Palpable

I use Sonik Synth 2 for a lot of the more standard sounds in my songs. Strangely, I'm not that enthralled with the synths that come with it, but the orchestral sounds and pads are great. This looks like a nice deal if you don't have the software already.

I don't think I took to this one quite as much as the other judges. When the song is on full cylinders, it works, but I don't think it works that well in the breakdowns. The opening harpsichord on its own is thin and strange sounding, a little piercing even. Only when the beat joins, it starts to make sense. The transition at 1:36 is abrupt, and the oboe on its own afterward sounds a little thin again. I also thought that the second breakdown at 2:38 was too soon after the first, breaking up the flow. These aren't major problems (though they are sort of spotlighted in the song) and the rest makes up for it. There's decent variation between the sections of your song to keep it interesting, and the build-up at 1:36 is actually quite refreshing for trance, the way it's sectioned out. Clever interpretation of the original too. Maybe a little too compressed, but it suits the genre. Ultimately, it clears the bar. YES

I'm basically going to echo what the other judges have said. I felt the interpretation worked well - even though it was relegated to the background, the source was consistently there, subtly driving the song. Very laidback, chill groove. My criticisms are all on the writing end, actually. There's just not enough variance in what's going on. With the drums so pushed to the forefront from 0:45 to 1:33, the pattern has to change more. You should think about incorporating more instruments too, even just FX, because this section feels static and bare, with little variance in any element to draw your attention. The following sections had more note variation, with those cool, weird chords, but they still felt static from a larger perspective. There were few changes in volume and texture from there until the end of the song. The breakdowns at 2:19 and 3:06 would be perfect places to incorporate lighter drum patterns, more textural pads, or new melodies, rather than just holding the same groove without the drums. Even in the busier places, there are a number of directions you could take this in to spice it up - layering more hi-hats, or using some weird processing for a few measures. I'll leave it up to you. Production-wise, this is fine work. It just needs some more action on the writing end. I definitely want to hear you give the song another shot. NO (resubmit)

Thanks for setting this up, DJP. I was planning on donating money to charities this year anyway and you gave us some good choices here. I ended up donating to Doctors without Borders. It's remarkable how much you can help with just a small donation (they tell you on their website what each donation increment provides), so I'd urge everyone to contribute what they can. Volunteering time to local places is in no way less of a donation either.

I've got an idea for remixing "Mindbender"... I'm trying to figure out if I have the time for making a new remix though.

Nice energy here! It's a pretty in-your-face mix, and the adaptations of the songs are all different. Restless is a good word for this mix, because it barely stays on any one part for more than ten seconds. I don't mean that in a negative sense though - one still gets the feeling of direction. Things are cluttered, for sure. A lot of those background synths are drowning in reverb, the drums and cymbals sound lossy when they get louder, and that clipping at 0:39 is unmistakable. If that clipping lasted for more than that one second, it would probably make this mix a no. The song also cuts before the cymbal fades out. The mixing problems are more forgivable in a song with so much distortion already though. And echoing BGC, I'm very impressed how clearly you can hear the individual elements at that volume. In the end, while there is certainly room for improvement, I think this one is good enough as is. YES

Beautiful arrangement. Sort of an electronic lullaby - a wonderful interpretation of the original. I thought the mood of the piece and your vocals were excellent. Pitched just right. The execution was a little bit of a stumbling block though. Right from the start, I didn't like how unnatural those strings sounded, like they've had too much of the high chopped off. I might suggest using a better sample too, since they are used so prominently. It was something I noticed with the vocals as well, when you took the filter off at 1:04. It sounds like part of the highs are missing, while the 'S's are overemphasized. I hope this is just your EQ settings rather than a problem with the recording, because it really needs fixing. The drums seemed like a mismatch for the material, a little too in the background and lacking body. You can keep them quiet while placing them more in the foreground. I wouldn't mind more variations in those patterns too. You've got a really good start and I think most of your problems are with the production. Fix those and we may have a keeper. NO (resubmit)

Listening to the originals for comparison takes me back. Those arpeggios. Yeahhhh. I like this a lot. Very loose and fun. Raunchy, even. As such, the slightly lo-fi production doesn't bother me - in fact, I think a lot of popular rock groups have this kind of garagey sound. It's consistently lo-fi, and I think one or two lo-fi elements sticking out do more to hurt a mix. The levels are good, and the instruments are distinct. At times, the drums sound like they get ahead of the other instruments, and in other places, the guitars are a little off, but never to the point of distraction. Overall, the playing is solid. One does get the scent of medley-itis with those awkward transitions between sections, but that was my only real complaint about the arrangement. The sheer number of styles the song goes through is impressive - you get a lot of mileage out of the material. The surf take on "Hiroshima" was a little bit of a jolt from the much harder "Bordeaux", and I think it might have been stronger to just cut the song at 4:55, but I can give you some slack for getting 5 minutes of it totally right. This song exceeds the bar, and I think fans will really get a kick out of it. YES

