Palpable

Hahaha wtf is this YES

Co-signing that this new version sounds awesome. Glad to get the fixes.

I really wish the playing was a little tighter cause I feel like everything else is clicking. Great writing, and pretty much nailed the 90's ska vocal. Good stuff guys.

Emu had a lot of good advice. I too liked the writing ideas even though it was a little abstract. The mixing was problematic in that everything was so disparate, it never gelled. The bass is in-your-face and playing these quick notes, the drums are high-filtered, and the piano and some of the synths were on the piercing side. You may have been shooting for using these sounds in a unique way and you definitely had a clear soundscape, but I think there needed to be more in the low-mid range. Felt like there wasn't any meat to this song. Even stylistically it's a little weird, because the bass suggests something energetic, but the other instruments suggest ambient. Sorry, gonna push for another version, Rozo. NO (resubmit)

I have had problem with songs in the past that switch between original sections and very conservative ones, because it feels like there's not much arrangement going on. But the problem there isn't with the original sections, it's more with how the source is used. This song was NOT like that, because the sections that used the source were not very conservative and the original sections blended into that well. However. I didn't think there was enough substance here to justify a song of this length. By the five-minute mark I was tired of the same patterns getting used and I wanted a more substantial change. Even the intro/outro felt a little bland compared to a lot of popular trance. Sometimes songs like this can get away with a repetitive nature if the production is flawless, but there were issues on the production side with the soundscape getting thin at times, and the drums and synths sounding kind of simple. The bass especially sounded cheesy and out-of-place. Sorry, not feeling this one for the front page. NO (resubmit)

Mixing is muddy in the intro and continues throughout the song, and the song is overly compressed too. The drums were filtered such that they sounded like they weren't connected. I didn't get a sense of cohesion overall. Arrangement was liberal but I could make out the sources much of the time. The production is the larger issue. NO (resubmit)

The samples weren't the best quality and I felt there was a mixing imbalance. Drums were plodding, and the main synth was a little annoying because of the lack of movement that OA mentioned. I also agree that there wasn't enough flow to this piece - the direction and some of the piano and synth writing felt random. Sorry, I think this needs more work. NO

Right off the bat drums are sitting right up front and they sound unnatural. Throw some reverb on them. I like the ideas you've got, but you need to learn when to cut back. There's too many in-your-face effects like harsh synths, gating, stutters, and reversals - there's not enough flow to it. The drums were kind of low-quality samples but you did a pretty good job with what you had. I know you're going for a NIN-style distorted sound, but this is too much. That kind of thing works better when one element is distorted but the rest isn't - otherwise it sounds like you don't know how to mix. Good ideas, but needs refinement. NO (resubmit)

Feels a little unpolished in the mixing, but I thought it was pretty enjoyable despite that. Nothing felt like a major problem, even the cut-and-paste vocals (which I might not have noticed if I hadn't read it first - hard to say). I'm good with it. YES

I didn't listen to the sources so I can't comment on your use of them. The song sounded alright, but the other guys hit the big production problems. The articulations aren't realistic enough and sample quality is also weak on some instruments. I also thought the overall song was plodding, a lot of repeated patterns that didn't hold my interest. NO (resubmit)

I didn't like the formant lead at first, especially on those slides, but started to like it more as it added notes in higher octaves. I didn't agree with Larry that the added stabs and lead notes broke up the flow. Sounded totally natural to me and was a fine way to develop the mix. Not to mention, even though the patterns you use there have been used prior, that combination has not been used before - the first verse is a lot sparser. In all, I thought this was good stuff, pretty easy to pass. YES

Sorry, I'm required to make that joke each time this source gets remixed. I like a lot of what's going on here, but there's some sizable problems. Let's start with the bass. It's a little too prominent for what is an atmospheric song and something with less presence would probably sit better. Some of the repeated bass notes also sound very fake. The piano and pads probably should have held more of the space instead. The flute has a strange sound, but I think you used it pretty effectively when doubling it with the piano. That was a good way to mask the shortcomings with it. The drums were actually the most prominent element, which was odd. Probably would have worked better with the flute or piano taking lead.That's in addition to the fine comments that have already been pointed out. Keep at this one because your general concept is good. I think with some work this can be really solid. NO (resubmit)

Can't say I like this source too much, but your approach tried to do a lot more with it. That's a good start. You did some great bass work and the automation gets pretty wild. Nobody's mentioned this but I have to say I found the highest synth way too grating to use for so much of the song. It was in play almost the entire time. I feel a little weird rejecting it solely on that basis, and I might reconsider based on what other people say, but I had a hard time even getting through one listen. NO (resubmit)

