Jivemaster

We've got chips, dubstep, some standard EDM sections and some acoustic sections. You have a lot of variety in this mix. I think as far as your arrangement goes, most things are right. You take the listener on a journey and transition fairly nicely between your different genres. Some things that stuck out to me: -The strings at the start sounded a bit weird to me. Not a major gripe and I gather they're a bit stuttery on purpose but it would be nice if they were more realistic. -The guitar sample coming in at 0:21 (and again at 2:02) sounds super fake compared to the rest of the instrumentation. I understand during your intro you're trying to throw people off what kind of song this really is - I think strengthening that guitar part with a more realistic sample would help a great deal in achieving that. -Your dubstep writing is your strongest talent here. I don't have any concerns and wouldn't change anything here. You do use some generic sounds from the genre but I don't feel they're overused. -Your 4 on the floor trancey/dancey bit is probably the weakest part of the mix, the drums are quite generic and nothing really pops out in that section. I think a more prominent lead here my help pick things up, perhaps even playing the lead line an octave higher might make things more lively. Production is solid and things are good enough there. Source is represented. I think the main part needing improvement is the standard dance section. If you can squeeze some more life out of that part and perhaps make that guitar portions more realistic, I think this will work for me. NO (please resub)

To me your mix sounds feels like a solid base ready to build up into a larger production instead of a finished mix. It tries to make the minimal source tune more interesting and listenable - it's successful in some ways and not in others. -I didn't mind your intro. Everything is sounding pretty good at the beginning, and builds up nicely up until about 0:23. Then the main lead comes in which feels out of place and anticlimactic. For a piece leaning towards an industrial vibe, at this point I'd be expecting things to get larger with bigger drums and heavier hitting synths. -Your next lead at 0:38 isn't too bad but is very dry and could use with some modulation to make it more interesting. -Things repeat a little after this. You introduce some new leads and melodies as we go on, and they try their best to change things up and invigorate interest, but don't quite make it. -Your outro with the strings is quite enjoyable and fits in well with the source tune, but I would encourage something other than a fade out (not a mark down). I think this mix is a good starting point. Production wise things aren't too bad, the arrangement and instrumentation are the things that need more work. I can imagine this becoming a thumping track with the right choices. Please take on board some of the tips we've given you to strengthen this mix. NO

After a few listens, I'm quite a fan of this track. You have quite a few sections in here - I particularly enjoyed the solo section at 2:00 and the soft breakdown at 2:50 which break things away from the main feel of the song. And while things come off as a bit coverish, it all works well for the most part. The copy/paste stuff didn't concern me as much as the others, however I think it's enough of a concern to revisit the sections which are directly copied from previous sections and vary them a teeny bit. IMO you have everything sounding nice enough production wise for this to pass. If you add that little bit of variation we're golden. NO (please resub)

Liking your rock take on this source. It sounds polished. Your instrumentation is solid and believable, and there are a lot of things in here for a 1:19 min track. As the others have said, a great mix but too short (the high tempo works against you a bit here). It also feels a little too coverish. To beef up the arrangement, I think you could include some kind of extended solo section in there, and add a few more sections either side to expand the mix. You have a lot of talent in here, just gotta make it longer for it to pass. NO (please resub)

I like the work you have put into the instrumentation of this track. The dubstep bits that hit in the middle (and again at the end) were a really nice and unexpected change up. You have some nice lead lines and licks. I actually liked your piano outro, it threw me off because I thought it was gonna end big but it ended soft instead. I was also a big fan of the flutey lead, first heard at 0:44 and more substantially at 0:59. I thought your drums were ok - they punctured through the mix well and you had rolls here and there to vary stuff, but the main beat started to feel a little loopy over time. It's a minor crit but worth mentioning - when comparing your track to the source tune, I noticed you are following the original quite closely in both progression and instrument choices (at least at the start of the song). But you do take the track to original places soon after. The major problem we have here is the bass (or lack thereof). It almost feels like there is a high-pass filter over the entire master bus, making the track very thin. I'm not sure what's happening here, but I would check your EQ on all of your elements and dial some bass back in that you may have removed from each part. Be careful doing this though, you don't want to go to the other extreme and mud up the mix. This is the main thing letting this track down. If we can sort that out we'd be close to success. NO (please resub)

