Liontamer   Judges ⚖️

Noooooooooooooooooooooooope. That's all Roger (Rekcahdam)! He nailed it.

OC ReMix Presents 25YEARLEGEND: A Legend of Zelda Indie Game Composer Tribute! November 22, 2011 Contact: press@ocremix.org FAIRFAX, VA--OverClocked ReMix today released its 29th arrangement album, 25YEARLEGEND: A Legend of Zelda Indie Game Composer Tribute. This album, directed by indie game developer and composer Roger "Rekcahdam" Hicks, features 20 indie composers producing 18 arrangements from Nintendo's entire Legend of Zelda series. Among these composers are Laura Shigihara (Plants vs. Zombies), C418 (Minecraft), Disasterpeace (Fez), and the list goes on! The album's release also features artwork by game artists Paul Veer (Celestial Mechanica) and Lisa Coffman. 25YEARLEGEND is available for free download at http://zelda25.ocremix.org. This album was produced to help promote the music and 25th anniversary of The Legend of Zelda, was made by fans, for fans, and is not affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo; all original compositions are copyright their respective owners. "Working with fellow indie composers for this tribute album has been a dream come true," said album director Roger Hicks, whose efforts have resulted in a collaboration of epic proportions among several independent video game composers. "Each composer, at some point in time, has been influenced by the music of Legend of Zelda. It is an honor to have completed such an amazing album with composers who share the same excitement that I still have about the Zelda series." "While 25YEARLEGEND didn't originate within the OC ReMix community, both the arrangements themselves & the overall spirit of the album echo everything that we're about, and I'm extremely proud to be publishing it," said OC ReMix founder David "djpretzel" Lloyd. "That so many artists on the roster have already established themselves as ReMixers here on OCR only reenforces the synergy and crossover that can & SHOULD happen between the VGM fan community and game composers, indie & otherwise." Following the 2010 release of Threshold of a Dream, 25YEARLEGEND is OC ReMix's second Legend of Zelda album, and the first dedicated to the entire series. "25YEARLEGEND is an album that fans of both the series and indie games won't want to miss," said Hicks. "And we hope it makes the 25th anniversary of The Legend of Zelda that much more enjoyable for everyone!" 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. ### Preview it: Download it: http://zelda25.ocremix.org Torrent: http://bt.ocremix.org/torrents/25YEARLEGEND_-_A_Legend_of_Zelda_Indie_Game_Composer_Tribute.torrent Comments/Reviews: http://ocremix.org/forums/showthread.php?t=37701

25YEARLEGEND: A Legend of Zelda Indie Game Composer Tribute 25YEARLEGEND was started as a small indie session, but quickly grew into a massive project with the help of all the indie artists involved. Each featured composer has worked on a notable project in the indie game community while being influenced by the music of Zelda some time in their lives. Hopefully this project will make the 25th anniversary of Zelda that much more enjoyable! - Roger Hicks (Rekcahdam) Preview it: Download it: http://zelda25.ocremix.org Torrent: http://bt.ocremix.org/torrents/25YEARLEGEND_-_A_Legend_of_Zelda_Indie_Game_Composer_Tribute.torrent

Nah, every popular channel links back to some sort of page in their videos. It must have been all the scams and commercially deceptive content we had, like the free music. It's been appealed, and I'll be following up on this.

Hahaha, we're getting too old for this shit. "Sounds like it's from an old game, looking to be remixed" is a new one.

Try running the MP3s through MP3val: http://mp3val.sourceforge.net/download.shtml. Run those files through that and see if that helps at all. It's "Download MP3val 0.1.8 binaries for Windows (frontend version 0.1.1 included) (64 Kb)"

No, but a hoedown wouldn't work. - Collabs are welcome too, so feel free to take a stab at it.

I'm listening to the revised version, just noting. The backing piano sequencing for the first section & 3:04 was so mechanical, I can't think of any circumstance where this would be OK as is. When that finally went away in favor of the rock section, I finally understood the upside of this arrangement. The snare at 3:34 was extremely flimsy. I'd also need a source usage breakdown, so I'll have to come back to that. But the piano sequencing ALONE kills this dead. Do everything the others NOs said to get your parts working together more effectively and sounding more humanized & consistent. I hope to be able to add more substantial thoughts later, but this is an obvious NO-go, unfortunately. It has some promise though.

