Liontamer   Judges ⚖️

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.

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

Project Phoenix, based in Tokyo, has JUST launched its Kickstarter efforts to make an indie JRPG. We're hoping to raise the $100,000 we're seeking in funding to secure the 3D modeling for the game, which itself is currently in the very early stages of development (and shooting for a mid-2015 release). Right now, you can check out the team and the early concept work and see if you'd like to get on board. The FAQ goes over some common questions like "Why only $100K for a game Kickstarter?" (the team will be paid after it comes out, and $100,000 is not the budget to make the entire game, it's primarily for the modeling) and "Why's the lead character named Ruffles?" (It's fun!), so be sure to check that and the rest of the information out. That said, we've got a great, diverse team in place, including Final Fantasy series composer Nobuo Uematsu (his first-ever indie game he's agreed to work on, even before Oceanhorn), as well as Metal Gear Solid V vocalist Donna Burke (her work on the "Sins of the Father" trailer is incredible), and several artists, programmers and developers with experience from the Final Fantasy series, The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim, Valkyria Chronicles, L.A. Noire, Diablo III, Halo 4, Crysis 3, and several more top game titles, as well as films and anime. I'm also on board as part of the Community Team, and would sincerely appreciate you checking out what's been cooked up so far. We're already more than 50% of the way to the goal in the first 6 hours, but we feel a project like this hearkening back to old-school JRPGs should interest a lot of people so we're hoping to hit some stretch goals to expand the scope of the project. If you're able to spread the word about Project Phoenix, I'd greatly appreciate it! There's also a chance OC ReMix could get involved in some form making some music, and that's of course music to my ears since OCR came out with a not-too-shabby tribute to Final Fantasy VI last month. KICKSTARTER: http://kickstarter.com/projects/1300298569/project-phoenix-japans-indie-rpg-feat-aaa-talent PAYPAL (available after the Kickstarter as well!): http://projectphoenix.info/store/ HOMEPAGE/FORUMS: http://projectphoenix.info FACEBOOK: http://facebook.com/projectphoenix.info TWITTER: http://twitter.com/PhoenixJRPG

I like these other wrong answers. The FAQ link talks about removals, but doesn't explicitly talk about the numbering gaps (plus the anchor doesn't go right to that section since it's close to the bottom). We probably should add the bit about numbering gaps with the ReMixes into the main FAQ though. There are gaps in the numbering because we've removed many mixes from OC ReMix either by request or because they were violations of the standards here. Here's the big list of removed stuff to detail the numbering gaps: http://ocremix.org/info/ReMix_Changelog

So, originally, the beats were really weak and a legit dealbreaker issue, not just me being an old man per the usual. I form letterered it to speed up the process and Argle was cool enough to respond back with some resubmission tweaks that fix the issue and get the piece solidly there, IMO. I still though the beat-writing was metronome-ish in places, which didn't drive the track forward in the way I think was intended. But the beats in this resub did have that denser sound needed to properly fill things out. The arrangement was relatively conservative to start but expanded with new part-writing and personalized well with the instrumentation. The live instruments starting at 1:30 added beautiful interpretive touches to things in the second half, and it was nothing but goodness all around. Nice job on this, guys! YES

Your ReMixer names: Skolar, Argle Name of game(s) arranged: Sonic the Hedgehog Name of individual song(s) arranged: Green Hill Zone - Name of arrangement: Did a Hedgehog Just Come Through Here? Skolar: Argle offered to provide violin for my original version. I was happy that someone was interested enough in my remix to help with it, but I knew that in the state it was in, my remix wouldn't come close to doing a live instrument recording justice. Fortunately, that problem was solved a few days later when Argle - apparently just for fun - completely remade the remix into this polished orchestral-electronic-I-don't-even-know-what-to-call-it. I can't pretend to take credit for how cool it sounds at this point, but I'm proud to have participated in something that wound up sounding this awesome Argle: I initially offered to do some recording for Skolar, cuz sampled violin makes me a sad panda. Since he sent me a MIDI to work from and I had to patch everything to samples anyway to get a working mix, I figured I'd make a tweak here. And a tweak there. All of the sudden I had a mix that was fairly different from Skolar's original track, yet built on the foundation of it. Moral of the story is sending me a project MIDI is a dangerous thing. Many thanks to him for inspiring me with this tune; it's a source I probably never would have chosen on my own. ----------------------------------

