Liontamer

I didn't even notice anything there. Doesn't even sound like you're listening to the correct track. Nothing but smooveness here.

Substantively, that's not your own arrangement, no. The MIDI was the arrangement. We need some level of creative interpretation as well. Check Section 4 here: http://ocremix.org/info/Submission_Standards_and_Instructions

Google Drive could work to host it. Email me a link.

Not sure how we could fit another song onto the album art (no room) at this point. It could be bonus, but I'd need a WAV in the next 12 hours.

Definitely co-signed with Palpable on his critiques on the sequencing, dynamic contrast and repetition. I had a few additional thoughts. The sitar stuff sounded super quantized; zame with whatever twangy, plucked instrument you used at :16. I'm not sure why the bass kick first used at :03 is so boomy, but that should be toned down, not beefed up at :24. The low-end the kick creates just clutters up the soundscape, IMO. The fullest textures from :24-:33 weren't totally clicking with me, partly because there's no real dominant melodic presence due to the mixing, and partly because there also seemed to be a lack of high-end clarity, making everything sound distant. The lead could stand to be more upfront when interacting with other elements. It's a cool concept that needs more substance in the second half, as well as more clarity and balance in the mixing, but it's a cool source tune choice and a promising concept if you're willing to tweak it further, Cody. Definitely keep at it in terms of submitting things, even if it's not a resubmission of this piece. NO (resubmit)

I'm basically in Palpable's camp, only I counted a bit more source. I counted 00-:28.75, 1:08.5-1:37.5, 2:17.25-2:39 (quiet bassline from source paired with interpretive lead, plus counting the tail of the final note from the melody). 79.5 seconds of a 162-second track or 49.07% overt source usage So even being super generous, the source was still incorporated a little less than 50% of the piece, meaning the VGM wasn't the dominant aspect of the arrangement. It's an awesome track, and I'd pass it if the fadeout ending used the E1M1 theme a little more. IMO, that'd be an easy way to use the source one more time and have it squeak by with the source usage being dominant. Awesome piece and a strong performance that just needs a little more usage of the VGM for the win. Hopefully we'll see DPC on the front page in some form; we definitely want more like this! NO (resubmit)

DAT CHERNABOGUE TRAILAH! COMING SOOOOOON!

Ditto for me, so I'll echo Palpable's comments. I thought the soundscape was also on the muddy side, but it did allow the instrumentation to blend together more. If you get the drumkit sounding like it's part of the same soundscape and the writing becomes more creative & less plodding, this would be much more likely to be a winner. NO (resubmit)

djpretzel? He ain't nobody.

Quoted for truth. (Kidding. Locking because the answer's in the first post.)

:37.5-:55.5, 57.5-1:01.25, 1:07.25-1:14.75, 1:16.75-1:53.5, 2:42-3:20, 3:32.5-3:37, 3:38-3:55.5, 3:59.75-4:33.5, 4:42-4:47.5, 4:54-5:03.5, 5:06.5-5:10.25 178.5 seconds of a 5:55-long track or 50.28% The outro arrangement sounded liberal, even though it's mostly a rhythmic change, but even with my conservative timestamping, the total source usage checked out as dominant regardless. Awesome piece. It's definitely weird and not everyone's cup of tea, but it was super smart stuff all the way. Much like Brent's other pieces, it never stays in one place for long. Fun outro from (and a warm welcome to) Brendan as well. YES

As far as I can tell, this claim of plagiarism is unsubstantiated. Just noting for anyone who reads this that there's been literally no documentation online about Ben Daglish's copying/plagiarizing from the band Laserdance. Laserdance's entire catalog is listed on Discogs, and there's no song named anything similar to "Deflector". /shrugs

Yipes. SUPER mechanical timing. As far as the instrument quality, I feel like I'm playing SimCity 2000 on my Macintosh in 1994. Coupled with the timing, this felt like it was already dead in the water. Slightly interesting f-ing around with the textures around the 1-minute mark, but this is literally the melodic line copy-pasta'ed over and over with no variation (except for the chorus) over some mildly evolving background elements, and none of it sounds cohesive. The dynamic curve throughout was basically a flat line. I'm afraid it's pretty far off the mark. NO

