Liontamer

The most important thing to mention first is that this is Yoko Shimomura's theme. Isao Abe's composed Sagat's theme, but the other World Warrior themes are hers. Now, I don't know how Palp and I, two close members of Team Brown Heat (who, in my head, are legally bound to vote as a bloc), have been on opposite sides lately, but somehow we disagreed here and now wind up on different sides again. I think I'm on the right side of this one also. I listened to this at full volume, and I'm ultimately OK with the production and balance here. I thoughts the parts were distinct enough, and didn't get the same sense of this not gelling enough, though I see where he's coming from. Timing this out, this was JUST at 50% overt source usage, mainly due to the long intro taking up lots of time. For a 5:24-long piece, I needed at least 162 seconds of identifiable source usage for the VGM to be dominant in the arrangement: 1:13.75-1:40.5, 1:57.5-3:32.5, 3:33.75-3:48, 4:46-5:12 = 162 seconds or 50% There was also that little snippet of sampling the SNES version of the source from 5:13-5:15 that nudged what was dancing on the line over the cliff. Arrangement-wise, I felt this was samey at times in terms of the ideas and energy level; that said, the overall interpretation of the theme was obviously creative and otherwise excellently executed. Matias has done a nice job rocking out Blanka's theme. Let's go. YES

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

We're not at November yet (we're at Oct. 30), but I see it in the inbox, so it hasn't been lost. I look forward to an influx of lottery money, so I can work on the inbox all day. Sorry for the wait, FDF.

We actually added Trap recently, so we need to add it into that list.

Yeah, original artists don't need any permission to provide their own tags, then can just ask us for the submission link and submit their information at any time. Like djp said, we'll run everything by artists later on for another verification step as well.

CONTEST! YES! The contest is simple: in preparation for the release and promotion of FF9: Worlds Apart, we're giving away 10 limited edition physical copies of the OC ReMix community's 5-disc, 74-track album, FF6: Balance and Ruin! This is open to ALL international fans, so we're picking 10 winners from ANYWHERE in the world, not just the U.S.! In order to enter: Retweet this contest tweet and follow @ocremix by the end of Saturday, August 22nd. BOOM. That's it! After the end of the entry period, we'll randomly pick 10 lucky entrants as winners and ship them each a copy of the album! Thanks for entering, spreading the word on video game music, and supporting OCR! RULES No purchase necessary. Alternate entry: email competitions@ocremix.org with your name by Sat. Aug. 22nd, 2015, 11:59PM EDT. Contest is open to everyone worldwide, except OC ReMix staff members and Balance and Ruin contributors (j00 got albums). Contestants using multiple entries will be disqualified. Contest runs from Tue. Aug. 18 to Sat. Aug. 22nd, 2015, 11:59PM EDT. Contest sponsored and promoted by OverClocked ReMix. (Contact: admin@ocremix.org) Prize (10 winners): 1 physical copy of 5-disc Balance and Ruin album. Prizes will be shipped to each winner’s physical address via Amazon. Winners will be randomly selected from those who retweet https://twitter.com/ocremix/status/633708643565879296 and follow the @ocremix Twitter account (http://twitter.com/ocremix) or email competitions@ocremix.org with their Twitter handle. The list of winners will be available in this thread shortly after Sat. Aug. 22nd, 2015, 11:59PM EDT. WINNERS (OH SNAP!) @2PProject @BenKosciuk @BenyoBoy @ChamSoundscapes @darkr3x @GermanSeabass @halfon123 @iMenchi @Nebocsid @Ryo_0hky