Not a fan of how blocky the performance sounded from :38-:49, and the fakeness of the piano was VERY unfortunate throughout. Anything that can be done in the future to smooth out the velocities and make the piano sound more humanized would be great. The more delicate notes sounded good on the whole, but when the volume was higher, you couldn't help but pay very close attention to how stiff/unnatural the performance comes across. It's not WAY below the bar given the arrangement and some decent handling of the production to at least thicken up the piano sound, even the rigid timing was still very exposed. Also, I'm down with the arrangement, and I can understand these YES'es given the strength of it. I won't die with this posted as is, but hearing it I've got to dissent along with Palpable and ask for more votes. NO (resubmit)

A little dated, sure, but this has always been nice and chill. The arrangement was handled pretty conservatively, but was all pieced together nicely.

Hey, I like being shown the light. Not on 50% though. I'm always basing that on the standards as written. That said, on 3:15, you're right, and I'm glad you caught that. The chorus sounds too simplified on first blush, but the note pattern from 3:14-3:18 is actually derived from the first 4 notes in the source chorus (:40-:42 of "Green Hill"). Though it comes off very liberally handled, it goes on for about half of that 3:15-3:41 section, so that definitely puts it over the top. I thought the execution was on point, and I don't get the production crits holding it back, so I'm glad djp pointed out some subtle source usage I missed. Let's go! YES

Kidding in the writeup aside, this is the way to bring it! We're always open to this kind of music, so if you ever change your mind, we're here. Send it over!

Botchamania reference!

The soundscape lacked high-end clarity, and I felt that the overall levels were too loud (though I could live with them). That said, there were clear moments where the lack of clarity hurt the writing, for example the closing section of 5:56-6:37, the piano writing seems to be muddying with the trance synths, and then the rain SFX at 6:10. It's not horrible, but some further EQ of the parts to reduce the mud and get this brighter would make the textures sound much better, IMO. The voice samples (:41 & 1:48) were too loud and sounded very stapled on top of the soundscape; they're OK, but I'd pull them back some. The music portion was 6:42-long, so I needed at least 201 seconds of overt usage of the "Secure Place" theme to pass this on arrangement: :21.5-:28, :34.5-:41, 1:01.5-1:05, 1:14-1:18, 1:21.5-1:32, 1:34.75-1:39, 1:41.5-2:00, 3:03.5-3:34, 3:36.5-3:55, 3:56.5-4:01.5, 4:03-4:15, 4:16.5-4:19, 4:36.5-4:38.75, 4:43.25-4:46.25 = 128.5 seconds or just under 32% The source tune also has some supporting string writing that could be adapted here, but I couldn't ID it anywhere in here. If I'm right that what I hear is all of what's there from the source, then this needs a LOT more RE2 theme usage in here to have a chance at passing. Either use the 'Secure Place" melody or backing string writing more, or consider integrating another RE2 theme in here, just so that the arrangement of the actual video game music stays dominant within the track, per the standards here. In any case, Vig had some crits about the way the piece was structured, and a lack of intensity. I wasn't bothered by any of that and thought everything turned out fine on that level. It's not as if his advice was invalid, but it shouldn't be anything holding this piece from passing. I could pass it without production tweaks, but I'd always want a version with better mixing, if that makes sense. Do consider Vig's production critiques, as well as reducing the volume of the voice clips a touch and seeing if the soundscape can gain a bit more clarity. Y'all have had to tweak some tracks like Sonic 3 "Breaking the Ice" and Corpse Party "Heavenly Horrors," so hopefully this is just another one of those cases where some time away from the track along with the critiques help you better realize this great work here. That said (and please correct me if I'm wrong), you need more RE2 source tune usage in here, no matter how good the track ends up sounding production-wise. Awesome work so far, you guys. You guys always bring the creativity, and I'd absolutely want to see this posted in some form. NO (resubmit)

