Liontamer

No Larry on this album = bad. :'-(

That's because it's Luiza.

Intro seemed pretty strong. The beats at :42 had some meat to them, and there were obviously effects employed on them, but they seemed comparably too dry and exposed compared to everything else. If anything hurt this arrangement, it was that issue. By about 1:45, the dynamic curve already sounded too flat, mainly on account of the beat pattern being so static. That said, there ARE subtle rhythmic variations throughout, I DO notice them; but the pattern basically sounds fixed & repetitive on account of the percussion sound never changing for almost 4 whole minutes. One idea would be that you could swap the sounds of the beat out a couple of times over the course of the track to create subtle but more pronounced dynamic contrast without needing to resort to something drastic that would disturb the overall pacing and flow of the track. Either way, you need something that more effectively creates variation and dynamic contrast for the backing instrumentation. Meanwhile, the foreground treatment of the Zeal theme and the overall arrangement and production ideas were excellent, and I wouldn't change a thing about the rest of the piece. This is definitely well on the way to passing, John, and just needs some background writing tweaks to give this more obvious development & evolution over the course of the arrangement. I hope you tweak it and resubmit this so we can pass it and post it. Get feedback on your revisions from a couple of people first before you do, but I definitely want to see this posted in some form. NO (resubmit) EDIT/P.S. Don't forget, for here you need a more creative title than "Source Tune Name (Artist Mix)".

The panning's too wide. Though it wasn't a huge, HUGE deal, and I didn't notice that issue in the previous version, the extreme panning does make the parts harder to make out on headphones. The core beat/kick still is weak. I'm not sure if the tempo slowdown around 3:36 is new; I don't recall it from before, but I'm not feeling the way tempo shifted; there was no point to it because it was the exact same writing, just barely and briefly slowed down, with otherwise 0 meaningful variation Dynamically, the second half is a rinse/repeat of the first. The transitions between JJ2 and SM64 were slightly different from the first half, but the way the energy level changes and the way the instrumentation/textures sound is basically just repeating things and staying in the same gear. Yeah, the final section of Mario was maybe a LIIIIITTLE more intense than prior iterations, but it's not particularly different. Unfortunately, I find it a little funny that I like the arrangement a bit less now, having heard this revision. Adjust the panning so it's not as drastic, beef up the beat, and try to introduce more obvious dynamic contrast into the song through more distinct changes in instrumentation, textures, rhythm, or intensity (just something so the overall energy level doesn't hover in the same place). Still a NO for now, but this still has good promise and can be lifted up above the bar.

OC ReMix Publishes Free Perfection. OST by Omni-Psyence! June 11, 2013 Contact: press@ocremix.org FAIRFAX, VA-Perfection., a puzzle title developed by Greg Lobanov for multiple platforms, was released earlier this year for 99¢. Today, OverClocked ReMix has released Omni-Psyence's chillout-style game soundtrack for free. The score is available by BitTorrent download at http://ocremix.org/album/45/perfection-original-soundtrack. This marks the sixth time OverClocked ReMix, a community primarily focused on fan arrangements of video game music, has published an original soundtrack on behalf of a game developer. Perfection. Original Soundtrack features the four in-game compositions by Cory "Omni-Psyence" Richards, OC ReMixer and independent composer, alongside unused pieces and an arrangement by Richards featuring the violin and vocals of Tera "TeraCMusic" Catallo, whose work has been praised by fellow multi-talented musician Lindsey Stirling. OC ReMix will continue to publish more free game soundtracks on behalf of interested game developers and publishers in the future, providing convenient hosting and free promotion. "The Perfection. soundtrack is a collection of pure tone, meditative ambient-synth soundscapes with an evocative, slightly Eastern melodic patchwork," said Omni-Psyence. "This was composed to support the minimalist and zen-like aspect of the game; this is all about relaxation and taking your mind away from everything else. I want to thank Greg Lobanov for allowing me the opportunity to write music for his excellent creation, and OC ReMix for supporting video game music as strongly as it does. Long live VGM!" Perfection. is described by IndieGames.com as "Fruit Ninja for smart people," and is a simple, soothing puzzle game about cutting shapes to fit into outlines. There is an infinite number of puzzles, each randomly generated to be unique and interesting. Its gameplay is very minimalistic and very forgiving; there is no time limit, and you can cut as many times as you want and undo as many times as you want until you get each shape right. Whether you get it perfect or not, once a shape is completed, it's gone forever. There's no commitment to go back and master what you've already seen; only what's new and in front of you. Links Get the Game! Only 99¢! (iOS/Android/Windows/Linux/Mac) - http://perfectiongame.net Official Game Trailer - http://youtu.be/Bs_NcyqVDbw Album Info - http://ocremix.org/album/45/perfection-original-soundtrack OST Download (BitTorrent) - http://bt.ocremix.org/torrents/Perfection_Original_Soundtrack.torrent Review the Album - http://ocremix.org/forums/showthread.php?t=44092 Dumb and Fat Games Homepage - http://dumbandfat.com Omni-Psyence's Homepage - http://omnipsyence.com About OverClocked ReMix Founded in 1999, OverClocked ReMix is an organization dedicated to the appreciation and promotion of video game music as an art form. Its primary focus is ocremix.org, a website featuring thousands of free fan arrangements, information on game music and composers, resources for aspiring artists, and a thriving community of video game music fans. ###

