Palpable

Aw, hell. This thing just kicks ass all around town. High quality sounds used in awesome ways. Epic intro, excellent performances, and some really cool detours. I could have listened to another minute of this easily. It'd be incredibly hard to say NO to this and yet... ...Larry's dead on about the cymbals. This song is already pretty loud, and the cymbals are really loud. I feel like I can't play this at the volume I want to because the high end just gets overpowering. If you can tone it down a little, this is a no-brainer pass. YES (conditional on volume)

I liked the general mood of this song - creepy and slick. There's some good usage of effects and production techniques, and the changes in structure and rhythm were interesting. I didn't like how the most trademark parts of the source (the arpeggio, the melody, and the low string stabs) sound pretty similar to the original, while the new additions are mostly effects and background elements. I think more of an effort could have been put into personalization, though what's here is decent. Production sounds really off. Nearly every instrument sounds over-filtered or EQed, some too high and some too low. As I've noted before in decision threads, this sort of thing makes giving specific production advice beyond that a lot harder. I'd recommend undoing all the filtering and EQ, and then very carefully reapplying EQ when you sense a conflict between parts. If any major part is starting to sound too thin on its own, you've probably done too much. Definitely make use of the WIP forum to see if you're going in the right direction. You've clearly got talent from what I hear here, but you have one big problem area holding this back. Work on it and resubmit! EDIT (2/21): Uh yeah, me too. Definitely sounds better. I still think some of your parts sound thin, but I'm starting to think the cause is sample quality and balancing. The drums at 1:07 are weak compared to what came before it. Bring 'em up, amd maybe layer the snare with something more prominent. I'd still recommend my EQ suggestion above, if it applies. NO (resubmit)

Conservative but well-executed arrangement. Though most of the right-hand melodies are kept intact, the left-hand is new. The switch between songs was seamless. Overall volume needs an increase. I didn't hear whatever hiss Larry was talking about though. The strings and crystal chimes were nice ideas to keep it interesting, but I thought they added their own problems. The strings competed with the piano a lot, especially around 2:04. You definitely need some EQ so the strings don't drown the piano. The tone for the crystal chime was really odd, sort of like an alien whoosh, and I thought it really stuck out. I'd say either tone it down, EQing some of the presence out of it, or try some different samples. Ironically (I'm using this in the Alanis sense), I think I would have passed this if it was just the piano. Either way, it's close - just needs a little more work to pass the bar. NO (resubmit)

This is one aspect of the standards I'm not that clear on. If it's determined that this much usage from another source isn't kosher, it would certainly change my vote.

You'll almost certainly not want to use this, but hell, it is themed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDErgD9YNyc

Strangely, I found myself really digging some of the dissonance in this. 0:34-0:38 and 3:44-3:52 sounded off the first time, but on the second listen, I thought it fit the restless mood of the piece. Anyway, the dissonance didn't come up that much and I thought it created interesting texture when it did. The rigidness of the synth guitar at 0:54 didn't bother me either, because it didn't sound like it was trying to be a guitar. The song is a little meandering at times, but I never thought it really lost its direction. And the textures are pretty awesome. It seems like I dug this one more than Jesse or Larry. Nevertheless, a lot of their criticisms still hold. Things were very thin at times, in the sections Larry pointed out. It often felt like more bass presence was needed. I didn't think the lead introduced at 1:27 was well-chosen, nor were the notes it played (and that ended up being the most prominent element in the piece). I think that instrument really needs to be reworked. Drums were also a little too thin in general. Easing up on the 'verb and EQ will probably restore that lost power; if not, try some layering. You have a lot of good elements in place here, but there's still some work to be done. Give it another try! NO (resubmit)

Larry, I'm also hearing some usage of the background choir that starts in Auron's Theme at 0:59. Compare that to the filtered-in gated synth in Endless Skies at 0:46-1:01 and 1:46-2:31. I think that's enough of a connection for those parts. This was a pretty great arrangement. Even the few sections where the source is not there, it connects well to the source material. Love those stuttering drums at 3:16 and the incorporation of the solo from Auron's Theme. 3:31 is just gorgeous, hearing those arpeggiations on their own, leading into the minimal piano part. Maybe the cutback to the drums at 4:16 could have been telegraphed more, but that's a small complaint if I ever thought of one. Production is solid also. Great texture. I think you still go a touch too heavy on the reverb like "Barrel Roll" did, and it ends up making parts less clear than I'd like, but there's enough clarity. I'm ready to throw my yes on this one. YES

I discussed this with Larry today. Knowing the chords isn't really going to change my decision on this - I recognize that they are the same, and I still don't hear the connection. I'm finding it difficult to pinpoint why exactly. Perhaps it's because the melodies in this song stray so far outside the chord (as jazz can), or maybe because Maridia is so minimal that the original melody implies the chords and just using those chords is not reminiscent enough. I've heard songs where the chords were enough of a tie, but I don't that sense here, and I've listened both to this song and the original several times now. Up through 1:11, I'm really feeling this one. It uses some phrasing from the original and I hear the connection. Some minor usage of the Maridia melody here and there in the following two minutes would probably give this the connection I'm looking for and make that chord connection stronger.