Interesting fade-in opening. The vox sounded like mud paired with the guitars. The leads from :41-:54 were way too loud. Dayum, by :41 it was apparent that the mixing was just cluttered and indistinct. Hopefully, Vig or someone else can clarify what exactly went wrong here and offer specifics on adjusting things. Really disliked the sequenced lead at 1:08; the timing was extremely stiff and just sounds like sloppy execution. That issue's even more pronounced from 1:34-2:01. If you can't smooth out that synth line, then just have it double the guitar and make sure it's never the louder of the two. Also, the transition to "Metal Man" at 1:34 was nonexistant. It was like an awkward key change. You need an actual transition there. It worked better at 2:01 though; that was a smoother fit. 2:17-3:28 sounded like mush, continuing for the long haul. The attacks for the Boomer Kuwanger theme at 3:29, again, sounded really stiff and quantized; it was less of an issue when the guitar layered with it at 3:36, but it's still unfortunate. The track cut out before the vox finished fading; watch those details. Although it's not my personal cup of tea, the arrangement generally is OK. But humanize the timing of those synths and, more importantly, clean up the soundscape. It's a decent base, Antanas, but needs mixing polish. NO (resubmit)

I actually think this is closer to the bar that Vig gives it credit for, but you do need to clean up the soundscape some and introduce further variation into the picture. I actually liked some of the sounds here, in that it definitely reminded me of European VGM arrangement scene music and some OCR stuff from ye olden days. The main difference between those throwbacks and this though is that the soundscape here was needlessly muddy/delayed. Despite the lower encoding, U-ji's Zillion "Melodic Trance" mix compares way more favorably to this as far as the mixing goes. By 2:16, yeah, I was seeing where Vig was coming from. There's some good energy at the core here, and obviously some additive writing introduced midway through, but the overall arrangement was too repetitive. The part of the arrangement handling the main source tune needed more variation. Right now the core pattern arranged from "Underwater Frigate Reactor Core" basically sounds the same in your mix from :43-3:58 & 4:39-5:11, and it does drag out. Since slimming this down seems off the table (though it shouldn't be, IMO), perhaps there are some instrument or rhythmic changes you can throw into the picture. The way you break down and rebuild the textures was definitely well in the right direction, and the additive writing was all well done too. But at the core, there's a lot that ended up being a little too repetitive due to the treatment of the core pattern. It was a close call in terms of the panel vote, but I think FFmusic Dj's Shadowrun "Running the Cyberpunks" is a great example of how to provide subtle but constant evolution of an upbeat arrangement. Definitely worth revising if you're up for it, Z. This has good potential. I hope this isn't the last we hear from you. NO (resubmit)

I disagreed about the piano sounding like "garbage," personally, but Vig was dead on (including the specific piano advice) about everything else. All those kicks sounded lossy and were very obviously muddying up the soundscape, and the lead guitar needs to be pulled back. I'd also argue that the synth at 1:28 was too dry and upfront; the timing of it sounded too rigid and its placement in the mix made that issue stand out too much; I'd use a softer synth sound there that more complimentary when trading off with and doubling the guitar. One other small detail that stuck out like a sore thumb was the audible hiss that showed up at :03 when the guitar came in. If the hiss is unavoidably part of the recording and you can't get rid of it, at least fade it in so it doesn't just plop right into the soundscape like that. Get rid of it or at least smooth out its arrival. It just feels like a lack of attention to detail the way you notice it come in. You hear more light hiss during the final guitar section at 3:50, and at 4:03 it fades down very quickly. Anyway, great arrangement otherwise; wouldn't change a thing about that. Even though this is a NO as is, you could definitely tweak this and get it passed. Like Vig said, all this needs is some production adjustments, and you'll be in the clear. Always good to hear your submissions, Ivan; they're always very creative, with great energy. NO (refine/resubmit)

Not really impressed by the synths during the intro; pretty vanilla/stock choices here. Super bland layered claps and kick at :44. Wow, not feeling the piano sequencing at 1:11; weird notes from 1:21-1:23. Decent piano run there from 1:25-1:29, but everything sounded so mechanical and devoid of feeling. Pretty minimalist beats and pads from 1:44-2:42. I guess with a 6:18-long piece, you can have a minimalist build somewhere, but even so this was still REALLY barebones. 2:43 (finally - you could trim that last section) moved onto something from the source, gradually building into some bass kicks coming in at 3:44. The lead to things picking up at 4:14, though the energy level was way lower than that buildup implied. The writing was decent there, but the textures remained VERY thin despite everything indicating this was the apex of the arrangement. The sounds just have no body, no richness whatsoever. The mixing lacked clarity/sharpness as well. Yeah, Deia mentioned some interesting arrangement ideas in there, but it's all hampered by weak execution. Many of the instrumentation choices were flimsy with no creative processing, none of the textures were cohesive, you often had odd notes from the way the leads combined with the pads, and the climax didn't even get into second gear as far as the energy level. There's just a ton of unrealized potential here, and a lot to work on to get it into shape. I wish I could be more complimentary, as the arrangement approach was good and used the source tune creatively throughout. But the energy inherent in the writing never arrived. NO

