Jivemaster

Initially, soundscape builds up nicely over the first minute. The quieter piano section at 2:00 was a nice change in tone, though the transition to it was a little odd. The section leading up to and beyond 3:24 does seem too crowded for your master bus, with a bit of crunch coming through. I can see what Larry is raising here - there are a lot of layers that build on top of each other over time which is dropping overall clarity. Levels should be eased off a bit in the busy sections to let the track breathe more, perhaps even consider dropping some layers if they're unneeded. The arrangement otherwise progresses ok. I think this really needs another mixing pass to clean up your levels a bit, but it's not that far off. NO

Gritty. The guitars, while sounding great with a Ramstein feel to their performance, overpower the synths a bit here. I understand the synths aren't the focus, but they become so subtle at times, that they don't really need to be there. The guitars could perhaps do with a subtle tapering to the low-end to allow things to breathe more. Things improve a bit over the first minute. The 1:50 guitar lead carries a nice tone and performance. The percussion, while robotic, was enjoyable, and fit the mix well. Arrangement is relatively straightforward, but enjoyable. Overall, despite some of the concerns, this is a good take on the original. YES

Soft ambient intro. There is a bit of a muffled sound to this mix overall. There are some good ideas in here, however I agree the arrangement feels a bit underdeveloped. Things are quite similar throughout, and with the slow pacing here, not a lot of content unfolds over the ~2min timeframe. Take a look at the arrangement and see what could be further expanded upon. I would also look at your EQ levels as mentioned by Emunator, you have a bit of muffle that should be easily fixable by re-introducing some highs. NO

Big kick indeed. Clarity drops a peg at 0:59 due to the amount of layers, and again at 1:12. Synths occupy similar EQ space from the 1:30 section. 2:07 the lead is a bit quiet, with accompanying elements overpowering it. Nice break/change of pace around the mid-point. 3:04 the lead again is quite soft compared to its neighbouring instruments. I think the mix could certainly do with another mixing pass to clear up some of these issues, it would be relatively simple to fix. The ending was a bit average. Overall an energetic mix, some good changes, drops and much needed breaks across the arrangement. The mixing issues put this on the wrong side of borderline for me, considering the fixes would be simple to accomplish, I vote we push for that. NO

The leads are unusually quiet (particularly noticeable during the intro portion), the rhythm guitars are a bit intense by comparison. The mixing is otherwise fairly clean. Things flow along fairly conservatively, almost cover territory. The outro portion of the mix is a nice departure to the main progression, with the mix finishing on an unexpected note. A change like this could have come a little earlier in the mix to add some intermittent variety, I guess if it wasn’t so short. The conservative nature of the mix and the low lead volume are my main gripes here. Kinda takes this to the wrong side of borderline for me. Let’s see what the others think. NO

A good slice of metal/rock-opera (or whatever the genre is :P). The organ shortly after the intro is indeed weak, although I took it as intentionally cheesy. The timing change at 1:10 felt ok. The timing change at 2:00 and the solos that follow were quite interesting, appreciated the change in panning, gave the effect both leads were talking to each other. Mixing is decent enough (kick being audible is a good test), and there’s a decent level of clarity and attention to detail throughout. Vocals aren’t always on point but they crossed the zone enough and were passionately executed. Solid job team. YES

Good performance here overall. I enjoyed the contrast of guitar tones and the leads. I think the reverb from the leads does overpower the clarity of your mix (if you're able to, consider a high-pass on the reverb output to remove some of the low end, works a treat). The transition in themes at 1:10 was quite abrupt, but wasn't quite as jarring to me as my fellow judges. The solo at 2:30 was nicely added with a good mix of fast and slow notes. Wails occur where you'd want them. Pan bouncing back to 3:36 was an interesting way of bringing things back to the first theme. Arrangement moves along well, swapping things up quite nicely as we go along. Production wise, some further clarity would benefit this, as sometimes layers get a bit too thick and cloud the performance. I wouldn't say it detracts from the overall presentation, but more clarity would strengthen things. Despite these gripes, there's nothing really here that's enough for me to hold this back for. Jive approves. YES

There is a bit of a rawness to the vocals, which carries some charm. The sax starting at 0:51 was fun. I think the chorus performance could certainly use more power. There are some dropped notes here and there as we progress. I agree with Larry that it could do with a bit of autotune to tame some of the drift. The vocoder at 2:20 was fun, and the sax and guitar solo exchange afterward at 2:33 was a nice surprise, with some great tone that fit the piece well. The main thing holding this back for me was some parts of the vocals, but I think it works well enough. There's enough variation here in the arrangement, and mixing seems ok. If the artist would like a chance to tweak the vox a bit closer to tune I'd be all for that (if we haven't done so already). YES (Borderline)

