Liontamer

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

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

I'm slammed with work.

This was a cool concept. The track did have dynamic contrast and textural difference throughout, but the relatively static beats and overall loudness actually made the track seem less dynamic than the writing intended. Agreed with MW on the weakness of the fadeout ending in this case, which is something that normally doesn't bother me, and I agreed with everyone calling out the off-key moments. I wish the mixing were sharper/cleaner, and I've heard plenty of synthwave like that, but the strength of the arrangement carries it. Welcome aboard, Ernesto! YES (borderline)

With the extended intro & outro and occasional gaps in the source usage, I timestamped this just to be sure the OoT sources dominated the arrangement, but it was more than half a minute over what I'd need for a minimum, so fair play there. I didn't mind the arrangement approach at all, and the interplay between the vocals and ocarina was a perfectly fine concept; no problems at all there, and I didn't feel at all like the lyrics were half-hearted or half-finished. The breathy, whispering style is an interesting approach, although the vocals should have been sharper and not as lossy-sounding. As far as the extended intro/outro, especially everything from 3:50-on essentially being a low-key winddown, I didn't mind any of that. Quiet or not, there were source references from 3:48.5-3:57, 4:41.75-4:47, 4:53.25-5:01 & 5:05.5-5:35 during the final two minutes, so the track's still serving as an arrangement even when it's underplayed. Criticizing the final section is just needless nitpicking in terms of what's permissible here. As a judge, as long as the source material is adequately referenced, the production is reasonable, the arrangement is interpretive, and the writing and structure are cohesive, I don't care what else you do and I welcome the unorthodox. This concept and structure of this track, whether in a vacuum or as a Zelda arrangement, are completely fine & allowable, and don't need to be meddled with. The real dealbreaker is that I heard all sorts of issues (e.g. light pops/crackles/deformations/air blowing) with Rebecca's vocals (or David's ocarina) and have no earthly idea how they survived into this render. I mean, even in the buildup, you hear air disturbing the mic at :from :15-:17 and again from :38-:40. There are unwanted sounds all over the place. There's just not enough care and attention put into handling this at all. Unfortunately, it may mean that Rebecca's vocals would need to be re-recorded, if all of these problems can't be eliminated. Too bad though, because I would vote YES if the constant artifact issues weren't littered all over. Great concept, Rebecca; see how many of the smaller audio issues interfering with the live recordings can be eliminated (or re-record the vocals) and holler back. NO (refine/resubmit)

Will keep it short and sweet. Soundscape was cramped and felt like things could have been cleaned up some. The first 1:30 was more of a super-close cover, but the sections afterward with extended soloing over the foundation of the source tune, followed by more interpretive arrangement and more substantial backing writing and textural differences afterward thankfully put this on solid ground in terms of the needed interpretation. Love it and glad to have Power Drift represented! Nice work, guys! YES

The soundscape quickly got cramped at :11 as more elements were added. I like the concept of the arrangement though, which on that level is a pass; this had good variations in instrumentation and textures that prevented the track from ever being repetitive. The synergy with these parts (orch strings, vox, electric guitar, drumkit especially the snare) didn't fully click together, but works well enough that I think it can get by from some folks' POV. I thought this the mixing of the different instruments could use some tweaks to not let the soundscape sound so muddy, but will leave it to the musicians Js to elaborate on. For me, that snappy snare stuck out like a sore thumb and was too loud in many places (e.g. 1:12-1:16). The vox sounded slightly behind the beat, but that wasn't a huge deal. The ending also cut off a few seconds early, so we would need a fixed version if this passed. This was a brief track, only 2:20 long, so everything really needs to be clicking for me to be comfortable getting behind it. Very awesome stuff so far, Ernesto. Maybe I'm being too tough, but I think it just needs some production tweaks to push it over the top, and the arrangement and part-writing themselves wouldn't need to be touched in any way, IMO. We'll see where the other votes fall, but good luck with the rest of the vote, and this definitely deserves to be posted in some form. I think if this got posted as is, Ernesto would listen to this later with more experience under his belt and hear himself how this could sound sharper and more balanced. NO (resubmit)

With a Hamauzu source so minimal, there are a lot of places you can go; this mainly distinguishes itself from the original by subtracting the backing strings and adding other organic-sounding parts in Rebecca's new age arsenal to fill up the space and present a different feel to the theme underneath and around the base pattern and melody. The soundscape turned into mud at 1:09 until about 1:32; yeah, definitely revisit the mixing on this so things don't get flooded when you introduce some denser parts. 2:10 was a point where the woodwind came in to add more textural depth for a little bit. Hard to really evaluate the track as anything but a background piece, not that that's a problem; some sources aren't heavy on melody, and that's OK. I enjoyed Rebecca's spin on it! YES