The piano timing (first heard at :32) sounded really stiff and awkward, which needs to be addressed before we could post it, IMO. If it didn't sound so rigid and fake, it would be fine. Yeah, pretty much the same piano lead writing from 1:32-2:16 we heard from :33-1:17, while adding (good) string and bass accompaniment. Good additions, but yeah, it just comes off like a copy-pasta; perhaps a different lead, some flourishes or rhythmic changeups could give you something more substantive, though IMO what's here was still solid enough despite Vig's concerns. The beat-writing had lots subtle variations, though it was odd that it still felt bland and metronome-ish at times with the constant core pattern. It wasn't a dealbreak or anything, and there are subtle dynamic shifts throughout, but there was an overall feeling of sameyness in the arrangement that Vig pointed out. Solid stuff so far. While the verses were a bit repetitive, I thought what was there could get by. We'll see if anyone else agrees. That said, the piano forms the core of the arrangement, and the timing needs to sound humanized. Good, creative work so far, Steve, just get it over the hump. NO (resubmit)

Dude, save us some headaches! If you're arrangement is 7 minutes, give us a breakdown of how the source tunes are used in here. "Nisus" is 3 minutes long with no loops. "Dancing Mad" itself is 17 minutes long. What did you use from either? You're just making the evaluation process take longer with no specifics to go off of. I barely recognized any "Dancing Mad" in here beyond the 2-minute mark, but I'm also not overly familiar with all 17 minutes of it. Little help here? Wow. Yeah, this mixing is egregiously whacked. The vox is just barreling over everything else with a ton of mud, and there's 0 clarity in anything. Anyway, I'd focus on critiquing the arrangement more, but the mixing is a non-starter. I'm not mad, but definitely address the mixing AND provide a thorough breakdown on how the sources are used in the arrangement, just so it's clear what you used everything NO

Definitely a muddy soundscape. Something about the backing writing from :23-:35 was weak and didn't move the :36-on was better at driving the track forward. The guitars at :11 were pushed too far back, although they sounded like FL Slayer stuff the way the articulations sounded; if there's any way to get a better lead guitar sound, go for it. That supporting writing from 1:23-1:35 sounded like an awkward fit, not that it affected the decision. Basically sounded like a copy-pasta loop of the verse at 1:53. Yep, it was. Some variation for that verse would have been good. Switched to a more electronic deal with laid back bass and beat from 2:35-3:05. Really poor synth lead there with super stiff sequencing, along with cheap-sounding claps that were mixed too loud and didn't create a cohesive sound. Well, I'll say this, Mike; your last sub took 4 tries to get it up above the acceptance bar, but you HAVE done it before. The arrangement has merit, so don't be discouraged. You're using a pretty different sound palette here, so it's understandable that it's not as polished as how the previous mix ended up. That said, this track definitely needs a lot of work in terms of the production. Vig's right about the way the guitars are mixed. Beyond that, some of the supporting instrumentation sounded really poor compared to everything else (e.g. the guitar lead at :11, the drums from 1:23-1:36, the synth lead from 2:42-3:05, and the layered claps from 2:42-3:03); there's definitely a quality disparity with some stuff used here. If you're still interested in working on this further, use the Workshop resources here and see how much you lift this up. NO