Good selection of instruments here, creating a chill atmosphere. You take us through a good number of sections, and transition between these quite well. There are some problems with some of the cohesion between instruments, like they're doing their own thing and eventually catch back up with each other... perhaps there's different amounts of swing at play at an attempt to increase realism, but it does detract from the presentation. Sound wise, I thought the piano was ok, however some of the brass was weak, and the guitar I thought was a bit noodly and broke the rhythm of the other parts. Things finish off pretty abruptly. I think there are some good ideas here, but the execution needs some work. Sequencing needs some fixed to avoid the perceivable out of time issues that are present — humanisation can be achieved while still allowing each instrument to follow the others more closely. I'd also agree with the others that this needs some more mastering done — certainly don't crush it down, but you could do with some compression and a boost to overall volume. Please revisit this for us. NO

Piano is quite dry. Straight up, the progression here is quite rigid, heavily quantised. The occasional panning to the opposite channel for some higher notes was a little out of place, and broke some of the immersion. The break at 1:35 changed things up a bit which was good for the arrangement, though the transition to it could be improved instead of simply fading out the previous section. There are a few repeated sections here, particularly when the main theme is played, which stand out more because the track is piano on its own. The rigid nature of this mix definitely harms the piece. I recommend humanising the performance, then looking at adding some subtle variances throughout so that repeated sections avoid the copy paste vibe. NO

Strong start. Fairly tightly compressed, but there isn’t a pump that I could make out. Good orchestral soundscape mixed with some piano and off-genre percussion, which created a nice blend. There is a lot of original material in here, and a lot of changes between sections. It does bring us back to the main theme periodically to remind us that it’s based on the original, and that’s kind of the vibe I felt from this… it feels like the original, but a lot of parts aren’t from the original. It’s a tough one here because while it sounds good, I felt overt source usage was lacking, which could quite easily be restored with some note tweaks. I think a revisit this would be the best course for this to more firmly connect this to the original. NO

With the minimal original material to pull inspiration from, I appreciate the melodies you’ve drawn out and built upon to make the mix work. Without going into the numbers, I felt the original was discernible enough within this, but I appreciate Rexy’s breakdown. You’ve captured the mood of the original well, and built upon it. Things are a bit on the quiet side as usual. It was a good move to not have this go for too long, you hit what you needed to and closed things off. I’m with the others that I think this would benefit from a boost in volume, otherwise I think things here are fine. YES (conditional on volume)

Great instrumentation as always. Good amount of depth in the dynamics, although as the others have mentioned, this could certainly be boosted up without any negative effect. The choir also stuck out a bit for me, against the other elements it felt lower in quality and broke the immersion, and I'm normally a softie on this stuff. Things travel in a similar pace throughout, 3:00 changes things up a little. Each section has its charm, and we get changes in parts of the ensemble for variance. I think this is a good mix, but would side with the others here on boosting the volume, and perhaps looking at that choir implementation while in there. Once we get that looked at, I think we’re fine. NO

I liked the synth swells at the intro. I notice you have a bit of bass rumble here. There is also a bit of an unintentional pump on the master side. I understand this was fixed from the previous version... but I still think work needs to be done there. It’s not overly distracting (at least initially) but it does occasionally take you out of the mix. The soundscape is quite full/atmospheric. The break at the 2:00 mark is good, but we hear the effects of the mastering warble again here, even when instruments are peeled back. I think the entire presentation would be improved if we dialled this back further from hitting your limiter so intensely. Otherwise I feel your choice of sounds is good and the arrangement is well executed. Can we get a further revision that isn’t as hot? NO

Fat bass intro. Lead is a bit loud when it first comes in, and is somewhat on the verge of clipping. The distortion portion is good but could do with some revised mixing to fix some of the collision happening here (you could consider dialling back some of the bite on the bass if you haven’t already to give room for the other parts). The break at 1:50 is a good change of pace, although the transition to it could be improved. The violin and piano portion was unexpected and a nice surprise. Things pick up soon after with a return to the distortion portion. I think things here are climbing over each-other a bit too much and could be mixed in a more complementary way to let each part be crunchy but also heard. Things ended a bit abruptly and close off on an odd bar. I don’t mind the arrangement and instrument choices here, I like what you’ve done with the original to make it your own. I’d feel the same as some of the others here where I think some more time mixing will clean this up. After a tidy I think we’re good to go. NO

Enjoyed the sitar intro. Vocals sound decent and complement the track well. The backing instruments while minimal over the course of the track, do provide enough atmosphere. There are a number of times during the mid point that I thought things were going to pick up, but the mood stays mostly the same. Nothing wrong with this but I imagined this going further. I think the interpretation of the original is well done here. For the sake of consistency, I would agree with the others that we need volumes sorted out. But otherwise I’m happy. YES (but can we get those volumes up)

