Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About Jivemaster

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Australia (Brisbane, QLD)

Contact Methods

  • Website URL


  • Biography
    Made a name for himself by being one of the first to bring old Sonic tracks back to life with some creative synthage and a touch of guitar. Now lurks the boards from time to time, adding the odd comment, and submitting the odd remix.
  • Real Name
    Joel Bird
  • Occupation
    Systems Training Officer; Producer, Designer
  • Twitter Username
  • Xbox Live Gamertag
  • PlayStation Network ID
  • Steam ID

Artist Settings

  • Collaboration Status
    2. Maybe; Depends on Circumstances
  • Software - Digital Audio Workstation (DAW)
  • Software - Preferred Plugins/Libraries
    Plugins are for pussies 8-)
  • Composition & Production Skills
    Drum Programming
    Mixing & Mastering
    Synthesis & Sound Design
  • Instrumental & Vocal Skills (List)
    Electric Bass
    Electric Guitar: Rhythm
    Vocals: Male

Recent Profile Visitors

5,053 profile views
  1. I agree the guitar backing is out a bit, which is quite distracting. The initial build-up is otherwise interesting. The change to a minimal squelchy synth-scape worked well, with different parts coming in over time. Production is mixed. Synths sound good when there isn't too many at once, piano is basic but decent enough. The drums were quite muffled across the mix. The track is a bit low-end heavy as well — parts that don't need it could have their low end dialled back a bit to allow the bass and drums breathe some more (similar to what Rexy has mentioned already). This would also brighten th
  2. Piano sounds decent, with a good amount of low end. Solid emotive arrangement all round. Things keep a fairly consistent pace throughout, with a few interludes to break things up. Some sections sound similar to each other at times but carry different dynamics and articulations to separate them. Things close out softly. Dynamic expression overall is pretty good. Track volume is a bit quiet but serviceable. It would have been nice to hear a bit more evolution of the track, but what is here sounds good. YES
  3. That organ playing the melody is a bit hard to hear. The accompanying guitar portions sound good, with decent tone and technique. The arrangement structure is pretty straight forward, sharing several sections with the original, but there are some nice additional layers throughout. Mixing is a mixed bag. The synths/organ fall too far into the background and can’t be heard all that well, which is a shame as they carry the bulk of the burden when it comes to the main melody. While the track certainly follows along with the original, I think the mixing for the lead organ parts need to be fixed so
  4. Bassline has a solid tone, percussion has good sense of movement. Lead synths fit well with the synthwave vibe. The short break at 0:59 worked well. The second section doesn’t repeat verbatim, which is appreciated. The percussive elements change around and mix things up. As the track continues we get some variations of the previous theme sections with some different lead additions. The outro hits some different notes and includes a nice little solo to finish things up. Some creative work here across the arrangement, even for a fairly minimal mix, there are subtle changes to the parts throughou
  5. Being on the last vote I look forward to seeing how things turned out here. The brass seems a bit more under control now. The saxophone lead could do with being louder. The rhythm guitar adds some interesting balance. The stereo field is definitely cleaner now. Guitar solo at 2:21 is still too soft IMO. The solo at 2:47 has better presence. When the brass and the guitars play together in the last third, their levels are more complementary — I’d say the guitar could’ve even been louder there. Things felt best placed to end at 4:24, but it’s not a major problem. Overall things are better. With p
  6. Guitar is clean, and the performance is mostly good, with only a few slight missteps here and there. The production quality is warm, and mostly consistent. On the arrangement side, this is a bit of a strange one for me as I’ve not judged a submission verbatim based on another performance. If Cecil’s mix was posted, then I imagine this would have to also, provided (1) production is up to scratch, which IMO, seems to be; and (2) it’s within our rules to do so. That said, more original interpretation of the source would’ve been nice to hear, to take the track off into it’s own territory. Interest
  7. Percussion and guitar start things off, with bass and accordion coming in at 0:40. An accompanying piano line enters at 1:12. These play off each other for the next section, building up into the guitar’s return at 1:52, and altogether at 2:08. Arrangement is fairly basic, but does introduce a number of added elements to the original. Production wise things are ok, given the track is quite minimal — less issues are expected. I will say things do sound a bit stiff/to the grid, and could do with some humanisation, although I don’t think it’s a dealbreaker. There’s not a lot to it, but I think wha