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

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

WE FINALLY DOIN’ IT! We need your help to add genre, mood, instrumentation and other tags to the OCR database. The full list of terms. The minimum of what we need for every ReMix is: Primary Genre (e.g. funk, metal, rap, EDM, jazz) Secondary Genres (when applicable) 1+ Mood (e.g. aggressive, goofy, romantic, sad) 2+ Instrumentation (e.g. acoustic-guitar, chiptune, piano, singing) Additional tag types we want to apply whenever possible: Specific Arrangement aspects (e.g. # of instruments, minimalist, extended soloing) Effects (e.g. distortion, glitching, lo-fi, vocoder) Origin (e.g. collaboration, created for a compo) Live production aspects (e.g. live ensemble, live recording, use of live instruments) Regional influence (e.g. Celtic, Japanese, world) Time (e.g. tempo, long or short duration, time signature) Usage (e.g. workout, winter/holiday, Halloween, meditation) This is a serious project, so you need to have a good understanding of what the tags mean and also have a good ear for labeling genres and identifying instruments and moods. We want to build an accurate library of tags for the remixes on the site. If you’re interested and you think you have what it takes, let us know right here in this thread and we’ll assign you a block of ReMixes to work on and PM you our tagging submission form where you can enter the data. THANKS! __ Can we add more tags to the list? No! We don't plan on adding many other tags, but if a good case is made for something we've overlooked, we may add more. Note on genres: We're not trying to add tags for every subgenre under the sun. We're going for pretty broad descriptions. We don't need "tribal Moombahcore chillwave"; EDM works just fine in most of those cases. Note on using "epic" for mood: We're not using "epic" as a synonym for awesome/amazing/yoooooooooooooo. We're using it to describe ReMixes that are grand, heroic, or anthemic in scope/tone, which isn't limited to orchestral and rock pieces. Note on lyrics and duration: Larry has already handled lyric-specific tags (original, existing, explicit) for all lyrical ReMixes, and duration tags for long and short mixes. Problems?! If you’re working on tagging your batch of ReMixes and run into an issue where something isn’t clear, then post here and let us know and we can help you.

Eventually, but it'll be back.

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

I thought the pizz strings were too stiff and exposed the sample, even though they were serviceable. But the real WTF was... Hahaha, yeah, both the tone and timing of the drums there don't fit at all. Unfuck 1:47-2:12 & 2:36-3:28 and you have a winner. NO (resubmit)

Opens up a bit loose and lo-fi, but we'll see where it goes. Light pops at :25 and :27 that shouldn't have been there. Good mood established though. The drums at :41 were on the loud side compared to the leads, but were OK; props for getting subtle and creative with the patterns and not going for plodding pattern. Next iteration of the theme at 1:22 was even quieter and more subdued, which would have been bad, but using the guitar as ornamentation from 1:22-1:40 & from as an original countermelody 1:40-2:03 were smart ideas that could get overlooked. Back to the source melody from 2:03-2:44, which felt like a retread of :41, only with the very light doubling of the melody by the synth behind it. I think what's there with the arrangement was adequately personalized, but doing something more interesting and substantive with the interpretation for the final section there would have made this an easier sell as far as the arrangement feeling fully developed. IMO, it gets over the bar with the effective tempo change and instrumentation changes, plus the subtle but creative original percussion and guitar writing. The mixing was some parts lo-fi, some parts muddy, and buzzy in some very brief spots, but I was OK with it overall. It's a solid aesthetic I can get behind, and the arrangement doesn't need to reinvent the wheel, just creatively personalize the presentation of the theme, which I argue it does well enough. Good job, Patrick and Zach, and good luck with the rest of the vote! YES

Not to be dismissive, but I just didn't hear any major production or balance issues in this that would make me think we need to hold this back at all. Chimpa had some detailed criticisms, but I really couldn't co-sign. I was worried about the sampled beats from :19-:43, in that they could have been leaned on too much (but they were just in there briefly), and the transition at :45 feeling awkward (but the rest of the track flowed together nicely). Source tune was used in spades, but for anyone curious for a cursory breakdown: :00-:49, 1:07.5-1:16, 1:22.5-1:32, 1:35.5-1:38.5, 1:58-4:30.25, 4:32.5-5:07. The arrangement was super creative and energetic, and I felt the instrumentation was more than adequately balanced and clear. Though the track's dense, the elements were very distinguishable. Nothing but love for this one, Kenneth. Nice work! YES

