifts to adding some original bell writing underneath at :55, but the overall structure is the same, and the plucked string part sound very similar to the original. Meanwhile, the mixing of the bells and string orchestration from 1:19-1:41 was VERY cluttered and indistinct; the parts are mudding together, so this needs to be cleaned up. This is a beautiful cover with good though scant original writing additions. It's definitely underdeveloped compared to where the bar has been on arrangement, so I strongly disagree with the YESs and also don't feel they've made any compelling case vs. the Standards. The structure of the theme has mimimal differences with the source tune, and there's just not enough in terms of personalizing the theme in other ways (instrumentation, tone, tempo, rhythm, original writing additions, etc.) to make up for that vis-a-vis the standards. The vox and plucked strings are essentially the same as the source tune, just stronger samples, so the overall tone and structure just isn't much different than the original. I agree with the NOs that this arrangement needs more development and variation to meet the arrangement Standards with an adequate level of interpretation. It's a sweet cover, Shawn, so if you're not interested in revising this to pass for OCR, no worries; you clearly have talent, and we certainly hope you submit something else that meets our arrangement/interpretation criteria. NO

I've gotta agree with Emu all the way. Reading the timestamped breakdown and comparing the tracks, I was waiting to see where I disagreed with Truong-Son's breakdown, and that never happened; everything matched up as he said. For me at least, both the melody's notes and the sustained chords are pretty simple and upfront in the source, so it was important that the connections to both were constant in this arrangement to keep it connected to the source, and that's exactly what I heard here. No issues with the arrangement, production was on point, and nice work! YES

Opening textures after the build at :39 were a bit puny, but I'm willing to see where it goes. Lead at :55 was certainly weird, but interesting. If anything I thought the volume of the synth lead and the string work was too soft, but by 1:13 the levels on the lead rose, so that levels issue didn't last too long. At 1:28, the backing writing felt really plain and simplistic. Spoke too soon; at 1:48, the strings were very quiet behind the synth stuff even though they should have taken the lead. At 2:07, the beats again felt very static; there's got to be a way to retain the overall tempo but change the rhythms a bit to not make the beat writing so plain that it saps energy from the track. This is a decent arrangement, but needs more polish, so I'm with Jive on this one. The voice clips were a little cheesy, but I didn't mind, though Emu's right on their lossy & loud sound. I'd just say that some of the levels need to be adjusted so that when either the synth or the strings are the melodic lead, those clearly take the forefront when they're handling that lead role. Also, I'm not inherently against tracks with deliberate pacing or understated energy, but the beat writing that I pointed out was very barebones and sounded placeholder-ish; the snare needs more sophistication to effectively contribute to the track. And considering I didn't read Jive's vote at all before I wrote mine, it's a legit criticism that you've got some tweaking to do on them beats. You're not far off the mark, but I'd say this is only 75% of the way there. Keep at it on this one, Yoshi, it's a good start! NO (resubmit)

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

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

Very relaxed presentation with several themes getting a shout-out. There's only some slight spots where the timing feels a bit tight with the piano performance and the string sequencing, but it's not much, and this holds up well for its age. Wonderful team-up by Mustin and Kassi.

That's pretty dumb and sweeping to say. "DrumUltimA, congratulations for -- by virtue of choosing to use Auto-Tune -- insulting... yourself?" You have your own personal taste, sure, but ever since T-Pain, Lil Wayne, and others made a successful tool out of transparent use of Auto-Tune, it's been used by many artists on purpose as its own aesthetic. And you can (and will) complain all you'd like, but plenty of people have no problem with it. You're framing it like it's being used here to fool people that the singing was pitch perfect, and you're coming in like "it's an insult to the ear," which is just overly broad, closed-minded, and silly. Your taste. Your loss.

The countermelodic synth added in at :08 is such a subtle introduction, but boy does that writing fit like a glove there; nice touch for the intro. This was a melodically conservative arrangement, but Philip personalized the arrangement well via the instrumentation choices and some occasional sections of original writing.

I do wish @Shion had submitted something else to OCR back in his day, because this Flashback piece was cool for its day. Flashback gets almost no love, and I see why in the sense that music's pretty rare in the game and thus may not stand out as much. That said, this is the arrangement that made this soundtrack click for me. It's somewhat rigid, but the textures here are well-constructed and the piece has just the right amount of intensity where you feel the weight of the percussion, but the energy still feels very chill. Cool stuff!

So old school as far as the sophistication of the sound design, but this holds up pretty nicely as far as being a fun and transformative arrangement. This one put Ristar on the VGM map for me. Thanks, 4-Eyes!

Good work that typified a lot of Gray's early sound. I liked how the melody and beats didn't line up in the typical way, which created some interesting rhythms. Sequencing's too tight for some parts, but there's lots of character here, and the instrumentation choices are nice and strong. I definitely miss the unique sense of style GL brought to the table at OCR with his new age influence.

The timing's noticeably stiff, so it shows its age in that respect, but the overall sound is very solid nonetheless. A conservative arrangement with a more ambient, mellow approach that makes for a nice, relaxing listen.

Your loss.

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

Oof. :'-(

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

Right, but he's saying it would have been nice to learn specific track credits; I agree, we need deeper info, it would be great to learn.

This great read by Huffington Post's Todd Van Luling finally and truly 100% confirms from 3 of the credited Sonic 3 composers that Michael Jackson made music for Sonic 3 and it made it into the game. http://testkitchen.huffingtonpost.com/michaeljacksonsonic/

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

No. Lossless files were never provided for the original release, so a FLAC set isn't possible.

Yeah, it's a cool adaptation to piano, Liam, and I like the purposeful click/pops and ambiance, but the tempo, overall structure, mood, and tone of the piece are all too similar to the original. There's effort in personalizing the sound, but it doesn't stand apart enough from the original song. We hope you'll submit something else in the future; this was a cool listen, but the very conservative arrangement falls outside of our specific Submissions Standards. NO