I was feeling this one a lot more than zircon. The interpretation had some cool touches to it, like the incorporation of Bach. It's not a big enough part of the mix for me to be concerned about it, and I felt it was a good addition that was thematically appropriate. I liked the flow of the song, and the dynamic variety between individual sections. Nice arrangement. Production has some weak spots but nothing too bad except the track's volume. That definitely needs to come up (even with master compression you found it was distorting? I don't think this is a big deal and one of us can help you with it). Once I turned up the volume, I thought this had more than enough energy and didn't feel plodding. Liked the tones of the guitar a lot too. I guess I'd prefer if the lead was more prominent but you can still hear it quite clearly. I'm comfortable passing this if the volume gets increased. YES (conditional on volume)

I really like how the song keeps pushing forward and pulling back in the quiet sections. I too was a fan of the mild dissonance (seemed to fit the song), and I absolutely love those shimmering strings that show up every few measures - very chilling effect. This is great, DS.

Besides judging, pretty infrequently. There's been a small handful of remixes I've become obsessed with though, and those end up getting played a lot. I like a lot of music in general, so remixes have to compete with thousands of other songs. There's only so much listening time in a day!

Haha, I have no idea what the hell that title means. Probably that I gotta read the forums more? This was a very solid arrangement of Town (what a boring name, guess you were making up for it). There's nothing too unexpected in it, but you struck a good balance between sticking to the source and doing your own thing. I liked how the melody was used in the foreground and also more in the background at various points. Piano part was original yet reminiscent of the opening of the source, because of the rhythms. Tasteful, complimentary choices of instruments thoughtout, and a smooth flow. There was some seemingly unintended dissonance in the section starting at 0:39, but barely an issue. I also thought the ending was a little abrupt and could have built up more, but also no big deal. Some parts were a little hard to hear, and the song might have benefited from some rebalancing and light compression. Again, this was not much of a detriment. Nice job on this one, Andrew! YES

While your arrangement has a slick, heavy sound to it, I thought it was pretty similar to the original soundtrack, sort of just an upgrade. On that level, I wish it had been more of a departure. This is compounded by the fact that all the original melodies are basically intact, and some of the backing parts too. The rhythms of the drums have changed, and some new parts have been added. No big changes in structure either, and the transition between songs was a little awkward. In all, I found it too similar and comparable to the originals. There's not enough personalization. The sound was pretty slick, like I mentioned. You have some really cool processing going on with some of those synths and guitars. The machine gun drumming suits the song. 1:02 gets a little overwhelming in the amount of things demanding attention - might want to pull it back a little there. There's a lot of directions you can take to making this work. An original intro would be great - leading off the song more smoothly and giving it your own touch. Some changes in melody and more prominent original parts like the new lead at 0:16 would also nudge this closer to a pass. Hope you give it another try! NO (resubmit)

Though I love your beats and I'm one of the groove biasiest (it's a word now!) people you're gonna find, I love how the beats take a backseat approach to the other instruments in this song. There's just some damn creative instrumentation going on. Especially love the eerie synth coming in at 0:40 and the interplay in the break that shortly follows. Awesome song all around. I have say I was not totally feeling the fadeout though...

I almost always judge on headphones too, but I don't get the best low-bass response from them, so if a mix sounds like it might be unbalanced, I like to listen to it on my system at home. One of the mixing adages you'll see come up a lot is that you should listen to what you produce on as many different systems as you can, including low-end gear. You do occasionally get stuff like you describe, where something won't sound good on headphones but might sound great in a car. I like to listen to my own mixes on my monitors and headphones before calling them complete, and if I have the time/effort, I'll give it a listen or two on the stereo in the living room or my car.

I do software stuff, and music is just a hobby. Unlike a lot of others here, I don't have any strong aspirations of making it into a full-time career. I do work on music in a lot of my spare time, making my own ReMixes, and songs with my band Flickerfall, but I don't actively seek out work. If the right opportunity came along, I'd definitely take it though.