I've been maxin' and relaxin' to Cory's work here for a while (and Tera's guest performance), so I'm glad we've finally put this out, and also have it coinciding with Perfection. being featured by IndieCade at E3! Definitely get the game if you haven't already. I've been watching Banov's Twitter feed, and he's continuing to add to and improve it, all while planning his next stuff. One to watch.

There's some light but pretty obvious hiss that's unfortunately audible throughout. I definitely love the arrangement, and I could see this passing due to the character of this winning out, but I can't get over the lack of realism in much of the sound. A piano-playing J can correct me, but the piano sample just sounds too thin in the higher octaves and many of the decays sound too sudden. I guess that can be a style, but it doesn't sound very good in the big picture; someone can let me know if it's just my personal taste, but I felt a lot of the energy inherent in the writing was undermined by the thin, somewhat rigid sound. The arrangement really was sweet though; it was close. NO (resubmit)

Some generic-sounding instrumentation pads and a vanilla lead synth opened things up, though once the track got fuller at :42, the textures were OK. The soundscape was a little swamped, but it was a personal choice that wasn't really overpowering the track for me, at least at this stage. "Underground BGM" finally kicked in at :42. A slow build was occurring with some escalation at 1:00, but the pace plodded pretty quickly. Always dislike the way thin, exposed claps like those from 1:28-1:44 don't do anything to really fill out the soundscape. 2:05-on basically rehashed the verse with a lot of overly busy original writing ideas on top. It was definitely a strange combination where the foreground writing was super-busy yet the pace and dynamics were otherwise static. You could stand to have some rhythmic variations, for sure; otherwise, this beat writing really does drag out. Jeez, the original writing from 2:51-3:31 was over the top. I'm not inherently against the additions there, but the actual parts playing the source melody really got obscured as a result. The whole soundscape was very muddy as well for that final section. 2:05-2:24 was cluttered as well, but at least I could parse individual parts out, unlike 2:24-2:33 & 3:07-3:31 which was extremely cramped. Give the parts some more room to breath. You'd got the interpretation factor there, that's good. But you need to fine tune the writing details like Vig said. Some rhythmic variations of that overly repetitive beat would help, and you need to clean up the soundscape a bit for the fullest sections. Some instrumental variations could really do wonders for this as well; again, another move to help this not be as plodding and repetitive over the long haul. It can't just be stapling new writing on top of the verse reduxes when the tempo is so deliberate and the overall feel is too repetitive; that's actually not keeping things insteresting. That said, you may not be able to get this to a state where it could pass, but you show potential overall. Keep at it, Corey, and just stay hungry to learn. NO

This is awesome. I'm really glad Yan was able to take another pass at the production. This'll really stand the test of time much better now, and it sounds excellent.

