Liontamer

Tell other people to review it, fool.

I have rated! If you heard the album, definitely drop some review & 5-star action its way!

Sure it does.

super pendant

Interesting opening. The drum writing was OK, but sounded pretty empty; the pattern was also too repetitive during the verses. Meanwhile the guitar was also too dry and the performance was on the stiff side. Interesting usage of the bells to accent things; good stuff there. The piano sound and sequencing was solid as well. In general, I'm feeling the arrangement, but both the percussion and electric guitar sounding dry and stiff ended up underming the personalized arrangement ideas a bit. It's not incompetantly performed or anything like that, but I'd argue that on balance it doesn't quite flow smoothly enough. You need some padding in the background to glue the elements together in the soundscape; in particular the guitar sounded stapled on top of everything instead of sitting within a larger soundscape. I'm very familiar with this theme and how it's structured, and I'd also say that while this was a good cover with personalization, but there could be some additional dynamic contrast. There's definitely some subtle up and downs (much like the source), but the guitar lead combined with the drums during the verses ends up sounding too similar in the overall tone and energy after a while with no other instrumentation really evolving around it. You could take some of the other ideas you had outside of those sections and apply similar ideas during different iterations of the main melody and chorus. Promising stuff so far, Jeremy. NO

ReMixer name: thejeremymenace Website: soundcloud.com/thejeremymenace thejeremymenace.bandcamp.com Name of game arranged: Streets of Rage Name of arrangement: Glass Knuckles Name of song arranged: The Streets of Rage --------------------------------

It's so good (and so needed), I added it to the FAQ. http://ocremix.org/info/Frequently_Asked_Questions#Super-pedantic_OCR_Style_Guide

I refuse to pop in! (i.e. I have made contact!)

It's automated based on whatever parameters vBulletin uses to flag potential stuff. I check through them every few hours and approve the non-spam. I don't quite get its selection process either, but just be patient.

Nice sound here, Morgan. While the multi-tracking was a bit loose at times, this piece was not without skill and charm throughout. The structure of the source was obviously maintained here, which means it's arguably a bit repetitive. That said, the variations and trade-offs between original countermelodic writing and doubling the melody coupled with the personalized live performance put this on solid ground for me. While the theme itself repeats, nothing was cut-and-pasted repeated. A good example, IMO, of a short-and-sweet cover that's personalized enough to get the nod. Some further development in the form of melodic variations or weaving in wholly original sections would have made this a much easier sell, and this falling under just 2 minutes may make some people double take. But successful arrangements come in all shapes and sizes. Not the strongest YES in the world, but it gets it done enough. YES

If this passed and the source files were available, we would need an MP3 (not M4A) with 192kbps or VBR1 encoding - LT CONTACT INFORMATION: ReRemixer Name: Greyvoice Real Name: Morgan Mills Email Address: SUBMISSION INFORMATION: Name of Game: Super Mario 64 Name of Arrangement: "Welcome 64" Name of Song: Super Mario 64 Select File http://ocremix.org/song/1029 -There's something infectiously hopeful and welcoming about this particular song. It seems to say a lot of things, despite its brevity. I wanted to do a rendition of it on the ultimate nostalgic instrument, the acoustic guitar (with a hint of mandolin). Hope you enjoy. -------------------------------------------

