Liontamer

Was a YES before, so I’m still on board now!

We maaaaaay need further help with this.

It'll sound like I'm saying I hate the sax; Lucas's sax performance is still pretty honky and lacks strong control (e.g. small examples, 1:18-1:23, 2:51-3:00), so while it's got some issues on display, it's capable enough to get by and, importantly, is surrounded by the rest of the quartet. Arrangement's fun with some good dynamics. Like butter, baby. YES

Always loved this theme as a kid, so let's go. Melody on keyboard at :15 feels very rigid. Oooh, at :29 with the shift, the percussion feels too metronome-like and locked to grid, and the melody's not standing out enough. The bassline writing's OK in principle, but almost sounded quitely off-key. At 1:21, the blocky keyboard backing and percussion is still holding this back, and the textures feel barren despite some decent padding going on. Keyboard at 2:13's also very rigid-sounding (with an awkward/sudden decay of that last note in the measure at 2:26). Track cut out with no fade or ending at 3:20. There's no fluidity to the timing of these parts, Adrián, and once you get to 2:27, we've basically heard all of the ideas; there's no real dynamic/energy contrast going on, just occasional times where the textures get fuller or emptier while the overall tone and pacing remained the same, which undermined the potential dynamics. I appreciate the mellower feel here; it would be very difficult to raise this up to a place where it would pass, because the timing isn't smoother and the textures lack synnergy. NO

Not recognizing the theme used in here to start, but we'll see where it goes. 2 minutes in, I'm not recognizing anything, so I'm hoping the back half is loaded with arrangement. Once the track picked up around, 2:07, the mixing was very muffled; the little melodic notes sprinkled in from 2:16-2:48 are barely audible. Source theme finally get referenced in a way that I can recognize from 2:48-3:19. Whatever sustained lines those are from 3:55-4:28 are definitely shrill/piercing, so tweak the mixing for those. Though this has a plodding pace/energy, it's very well performed and sounds/feels intentional, so in a vacuum, I can get behind this deliberate, grungy concept, even if the mixing isn't ideal. I'm not understanding how "Promise (Reprise)" is referenced in this aside from 30 seconds' worth in the middle though, Nomys, so whatever I enjoy about this piece is a moot point unless the source tune is overtly referenced in the majority of the arrangement. If there's something we majorly overlooked or other Silent Hill 2 themes are also referenced, please let us know and we can revisit this. NO EDIT (11/13): OK, there's "Promise" from 2:16-2:47, albeit mixed super quietly. IMO, it should be more prominent. Then the backing pattern found in both "Promise" (right at :00) and "Promise (Reprise)" from 2:48-3:19. Then "Promise" again, referencing 2:47's section from 3:19-3:49. From 4:29-5:38, it's arranging "Promise" (:33-1:21) in a minor key. There may be connection prior to 2:16, but with 3 1/2 minutes of source usage, I'm OK saying this is a substantial enough arrangement of "Promise". Alright, cool, the source is there for most of the track. Like I said, the mixing's not ideal, but the performances are solid. It's not like something CotMM or Steve Pordon would have made, but I'm an old school OCR fan, try my best to stay open-minded, and appreciate arrangements taking things in a more grungy and less melodious direction. Chimpa's calling this "loose and noodly", sure, but that's a feature, not a bug, so I don't agree with her POV at all. It's capably performed, and aside from 3:55-4:28 being piercing, mixed in a way that's meant to sound dark, dour, and dreary. These judges sti-ink. I'm the only one vibin' here. If this doesn't make it as is, Nomys, don't change this arrangement/writing if you don't want to, just see how you can tighten up the mixing. YES (borderline)

I'll just go on record as disagreeing. The melodic treatment is conservative in places, but there's enough differences for me in the genre, mood, and some additive original part-writing that interacts with the source (e.g. 1:46-2:37). There's room for melodically conservative arrangements being transformational enough in other respects, but MW's reservations are also something to keep in mind, Mel.