Great source tune choice. I'd love to hear someone turn it into an alternate version of Mario Kart 64 "Koopa Castle," MK64 instrumentation, rhythms and all. Now... I say this with no personal insult intended, but... :19 is a bunch of bullshit. What in the world happened? The screamo stuff and mixing makes no sense whatsoever and sounded as if I turned the preamp on Winamp to +12db and everything was just flooded and distorted. It's gotta be crazy when I'm checking other tracks to make sure my computer AND ears aren't broken. It's a great arrangement, but the way it's produced/mixed is just sillyness. Pull it BACK. Source melody comes in at :45 and it's just buried behind the vox and drums. Even when the unintelligible vocals come in, everything was just mud and volume. I'd be begging someone like Sixto or something to see what they think. Again, great arrangement, Joachim, but the overboard mixing choices that are intended to enhance how intense this is just ended up swamping and undermining the whole thing. Once that's fixed, it would be such an easy pass. NO EDIT (9/6): I was reaching out to Joachim today to potentially get a revision for this mix, and he mentioned he thought I was bashing the vocals. I wasn't, but I was glad to get the chance to clear up what I meant : Just to clarify for the peoples, I didn't know that was an insult, sorry. I wasn't using it as a pejorative, and until today I didn't know it was considered a separate genre OR that it's more about emo music. OOPS. Now I get why that could be taken the wrong way, that's my fault. I'm referring to more the power & intensity of the vocals, but I don't meant that the performance/lyrics/creativity isn't substantive, just more that the vocals are meant to be way out front, SUPER intense, and less about being able to understand each word (which isn't required for OCR, by the way). Again, sorry for unintentionally insulting your approach; I'm down with all genres, so I don't want you to think I was just trying to wave off black metal. As far as the decision, and how the production factored into it, Torzelan mentioned he wasn't sure that some of the production inherent in the genre fits OCR's standards. I think that old techno/trance argument is more about being too repetitive, but everything goes on a case-by-case basis. For this mix, IMO, it's just about the different parts all being at the same high volume, it was near impossible to hear the details in your composition and performance, enough to (in my opinion) undermine what you were otherwise going for. I think it's definitely possible to do black metal and have it sound loud, intense, aggressive and all that while at the same time not having all of the parts mud together. Thankfully, while asking Joachim if he could somehow revise this piece before BadAss 2 came out, he let me know about his problem with what I said, and (I hope) I was able to clear things up so he could understand where I'm coming from. BTW, artists, if your track is being judged and you see something written that that pisses you off, don't hold it in. Contact the judge who set you off first and see if you can make sure there's no misunderstandings. But if the judge is being a jerk about it when talking to them (they shouldn't be, we're not out to be mean), then make a thread on the forums and have at it!

Vig's crits about the muddyness aren't wrong, but having heard a bunch of Brandon's subs with these kinds of problems being more pervasive, I just wasn't bothered by this as much as others, and thought the mixing worked well enough. 3:23's section was the most swamped to me, but even then it was nothing that would bar posting it. The compression didn't bother me overall, and I thought all of the elements pieced together well. The drums were a non-issue to me and nothing ever sounded off or wrong to me. I didn't mind the transitions; the move into Chrono Cross could seem jumpy because that theme is so well-known, but I thought that usage, and the 7th Guest one were fine. I'm not hearing anything other than a great arrangement with strong, stylish execution. Let's go. YES

Finally. Took me a long while to wrap my head around this piece, but (after a lot of back and forth comparisons) I hear the source in there. I rearranged Chris's breakdown to make more sense in following the arrangement: REMIX - soft, ethereal string and choir chords; easier to hear at beginning (LT Note: :11.25-:37.5 of the arrangement, though Chris would possibly argue it lasted until :46) ORIGINAL - oompah oompah chords (LT Note: looping in source background from :00-:07) REMIX - 0:46-1:20 - soft strings and choir ORIGINAL - 0:15-0:22 - tuba and xylophone REMIX - 1:22-1:57 - synth lead ORIGINAL - 0:00-0:08 - tuba theme REMIX - 1:58-2:32 - synth lead and accomp. ORIGINAL - 0:15-0:22 - tuba and xylophone REMIX - 2:33-2:50 - bells melody, w/ some decoration ORIGINAL - 0:08-0:15 - tuba secondary melody --------------------------------------------- The track was 3:27.75 long, so I needed 103.875 seconds of overt source usage for the pass on arrangement: 11.25-37.5, 46-1:11.5, 1:21.5-1:47, 1:57-2:03, 2:05.75-2:13, 2:14-2:19, 2:50-2:54.75, 2:56.5-3:03, 3:05.5-3:08 = 109.25 seconds Once I got past the source usaeg threshold I was looking for, I stopped, so there's definitely more I'm not counting. This arrangement'll definitely (and understandably) fly way, way, way over people's heads, so if they don't like this, I get it. Slowing the tempo AND changing the rhythms of the melody like this (e.g. 1:22's section) gets pretty dicey, but those source parts are there, just like Chris said they were. I wouldn't speed up the track 400%, but 150-250% did help, for anyone curious enough to try. In a vacuum, I love it. It's too abstract to appeal to most people as a Plok arrangement, so I would have liked something a bit more melodically straightforward, but that's more a subjective concern than anything else. It's definitely a liberal take, but as long as the source usage is clear to me, I'll allow it. YES