The drumkit (especially towards the finish from 2:52-on) sounded very exposed and stilted. This was another example like "A Very Mario Christmas" where the arrangement concept is sound, yet -- not knowing what parts were performed live or not -- the execution sounded very rigid and not as expressive and smooth as it should. The execution is close to the bar here, but ultimately falls short. If you can spice up some of the drum writing and adjust some levels for the parts that the other judges alluded to, that would be great. For me, Reuben, this was just too static-sounding of a performance, and that's what drags it down for me. Definitely don't be discouraged; this was a really good foundation here where the core of the arrangement doesn't need to be touched at all to get it above the bar. Would love to hear a tweaked version of this back in the submission inbox. NO (resubmit)

I like how close the opening percussion and female vox sound on headphones; pretty cool placement. The track does feel more static due to the slower tempo, but let's see where this goes. Lanayru theme comes in at 1:13, I see how it fits with Brinstar, but can't say the synergy is quite there. I hear how some parts are slightly behind the beat as well, though that didn't bother me a lot. This has so much potential, but I agree with MW and proph that the overall piece is too static. Even when you have subtle dynamic contrast due to the leads changing around some, that's going to be undermined by the backing ultimately droning on and making the track feel stale after a while. It's basically the same pattern from :04 all the way to 2:47, then back again at 3:21 for the close. The tempo being slow isn't inherently a problem, just to be clear, but they're right that the backing patterns plod. NO (resubmit)

The instrumentation strains credibility sometimes, with the piano being the worst offender given how thin/flat/exposed it can sound. IMO, that part needs more realism to it, and I'd feel this was good to go. Otherwise, very cool and otherwise vibrant arrangement approach that packed a lot of evolution within a short time frame. Perhaps I'm being too tough in my production criticism on the piano/keyboard, we'll see, but IMO when you have such a short piece, everything really needs to be close to clicking on all cylinders. NO (refine/resubmit)

I was right. I don't mind Luke Juke adding a little more spice to the picture now, of course. YES

Opens up pretty conservatively, not just structure but overall tone as well (only more electronic), but let's see where this goes. I thought 1:17 was a point where more needed to be going on melodically or dynamically. This was pretty flat even when other melodic sections came in, e.g. 1:39; even where something melodious is there, it's not positioned in a way to focus on it. The levels of the different parts would need to be re-balanced to give this more to focus on. In a vacuum, this is a nice-sounding cover, Marc, but it doesn't really stand apart enough from the original in structure and tone/instrumentation to differentiate itself. That's not inherently a bad thing, but we are looking for more in terms of arrangement & interpretation. NO

Word, just need to get a version with the ending intact. Always loved this! A track with energy that brings a smile to your face. YES (conditional)

This was a solid orchestration approach. It's a melodically conservative approach, but totally works with what we're looking for with interpretation. 2:13-onward being a cut-and-paste was lame, but the arrangement was interpretive enough, so it's not enough for me to NO this in combination with the other issues. There's a lack of clarity here that meaningfully dings this, but the muddiness does somewhat mitigate the realism issues with the choir vox, so you're left with a mixed bag on the production. Yeah, the vox would need to be fixed at 1:16 for that flubbed syllable, at the very least. I see where MW's coming from on needing the vox to be fixed up; it's kind of like how some people hear noticeable AutoTune and it kills things for them. All I really need to be fixed before posting would be the vox at 1:16. Tweaking things after 2:13 with some additional subtle differences in the writing would be nice as well, and another EQ pass would be nice to have. YES (conditional) EDIT (5/6): Since the source files are gone and none of the issues can be addressed, the one vox issue along with the smaller issues unfortunately has me tipped to NO.

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.

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

As soon as that bassline started with the altered rhythm, I knew I'd enjoy this approach. Onto the negative first. I wasn't a fan of the rising notes from 1:17-1:42; it got used three times (also at 2:30 & 3:29) and always felt like a static, overlong section that should have had something else involved to spice it up. I agreed that the flute was piercing, but not enough of an issue to hold it back. Agreed with the bassline ultimately becoming too repetitive, but there was enough development to this arrangement to mitigate that issue. That said, those were all more minor things while the overall arrangement and performances were well-executed. Chill, laid-back jazzy goodness all around. YES

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.