Hi. While playing »Tears Of The Kingdom« I was reminded how great the score of the dragons is. So I started a remix and tried to do something quiet and calm, but soon it took it’s own direction after I stumbled upon that beat, that fitted perfectly after I altered it. By the way: I’m not sure about the name of original track. It seems to have many names like Attendant Of The Sacred Spring, Servant Of The Sacred Spring or simply Dragon. I remixed it from the BotW-sourcevideo linked below. But because the song is the same in both games and I was inspired from TotK I named the newer Zelda as the source. You could listen to it here: Contact Information Your ReMixer name: Gaspode Your real name: Peter Köller Your email address: Your website: – Your userid: 26608 Submission Information Name of game(s) arranged: »The Legend Of Zelda – Tears Of The Kingdom« Name of arrangement: Ancient Dragons Name of individual song(s) arranged: »Attendant Of The Sacred Spring« Additional information: Switch, Manaka Kataoka, Yasuaki Iwata & Hajime Wakai Links to the original soundtrack: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyrIMXd-GhM

Hi! Here is my submission : Your ReMixer name : Nomys_Tempar Your email address : Your website(s) : nomystempar.fr Name of game(s) arranged : Silent Hill 2 Name of individual song(s) arranged : Promise (Reprise) Your own comments about the mix, for example the inspiration behind it, how it was made, how the source material was referenced in the arrangement, etc : The track was made in 2019, the main inspiration was the band Type O Negative. I wanted to make a metal cover of Promise and I though the weirdness of Silent Hill would fit the elusive/complexe gothic style of Type O Negative. I mostly just break the original track into pieces and put it back into another order with some harmonic changes along the way. LT EDIT (11/9): Nomys reached out and said he made a mistake in stating his source. It's "Promise" rather than "Promise (Reprise)". Since a small segment found in "Reprise" is used, I'll leave that video there, but also include the main source, "Promise". Let's revote!

Nice groove here at :16. Dunno why I'm getting so many subs in a row with lossy-sounding mixing, constantly having to compare with a control track to ensure I don't have wax in my ears. Mixing feels busy, some of the panning's too wide, and this lacks proper sharpness/clarity; unlike others I've voted on today, this is serviceable enough mixing, even though it's lossy-sounding and not ideal. Themes flow pretty well together. Would love another mixing pass before this was posted though; it's well arranged, but this doesn't shine like it should. YES

So the first time around (for direct post/flood consideration), Chimpazilla and I were fine with this, but djp pointed out loads of performance issues, mainly with the sax, that DarkeSword, prophetik, and others co-signed, and I definitely heard where they were coming from. Loads of hiss right from the jump; really unsure how that wound up here, because even as an aesthetic, it doesn't sound good at all; the hiss here is much louder than than album version. Starts off sounding so lossy here with the sax at :18; where's the sharpness??? I had to throw on a control track to ensure my listening setup wasn't compromised. Still hearing loads of shakiness/honkiness/flatness in the sax at :30-:31, :50-:52, 1:15-1:25, 1:48-1:51, 1:56-1:57, 2:03, 2:18-2:20 - TOO MANY PLACES. Now the mixing's not strong either, which is a shame, because the album version was fine with me there. The sax still needs more strength and control, and now the mixing's not sharp enough either. If this is to be revisited, let it be with more time to have some distance and clarity on what needs work; this may even need a new sax take from Lucas or someone else. Great arrangement, Mel, but the performances and mixing are hurting this. NO (resubmit)

Immediately digging the interpretive approach here. Even the nighttime/cricket SFX underneath is a very subtle touch. Beats brought in at :14 feel scant, but the bassline bumps and has a nice presense to it. Good instrumentation and textural tradeoffs throughout. I could see someone arguing that the development's too basic, as the textures aren't complex and the tempo's slow; to me, there's original writing involved and the genre change is cohesive. Dunno why I heard a bird crowing in the background at 1:41, but OK; it fits the opening SFX premise of this track somehow taking place outside. Oooh, no, that woodwind line from 1:59-2:02 was wildly off-key. This is well along the way, Alexis, but does need some sort of real resolution (as well as that off-key part fixed). Any further development, maybe another 30 seconds and with a real ending, would make this feel more complete, more solid. This is very far along the way and could use some extra spices and/or room to grow. NO (resubmit)