I like your intro, nice work. You have a big audible kick, which is essential to the genre. After the intro we're hit with a bit of arpeggiator action. The synths used here are quite basic, although I took it as you going for a chip vibe. The voice samples are nicely woven in, used differently in each appearance. I wasn't actually a huge fan of the snare - I think it has too much hiss, but it grew on me a bit after a couple listens. Problems 1. My main problem is that the low end of your track needs some work. Your kick always stays out in front which is perfect, but your other instruments need to be separated more, as the majority are sharing the same frequency space. Your leads in particular when they come in, everything feels a bit crowded. I think it's an easy fix - I would taper off some of the low end on your lead synths with a high-pass filter. Some EQ notching here and there could help too, but I reckon a high-pass filter will almost get it there alone. 2. I think your synth lead lines could benefit from some filter modulation to make them more interesting. Some portamento so things glide between notes would work great too. When your track was playing I actually thought a synth like an acid 303 line would fit your main lead better. 3. The second half of the mix is quite similar to the first. This didn't bother me as much here, but I think the track would benefit from some more exploration in the second half, perhaps even a breakdown. I really enjoy this track and I hope you consider our points to strengthen this mix. It's nearly there. NO (please resub)

Slower pop-ballad version of the original punk track. Some interesting choices here. I noticed immediately that there is too much compression across this mix. Everything sounds too blended together, and there is a bit of pump. This may be coming from your master bus compressor, I'm unsure - but there's definitely a compression issue. I would also pull back on hitting the limiter so hard. The combination of the two is not leaving you any dynamic room for the track to breathe. The drums and vocals can be heard quite well, as well as the occasional lead synth, but a lot of other elements are lost underneath. I think a combination of pulling back on track/master compressors and the limiter will sort these things out. The vocals and harmonies are a nice touch and are performed well. I'm actually going to go as far as saying they're better than the original track. Arrangement wise you're following the original quite closely, but I think you've done enough for it to not be taken as a straight cover. I like the creativity here but I think what this really needs is a remaster to make everything more audible and less crushed. If the production is fixed this would be a Yes. NO (please resub)

Nice track. You have some nice production quality across the mix, good use of stereo and frequency space. You have chosen sounds that work well together, and everything is audible. Nothing sticks out as overpowering, keeping a soft feel throughout. To me the arrangement in this track is the weakest bit. It's not bad and I'm happy to accept it, but things do sound like they're on block rotation. I think the original tunes are mainly responsible for this, as a lot of them consist of 4-8 bar sections that repeat a few times before differing (with some only differing slightly). There are some unique bits over the top as we pass through the mix that separate things somewhat and add an original touch. Good work on this one. YES

I get a nice off-beat jazzy vibe from this track. You have some cute instruments in here, you have made strong choices and vary things up along the way dropping different sounds in and out. Nice job there. Some things I think need work: -Straight off I felt this mix could do with more panning. A lot of the instrumentation is buried quite close to the centre, and this is causing some parts to be masked a bit (in particular when the bass hits notes close to its neighbouring instruments). Have a play with moving some of the instruments out wider to take advantage of that stereo space. -I think the bass would benefit from having some of its "bite" reduced (some EQ around the midrange should do it). This should clear up some of the clashes with the other instruments. -The portion at 2:24 didn't fit in well to me, at least the transition into it didn't feel quite right. It's a cool section but it'd be great to creatively integrate it more to the rest of the track. You have a great track here, there is just some work to be done to tidy things up. Please consider the above ideas for a resub. NO (please resub)

Very contrasting themes we have here I must say. Cheerfulness and moodiness side by side. You've certainly made some interesting choices with the source tunes here. Firstly, I like your instrumentation. There are some funky vibes and a nice selection of quality instruments varying the soundscape. I found these to be mixed quite well, you have made good use of stereo space and everything feels fairly balanced to me volume wise. On the arrangement side, the songs do clash a bit. It's not as big a deal to me but it's definitely worth mentioning. I think those changes between the sources gave some nice contrast, but at times the contrast was too much (particularly when Edward's theme dropped for the first time, things got quite dissonant). If doing a resub I would really consider changing a few of the notes to make the pieces fit better together. The other point of contention is some production aspects. I felt there were too many highs in the mix. So much so that I had to turn my headphones down a few of times while listening. Couple this with what sounds like some strong compression on some elements (some drum hits are quite powerful at times, like the snare for example) makes the track a little hard to listen to at normal volumes. Especially as this track is very acoustic driven, it'd definitely pay to ease off things and not hit quite as hard. I think if some work is done to address these two major points, we're golden. NO (please resub)