I didn't agree with Vig either about the arrangement being disjointed. The structure was there, the dynamics just ended up flatter than they should have been. This was a pretty interesting arrangement with a lot of good things going for it. The chiptune-ish instrumentation was pretty cool, but a lot of the non-chiptune instruments were lacking Opening sounded interesting though it was possible the synth design could end up pretty boring. It's on the generic side, and the intro of the flimsy beats at :37 meant that the soundscape would never feel full. The percussion writing's not bad, it just needs more meat to the sound, IMO. The organ timing from 1:45-1:58 & 2:49-3:02 just sounds too mechanical for an instrument that needs humanized timing to sound good. That part probably sounded the worst out of anything in the track. The saws/synths from 2:10-2:23 were pretty cheap-sounding as well. Both Vig & Deia mentioned the overall lack of dynamic contrast here, and it's mostly because you're coasting off 1 beat pattern and it makes the energy level VERY static and plodding. The beat pattern changes that were already there were a decent start and pretty creative. Most of 1:05-3:22, however, was the same drum pattern and definitely got boring quickly. Even though you're going for a fairly subdued groove, you need to employ some other instrumental, rhythmic or textural changes to create more development and evolution in the composition. So to summarize: 1. You need dynamic contrast. 2. You need more variation in the percussion writing. 3. You need more humanized-sounding sequencing/timing for the organ at 1:49 & 2:49. 4. The beats were too thin and need a richer sound to better fill out the background. 5. Look into modifying some of the synths (e.g. saws at 2:05/2:10) with creative processing, effect, etc. to not sound so generic. Good effort so far, Sven. I disagree with DragonAvenger that it's close to passing, because there's a lot of parts that should be addressed. That said, you're showing some legitimate arrangement skills and definitely demonstrate potential. Please don't be discouraged. Even if you don't make it onto OCR with this mix after attempting to improve it and resubmit it, you do have some arrangement skills and I liked many of your instrumentation ideas. Keep polishing your skills. NO

The source usage was pretty straightforward, and there was no big need to stopwatch. Anyway, here's a conservative breakdown - :12.75-1:38, 2:04.5-2:15.5, 2:15.5-2:17, 2:49.5-3:00, 3:08.5-3:35 I'm not sure what's with all these subs lately where the mixing is not ideal, but oh well. I thought this sounded too hot, but not in a way that ruined the track. The drums here were on the weak side as well, but they were couched well in the background and didn't negatively stand out too much. Similar good placement of otherwise weak brass samples was effective to not expose the samples too drastically. In any case, just an awesome, souped up cover of the source that really expanded upon the instrumentation nicely, giving a source tune that already had good drive a big boost of energy. Nice dropoff at 1:40. Loving the energy of the guitar work as well; this was definitely one of Liam's best, most polished performances yet, with excellent layering to give the sound of the theme tons of depth. Wish the mixing got another pass, but what's here gets it done in spades. Nice work! YES

Do I need to change it in the OCR database then? If Bryan can post or you can find out from him, that would be good. Otherwise, if he's cool being known at Insixfour for his artist page, that's fine too. Just checking.

Added; the games listed on in-progress bios right now are just to seed them and get it started; if folks want to list other important appearances, that's fine.

/raises hand Oooh, oooh, call me! I might have an answer! It's possible Emery made a conscious or subconscious connection due to... http://youtu.be/gtJyq0STBu0?t=1m28s - 1:28-1:41 = http://youtu.be/a1YhYv6-_Os?t=3s :03-:17 It's worth a guess! That common thread wasn't really explored in this arrangement, but it was cool to hear Alexander Brandon had employed that pattern in JJ2 after Koji Kondo used it in Mario 64. The sources are distant cousins! I thought the percussion groove at :27 was VERY flimsy, so I'm actually more in Vig's corner on this one. The arrangement is nice, but a lot of the backing writing sounded too obscure, and the kick really was a weak link and undermined the energy inherent in the rest of the writing. I also thought the mixing should have had more high-end crispness to it; this all sounds distant and lossy right now. What's here, while kind of muddy, is barely serviceable enough, though a higher encoding may also help a little. It sounded like something dropped out during the 3:44-4:00 section that made things sound a little less muddy, but it was short-lived. Anyway, short and sweet. 1) Beef up the sound of the core beat first used at :27 so that it's less flimsy/bland, 2) sharpen the mixing so it doesn't sound quite as lo-fi, 3) Stop submitting at 160kbps. It's gotta be either 192kbps or VBR1. Love the arrangement, Emery. Now we just need the other half of the equation lifted up a little bit. I won't die if this makes it as is, and I hate to vote NO, but I genuinely feel it's slightly below what we should accept and that sometimes smaller details can really add up, especially listening through a 6 minute-long piece. NO (resubmit)