I absolutely loved OoT when it first came out and I played through it, but when I went back to it five years later, I couldn't believe how much the fuzzy, indistinct graphics hurt my head. I couldn't even play it. Graphics don't usually factor much into my enjoyment of a game, but they do when they give me a headache.

Nice work, Jimmy! I love the processing on this one. Totally out there at times but never overkill. And the section at 2:00 is very pretty. Can't say I remember the song but it's been years since I played the game. I think I need to go back and play it again.

Very sweet guitar work all over, especially that solo at 2:17. I like how the song initially sounds like some sort of gloomy Cure type of thing but the playful synths turn it into something totally different. Solid track.

I really liked the arrangement of this mix. Very clean, loose, and simple, while still uniquely arranging the original. I loved the way it gelled at 0:27 with sort of a klezmer feel. An unusual set of instruments used effectively. The woodwind that comes in at 0:09 could use a little more rhythmic tightness - it sounds late. Also, the panning of the instruments was a little much. Try to keep things closer to the center so that they sound more of one piece. I don't think either of these are very big problems, but if the mix doesn't pass, fixing them would be appreciated. Ah, length of arrangement. I really felt like more could have been done, especially after the percussion comes in. It sounds like it is building into a real groove, and then 12 seconds later, it's over. I would have loved to see the klezmer section return with that percussion. There are a lot of ways you can extend and develop this piece, including just elaborating on some of the things you've already got. There are so many ideas here - why keep it so short? NO (resubmit)

I'll go contrary to zircon and say I really liked the choice of sounds. It's like futuristic orchestral. Little kitchen-sinky but I think you can sell it. However, the execution needs to be stepped up for that to happen. The massive compression is extremely distracting, and it actually makes it hard for me to give you more production advice! The balance of the instruments seems really off, and it sounds like compression is being used to compensate. Make it sound good without the compression first, to get a more natural sound when you do compress. I rarely get bothered by panning, but there's too much here. At times, because of how far to the sides the instruments are pushed, it's almost like listening to two different songs at once, especially before the elements truly gel at the 2:11 mark. Unusual instrument choices can work, but only if it sounds like they have purpose. Things are a little too random in the intro, though later on, they start to make more sense. Maybe rework that intro so that it builds more cleanly. Also, that pizzicato string is a little too annoying to be used so prominently and repetitively. I'd like it to be pushed back, or possibly removed. I hope I haven't put you off too much, because this is an ambitious song with some very good ideas. The approach you took was inventive, and the percussion was snappy. But ambitious songs need a lot of work to sound right, and this song needs that level of work. NO

My biggest problem with this was how static the elements were. The section starting at 0:58 gets repeated four times with very minor changes, and while the next section does some have changes, it too sounds similar. The individual parts just sound copied and pasted over - it doesn't keep the listener's interest. I did appreciation the variations you added, like that little bit with the strings at 1:05. Use a lot more of that sort of thing, in the strings, in the piano, and in the drums especially. Even small changes can go a long way to holding the listener's attention. That goes for volume too. You wouldn't hear a snare playing every hit at the exact same volume, because certain hits get accented and others deemphasized. Play around with changing volumes until you get something that sounds more human. I didn't think your samples were that bad, but they definitely need to be used more interestingly. I also thought the interpretation was too simple, like zircon said. Most of the changes involve taking parts out, with not enough new stuff added back in or modification of the original parts. I did like the quieter section at 3:08, which changed the chords AND used a different chord progression than the original's - that's a step in the right direction. Try applying that kind of creative thinking in more places. NO

The first thing I notice off the bat is that it's too soft. Definitely needs a major volume boost. I didn't think the piano sounded cheap but it does sound muddy. It's difficult to make out the notes you're playing sometimes. The arrangement was interesting in places, but mostly in the new writing you did. The Middle Eastern-ish parts you added went well with the material and spiced it up. I was disappointed how closely you stuck to Champion's Battle though. The first time, there were minor variations in the right hand, and some added block chords in the left hand, but it was pretty intact. At 1:55, the left hand is even closer to the original. That part in the original is so simple; it seemed like a wasted opportunity, to play it so straight. In general, the parts were too repetitive. The left hand stays on the root of the chord a lot and plays a pretty even rhythm. Would have been nice if it went off the rails a little. The playing was also a little sloppy, especially when you speed up. This one is gonna take some work before it can pass, but keep at it. Your writing shows talent. NO