Wow, these levels are fuckin' SLAMMED, what in the living hell??? My brother in Christ, pull this back. Sounds like a big density change, but otherwise 0 compositional differences in this version compared to the original. Starts with a fade, ends with a fade, loops the same, structure's the same, no differences from section to section, and no effort given to personalize the arrangement approach beyond a simple MIDI rip/instrument swap, so this would be a clear Standards violation here. I'm sad to say that we don't have any "Fire Field" arrangements on OCR yet, so for reference on what we're looking for with more transformative and interpretive arrangement techniques, listen through the F-Zero arrangements we've posted and compare those to the original songs. NO

Slowed down first two notes of beep pattern (:00-:01) from Mix 1: :02.5-:10.75, :13.5-:19.5, :24.5-:27.5, :29.5-:32.5, :40.25-:43, :45.75-:48.5, 1:28-1:30.25 Pattern from intro (:00-:15) of Mix 3: 1:30.25-1:41, 1:44-1:45.5, 1:46.75-1:48, 2:00.5-2:12.5 Mix 1 bassline's two sets of 5 notes (:14-:42) simplified into two set of 3 notes - 2:12.5-2:16.75, 2:18.5-2:22.75, 2:24.5-2:34.75, 3:07.5-3:13.5, 3:18-3:33.75 Seemingly liberal version of 1:29-1:43 & 2:14-2:28 from arcade version (also :00-:16 of Mix 2): 3:32-3:56.5, 4:20-4:57 I've come back to this so many times. This is a game I loved as a kid, so I've looped these sources a bunch of times and even included the arranged version and all 3 Dreamcast mixes to dig deep on comparisons. I enjoy the sound design and production, so that's not in question. Even with Kyle's breakdown, none of these stated connections are overt, with the only exception being the slowed down beep pattern used at the start (:02-:48). I'm not counting the whistling SFX, which sounds sampled as far as I can tell, but it wouldn't have added much to my count. To me, the source theme's just too liberally treated; when you're talking about references to brief patterns and cadences, you can't go too far off the beaten path or it becomes unrecognizable and feels only like stylistic influences rather than adapted patterns or arranged melodic fragments. Even something like the synth line from 3:07-3:13, I hear how that's adapted from :00-:12 of the arcade version (the first source video) or :00-:12 of Mix 1 from the Dreamcast, but that's not actually how the source melody goes in the original. It's a difficult source tune to work with, and it felt there (3:07-3:13) like an inaccurate internal/mental transcription was what was being arranged. I'm one of the judges known as being very appreciative of very liberal arrangements, and I wanted to divine what you're selling, but it's not happening here, IMO, unfortunately. Unless someone on the panel can explicitly timestamp segments of the source and explicitly connect them to segments of the arrangement, a case for this being a recognizable arrangement is too difficult to make. NO (resubmit) EDIT (11/9): Alright, Dagger_G's breakdown isn't as explicit/clear as I'd like, but I'm listening more and more to the Dreamcast mixes in particular (which are cleaner/clearer), and I have a better picture of what's referenced. This definitely isn't focused on arranging the source's most memorable melody, and IMO, some will say the references aren't overt enough, so my more detailed A-to-B breakdown may not be compelling for some. That said, it's offered with timestamps and me pointing out what patterns/parts are referenced: * Slowed down first two notes of beep pattern (:00-:01) from Mix 1 - :02.5-:10.75, :13.5-:19.5, :24.5-:27.5, :29.5-:32.5, :40.25-:43, :45.75-:48.5, 1:28-1:30.25 * Pattern from intro (:00-:15) of Mix 3 - 1:30.25-1:41, 1:44-1:45.5, 1:46.75-1:48, 2:00.5-2:12.5 * Mix 1 bassline's two sets of 5 notes (:14-:42) simplified into two sets of 3 notes (like simplifying 1-1-2-2-3 to 1-2-3) - 2:12.5-2:16.75, 2:18.5-2:22.75, 2:24.5-2:34.75, 3:07.5-3:13.5, 3:18-3:33.75 * Mix 2 springy line (:01-:16) - 3:34.75-3:36.25, 3:37.75-3:39.25, 3:40.75-3:42.25, 3:43.75-3:45.25, 3:46.75-3:48.25, 3:50-3:56.5, 4:19.75-4:21.25, 4:22.75-4:24.25, 4:26-4:27.5, 4:29-4:32.5, 4:38.75-4:39.25, 4:41-4:42.5, 4:44.25-4:45.75, 4:47-4:50.25 * Mix 1 bassline pattern (:00-:14, sounds like a low rumble), 2 notes twice, rhythm altered - 3:56.5-4:29, 4:32.25-4:37.25 * Mix 1 bassline's two sets of 5 notes (:14-:42) - 4:31.75-4:33.5, 4:35-4:37.5. 4:38.25-4:39.5, 4:40.75-4:42.5, 4:43.75-4:45.75, 4:46.75-4:48.5, 4:50.25-4:57 The track's 4:54-long (due to silence at the beginning), so I needed to make out the source tune for at least 147 seconds for the source tune usage to be dominant: :02.5-:10.75, :13.5-:19.5, :24.5-:27.5, :29.5-:32.5, :40.25-:43, :45.75-:48.5, 1:28-1:41, 1:44-1:45.5, 1:46.75-1:48, 2:00.5-2:16.75, 2:18.5-2:22.75, 2:24.5-2:34.75, 3:07.5-3:13.5, 3:18-3:33.75, 3:34.75-3:36.25, 3:37.75-3:39.25, 3:40.75-3:42.25, 3:43.75-3:45.25, 3:46.75-3:48.25, 3:50-4:39.5, 4:40.75-4:42.5, 4:43.75-4:45.75, 4:46.75-4:57 = 165.25 seconds or 56.20% overt source usage I can get over not recognizing the source usage in the ways I would have expected to, and I'm happy to recognize lots more subtle references; there's possibly other connections I'm overlooking. More cerebral and granular of an arrangement approach than I'd prefer, way more difficult to make the connections than I'd prefer, but those gripes are immaterial to how I'm judging it, nor do I need a casual listener to say it's recognizable. It may not sound like what I'd expect an arrangement of "The Beep" to be, but Dagger_G's in fact referencing a lot of different elements from the different mixes. Clever! I ain't too proud to change my vote. YES