Epic mix my friend. You have taken the original (which is essentially a chamber piece) and turned it into an adventure. I am enjoying the arrangement in this mix, many nice ideas, changing moods throughout. Great convincing sounds as well. Your production is decent and everything is audible. Kristina brought up some good points regarding mix/dynamics volume. I too can hear a fairly large disparity in volume between sections. I understand this is used for effect, and that's totally cool, but I think the volume changes are a little too extreme in some areas (specifically 0:35-1:30 and 3:25-end). I've done some analysis in Audition and there is definitely two volume extremes to your mix. To me this is really the only problem. Absolutely keep the volume differences, just don't make them so far apart. If you can bring up the volume of the softer bits, this has Yes written all over it. NO (please resub)

I'm quite a fan of the sound of this mix initially. Straight away it feels like a modern take on the original. My initial feelings after hearing this mix for the first time is that there isn't enough of you in this mix. The arrangement is very similar to the original. There isn't really any original sections that the track breaks into, which is a shame because you certainly have the skills to pull it off. The sound quality is decent enough for me, mostly. I do feel the sequencing is a little too stiff for a track relying on acoustic instruments exclusively. These could do with some humanisation across the entire track to make things feel a bit more believable. Please consider this if doing a resub. To me the mix feels like it's at a stage where it's ready for all the original content to be added. I'd love to hear your own interpretation of the source tune more on this one. NO (please resub)

I felt like Flexy here when checking the mix out initially. I have come back to listen again and don't have any major crits. I think the production quality is very nice and the arrangement is solid. A very funky production. To nitpick, the snare is a little weak (it's almost like a puff of noise), but this isn't a hard electronic mix, so I think it works ok. The leads poke out and the mixing isn't too bad. Some levels could do with some slight adjustments but nothing to make me send this back. I would say the arrangement here could also be more interesting, I'm hearing a few parts reused throughout the mix, but no show stoppers. YES

Smooth intro. One thing I'll mention straight off the bat is the reverse hat that plays regularly every bar at the start (and through most of the mix) gets a little annoying, I think it is possibly mixed a little too loud. I'm not putting a major mark against the mix for it, I just wish it was softer and perhaps varied in tone a bit. Beyond that production quality is solid enough for me. This is a very Sonic sounding mix. The instrumentation is very nice. The synth leads and keys in particular work well together across this track. I really enjoyed the short lead guitar portions near the end as well, they were a nice change from all the synth work. Those kinds of changes should be implemented more often by artists, it keeps arrangements fresh. Speaking of the arrangement, I found the track quite interesting and varied. It did actually feel like it ended a little too soon for me, but leaving people wanting more isn't a bad thing. There are quite a few sources in here and I'm not having major problems hearing them, but I haven't done the math. I believe there is ample usage. Overall I'm quite happy with this track. YES

An interesting take on these original sources. SNES rock is certainly a challenging genre. With the kinds of sounds involved, it can get awfully busy quickly and hard to manage. Here in this mix things aren't too bad at the start as far as arrangement goes, but as Kristina has mentioned, your track does tend to get a little too thick in places, particularly when you have the SNES guitar and lead/apprego plucking off against each other (like at 1:13 for example, then more so at 1:58 ). These sections while cool tend to be a bit too busy to appreciate whats going on. I think there are a couple solutions to this: peel back a layer or two OR mix some of the elements that aren't important in those sections to a lower volume so the main instruments can be heard clearer. Things are a little dry in this mix too, but adding some reverb may add to the above problem and make things harder to make out. You could possibly utilise some reverb that is side-chained to the main master volume to make the reverb decrease the louder the entire mix gets (or you could simply go the automation route). I also found some of your mids/highs to be too powerful. Not overwhelming, but I think they could be pulled back a bit. I'd like to see that if doing a resub. Please consider the above points. This mix is very interesting, I just think it needs some work to make stuff clearer. NO (please resub)