IMO, that's not a NO (resubmit), that sounds more like a YES (conditional) that you could live with as a YES if forced. Whether or not an improved version can be made shouldn't factor into the core YES vs. NO vote at all, otherwise one could also factor in what reason the artist has for not revising it. Should you stay NO if someone just decides OCR blows and they don't want to revise it but go YES if their project file simply got corrupted? Let's not go there. Besides, distilling your vote, it comes off as... That didn't really scream NO to me as your conclusion, so you either want to flip your vote to YES or further articulate the sum total of what's holding this back as a NO. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- The oboe lead at :47 was definitely too quiet, but if it were louder, the sequencing/timing flaws would have been more exposed. It was audible enough, but it needs to be louder to really work as the lead, IMO. Same with the organ at 1:51, that's too quiet as well. By better mixing the leads upfront, there could have been some nice lead tradeoffs, like the oboe & organ being the lead at :47 and 1:51 and the guitars really emoting loudly at 2:50. Everything's mixed in a compressed way where's nothing's truly dominant. I could live with it as is, but would love to hear this all tweaked and fixed. I could see how 3:32's section dragged out, but the length didn't bother me. The muddiness of it was a little annoying, but that was on purpose along with the lo-fi noises, so no beef here. The final section being so long really makes you pay attention to the way the gears changed. I thought it was a deliberate, risky move that worked nonetheless. The arrangement was creative, and although the dynamics were harmed by the awkward mixing, the execution was strong enough to get by. I'd prefer this was tweaked, if we can get this looked at further, but a "no mas" from Mike would mean I go YES. YES (conditional)

I relistened given Emu's crits, all very valid crits, but I'm fine with what was there. The drums were definitely the weakest point for me, even though the production on them was a bit better than some of Brandon's NO-level stuff. They weren't as exposed here. There's some production/clarity issues; good suggestions on handling the beeping. The overall strength of the interpretation and reasonable cohesiveness of the performances were good enough, on the seesaw of good vs. bad, to meaningfully outweigh the bad. It could be improved in a number of ways, and I imagine if Brandon continues to improve, he'll look back in 3 to 4 years and be able to distinguish what needs improvement, but what's here was solid enough, IMO.

The piano timing was too mechanical and plucky, making it sound extremely unrealistic, and the sound itself needs more body. You don't have much instrumentation going on, so the piano needs to sound rich and carry much of the soundscape. What's here for the moment is too flimsy. When OA says, "Vocal performance was pretty good," that's wrong and that's too generous. I'm not coming down on him (or you, Jude), but critically, most on the panel wouldn't agree with that. The lyrics matching the melody at every point needlessly exposes the shortcomings of your singing voice; the pitch and projection aren't great, and the syllables needing to match the melody restrict the flow, so there's no power or fluidity behind the singing. There's also no need to practically double the woodwind lead at 2:24 with your vocal timing. You shouldn't have stuck so closely to the melody at the expense of flow, but 2:24 was a perfect place to break out of that. Minor point, but you need a better pop shield, because your plosives are popping (e.g. "presence" at :40). Star Salzman once used something like a bubblegum wrapper wrapped over his cheap mic, if I remember correctly, so you don't need to break the bank. I'm glad there's a bit of delay on the vocals so they're not entirely unprocessed, but they're still pretty barren and exposed in this soundscape. The plucked strings at :48 and woodwind at 1:36 were both very rigidly timed as well. The plucked strings sounded a bit better because of the resonance, but the sequencing being so perfectly timed still stood out. Like the piano, the tone of those instruments was also very thin and sparse. Arrangement-wise, this had some interpretation, but most of the writing during the verses held too closely to the original, both the melody and the countermelody. Take some more creative, interpretive liberties with the source material. Dynamically, this song had basically 1 tempo and 1 gear, so the dynamic curve was mostly flat. 1:35's instrumental only section wasn't much of a dropoff and 2:32's return of the vocals was essentially a structural cut-and-paste from the first section. Even in a song that basically stays in 1 gear, you need more distinct contrast somewhere so that there's direction and progression in the composition. This track can't be salvaged at your current skill level, so I'm not sure why the other judges said "resubmit." Resubmits should be suggested when there's a decent chance the artist could improve something to a passable level. I'm not trying to demoralize you, I'm just trying to be honest and realistic. Your ideas have some creativity and merit, but the execution's nowhere near the level you need to pass, so we want to try and help you get there down the line. That said, it would be worth your time to get deeper feedback and production advice from the Music Composition & Production forums and the Post Your Game ReMixes! forum in our Workshop area. You can learn about inexpensive and free, legal ways to beef up your sample quality and achieve more realistic, fleshed out sounds. I hope you keep at it, and if you want to work with this mix further to see how much you can improve it, that's a worthy goal, but you still have a lot to learn on the fundamentals of putting it all together. NO