The instrumentation seemed too bright to me, and I'm not really a fan of the synths, but I can get past it. I have a feeling if the mixing were different, and the synths weren't as shrill, I'd love this. Bass kick is nice and meaty though. Anyway, this was a SUPER smart arrangement of Marble Garden. With the rhythms being different and the mixing of some of the parts de-emphasizing the source usage at times, I could see folks being thrown off, but the theme's there nearly all the time (except 2:07-2:33 from what I can tell). The fade ending at 3:24 was way too abrupt. Should have given it a few more bars to let it wind down more smoothly. Yeah, maybe another J can articulate some concrete ideas on how to better balance these parts; something felt off there. Not that it was something that risked a NO (far from it), just that this didn't sound optimally mixed, and you can hear unlocked potential. Regardless, this was some sweet work by Ben, and the first submission of his I've voted on where I felt like this was an easy pass rather than one I could pass with some close call issues. Good work, bro; keep stepping up your game! YES

First off, I don't care what ninja arts Vig knows, I poop on him for crapping on the X-Men soundtrack. That's a good theme, foo'! X-Men definitely had an odd sound to it, even for the Genesis, but it's got nothing but love here. Strange opening; the timing of things seemed overly rigid right from the get-go. The mixing was too muddy, IMO, and the bass timing seemed just slightly behind, at least until the melody came in. No big deal, just pointing out what I heard. The lead at :23 was too quiet compared to the bass and pads, and the lead was bland and devoid of energy. This has gotta be sequenced, because no lead should sound that robotically timed; it saps the life out of this. The claps added at :41 were also louder than the lead. The piano at 1:36 was pretty poor sound quality; just no body/richness to the sample. You need a sample with a thicker more realistic sound or need to mask the deficiencies of that sample with effects; when more things are going on at 2:31-2:49, the piano works much better in the background where it's less exposed. That said, I was enjoying the piano writing itself and thought it was a good change of pace. The thinner layered claps at 3:48 we're too exposed for a sound that dry. I thought the bass writing sounded good overall, but Vig's right that the rhythms got boring after a while. There were some subtle drop-offs and whatnot, but overall this track just plodded along without enough dynamic contrast and without enough energy or presence in ANY of the mechanically-timed leads. It felt very static and unexpressive and made a 4 minute track feel like 6 long minutes. The fadeout didn't even wind down properly; c'mon, man. You can't have it fadeout halfway then abruptly cut off. It's minor in the big picture, but that's just sloppy detail work; keep an eye on that stuff. Damn, I like the arrangement too; that aspect of this was smart. But the execution isn't there yet, and some of the supporting writing could use touch-ups as well, like Vig alluded to. If you're willing to stick with it, Harold, please get more feedback at the Workshop forums and see what else you can do to improve this. Just being honest, I'm not sure you can get this to a point where we could pass it YET, but you DO show a lot of potential and I hope you stay hungry instead of getting discouraged. NO (resubmit)

Dude, I SHOULD have known you would have wanted to get your stuff in front of Brandon. Nice work! You've already made the connection, but the next time I see him, I will definitely throw in a good word. He's been an OCR fan for a long time, even before his writing career took off. If you haven't told him you're on here, you should. Small world. And I wouldn't have known this without you talking about it in da thrad! Networkingz!!!

The energy was pretty strong, and the arrangement, while cover-ish, was personalized to the core and varied very nicely. The ear candy here was awesome, and this even made some of the fakest brass samples in the world sound cool; you get a medal for that! :41-on sounded flooded. The lead at :48 was mixed too quietly, and the soundscape sounded noticeably cramped. Overall though, I don't get these NOs. I'd be glad to have a million strong arrangements mixed this way, there's no dealbreakers here. Vig's not wrong about the bass overpowering things, and the mixing could be adjusted, yes, but IMO we could post this as is with no problems. The balance among the parts was strong enough to hear the leads and supporting instrumentation clearly; everything could still be heard fairly well to me. I'm lovin' it, Jari, this was just an amazing arrangement. If this doesn't make it because of the mixing, just tweak a few knobs and send it on back. I think we shouldn't be holding this back if this was the final version we could get; it's letting the perfect be the enemy of the good on this one. YES