Hahaha, I see how you were attempting to call this a "Funky's Fugue" arrangement, but the melody's VERY distinct on that and you've changed it to the point where it's not actually a VGM arrangement but an original piece with rhythmic similarities. Yeah, I grew up on DKC and love it, but I agree with Vig that the change to the melodic progression of "Funky's Fugue" rendered this attempt at interpretation as too original to count ANY of it, IMO. However, though I didn't stopwatch this, the "Aquatic Ambiance" usage was recognizable enough that I wouldn't necessarily call this too liberal of an arrangement; there was certainly some substantial, overt VGM usage in the second half. The mixing was off; definitely VERY muddy like OA & Vig pointed out. It was pretty bad/poor the whole way through; the mixing was even worse from 1:49-on. Let me be very clear though, the writing and instrumentation was cool, it was only the mixing that was a problem. Oof, the choir brought in at 2:17 definitely had slow attacks and otherwise sound super fake with the note transitions. AH, there's "Aquatic Ambiance" at 2:44 to finally bring in an overt usage of DKC music. The use of the sax at 3:13 was good in principle, although the sequencing clearly exposed how fake the sample was despite the effects in place. I hate to say it, but the fakeness of the sax sequencing was kind of brutal; it's just way too exposed. Also, the tick-tick-tick-tick of the beats was too loud and upfront; pull that back some. The writing wasn't bad at all, but the muddiness and imbalance among the parts was a large mess; 4:07-5:01 was a glaring example of the imbalance with how the sax "lead" was swallowed up by the bassline, beats and chiptune-ish pattern. Rough stuff with the choir returning at 5:01, again with the super laggy attacks and overall unrealistic sound. There were a lot of cool writing ideas in place, Clint, so the arrangement side wasn't the weak point. But the (really) poor mixing killed this dead, and the weaker aspects of the sequencing added to the issues preventing this from having a chance as passing. I hate to pile on, but I don't think I've heard something this poorly mixed and disparate compared to the arrangement potential in a long time, which was a shame. It's a decent premise with potential that's nowhere near being realized. You've really got to compare the mixing and production of this song to other music in the same vein that you like, Clint, and really focus on achieving a cleaner, more polished & balanced sound. NO

This opened up very similar to the original, only going for more intensity once the beats came in. Whoa... the padding at :16 absolutely swamped the string lead and everything else. It's a cool idea; unfortunately, the soundscape is just massively imbalanced. :34 moved into more of an electro feel; the lead synth there was grating and and needed a sharper, more focused sound (if that makes sense). That said, I do like the personalization employed here, even if the countermelodic writing was a bit swampy. Cool clearing of the soundscape at 1:26 leading into the source chorus. The energy escalated again at 1:44, showcasing some relatively basic but solid dynamic changes. Again, the verse at 2:01 sounded kind of flooded with the way the lead was processed, but it was serviceable. Really odd (read: briefly messed up) rhythmic variation around 2:26 that could stand to be tweaked. The arrangement was relatively straightforward as far as the treatment of the source's structure, and I thought the sound design was on the vanilla side with the more electronic side of this, which I honestly didn't like and though undermined the quality of the arrangement. Still, this arrangement had the fundamentals down as far as personalizing the sound and building an engaging enough interpretation. Much of the melody :31-1:27 & 2:00-3:08 was bordering on abrasive, IMO, and needed to be toned down, and I could see NOing this on needing more effectively dynamic contrast and more creative synth design. I'm on the borderline, and it's not even really my cup of tea, but I felt the original supporting writing in particular during the melody was smartly written. Even during the bridge, there was subtle but well-handled original writing underneath the source melody that pieced together with the melody well. There's room for improvement on the production side, and the volume actually hurt this, but why make the perfect the enemy of the good here? I can (barely) go in favor of it. If this doesn't make it as is, that's OK, Benjamin, then work to improve the production and send it back. You need a 192kbps or VBR1 encoding anyway, which would help improve the sound quality (just) a touch. YES (dancing on the borderline)

Favorite musical memory? Probably Coldplay's Parachutes. Super emo depressing stuff given my mindset at the time, but I loved every song on it. Not as much of a fan of their pop stuff (I still like it though), but Parachutes is a sweet album.

You're definitely not giving us any ideas.

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.

Lyrai, I'm definitely NOT above trolling right back , but oftentimes when encountering douchey/accusatory/bad faith comments, it's just better to distill the nonsense away and just address the perceived problem rather than be hung up about the tone. Sometimes the tone is caused solely just because of a misunderstanding. Better to give folks one chance to either soften the tone OR double down. Also, Nabeel, calm down. e-Teeth gnashing (CAPS CAPS CAPS) is unnecessary (and dumb).

Does this work? https://itunes.apple.com/ca/album/for-everlasting-peace-25-years/id734078834

This be so fly.

Our next commercial album will be 900 tracks to get every ReMixer in. Cost: $449.99.

That's indeed the deal. They asked us to create it, so we did. Thanks for asking about this on OCR Talkback last night too. We're region-restricted on where we can sell the album, so we unfortunately can't use Bandcamp since there's 0 region restriction. That said, thanks so much for the kind words and the support!