Pulling that back also helped downplay some of the mechanical timing flaws, as is was too perfect. At 2:35, the trumpets should have stayed at their original volume, since it was the lead and not competing with anything else major, but that's a minor thing. What's much more important is that the trumpet isn't trampling on the guitar any longer. Thanks for the fix! YES

Actually, that's a good catch. Maybe we can get Chris to take another pass at this, because there are minor clicks, pops, and distortions all over that percussion. There's not even a need to timestamp it, it's so pervasive. That's definitely a very legit issue. I'll go conditional on it as well. I could live it as a listener, but Emu's ultimately right that it's too messed up to let slide.

There's definitely a muddiness that needlessly obscures some of the details of the instrumentation. For example, the electric guitar strums or whatever that lead is at :17 ends up crowding out the drums and mallet percussion brought in at :33. The end result is really muddy. It may be the drums at :33 that are the culprit as well, like Emu's guessing at, but yeah, there's some production issues here. It may be purposeful to some extent, giving Chris the benefit of the doubt. It was nothing that was a dealbreaker to me, but the lack of clarity during the densest parts still drags the piece down a notch. Some EQ love would be welcome. Good catch by Deia on the baseline from the opening section of the source being used here as a melodic part of the arrangement; that was surprisingly easy to miss. Over 2 minutes of the arrangement explicitly used the source just watching the clock, so I didn't feel the need to stopwatch it, but I can do one if it's really necessary. Love the arrangement; well up to Chris's high standards and a pontentially risky combination of instruments to boot with the Morricone-inspired instrumentation. Aside from the production issues, this was an easy call. YES

You winning?

Hahaha, these stupid voiceovers definitely added to it. Once things kicked in at :56, the guitar performance should have been a little tighter and more expressive, but what's here was noticeably strong enough on both of those levels. I was cool overall with the production of the drums, though the machine gun drums from 1:37-1:51 sounded muddy and overcompressed. The production sounded a bit too lo-fi (not a huge deal), and was heavy on the compression, which was noticeable in how bleh the cymbals sounded during the beefiest sections. The beeping at 1:51-2:16 during the stage introduction theme just makes you think of a garbage truck backing up, not anything spacey. With the stage 1 theme at 2:37, the background sounded empty, and the skimpy drumwork didn't adequately fill things out. Luckily that only lasted until 2:49 when some good guitar chugsfilled that role nicely, followed by some doubled guitars. 3:29-3:41 had the same issue. I love the arranagement, but I'd honestly say one more production pass at this to reduce the overcompression would be a blessing for this. I could live with this being posted as is, and not make the perfect the enemy of the good, but if Brandon can take another final production stab at this, I think he'd find it holds up a lot better down the line. YES (borderline)

The arrangement felt somewhat repetitive, but was otherwise creative and solid. Nothing much else to say there other than cool approach and good work. The mix title though...uh... The brass writing was really cheesy and probably should have been pulled back. As is, the acoustic guitar felt like it was getting trampled on. It could only be appreciated after the dropoffs of the brass from 1:23-1:43 & 2:14-2:35. That needs to be tweaked before I could be comfortable seeing this posted, the balance isn't right. The timing of the strums during the choruses was a bit loose, but nothing dramatically negative. I agree that the fadeout ending was too sudden and abrupt, but it wasn't a dealbreaker. The sound effects were gratuitous, but oh well. Lots of "buts," as there were a lots of creative choices this could have done without. However, what's here does get the job done. YES (conditional on brass levels)

Deus Ex: Human Revolution ReMixing contest We're working on something that MAY be co-promoted with Eidos & Square Enix as a freely distributed tribute album, so I'm seeing who has the next couple of weeks to make something awesome. Just FYI, there's also a chance it is NOT official and co-promoted by Eidos/Squenix, so it's possible it's just released through OCR only. We're just trying to be transparent. The rules: Arrange any track(s) you want from the Deus Ex: Human Revolution soundtrack Listen: More source tunes here: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=F8723BAE6F2F1B10 Entries should able to pass the OCR judges panel Arrangement must have instrumentation or moods inspired by Deus Ex series music (DX 1, 2 or 3 is fine) There are up to 5 spots available, depending on how many quality submissions are received We'll send you a physical copy of The Sound of Speed if you make it on the album (speedy hedgehog!) Deadline is 11:59 PM EST of Sunday, Nov. 27 "Icarus" is the main theme, so I imagine at least a couple people will tackle that, but anything is open to mix. Keep your Works-in-Progress private, please. PM me with your entry here on the forums, not this thread. If you have any questions, holler.