string pad part from source with original writing on top: :00-:34.25, :36-38.5, :39.75-:42, :43.75-:50, :52-54.5, :56-58, 1:00-1:10, 1:12-1:14, 1:16-1:20, 7:04-7:20 1:32.5-1:39, 1:51-2:13, 2:22-2:30, 2:37.5-2:44, 2:54.5-3:11, 3:15.5-3:24, 3:30.75-3:38, 3:46-3:57.5, 4:01.5-4:58, 5:02-5:44.25, 5:47.5-6:18 Vig missed an important part of the arrangement usage. The repeating string pattern used in the very opening corresponds to a backing part that drones much more slowly for the first :29 seconds of the original. So there's always that aspect of the source in play during the extended buildup, and it's a very important reason why the source tune sounds so eerie in the first place. Some of the instrumentation during 2:14-onward could be viewed as generic or bread-and-butter, and the beat pattern could have been more interesting. Pretty underwhelming string lead from 4:15-4:45 as well. While the energy could be called plodding, I thought the subtle dynamic builds and drops all clicked. Usually, I'm in agreement with Vig's criticisms on arrangement, but I just thought he was off-base on this one. In the big picture, I thought DarkSim's overall sound choices were solid enough, and things were mixed reasonably well. It doesn't have to reinvent the wheel as far as the instruments, and the arrangement evolved nicely throughout. I thought what was here executed the bread-and-butter sounds and arrangement approach nicely. Let's go. YES

Normally I don't have such a brief vote, but Vig and Deia really elaborated all of the core issues. I'm just co-signing at this point. Yeah, the synths were bland & flat and the textures were too sparse, and there wasn't enough substance to justify this length. The beats had some good beef to them though. Unfortunately, this wasn't close to being a pass, BUT you should actually stick around and improve your overall skills via the Workshop forums and soliciting more advice. NO

This still sounded too bright for my tastes, but not enough to disqualify it. The lead guitar at 1:11 had good energy, but why were the rhythm guitars so buried in the back? The writing and arrangement sounds good overall, but when you bury supporting instrumentation like that, it makes the whole soundscape seem as if it lacks depth. Right now, it's as if you just have a lead and the drums with no other support. The mixing needs to be adjusted to get the levels of the parts properly balanced and also not let the fullest sections sound so cluttered. Anyone think we should go conditional YES instead? The lead guitar also sounded a bit hot to me in spite of the revisions, but I could live with that if the other production issues were improved. Stellar arrangement though, Liam, you just need a little more fine tuning for the win! NO (refine/resubmit)

Definitely echoing Eino's comments; I WANT to see this posted in some form. The source usage criticism matters so much more than the production criticism. That submission with more obvious source tune connections added would have passed with that same level of production. I really hope you're willing to revisit this one at some point, it really is awesome. If not though, it's still a sweet piece of music!

Intro sounded pretty sweet. Liking the gliding lead at :15 and the gradual build. Indirectly channeling posu yan at :33 with the finger snaps. The snare at :49 still sounded too plodding, IMO (a constant issue throughout the mix for me). Meanwhile at :49, the other supporting percussion and bassline sounded kind of marginalized. XPRTsax sounded pretty swanky from :49-1:22, hearkening back to "Time Chill". Still diggin' the Schala-esque writing from 1:22 that was transitioned to very nicely. Nice build with the drums coming in from 1:39-1:55; subtle stuff that added a nice dimension to the background. Good dropoff at 1:55 as well. The piano had more body, though some higher notes still strained for credibility as far as the realism; nonetheless, a huge improvement there. There was a very soft pop at 2:05 that you'd need headphones to pick out, but it was there. Good build back up into Joe returning with the sax, which worked well in tandem with the Zeal background and Schala-esque stuff on top of that. Sounded like the end at 3:45 came 4 notes early, so that made the finish sound a little odd, but that's not a huge deal in the big picture. I'll say, while I think the mixing wasn't as clear as it should have been, and the drums really plodded, this is definitely a good step up in the overall execution. A good portion of that leap forward comes from Joe's involvement, but going beyond that, Aaron did a much better job giving better depth and realism to the instrumentation he employed, which filled in the soundscape nicely compared to the old version. This was a fuller, richer experience than before and safely gets it above the bar. YES