  8. The beginning bar is a bit fumbly/out of time. The following section sounds ok. The intro section at 0.26 is fun and stylistically supports what you’re going for, well done there. The main theme chorus portion works fairly well. At 1:06 we slip back to the previous section with some different lead, which feels less confident in performance than before. At 1:36 we get a solo which doesn’t sound too bad, and covers a bit of territory. As the solo begins to wind up before the transition starting around 2:07 there are a few timing fumbles. Things end fairly well. Arrangement here is ok, with a goo
  9. Things open up cleanly and quite formally. The orchestra has a playful feel in the opening sections. There’s a good level of variety here in the arrangement, with various build-ups and changes throughout. The piano at 1:42 sounded extremely robotic and ended more like the conclusion of the mix. The second half of the mix explores some different ideas and winds things down well. Production wise, the sound set used here is quite basic, with the brass particularly lacking, which broke the immersion at times. I don’t normally have issue with this, but I felt the sound set particularly lacking, esp
  10. We get the theme by guitar lead to start things off, with rhythm added in shortly after. Tone is a bit too bass heavy. The drums are difficult to make out because of this. There are a number of guitar parts that play simultaneously, and while they sound fairly cohesive, it’s a bit difficult to make them out from each other. The section at 0:57 was better, as was the break portion at 1:13. The pace picks up at 1:26 where we’re presented a guitar solo, which sounds quite good, and gels well with the rest of the mix. After a short interlude, there is more solo which is equally cohesive. The drums
  11. Guitar and piano work well together in the intro. Drums are hard hitting, but to the point where the guitar gets drowned out. At 1:39 things begin to sound messy, which gets worse at 1:45 where there is just too much stuff occupying the low end. The wah bass takes up too much frequency space. The break afterwards sounds ok. As the mix continues, it’s evident the drums here are simply too big. This is a shame because the guitar portion sounds quite good, with some nice licks throughout, and the solo at 3:39 is decent, but it’s all too difficult to make out. The mixing here definitely needs work
  12. We’re prepared! Interesting concept you have here. Things are definitely christmas-a-fied for sure. The slower pacing fits well, The choir and bells are very thematic. The first minute covers a number of transitions. The section at 1:24 has some weird notes in it (piano) that hit dissonantly during the breaks. Are those off notes in there? Would be interesting to get the other judges opinions. The breaks also feel a bit odd. Otherwise I think the mix progresses ok, certainly doesn’t have too much original content but I think the thematic changes contribute most of what we need here. Production
  13. The off-beat staggered drums are a bit off-putting initially, not so much due to the adapted timing (which I thought was a creative idea), but by the swing the parts seem to have which throw them off grid a bit too far from the other parts. This feels better from 0:29. The synth bouncing between the left and right channels adds further movement to the mix while a flute initially takes up lead duties. Things are mixed up over time with bell/chime like sounds. The break at 1:54 was a good departure and reset from the first section, moving into some interesting melodic territory before heading ba
  14. Gentle opening. Harp was a nice touch. Strings play the main theme as things begin to build up to 0:35, at which point things instead break down and become gentler, as the pace increases. The violin takes on lead duties from here shortly after. While the overall track is slower paced, the theme is played much faster than the original which provides a nice contrast to the original piece. At 1:36 the pace begins to wind back down. The pace changes across the arrangement are transitioned well. The piece while quite minimal keeps interest. Production wise, things could certainly be louder without
  15. Good set of sounds, and I dig the DJ-style vibe this has going. There is a bit of a timing issue with the guitar (or is it a harpsichord, can't tell due to quality), which is making things feel out of time — very distracting, and carries on throughout out the mix. Good beat at play. The vocal sample 0:42 works ok initially and fits thematically but should really be pitch-shifted when the notes change for proper cohesion, as it seems slightly out of place in the last 2 bars. The layers then peel pack, and things retread a bit. The break at 2:18 was ok, particularly with the synth at 2:32, but t
  • Create New...