This is a tough one. Production wise I'm quite happy - everything has separation, all the different elements are audible. Arrangement wise things are also pretty interesting, there are quite a few changes along the way to keep interest. I also like the chimey instruments and synths you've gone for. There are some dissonant progressions in the track, which add to that eerie spooky experience. Sometimes it can be a little too dissonant, but because the track is working in horror game territory, I can accept it. The main issue like the others have mentioned is source usage. I certainly hear some stuff reminiscent of the source (especially when things build up at the 1:00 mark), and those organ stabs have similarities to the original, but these aren't quite source from what I can hear. You have a great base here to actually add in some of the original tune across your mix, and when that happens, I think this is passable. NO (please resub)

A foot tapping dub-steppy track here with some nice arrangement ideas. It's great hearing original takes like this on source material. You have some solid instrumentation throughout - while they're not the most original sounds around, they have been implemented well and fit nicely in your tune. Flexstyle be the detective of samples. While your manipulation of the vox is very groovy, we have to avoid direct samples from square-enix games unfortunately. Production for me is firmly above the bar. Everything can be heard well and nothing really drowns anything out. You have your low end in check which can be challenging for stuff in this genre. This is a Yes once those samples are exchanged with some original material. NO (please resub with original vocal samples)

Production wise this is pretty solid, which we can expect from Cutman. There is some decent low end (the bass guitar in particular is very groovy), and there is some nice use of the frequency spectrum. The elements are quite clear. Source wise this also ticks the boxes. I'm actually not as ecstatic as the other two when it comes to arrangement on this one. For the majority of the song, we have that piano line upfront and centre - and while it sounds great, it doesn't change all that much. In fact from listening to this a few times now, the piano only plays 3 distinct 4-bar parts, with 1 of those playing a lot more than the others (the main tune which the track starts on). Sure different background elements come in and out along that 4:37 journey, but because that piano is so samey all the way through with hardly any velocity or note changes, it's harder to pay attention to and appreciate the work that has gone into those bits (like the strings and the little blippy synth later on). I also noticed the kick and hat are on a constant loop, and those bongos play a very similar 1-bar pattern every bar throughout. The bass is also quite loopy as we progress through the song, although to be fair it varies occasionally. This all adds up to the energy in the song being pretty much constant the entire way through, with us being subject to the same patterns quite frequently. The song could really do with a breakdown and change of energy at some point, with the piano making way for something else entirely. EDIT: Revisiting this after fellow judge analysis - the strong loopy nature of this track and minimal original elements are not enough for this track to pass IMO. NO

The arrangement here was interesting enough. A nice selection of varied instruments throughout, with elements playing and then dropping to make way for the next bit. For this being said to combine 3 source tunes, the track does a good job at sounding like a relatively cohesive song. This brings me to the first problem - that I'm having some problems hearing the source usage. I would love a breakdown from the artist to steer my ears in the right direction. After a number of play throughs of the source tracks and the mix I can't really make it out. Apart from the difficult to identify source, production wise is where I think this mix needs some work. -Firstly, the whole mix sounds kinda crunchy, like it's hitting a limiter too hard, or is possibly clipping. -The high frequencies are quite harsh to the ears at times (particularly during the larger synth leads) -The mixing is kinda off. For example, the leads are a lot louder than the rest of the instruments (the synth brass at 1:39, 1:50 was the biggest offender) -It's very hard to hear the drums (especially the snare). I know this track is taking a lighter approach but this balance between the drums and other instruments doesn't feel right -There is low-end muddiness in the mix contributing to the above problem in hearing some elements -Not a huge problem, but the mix at the end cuts off a little early, will need that end marker extended if doing a resub. This is a NO from me purely on production. If someone can shed some light on source usage that would be great. NO

Arrangement wise you have made everything quite interesting and have shied away from cover territory which is nice. I can hear the source but I can also hear a lot of you which is great. The strings are quite fake sounding (maybe some reverb and more varied velocities would help), but it isn't a major downer. I'm not a big fan of the fade out ending. I'm not marking the mix down for it, but I feel fading out here is a lost opportunity to finish up the mix with something more creative. You certainly have the skills for it. For a project mix I can let this go, but for a mixpost I think more work needs to be done on the mixing side to get it through the gate. The clarity is passable in most places of the mix (like the chugging portions for example), which is good as it is easy in the genre to fall victim to too much low end. However there are some sections that have mudiness which drown out the accompanying instruments. This happens most noticeably at 0:30-0:53, 1:49-2:01, 3:23-end. I would like to see some refinement here (by the way of EQ or filters) to clear up the mix. There isn't really anything else that this needs IMO. Lets do some final clearing up and get this posted. NO (please resub)