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

Liked the Minish Cap treatment in particular, but everything was seamlessly combined. Short and sweet; nice job, Peter! YES

So many themes... so many trees... -LT Hi. I always wanted to do a megamix of forest-themes throughout the Zelda-series and it took quite some time to finish this. I concentrated on the more strange, eerie sounding themes to give this a dark, mysterious and sometimes haunting vibe. You could listen to it here: To spare you the effort of timing the different pieces, here’s an overview. According to the timings it seems the song most used is the »Forest Temple« from »Ocarina Of Time«. Ocarina Of Time – Forest Temple (composed by Kōji Kondō) 1:00 – 1:18 2:49 – 3:35 4:12 – 4:48 A Link To The Past – Forest Theme (composed by Kōji Kondō) 1:18 – 2:03 4:15 – 4:43 (little bits between this area) Spirit Tracks – Lost Woods (composed by Toru Minegishi, Manaka Kataoka, Asuka Hayazaki, Kōji Kondō) Only a 7-note-sequence pitched a few tones up 2:04 – 2:40 4:21 – 4:43 (little bits in this area) The Minish Cap – Minish Woods (composed by Mitsuhiko Takano) 2:22 – 2:45 Twilight Princess – Faron Woods (composed by Toru Minegishi, Asuka Hayazaki) 3:28 – 4:10 Breath Of The Wild / Tears of The Kingdom – Korok Forest (composed by Manaka Kataoka, Yasuaki Iwata, Hajime Wakai) 3:55 – 4:10 Breath Of The Wild / Tears of The Kingdom – Maze Forest (composed by Manaka Kataoka, Yasuaki Iwata, Hajime Wakai) 4:49 – 5:13 Contact Information Your ReMixer name: Gaspode Your real name: Peter Köller Your email address: Your website: – Your userid: 26608 Submission Information Name of game(s) arranged: »The Legend Of Zelda – Ocarina Of Time« »The Legend Of Zelda – A Link To The Past« »The Legend Of Zelda – Spirit Tracks« »The Legend Of Zelda – The Minish Cap« »The Legend Of Zelda – Twilight Princess« »The Legend Of Zelda – Breath Of The Wild/Tears Of The Kingdom« Name of arrangement: Mysterious Woods Name of individual song(s) arranged: »Forest Temple«, »Forest Theme«, »Lost Woods«, »Finish Woods«, »Faron Woods«, »Kork Forest«, »Maze Forest« Additional information: Composers (see above) Links to the original soundtracks: Ocarina Of Time – Forest Temple https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_G7Haf1aOI A Link To The Past – Forest Theme https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5Lm87Xeoo4 Spirit Tracks – Lost Woods https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwjR4B1A9f0 The Minish Cap – Minish Woods https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvZfSXVnHtQ Twilight Princess – Faron Woods https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_6Gcr0o3z8 Breath Of The Wild / Tears of The Kingdom – Korok Forest https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXllNPap39A Breath Of The Wild / Tears of The Kingdom – Maze Forest https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1OSrVwIAZk Bye, Peter