Alright, dub! There isn't much like this on OCR and it's great to hear some. The Lost Woods melody works perfectly in this laidback setting - excellent interpretation. Awesome instrument choices and usage of effects. I wasn't entirely feeling the shift to the Water Temple theme, with the complete change of instruments. I'd prefer the two sections were tied together more, even just by bringing the beat in earlier, before going back to Lost Woods. Also, the transition to the Water Temple near the end was very abrupt. Neither of these come close to sinking the arrangement for me though, since it has plenty going for it otherwise. I heard the weird jump Larry was talking about, at 3:13 - I thought the song had skipped. It sounds like a fraction of that beat has been accidentally edited out, and it didn't sound intentional because there's a strange amount of time missing. I'd definitely want it to be fixed. Also, the clipping on the guitar echo has been mentioned. That needs to get fixed too, because it happens a lot on the midrange of the phasing sweep. The tuning of the guitar distracted me in too many parts that I could overlook it. Particularly that call and answer part at 0:41 where I could easily compare the pitch of the guitar to the synth. Jill has covered this pretty well, and a hint of auto-tuning would fix it. I hope the issues I mentioned don't require you to totally redo anything, because this one is very very close. It's a great song - just a couple of tweaks and it's good to go. NO (resubmit)

I didn't hear this one the first time around, but the arrangement is nice. Sticks pretty closely to the source with new melodies and some added sections tying it together. Gentle but moving. I felt the transition at 2:18 was a little awkward and dissonant, the way everything overlaps for a short bit, but not a big deal. Don't have much to add about the EQ - I echo the concerns about the low-end. The first half sounds ok without it, but the second half needs that power. I'd want to see that fixed before passing this. The cymbals starting at 2:59 sounded way too short for how slow the song is at this point. It seemed out of place and I'd really like it to sustain more. Some added body would help it too. It's a small part of the overall picture so it's not a dealbreaker, but the lack of lows is. Fix that, and this is a pass. NO (resubmit)

Nice match, I don't think I could get it so close. The organ in the original sounds like it has a different note on top of the chord: a B, then an A. Your loop also sounds brighter so maybe take the entire thing down on the highs? Those old school loops are pretty warm.

How about we rate cereals instead? This seems like a good one to start with: Nintendo Cereal System - The Legend of Zelda Pretty weak adaptation. It seems like you just took an existing cereal and slapped Zelda on top of it. The boomerangs look exactly like the moons from Lucky Charms. I don't get the sense that much effort went into making this. Execution also very sloppy. The taste is lacking in sweetness. Could have used some marshmallows to balance it out. NO

The incorporation of the two themes in this song was smart. The Leela progression was slightly extended and provided the backbone for the first half of the mix, and it seamlessly led into a phrase from "Covenant Dance". The intro had a few modified takes on this phrase which helped tie everything together thematically. The connection to the source was not always overt but it's definitely there for the first 1:56 of the song. The arrangement was also imaginative, using an atypical set of instruments. I loved the shift in rhythm emphasis at 0:39, which made the song sound more like a waltz. Production was immaculate; this is a fantastic song on headphones. Instruments are crisp and clear, and there are countless details for those who listen closely, all woven in smoothly. Very nice work. I was initially concerned about the short length of the song. Discounting the subtle fadeout, there is only about 2:10 of material here, and the build-up was slow. It also doesn't help that the climax basically ends the song - as a listener, I really don't want it to stop there. Does that mean the song needs more to it? In this case, I felt it didn't. Each section, even the intro, introduces enough new ideas that none of that time is wasted. This is close to the borderline of length of arrangement though. YES