Vocals lend an interesting quality to the arrangement, and while not terribly tight/pitch perfect, I can see what you’re going for, there is a sweetness to them. It’s a good out of the ordinary mix for you — I love to see artists to step out and try something different. I will say I found the arrangement a bit too sameish throughout the duration, I was left waiting for some kind of evolution that never eventuated. Not to say the choice was bad, but I think this could’ve been even bigger if the mix evolved and things picked up at the halfway mark. Even without major changes, I think the mix would benefit from more variation. Overall mix volume is quite soft as others have mentioned. This has placed me on the fence. While I do want to see this posted, in thinking what’s best for the mix — it would definitely benefit from a resub to correct some of the above mentioned issues. NO

Crunchy. The bass is quite strong on this one. There is definitely a distorted spike present throughout the mix. The soundscape is quite full and lush otherwise, with a good choice of instruments filling out the arrangement. I particularly enjoyed the change between alternative kinds of percussion, although the snare throughout the second half was quite loud in comparison to the other parts. I agree with the others that this is in need of a remaster. I think reducing your gain into the limiter should be mostly all you need. Please resub. NO

Nice playing. Agree that we have some EQ issues here — the lows are a bit boomy, making things sound a bit muffled as a result. The change of pace throughout the arrangement is nice and emotive, I enjoyed your performance. There is definitely a feeling of heart that has gone into your work here. The moody change at 01:43 was a nice touch. The arrangement to me was a great listen overall. I can really only fault this on the lows, I would love to hear them toned down a bit, which I think would increase the enjoyment of the piece. If you were willing to do that before posting, we'd be golden. YES (conditional on EQ fix)

Enjoyed the Arabian vibe of some of the instrument choices. In the first few sections, I feel things are a little boomy in the low end which seems to be caused by a mix of reverb on the bigger percussive elements in combination with the other instruments, some revised mixing would help here (and/or you could possibly HPF out some of the reverb low end so to not impact the rest of the atmosphere). Initially the arrangement progressed well in that it doesn't stick with a section for too long, but while there are a number of nice transitions to different sets of instruments, the arrangement doesn't evolve a great deal - keeping mostly the same mood throughout. Combining this with the production issues others have mentioned, I think this should be tweaked a bit prior to posting. NO (please resub)

Nice atmospheric sounds here. Soundscape is a little bit thin to begin with but fills out once the bass kicks in around the one minute mark. The track plays things fairly cautious, with not much in the way of variation from the original here. The bass is very similar throughout, which was very noticeable in a minimal mix such as this. When we hit the end, the song ends quite abruptly without a proper outro. There is a good foundation here, but this piece feels more like a demo than a completed track. I’d like you to build on this one further, and add some more you into the mix. NO

I'm coming in the same as Sir_NutS here - no prior knowledge of the soundtrack. Great track choice. I like the selection of squelchy synths, gives off a funky vibe. Agree that the sound design is quite generic, but I still thought you made good use of your selected palette. Production is ok. Arrangement sounds good, is faithful to the original with its own vibe, but as the track progresses not a lot changes. There are occasional instrument layers and fills here and there but I felt further variation in the arrangement was needed, which if fleshed out, would make for a solid submission. Otherwise this is a fun original take. NO (please resub)

The looped intro rhythm strumming feels a little clumsy timing wise. Synths pick up the main theme shortly after. The arrangement you have here is okay for the first minute or so. There are some solo elements dotted through which help quell some to the lack of variation. Breakdown around 2:45 was mostly well done and greatly needed. Agreed the mix is somewhat generic in execution, with some sections repeating a bit too often. Mixing quality is ok. There is not quite enough here to sustain length IMO, with a lot of segments feeling loop based. I think the arrangement could do with some improvements, perhaps by hitting the breakdown earlier and introducing the original elements sooner. This certainly has potential, I'd just like to see some refinement of the final package. NO

Track is certainly on the quiet side. Arrangement wise, I thought things were ok. The transition from one section to another is done well, with a good amount of instrument variety between sections which helped to compensate for a lack of drastic departures from the main theme. I didn't quite have the same issues some had regarding sequencing, and while I agree some parts felt too tight, things felt convincing enough to me overall. If the volume could be increased without affecting the dynamics of the piece I’m all for that, otherwise, nothing stuck as being a major issue for me. YES (would appreciate a volume bump though...)

Blippy intro leads us into this noisey instrumental rock interpretation. There is some lack of separation between each element, even for this style choice. The lead synth playing the main motif is quiet compared to other elements. The portion at 1:19 gets quite noisey making the each part difficult to hear. The wall of sound approach stylistically fits, but I feel has taken too much precedence over an acceptable level of clarity. Not much in the way of variation across the arrangement, a departure from the main progression would have been appreciated. You’ve hit some of your chosen stylistic requirements, however there is more that could be done here to improve mixing levels and overall clarity. NO