Awwwww man. I really just wanted to enjoy the energy here and rock with my 3 YES crew, but instead I'm hearing the muddy mixing here and knowing this 1) shouldn't sound washed out, and 2) could sound 10 times more badass with a proper mixdown. Nah, I can't do it. The arrangement is all sorts of awesome, but this would have to be cleaned up for me to pass it on production. There are (very) brief areas when the soundscape is less cluttered where I get really hyped for what's coming up, but then everything gets dense and messy-sounding, and it's just unfortunate. Looks like it'll make it anyway, but I feel like it's a disappointment that it would in this form. Rasmus, if you're willing to take a fresh look at this, even if it does pass right now, this could sound way cleaner and actually more intense by properly mixing it. It's an incredible arrangement, but it's hard to truly appreciate what's there. NO (resubmit)

Opening sounded REALLY fuckin' cool, straight out of a Japanese pro arrange album; great quality there. Bass kick at :17 sounded sweet but, dare I say it, might have been a little TOO beefy. Nice lil' usage of the bell line from the source starting at :32. Claps at :46 were kind of weak, as well as the drum shot build at :52, and the mixing felt odd once things moved over into the melody at 1:00. I'd bump up the melodic line playing the source some more. The boom-tss percussion added in at 1:14 also sounded really generic and shouldn't have been so loud/upfront. Once that part drops back and layers with some other stuff at 1:28, the boom-tss sound incorporates much better into the overall texture, adding depth without sounding cheap. Damn, what happened to using the Bison theme, bro? From 1:28-2:28 NONE OF THAT sounded like it had much of anything to do with the source theme. Even if it did, it's way too abstract to be able to tell what it's from, and I grew up on this theme. You really need to get the source theme to be a more central element here, and make this less about the original writing. Even just adding elements of the source tune in the background while not changing what you've already written would be great. Yeah, the soundscape sounds flat from 2:29-3:26; the way it's mixed sounds pretty dull exactly like Palpable pointed out, then 3:26's section was mixed much better. Definitely fix the mixing when that bass is in play, try to the give the leads some more energy, and perhaps create some stronger clap layers if you have the time/interest. The Bison lead at 3:54 was too quiet compared to the rest of the track; you need to push that up but also declutter the soundscape. It sounded better at 4:23 though. I didn't agree with Nutritious critizing the ending; I thought it was a strong outro and did a nice job subtracting elements for the finish. It resolved totally fine, IMO. ----------------------- All that said, I thought the overall piece here was pretty cool to listen to. If the Bison theme were more involved in this piece, I would still YES it, despite the flaws, because the production is adequate and the composition and flow are pretty good. However, the source tune connections weren't there, so now I'm gonna have to call out Nutritious on this YES. The mix was 5:34-long so I needed at least 167 seconds' worth of overt source usage to put that over 50% of the track and have the source tune usage be dominant in the arrangement. :28.5-30.25, :31.5-:35, :38.75-42.25, :45.5-:49, 52.75-56.25, 1:01-1:17, 1:21-1:28, 2:29-2:43, 2:50-3:03, 3:04.25-3:11.5, 3:18.5-3:30, 3:34-3:37.5, 3:47-3:52, 3:54-3:59.5, 4:01-4:08, 4:15.75-4:19.25, 4:23-4:28, 4:29.5-4:31, 4:51.5-4:55, 4:58.5-5:02, 5:05.5-5:09 = 119 seconds or 35.6% Let me make this VERY clear for all of us, just so we don't get complacent making these calls. This is bearing in mind that I could be drastically overlooking something from THIS arrangement that overtly ties to the source and making the wrong call entirely. It's not enough to "feel" like the arrangement has enough connections to the source material. It's not enough. When you hear tracks like this were the source tune and wholly-original writing have fairly good flow and synergy like they do here, it's very easy to just accept it because the overall composition sounds strong. To some extent, it's anal-retentive, but when I stopwatch stuff and time things out, it's so that I understand exactly how an arrangement relates back to the source tune. It's important to understand that relationship BEFORE you vote on the track. ESPECIALLY when YESing a track, please do the due diligence of understanding how much the source tune is used. Just going off your general feeling can sometimes be misleading. -------------------- Anyway, OneUp, I love you. This is definitely the best piece I've heard from you yet, and I like the creativity hear. The mixing/clarity should be tightened up a little, but it's OK enough to get by. And I'm sorry if I'm missing some obvious usage of the Bison theme, but again, I know that one well and listened to the source again, and I'm not hearing it used enough in this arrangement. Please figure out a way to use it throughout more of the piece if you want this to pass; right now, this arrangement is too liberal. Hopefully, you're still willing to look further at this, but if not, this is still awesome, it just falls outside of our arrangement standards. NO (resubmit)