Liontamer   Judges ⚖️

As soon as this started, I knew the arrangement had the potential to be a winner, as the tone and tempo's completely different than the original. The woodwind lead at :57 was cut-and-pasted at 2:33, which was disappointing; an additional rendition of it with different performance dynamics would have been nice, but there's at least another woodwind providing interplay with it the second time around, so it's a measure of variation. The very ending at 3:20 was flatter than a plateful of piss, i.e. not much of a resolution, but we'll live as the overall presentation was so capably put together. Sweet instrumentation and you folks personalized the source tune well. On the production side though, it's very disappointing to hear the hiss of the recording for the woodwinds audibly jump in at :25, then out at :42, which sounds pretty bootleg and sloppy. No one listened to this on headphones? At least this is a learning experience where you can attempt to reduce hiss on the relevant parts and see how well you can mitigate the issue. More audible start/stop hiss at 1:32, 1:38, 1:42, 2:01, 2:23, 2:25, 2:27, 2:29, 2:31, 2:34, it just keep going on and on throughout. This all messes up the track's immersion and needlessly exposes the multitracking when this is presented to feel like a singular live recording. If hiss can't be eliminated, it's actually better for a track if the hiss is ever-present; at least then, it only really draws attention to itself once, as opposed to here where it comes and goes frequently. A few hits of this here and there would be permissible; we're a hobbyist community with high standards but aim not to make the perfect the enemy of the good. However, the constant back and forth of the hisses added up to dropping this down enough on the production level, IMO. You need to mitigate or eliminate this. Part of that also involves trimming the beginning and end of parts where the hiss is introduced; at 2:01 for example, the hiss arrives half a second before the part does; again, needlessly sloppy I've been doing this for close to 18 years and don't think I've had to reject more than one or two tracks because of hiss, but we're here to innovate, baby; we're in rarified air! I would go YES (conditional), but a fix of this nature might not actually be so easy, so I have to go NO (resubmit) for now. Any of the musician Js giving targeted advice and recommendations on how to address this recording hiss would be extremely appreciated here. Don't conflate the critique for disliking the track. The arrangement and performances are an easy pass, the one production issue of hiss constantly dropping in and out is what's holding it back. Nothing needs to be changed with the arrangement, just a post-production cleanup, so I sincerely hope we see this posted in some form. Chris, Sean, Dan, nice work!

Your ReMixer name - donut Your real name - Chris Erickson Your website - https://twitter.com/donut_doots Your userid - 37679 Collaborators: Sean R. Hanson - marimba, glockenspiel, chimes Deckels (Dan Eckels) - EWI (I played clarinet and soprano/tenor recorder) Submission Information Name of game(s) arranged - Hollow Knight Name of arrangement - Mystic Mycology Name of individual song(s) arranged - Fungal Wastes Composer - Christopher Larkin Link to the original soundtrack (if it is not one of the sound archives already available on the site) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyI7sYvH8pc Your own comments about the mix, for example the inspiration behind it, how it was made, etc - This was arranged for the Pixel Mixer's Voidheart album with the premise "what if not sad bugs, but cutie bugs?" for a more whimsical, otherworldly fae-touched feel.

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

Jorrith was checking on this and let me know that he sent djp a revision WAY WAY WAY WAY WAY WAY back... which Dave seemingly never passed onto us. Boo, djp, boo. (I've overlooked things in much worse fashion, so no hate.) Jorito had no hard feelings about it, which speaks to his class, but we'd still like to apologize for it. I'm sorry to Jorrith, Kaisyn, Andrew, and Jarrod for us dropping the ball, and we're glad to now pick it back up! Listening to the revised version, the mixing of the various parts is much better; you can hear more of the supporting synth writing which helps spice up the instrumental, the vocals were pulled back instead of being so much louder than the instrumental, as well as given some effects & tuning touch-ups alongside chorusing & vocoder layering in parts which added more smoothness, depth, and variety to the performance. Everything glues together so much better as a result. Loved everything else about this updated piece and am happy to flip my vote to YES; I'm sure any concerns djp also had are meaningfully addressed here. Not that the bar rises due to Jorrith's track record, as the original version did pass, but given that djp agreed with my serious reservations, I didn't want this to potentially get veto'ed. The revised version sounds like Jorito's cohesive presentation we've come to expect, and will better stand the test of time. 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.

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

From 1:23-1:50's why's the panning so wide??? I don't like that I'm hearing things so weighted in the right ear, when that's not how sound behaves when you're sitting in a room. If I have to stop listening and put on a control track to make sure my headphones are fully plugged in, something's off. Other than the panning issue popping up there and a bit more later on, my previous YES vote still holds and the mixing and sequencing have been improved since then. I was ahead of the curve, but the improvements are a nice-to-have. Still a YES.

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

Love the opening sound to this. The initial Toad SFX ducked in a seemingly sloppy way at :26; it may be totally purposefully, but awkwardly cuts/drops in a way that felt like a mistake. Melody came in also and things were very structurally conservative; that along with the very steady beats, this was sounding very by-the-numbers and limited in interpretation. By 1:25, I was waiting for this to break out somehow -- not to get crazy, mind you -- just to embrace some additional and distinct interpretive ideas. I really liked the gliding lead at 1:44-2:13; arguably mixed too quietly, but the writing was creative and the effects on all the parts throughout the soundscape were solid. But going back into the source melody at 2:12, the ideas were retreading without much other development. I love the groove, but without something more substantive taking place from 2:12, this is coasting off a great groove and too repetitive. This works great in the sense of a sound upgrade for in-game use, as the groove is nice and you have a logical loop point. Love what's here so far, and it wouldn't take much -- just something meaningful -- to help push this over the top. Changes/variations to the instrumentation (read: percussion!), textures, rhythms, tempo; anything like that can make the presentation feel fresh and evolving. Nice work, so far, Neon, and I sincerely hope you'll see what more you can do to spice it up and develop the concept that additional degree to snag those YESes! NO (please resubmit)

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

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

I appreciate the further context and example track. I had a similar reaction to ella guro's EarthBound mix way back. I'm OK keeping my vote conditional. With the Low track, you could argue that the intentional distortion's done in short bursts and provides a more obvious and direct contrast with what came before it. Here, the whole soundscape feels too washed out for too long a period of time. I like the track in a vacuum, but would want that overall effect pulled back some. Nothing Michael does strikes me as unintentional or unskilled, same as ella guro. I'm willing to be the bad cop though, it's too unpleasing of an effect, IMO.

Dunno if you messaged me or not, but I'll check on this this week for you, no problem!

The encoding quality's low at 160kbps, so hopefully we can get a WAV. Melodically conservative, but the sound palette's initially well personalized, and you get a first taste of some textural changes at :56 that then constantly switch up and provide more personalization. I also appreciated the dropoff at 1:28 hearkening back to the sound design in the intro. More instrumental variation of the source's classic countermelody would have made the presentation more dynamic; I wouldn't say the piece dragged to the point where it was a close vote, but at points like 1:46 and 2:23, the ideas were getting exhausted despite the good textural additions and subtractions. The "hey" vox was arguably overused, but sounded fine in the big picture, so we'll live. It's a solid sound and I agree with Chimpa on the production sounding clean and well-mixed; it's rare to hear bass writing that (even when subtle and understated) genuinely cuts through, so nice work there. Let's go! YES

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

Duck is awesome! Why you so cute, ducky?!?

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.

Ryan's going to give this another pass based on the feedback, so just leaving a note that we'll await a potential revision.

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

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