Right from the beginning at :09, the guitar sample was very exposed, sounding very thin, static, and unrealistic. Even the intensity/triggering of the hand percussion sounded exactly the same, which isn't possible in real life. Texturally, there wasn't much going on beyond the guitar lines and hand percussion. The light gliding/whistling synth was an OK addition, but that wasn't enough to fully flesh out the soundfield. :37's verse & chorus vs. 1:56's had no significant differences or development in terms of the arrangement. I wouldn't have cut-and-pasted :55 & 2:14's chorus wholesale at 3:55 again either; you need some sort of variation to keep the piece fresh. 2:57 finally shifted into some new territory as far as the composition, but everything was hampered from extremely mechanical sequencing. Chimpa rightly cited a lack of instrumental and dynamic variety as a problem, but if everything sounds this robotically timed, it wouldn't matter what instrumental or dynamic variety was there. Definitely hit up the Workshop and learn what you can about acoustic guitar sequencing, otherwise your further efforts will always be hampered by poor sound quality and a lack of even decent realism. Arrangement-wise, the genre adaptation was there, but (regardless of the soloing later) the sheer repetition of the ideas dragged on. Pretty far from the mark, but one has to start somewhere. Definitely keep at it, and keep looking to broaden your skills through the Music Composition & Production and Post Your Game ReMixes forums. NO

Got a track order yet? Just checking in. I will definitely accept WAVs whenever in order to get the file prep process moving from my side.

Kyle answered a pretty similar issue a few posts above, and Brad's answer would take care of it if your player can't parse the discs field.

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.

I refuse! And special characters are impossible anyway.

MAGFest 8.5 Fri. September 12 - Sun. September 14, 2014 Alexandria, VA - Hilton Alexandria Mark Center http://magfest.org OC ReMix: Arranging (and Fanboying Over) Video Game Music Since 1999! Saturday, Sept. 13, 2014, 11:30AM-1PM, Panels 1 Panelists: djpretzel Arrow DarkeSword José the Bronx Rican Level 99 Liontamer --------------------------- Already locked in.

The arrangement's still on point, and I broke it down last time, so I didn't feel the need to elaborate on it. Not that this is bad, but I was probably too nice the first time around. I definitely hear the changes made, but the cohesion isn't there in terms of the textures, mainly IMO because the snare pattern plods. The drumkit sounded pretty flimsy on the whole, and there were portions where the snare pattern felt plodding with the rest of the track seeming empty, e.g. 1:47-2:00, 2:21-2:38. :47 or 1:11 would have been a good place to add some easy variation the drum pattern; in other words, doing it earlier than 1:36. The guitar at :23 lacked bite & presence compared to the percussion. Maybe have it enter louder and then drop it back to the level it's currently at from :35-on when the lead guitar arrives. In any case, making the percussion sound more powerful and less static & plodding would both help in lifting this up to where it needs to be. Don't be discouraged. It might not be able to pass, but it IS a promising track. See if you can further improve it, but if you'd rather move on, you've already shown you know how to get tracks passed, and this shouldn't drag you down. NO (resubmit)

1st RESUB: http://ocremix.org/forums/showthread.php?t=43650 Original Decision: http://ocremix.org/forums/showthread.php?t=42476 Your ReMixer name: Ivan Hakštok Your e-mail address: Your userid: 43292 Name of game(s) arranged: Chrono Cross Name of arrangement: Under Cerulean Skies Name of individual song(s) arranged: Another Termina Link to the original soundtrack: Your own comments about the mix: This mix was rejected a few weeks ago, the old decision thread is here, the source breakdown is also in there: http://ocremix.org/forums/showthread.php?t=43650 I re-recorded the guitars, and changed some stuff with the mixing. The out-of-tune bell synth was somehow caused by FM synthesis. It didn't bother me as much as the judges but I went and replaced the sound with something more simple ------------------------------------------

I've added to my original vote up top to close this out. Sorry for the long wait, Sean. It's a cool piece, but at the end of the day, it needs much more clear usage of the original NieR source tune for it to have a chance at being approved. If there is any sort of explicit A-to-B connection from the NieR soundtrack to "Pale Moonlight" that we all missed, please let us know and we can reassess this one. It sounds like it would be too difficult a piece to resubmit, with it being live, but we'd love to hear a resubmission of this if those stars aligned or a new submission. This decision's definitely not a knock on your abilities. Your talent and skill are very obvious, for sure.