You chose to interpret my favorite section of the original song, so nice work there. It's a little short at 2:13, but you get a lot accomplished within that span of time. Each repetition of the theme has new elements and emphases and the added passage at 1:06 was beautiful. I don't think the piece necessarily needs to be expanded for me to pass it on an arrangement level, but it would be appreciated. You've left me wanting more. The execution could use some work though. The rhythm of the parts was too uneven - the song lurched. I like that you're trying to humanize it but you need to rein it in a little and sync up the parts more. I also thought the rhythm got lost a couple times in the quieter section. The entire piece could have used more steadiness. The climax was a little cluttered as well, with all those low-frequency instruments and no highs. Maybe the piano could be transposed up an octave again for that part. Some instruments need production help. The lowest piano notes rumble strangely, as zircon mentioned, as if the sample is being stretched too long. You may want to find a different sample or try to work without the low notes. The right-hand piano parts, especially the higher ones, could use a boost on the low end. Though there are some issues, I definitely like what you've got so far and I think it's a good resubmit candidate. NO (resubmit)

I thought this one showed a little more effort than cookie cutter trance. Here and there, there were bells and whistles that I enjoyed - the flanged synths in the intro, the change in the bassline at 1:15, the series of nicely textured instruments that start around 3:00. I also thought the key change for the majority of the song was an inspired touch. It really sold the dramatic shift to the chorus, which returns to the song's original key. Production was strong in terms of instrument quality, effects, and getting everything to sit together. Definitely too loud though. The compression could also stand to be turned down. It robbed a lot of the satisfaction that you usually get when a trance song kicks back into high gear after a build-up. In places, it felt like the compression was being used to keep levels in check when EQ would have helped more. Neither of the production issues are big enough for me to say no to this, but the liberality of the arrangement is. There are a lot of sections where the connection to the source is too loose. I agree with Larry about the intro sounding close but not close enough - when you change a couple notes of such a short, basic phrase, it's hard to hear the connection. In other places, it's just the key tieing it together. It's a tough call, but I want to see a little more of an overall tie-in. NO (resubmit)

I liked some of the ideas here, but there are some sizable problems too. The biggest, that others have already mentioned, is that it really just sounds like a souped up version of the original. It's definitely not a MIDI rip, as there are both big and small changes - that excellent guitar solo, a couple new sections, and pitch bends all around. But from the beginning to around 1:21, it sounds note-for-note identical to the original. You've got to be more liberal with interpreting the song. The aforementioned improvisation and new sections are a good start - more in that vein would help. Try experimenting with some changes in the rhythm guitar and drums, or maybe adding new counter-melodies, like you do at 4:15. I also didn't like the repetition at 3:51. There's a key change, sure, but everything sounds like it was cut-and-pasted, then transposed. Your song sounds a little too compressed, like a wall of sound. When you got to the quiet part at 3:29, it was a huge relief on my ears and that shouldn't be the case. Try to keep it more dynamic, and maybe isolate your sounds better. The lead guitar rings clear but everything else gets swallowed up. In general, I liked the approach you took to the song with the guitar and the orchestral swells. It's a song deserving of the epic treatment you've given it. But the problems I've listed are too big to overlook. NO

Very very creative arrangement! The transitions between source songs are flawless and the whole thing sounds very much of one piece. The mix of guitars, vocals, traditional instruments, and chiptune synths is really fun and unexpected, and the energy level is high throughout. And speaking of unexpected, I too cracked up when I heard the lyrics near the end. You've got the technical parts of this down too. Playing and singing are strong, and the instruments sat well and played nicely with each other. Oh, and the bassline that starts at 3:06 grooves like "Owner of a Lonely Heart". Love it! I really didn't have much negative to say about this mix. The low end of the kick seems to sustain too long; you can almost hear a phantom kick between beats. The intro is a little weak in comparison to the rest (I think the strings aren't of high enough quality that they should be so exposed), and like other judges have mentioned, the drums are a little plodding after six minutes. But there's so much going on with the other parts that there's plenty to hold your attention. An easy YES

This has some big problems. A lot of elements in the song sound random - the jumps in the melody, the weird time signature, and the way the pads come in and out unexpectedly. In the right context, these elements can work individually, but put together, it makes your mix sound a little too directionless. I think CHz got at what I wanted to say here. Your arrangement should be more interpretive of the original. Some of the instruments are similar and the sparse mood is pretty much the same. I would have liked to see more of a departure. Also, 1:48 (knocking off the long silence at the end) is too short a time to really develop a piece. Some of the instruments need processing so that things gel together better. The choir could really use some reverb, which would push it back and fill out the soundfield. The sample quality could also stand to be higher at times, especially with the harsh violin CHz mentioned. You need to spend more time developing your writing and producing skills. There are some good ideas here (I liked the eerie pad textures) but they are a few pieces of the puzzle. I'd suggest listening to songs similar to the one you want to make and just try to recreate them first. It can be a useful exercise for understanding what makes a song work. NO