Liontamer

Yeah... you know, I believe I do. It's melodically conservative, but the orchestration is solid. In the interest of speed, I'll leave it to others to expound on this in greater detail, but the presentation is personalized enough despite a lot of similar part-writing due to new parts being added, new instrumentation styles, and mixing and textures that are different enough from the orignal. The samples don't fool anyone (not like they're supposed to), but they're used pretty damn well, certainly above our bar. Production's solid as well; pretty well balanced. Cheers, Alex! YES

I stayed on the panel, 8 1/2 years after the first decision, just to hang on for this resubmission for Jari. I was the sole YES last time around, and dammit, I'mma YES it again! COWABUNGA!

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

Cool stuff! A pretty by-the-numbers treatment of the melody, but a nice adaptation to this swung rhythm and denser energy. I could have done without the pumping, but that's a personal taste thing. The chorus sounds like Toby Fox cribbed "Wonderboy" by Tenacious D; maybe it was a subconscious thing. Not a groundbreaking interpretation, but solid. YES

In our case, it's more of a knowledge base to house some basic information & FAQs, as well as the character bios for the character mascots, so we haven't needed an open editing format. Happy to fix any typos you've found though (or they can remain forever, that's OK).

There's no reason somebody can't make one. There was AnimeRemix.org a ways back, run by @Xaleph, and the current version of the site's actually still hosted at http://dev.animeremix.org/songs.

Thanks so much for being dlligent about this; I did see the email question but didn't have the time/focus to follow up, I'm sorry about that. When we launched the Patreon, that definitely had not been an option, so it certainly wasn't leaving something unchecked on purpose. We'll look into this very soon!

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

Thank you for guaranteeing it will NEVER be moved. This community is a McRib community!

The track was 8:41-long, so I needed to identify the source tunes in play for at least 260.5 seconds for the VGM to dominate the arrangement: :00-:47, :51.5-:59, 1:50-3:08, 4:19-4:57, 4:58-5:49, 6:14.5-7:23, 7:24.5-7:35.75 = 301.25 seconds or 57.82% overt source usage I know I undersold the connections, but I was just timestamping this quickly to verify for myself that the source tune usage was there for the majority of the arrangement. Interesting approach with more subtle and understated references of the sources. Since the Final Battle theme isn't super-melodious, the key to the arrangement lies in building around that theme with interesting, well-mixed ear candy and well-executed changes in the textures and dynamics, as well as techniques to keep the track evolving and flowing. It didn't feel like a near-9 minute piece and didn't drag out. All of the Jaffar's theme usage fit nicely here as well, and the stuttering/gated vocals at 6:14 in particular were a creative touch. What a fun ride to take, and a really cool arrangement outside of Rasmus's past material. Nice job! YES

I've had 3 this year and need more! McRiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiib!

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.

It helped for me to listen to the source at 1.5x speed. Thanks to Gario for his timestamping, but he actually undersold the source connections in this case, since it's almost all over the arrangement. No hate, as I've sold stuff short plenty of times in timestamping; sometimes one person missing the connections at the start ends up influencing the rest of the panel, who assuming it's source-light or on the bubble. MindWanderer caught what Gario initially missed out on. :01-:19 (:00-:11 of the source), :19-:38 (1:21-1:32 of the source, but maybe just :22-:38 from 1:23-1:32 of source), :38-1:19.75 (:00-:11 of the source); 1:39-1:57; 1:57-2:16.25 (1:09-1:20, then 1:21-1:32 of the source); 2:16.25-2:36 (very liberal take on :00-:11 countermelody of source) 2:36-2:55 (liberal take on :00-:11 melody of source); 2:55-3:13.75, 3:15.5-3:33.5 (1:09-1:32 of source); 3:34-3:53 (:00-:11 of source), 4:02-4:14 (1:14-1:20 of source) From :38-1:20, the backing patterns were also inspired by the bass countermelody parts of :00-:11 of the source, with the second half of the 5-note patterns staggering the rhythm of the 5th note (like a soft accent). This shit's clever. The track was 4:15-long, so I needed to hear the source in play for at least 127.5 seconds for the source tune to be dominant in the arrangement. Just sticking with the overt connections I heard: :01-:19, :22-1:19.75, 1:39-2:16.25, 2:55-3:13.75, 3:15.5-3:53, 4:02-4:14 = 181.25 seconds or 70.80% source usage Smart arranging, David, and nice sounds! YES

Yep, the next time the site is synced with the database, it'll be updated, no worries.

I refuse on all counts!

There’s no public access to the site’s Wiki, but if there are updates you’re looking to see, let us know.

The arrangement aspect of it is just too minimal. Just two repeating lines of the stripped down source tune that desync and wind up back in sync. A fun audio gimmick, but not a developed arrangement by any stretch. And that’s OK, it just falls outside of our arrangement standards. NO

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

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

Someone slapped the Pac-Man jingle together with Alan Braxe and Friends - "Rubicon" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKVcGViwWPA)

Man, I hadn't heard this theme in probably 15+ years, and it just unlocked some old college radio memories for me. Awesome source tune choice! Structurally, it's initially conservative, but it's a very well-personalized genre adaptation. At 1:11, some bars of the intro were repeating and I worried the arrangement wouldn't develop more, but then it quickly shifted into the comping from 1:24-1:50, following that up with another hint of the melody coupled with vamping to not just settle into too straightforward of a cover. Loved the textures at 2:38's section; the original's countermelody is such a great element. The way the track ended at 3:00 was too sudden, IMO, and this otherwise smoove rendition deserved a more substantive conclusion, but that certainly doesn't hold this back. Gotta also give credit to the production; the instrumentation had a full sound, and props for some beefy bass work and creative percussion writing. When it's clear attention's been paid to the backing elements, not just the foreground players, you can achieve a strong sound with parts that have genuine synergy together. Nice job, Arden, count me in as a new fan, and I can't wait to hear your future arrangements! YES

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

I didn't mind the production choices and thought the Portal aspect of the arrangement was solid. Presentation and performances were well above the bar here. Unfortunately, there's too much reference of non-VGM source material IMO for me to vote in favor of it. Radiohead - "No Surprises" - :01-:13.5, :57-1:25, 1:27-1:44.5 (58 seconds) Pixies - "Where Is My Mind?" - 5:00-5:41 (41 seconds) 99 seconds total or 27.88% of the piece invoking non-VGM sources In a vacuum, I love the piece, there's nothing wrong with the concept and execution in terms of our quality bar. Involving "No Surprises" is also a really cool touch given that the music videos for that track and both Portal songs all have lyrics that appear on screen, aka "I see what you did there." But the involvement of the non-VGM sources is too extensive for me to not view it as a Standards Violation. If O.R.B. were open to an OCR Edit in some form to keep the Radiohead/Pixies references a lot, lot shorter, that would be cool and we would fast-track its evaluation, but there's no requirement or request to compromise the vision of the piece just to have it posted here. :'-( NO (resubmit)