Very catchy source; thanks for introducing me to it! I think the opening announcer VO's mixed too quietly, but it's not a big deal. Guitars feel dry until the shift at 1:08. I also felt the drums and bassline were too loud compared to the melody; nothing dinging this though, just more a personal taste thing, as the melody's still prominent and the approach provides contrast with the source melody aggressively taking charge at 2:17. The strings at 1:35 were pretty good; I felt the bow movements got exposed as unnatural very briefly at 1:50, but I could be wrong, and it's pretty negligible anyway. Cool concept and strong arrangement, Zack & Sebastian! YES

(WAV version updated 11/4/2023, track did not change) ReMixer Name: ZackParrish Real Name: Zack Parrish Email Address: Website: zackparrish.com User ID: 29013 Other ReMixers: Sebastian Mårtensson Other contributors: Alex Parrish — Voice of Samus Sebastian Mårtensson — Announcer Sebastian Mårtensson and Tove Petersson — Crowd and chants Name of game arranged: Metroid Prime: Federation Force Name of arrangement: Twilight Zone Name of song arranged: Blast Ball Menu Link to original: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kBbeUnpVtM Comments... ... from Sebastian: “This, and The Plot Thickens, was the first times Zack Parrish and I collaborated on tracks. Zack and I had the idea to surprise Darren with a track he would’ve never asked for. It would open with something classic Metroid and then just turn into something quite different. Zack made the groundwork on this one and I added guitars. The middle segment was left quite open for me to improvise and create something while the beginning and end had really clear visions from Zack. It wasn’t until we basically had the entire track that we thought about adding the commentator, audience and Samus. I’m so happy that we did, though. Alex Parrish did a great job at voicing Samus and I had a lot of fun being the commentator.” ... from Zack: I don't have much to add since Sebastian summed it up pretty well. Track started out as a joke with no intent of it being on the album... but then we just kept at it and churned out a full experience. Always an honor to collaborate with Sebastian. Super talented musician and the nicest person on the planet. Other info, lyrics, or something: -Script- Intro: Samus: "What?" Commentator: "Welcome to tonight's game between these two rival teams. The visitors are Zebes Space Pirates, and, man, have they been on a roll lately? They're coming into tonight's game with a three game win streak! However, if there's any team performing better right now it's tonight's opponent. The league leading Tallon IV Shinesparkers are the hosts tonight in their loud and passionate arena. Buckle up everyone, 'cause this is gonna be a ride to remember. Outro: Audience: "Let's Go Samus" (repeat) Samus: "I'd rather eat Phazon..."