Formality. /shakes fist YES

Man, what drum samples are those? I hear them all the time, and I can't think of a time where that snare ever sounds anything but too soft and not befitting harder-sounding tracks. In any case that was basically the only problem. I never have a problem with medleys as long they have legit structure and flow, so this was all good. Absolutely excellent, personalized handling of this multitude of themes with some sweet transitions. The guitars could have wailed a bit more and been more expressive, but what was here was still strong enough. Pretty solid performances and just a strong as strong can be collab. VERY cool debut from Fernando and Claudio that should leave the people wanting more. They haven't even reached their potential yet, when you compare this to DoD's top guitarists. Further polish will come in time, but I like what I'm hearing so far, and sincerely hope there's more to come. YES

Yeah, I've heard Megadeth's version a ton, and the backing instrumentation's absolutely nothing like it. The backing writing here was more dynamic and progressive. On the production side, the drums consistently felt hollow as far as filling out the background, and this could sound more cohesive with some tweaks there. It wasn't a big deal given that everything else worked strongly, and the arrangement was creative. The arrangement clearly stuck with the melodies we know and love, but there was a ton of personalization in the supporting writing and, from that, the dynamics. Loved the soloing on top of the foundation of the source tune to keep the original song in play while doing your own thing. Nothing else to say other this rocks. Nice work, Chris! YES (conditional on distortion fixes)

Did you want me to change your forum name to Zylance? zylance, lowercase?

I was prepared to hate this, because the last version was, to put it bluntly, terrible. This version's intro caught my attention in a good way, and there was clearly a lot more thought and creativity put into this new cut. The synths & effect that started at 1:07 (lasting until 1:23) were pretty generic, but were surrounded by better sounds. At 1:40, I wasn't feeling the synthy backing; it was on the generic sounding side, but it was OK. The woodwind lead and syrupy instrumentation worked well in combination. Drums at 2:29 sounded a bit robotic, but were serviceable. This section until 2:57 could have used something extra in the background to provide better contrast with the brief percussion dropoff at 2:59, but it's not a major criticism. All that production nitpicking aside, what else can I say other than this is a great, meaningful improvement over the first version and what should have been sent the first time. You really explored a much larger sound palette with some stock but solid instruments, including a lot of great throwback sounds that evoked chiptune & MOD soundtracks, and you also employed much more substantial development and dynamics in the arrangement. You really showed something promising on this one, nice work! YES

Wow, the shrill lead at 3:13-3:31 & 4:15-4:34 was annoying as hell. The mixing still wasn't great during some of the densest parts, but the parts were cleaner and distinguishable for the most part. The overall balance was a HUGE improvement, and I could actually listen to this nearly all the way without something needlessly attacking my ears or sounding like mud. That said, those shrill synths were annoying. At the end of the day, I can live with them, as much as I think they mess up the piece when they're in play. The arrangement wasn't in question, and the variations of the source were handled very, very well. There's not too, too much to this theme, so to be able to get this much mileage and substance out of it was excellent. The track still felt a little long, but the positives are definitely outweighing the negatives now. 4th time's a charm, Michael. Your persistence and willingness to rethink some of the things that were hampering this really paid off, and you have a much more cohesive and capably produced arrangement. Definitely hope to hear more from you. YES

If the strings are sequenced, how do you have massive "performance flubs" at :24 and :29? It doesn't sound dissonant in a way that works, it's just sloppy. The piano sample sounds OK, but the sequencing was too mechanical and dragged this down. The drums were improved and don't sound as hollow as the first version, but the snare tone still had no bite, and the writing was still plain and metronome-ish. This really started falling apart at 2:41 - the bowed strings sounded needlessly out of tune in spots and the timing wasn't tight enough. The guitar chugs were serviceable but lacked energy, and the drums were anemic & empty. There was 0 synergy with the instrumentation, and it ended up tanking the piece. The arrangement concept was still fine as far as being creative, interpretive, and expansive. But the polish still isn't there. This was an improvement from the last version with the production, with better instrument choices, but it still needs its screws tightened even more, especially for the final section. NO