OK. Heeeeeeere we go: 0:00-0:50 original 0:51-1:10 uses modified main riff, slowed down 1:11-1:53 original 1:54-2:05 uses modified marimba part 2:06-2:31 original 2:32-2:53 uses modified marimba part 2:54-3:02 uses half of main riff, slowed down 3:03-4:02 original 4:03-5:51 uses modified marimba part, and modified main riff a couple times 5:52-6:13 uses modified main riff and modified marimba part 6:14-6:42 original The original sections comprise just over half of the arrangement, not to mention, the marimba part in the long 4:03-5:51 section is not very prominent once the other instruments come back. It still feels like an arrangement of Female Turbulence though, which kind of makes me second-guess myself. I'd love for someone to double-check these numbers. For now, I'm going NO on arrangement. Production was pretty snazzy. Lots of neat little effects and I loved the sound of those strings. Panning seemed a little overdone (might want to center things more), and the prominence of certain instruments was a little weird (that shaker was loud!). Still, I think this was pretty much there. If you could work more of the original riffs into this, I would say YES. There are a lot in the source that you didn't use. Even more of the main riff might be enough. Hope you resubmit, Sebastian! NO (resubmit) (EDIT: 3/28) Yeah, looks like Sebastian's breakdown is pretty close to my own. The source is still marginalized. Keeping my NO vote.

Yeah, this is sort of what I was thinking. Maybe one form letter for NO, one for NO (resubmit), one for YES, with maybe some space for comments if we feel the need. (Of course, NO (resubmit) is an individual's decision, not a group decision, so maybe we'd have to be clear about what gets classified as NO (resubmit).) Getting people to resubmit is the most crucial part of this to me. A decent amount of stuff we get is close but doesn't make it.

Throwing in my own two cents here as a mixer rather than a judge: I didn't know about the judge decision forums until submitting my third mix here. The only thing I did was constantly check the front page for months. In the case of my first mix, I wasn't even aware it had gone up until months afterward because I had stopped checking! By the time I submitted my fourth mix (which was rejected) I had learned about the judge decisions forums, but I was essentially doing the same thing: checking every few days for a couple months. In that case, I got so tired of waiting that I lost interest in OCR completely. I would love if we could e-mail mixers once their mix had completing judging, informing them of the decision, but there are at least a few problems with it I can think of. One is just remembering to do it, unless we can automate the process. Two is that sometimes the decision can be changed. In that case, when is the decision finalized such that we can tell the mixer what the decision was? These are certainly some things I'd like us to think about. I think a lot of great potential resubmits fall by the wayside because the mixer isn't familiar enough with OCR or doesn't check back often enough. There was one rejected mix back in November that I absolutely loved that nevertheless had some major problems. I've thought about e-mailing the mixer just because I very badly want to see it completed, and I have no idea if he ever intends to go back to it, or is even aware it was rejected. More communication would be a very good thing, I think, if it's possible.

Hah, this is so true. And not only that, but your returns become less and less as you spend more time, like a logarithmic function. Sometimes I'll spend hours trying to get something sounding marginally better. But I suppose that's the only way anyone can ever improve.

Haha, I dig the track name. I thought for a second that the riff that starts at 0:31 was from the ending theme and you guys had just forgotten to list it in your e-mail. But upon checking it out, it's not the same; just a similar-sounding riff. Larry and 'Ili pretty much have this one covered. Very liberal, and even the parts that use the source material don't use it as overtly as I'd like. I thought the arrangement was pretty cool though, especially that guitar solo at 1:42. Interesting, unusual textures for a rock song. Production a little sloppy and hazy, but fine enough. I'll probably hold on to this one. I'd love for you guys to submit something that sticks a little closer to the original song, like your Top Gear medley did. NO

Happy birthday CHzA. Hope your brothas in the Wu-Tang are treatin' you right.

Not only that, but the review thread for it was broken for a couple days after it was posted, when probably most of the commenting takes place. This was actually my favorite song out of everything from VoTL, which is pretty damn high praise. The ways those strings creep along puts this incredibly evil grin on my face. Thick, chilling atmosphere and a perfect matching of styles between busta and TO.

Not knowing a lot of techniques can make your songs a lot quicker to complete, at least in my experience. When I first started out on FL Studio, my first few songs actually sounded pretty good and usually took only a few hours each. What I did was use the best quality samples FL came with, combined with default presets, in the best ways I could. You can make some very good sounding stuff just with that. But the thing is it almost certainly doesn't sound like you want it to. As time went on, I figured out a million different things you can do in FL Studio, added on lots of new plug-ins, and now it takes me a month or two to complete a track. What do I have to show for it? My songs sound a lot closer to what I want them to... though still not perfect. Yeah, sometimes I wonder if I shouldn't have just stuck with the first method of making songs.

Trying to go out of your way and use a different style can really inspire you (at least it has me). I mean, a lot of interesting ideas come from combining styles anyway. Maybe you might like the beat you created, and next time make a trance song with hip-hop drums. Or rock guitars over dance beats. Or even just a hip-hop break in your dance song. Even if you don't end up completing your experimental song, sometimes it'll really expand your mind as to the possiblities in music.