Opens up super conservatively, though with a meaningfully different sound palette. Initially though it was an awkward transition at :11, but I got used to it as I looped this more. I'm enjoying the tradeoffs and combining of the themes. The drums brought in at :40-1:04 were noticeably weak, IMO; not enough heft to them, and the backing felt too sparse as a result; from 1:36-1:43, the drum mixing helped that part feel better integrated compared to the previous section. Sounded like there was a subtle electric guitar line from :45-1:09 or at least something providing bass activity that was understated but filled out the background well. I liked the overall orchestration and theme interplay throughout; I was pleasantly surprised at how well the strings were produced to give a pretty full sound. At only 2 minutes long though, everything needs to be firing on all cylinders. To me, it's mainly about getting the percussion working correctly to fill out this track. Nah, you know what, the weak drums are only 20 seconds, and I'd love to see them thickened up even if it passed as is, but the overall arrangement is extremely creative with no repetition. prophetik argues it's too short, but it's packing a lot of arrangement substance and textural dynamics in the runtime, so I think it gets the job done and I'd rather not short-change that when it sounds like a complete cue. I thought the mixing was generally strong; it would have been easy to let something like this sound too thin; it's not overall muddy to me, just filled in. YES (borderline)

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

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

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

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

Really cool to be introduced to this theme. For me, it has a lot of PlayStation-era Mega Man X vibes; awesome choice, Nathan, and I'm interested to hear how you approached this. Opens up very conservatively, so we'll see how this breaks off into its own thing. Whoa, the lead at :22 is so piercing and abrasive, so much louder than anything else. The beats behind it sound thin, and there's a chippy-style backing part (not the countermelody) that seems to be filling a kind of bass part, but just sounds like distortion and white noise. The countermelody also sounds slightly off-key from :37-1:06. The fadeout ending after repeating stuff at 2:41 was also anticlimactic. Beyond eliminating the clipping, distortion, and piercing high-end freqs, the textures still feel empty despite the busyness; something's missing here. For contrast, the original has parts that are constantly padding this, whether it's warm backing synth lines in the intro & chorus or the delays on the lead during the verses; see if you can come up with your own ideas to help properly fill in the soundscape. Structurally, this is super conservative. The instrumentation's changed, though it's not texturally cohesive. Even if the mixing of these parts was ideal, this is too conservative of a cover for us to approve. Per what we're looking for from our Submissions Standards, more needs to be done for this version to distinctly stand apart from the original song. We do have plenty of melodically conservative arrangements on OCR that still are more interpretive (see: https://ocremix.org/remix/OCR04414 and all of the tracks linked in that writeup), so also consider listening to those for other ideas on how you can sufficiently personalize your style in this arrangement even more. NO

Was getting a lot of piercing frequencies with the beats here starting at :36, so I'd love to hear that addressed with another render, if possible. Not sure what was layered into to the beats at :36 compared to before, but it's tough to take. From 1:29-1:47, the themes were unpleasantly mudding together without a clear lead or direction, which needs to be fixed up. AFAIK, it was that woodwind-esque line (not the delayed "Mute City" chorus) that seemed to cause the interference and clutter; happy to be corrected by another J. In terms of the clutter, the theme interplay could probably be reduced some by selectively lowering the volume on some of the lines, pulling back on Top Gear sometimes and F-Zero at others. The return of the beats with the piercing high frequencies at 2:05 as well; my ears were getting battered here. 2:59 until the end referenced :49-:55 of "Mute City", but the transition into it was abrupt, and the section sounded off-key, especially that final trailing chord. I probably wouldn't have changed that chord at 3:09. What a weird way to finish it, and done in a way that undercut the rest of the arrangement. (The fadeout also didn't fully go to 0, but stuff like that can always be fixed.) I like the theme interplay in principle, and you've shown you're talented at it with your two previously approved submissions. The themes are creatively arranged, and it was cool hearing the interpretive treatment of both themes combined in a way that generally worked, especially with F-Zero in play the entire time. That said, the mixing on this one isn't clicking during the busiest sections, the piercing frequencies that were baked into the beats also made things needlessly difficult to listen to, and the awkward switch into the janky ending killed the finish. I'm hoping a musician J can identify some straightforward ways to tweak the mixing. This is a solid base, Richard, but it does need another mixing pass and a retooled ending. NO (resubmit)