This track is a bit of an oddball one for me. Source usage is noticeable. I like what you have done with the source tune, some nice original sections here. There are a couple of reasons why I think this track is only just passable: 1. The track feels too long. Had there not been the level of variation here in the arrangement and change in textures I don't think I could have yes'd this. I think the source tune contributes to this as it's quite an odd tune in its own right. There were just enough sections to encourage me to keep listening for the full duration. 2. The mixing needs some work. In some areas the kick drum is almost lost in the mix, which is really something to avoid in electronica (especially in sections with a lot going on, like at 1:42 and 3:38 ). There were also some isolated parts of the track with clashes in the low end (the ending starting at 5:37 being probably the biggest offender). Had the mixing been like this the whole way though across all sections, I would have needed a resub. The buzzsaw like distorted bass used throughout most of the song is an interesting choice but did become a little grating to me over time. I do like the sound of it, but it could stand to loose a few frequencies to make it play nice with the other elements around it. I felt the speed up bit at 4:09 was more of an effect that an actual section, so it didn't bother me. I really like the strings at 4:24, very clear and fitting. I'll give this a pass, but please consider some of the above points in future mixes. YES (borderline)

I find this to be quite a creative piece, taking a short piano number and turning it into a fuller arrangement and plugging in a christmas vibe was a nice choice. I can hear your source and have no problems with that. More humanised piano would be great in this mix. It's not enough to break the track for me, because you're using a velocity variation throughout, but def consider getting off that grid for future piano parts. The strings didn't feel overly realistic to me either - a bit stiff with not a lot of tonal variation in them, but they were usually accompaniment and didn't stick out too much. Mixing is pretty good here, I can hear everything clearly. You've got the song loud but kept it feeling soft. Nice work. YES

On initial listen, I too feel the bass is too loud. This is accentuated by its buzzy high end and the minimalistic nature of the track's instrumentation. I do feel however that because it's carrying a lot of source tune with it, and the song is predominantly bass driven, that it's passable. Apart from the bass being a bit loud, I don't have any major beefs with your production quality. I can hear the main tune in here pretty well, I don't think there is any major problem with source usage. The arrangement is mainly relying on the bass, organ and varying percussive elements to keep things fresh. Listening through, I think these are doing a pretty good job on their own. While it's terribly easy for stuff like this to become super samey over time, I think you've managed to avoid that with some creative writing. YES

Twinkly and chimey all round. Your transitions between the strong source tune representation here are quite subtle and do the job well. It seems this is primarily a piano piece with some accompanying instruments that vary over time. Because the piano plays such a central role, I would have liked to see it less rigid as far as the playing goes (most noticeable in the intro), but the great variation in velocity and tone largely compensates for that. I've had to listen a couple of times to pick up the subtleties of this mix, the different accompanying instruments that are brought in and out add nice flavour and originality throughout. I did wish some sections built up further/fuller than what is seen here, but it is only a minor crit and I understand the track is trying to keep things light, so I can appreciate that. Production wise things feel clean enough and audible to me. Overall a nice whimsical piece with attention to detail. YES

There are some good ideas brewing here but more development is required. On the production/mixing side, I feel your snare is faint in the mix, and needs more power. You also need to ease up on the compression you have across the track because everything feels too glued together, be it on the individual elements and/or the master bus. Arrangement wise, there are a couple of things. Firstly, the song is quite samey all the way through, both in the notes you hit and the instruments you use. Some changes would be needed here in order to make this a more original arrangement. I recommend adding a couple of original sections to the mix, perhaps even tearing back some layers and introducing others momentarily. I also think you need to develop your ending more - I could feel like something was building to a wind up that didn't happen. One technique you could use is drop your drums completely or shift them to half time and interpret the little with some small licks or note variations. Please have take a look at these suggestions and consider them for a resub. NO