Liontamer   Judges ⚖️

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.

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.

Hey everyone, we're likely changing the album field for all of the individual OC ReMixes to just "ocremix.org" -- without http:// or our recent change to https://. It would potentially future-proof that field vs other eventual prefix changes to the website URL, although we haven't had that many in the first place. Here's where I need your feedback: are there any services/programs where you think our discoverability would be negatively affected by making this change to just "ocremix.org" as the album title? As far as I can tell, there aren't many services like Last.fm that people use anymore, and some scrobbling-style services won't even display full website URLs as album titles. I can't think of any compelling reason not to change it, but if you have one, please let me know.

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