Normally I don't copy-pasta a vote to just crib it, but I unfortunately didn't have anything to add. The instrument combinations don't click, and the mixing was extraordinarily cluttered, e.g. 1:50-2:15. There are so many parts that mud together in the same frequency range. Minor issue, as it's very soft, but from 1:38-1:43, there's some sort of super-quiet dissonant buzzy line that's almost functions like counteremelody, but sounds like a production error. I'll disagree on :00 & 3:40's sections; though the sequencing was tight, it made sense there and I didn't feel there was an issue there. I enjoy symphonic metal, but this isn't balanced in that manner. Like last time, the arrangement creativity is there, but the production/mixing is very unfocused. NO

Source tune was used in spades, but in case anyone was wondering: :03.5-:41.5, 1:03.75-1:15.75, 1:18.75-1:30, 1:32-1:34.75, 1:42.75-1:51.75, 1:53.5-1:58.75, 2:00.5-2:28 Never heard the original version, but this was pretty strong. Some of the instrumentation would never pass as real (e.g. pizz strings, koto articulations), but the samples were used very well and came off very expressive. Some could say the soundscape was thin, but I thought it was more delicate than thin and the background was filled out nicely. Nice work, Adrian! Welcome aboard! YES

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

Careful! We'll take all the loopholes we can.

Heard the source in play from 1:17-4:25, 5:42-6:08, 6:33-6:56, and 6:59-9:51, i.e. used in spades. The source theme was used pretty consistently, and there were some more subtle but explicit chord progression usages that seemed valid but I chose not to count (e.g. 6:08-6:33), since the source usage was clearly dominant and I didn't need to get that into the weeds. It felt a bit overlong for me, so I see how Palpable was put off in that way. However, I didn't feel I was hearing much retreading, so I couldn't co-sign on that. I'm more in line with Nutritious's POV. The first overt usage of the melody around 1:27 already sounded promising as far as going for a different sound, but the arrangement/interpretation call could been dicey had this just been 10 minutes of the piano lead and carrying a similar tone as the original song. That said, the arrangement evolved well enough over the near-10 minutes, and Zack did well with constantly varying the instrumentation and making sure the textures were different from the original. Let's go. YES

Really glad to hear Random Encounter members is the submissions box. Briefly from :27-:28, the timing was noticeably loose in a bad way, since the beats hold steady, but the rest of what was here lined up well. Definitely agreed that the piece has great energy, and IMO works for a melodically conservative piece. The mixing's definitely pretty messy, and I felt like the drums were too dry, or at least the background wasn't fully filled out. I'm in Nutritious's camp that I would let this arrangement go, because the presentation is personalized enough, but at only 2:11-long with a little melodic interpretation, I'm left wanting more substance regardless. In any case, the mixing criticisms are the main thing holding this back, I agreed with Chimpa and Nutri there. Very good stuff, it just needs to be de-cluttered. Oh, AND a new song title [redux] NO

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.

September 11-13, 2015 Hilton Alexandria Mark Center, Arlington, VA http://classic.magfest.org Let's talk video game music! OC ReMix: Honoring (and Boom-Tss'ing) Video Game Music Since 1999! PANEL TIME TBD Panelists: djpretzel Arrow DarkeSword José the Bronx Rican

It's funny that my impartiality would be called into question for not being biased like you are against arrangements with lyrics, but sure, I'll take that bet. Like djpretzel mentioned, we're underway with a large project to add descriptors to all of the mixes which (on the negative side) should help picky people avoid stuff that spooks them, but (on the much more positive side) help folks find more of what they like and learn more about the artists in the process. If you had suggested a metadata approach in your previous comments -- which you didn't -- I would have said we're already working on this. I wasn't trying to "rudely pacify" you like you'd be some wilting flower. The original post doesn't say "Post your unassailable opinion." I was only flatly and forcefully rejecting the worst and -- by your own admission -- most hyperbolic of what you suggested, i.e. "I wish OCR would split off vocal remixes to another site or something," "lately it feels like lyrical new releases outnumber the instrumentals," and that vocals mixes are "tainted." Those things were said under the claim of somehow being good to the fans as a whole if we moved the vocal tracks, but would just stifle artistic creativity due to not getting equal exposure. I'll defend that for Dynamite Pleasure Chair or any other artist doing creative things with their music. My opinion, this track is not "tainted" and neither are any of the other vocal mixes just for having vocals.