I think you guys are mis-using conditional a little here. If you're just asking him to turn down the compression or master volume, sure, but fixes like rebalancing or reverb aren't always that trivial or quick. In this case, "mixing" can encompass a ton of stuff and I think conditional should be used only for easy specifiable fixes; if it doesn't fall under that, it's a YES with a suggestion or NO with a "must fix". We can always still contact the remixer about fixing things we'd like them to fix. Like Justin, the first listen sounded a bit sloppy to me and I was headed for a NO, but on the second listen I turned down the volume and was pretty happy with how it sounded. There's some loss of audio quality because of the compression, but I can live with it. I'll contact him and we can see what he will fix. Edit (3/1): He's sending a new version. YES

Pretty easy YES. I love these arrangements where the source is in play almost all the time, but the way it is used is miles away from the original. It's exactly the kind of arrangement I like to see. Love the deep groove, and the detail in the automation. This is swanky. YES

Right, and my concern was not that the source is obscured - it's more than that there's not enough presence to hold my interest. If the leads were brought up, it gives the mix more of a focus. I don't want Jamison to totally alter his vision but would have preferred him to split the difference and bump the leads up just a tad. Nonetheless, after relistening I agree that it's not enough of a deal to reject this. The arrangement is very cool and that goes a long way. On a personal note, Bubble Man was one of the first video game songs I remember loving, and the way that Bubble Man sporadically punctures through the dreamlike soundscape here really conjures those childhood memories for me, moreso than most Bubble Man arrangements I've heard. YES

Yeah I was feeling this. I agree with what OA is saying and maybe the leads could have sounded more prominent, but I liked what was here and it captured my attention sufficiently. Wouldn't mind someone double-checking me on whether that bass is too loud at 2:00. It seemed pretty crazy but then comparing to stuff like BT that's mastered loud, it was around the same scale. YES

Nothing but good things to say about the arrangement. Great focus on the bass, well-chosen set of instruments. Even the sparser sections show a lot of care. Overall levels are a little low but the more important issue to me was that the balance wasn't that good and it didn't groove as well as it should have. The drums felt a little low in the mix, and Jesse's comment about adding low-end to the kick was a good one. I might also throw some on the snare. I don't think that's the kind of thing a conditional should be used for, since even among the panel we're not agreeing on exactly what needs to be fixed. There's a problem with the frequency balance though, and it should be resolved. NO (resubmit)

I think that's a great way to learn (not at all unorthodox) and were I close to where you live, I'd be happy to show you a few things. The forums will hopefully help you too, if you can't find someone local.

This is one of those arrangements where reading the write-up really colored my perception of the song. The idea that you and your brothers will always be together, emblematized in a song like this is really powerful and moving. It makes the interplay and emotion that much more touching. Great arrangement.

I'll co-sign the last two votes and contact him to see if we can get a fixed version of this sub, because that's gonna be what swings my vote too.

I've never heard anything apart from your piano work on that Pokemon sub, so I wasn't sure what to expect. This was very chill and tasteful, but with a surprising electro-house bass. I love seeing weird combinations like that, when they work. If there's anything that could be improved, it's the sequencing of the lead. It was a little rigid most of the time, both in terms of timing and the way the sample played the same each time (which may come down to the instrument or the velocities). But when the mixing is solid, the instruments are high-quality, and the arrangement is good, one aspect that's not totally working isn't going to sink it. YES

Oh wow, this is crazy. Love the ideas going on here, the ramshackle feel, the random samples cutting in for a microsecond. Gotta agree with OA that this played too loose (all over, not just the drums), and I also think the mixing could have been improved without destroying the ramshackle-ness. It sounds a little too compressed as if that is making up for uneven levels. I'm tempted to pass it anyway because your ideas are getting across and this is still enjoyable, but it's sloppy, there's no getting around it. Man, I really hope you give this another go, because I would LOVE to have a more polished version of this. NO (resubmit)

It's-a Greg, Gario! Very cool stuff, this was a surprising combination of sources that really came together. I think I would have enjoyed more development in the fullness of the song, some really heavy drums or something, but keeping it chill worked fine. This tended towards the grating side with all those sharp synth sounds, and you could have softened this a little. That's really the only advice I can give you, this was otherwise very solid work. YES

Piano sounds great, actually. Full-bodied sound, good reverb settings. I really enjoyed the arrangement, especially when it started building up towards the end. You good a nice job with the dynamics, though I kept wishing that the strings didn't have that slow attack. They needed to just sustain and keep getting louder. It wasn't that big a deal. But as far as source usage goes, either you guys are hearing something I'm not or this is too liberal. Timestamping the parts that mostly follow the melody, I heard 0:57-1:27, 2:30-2:57, 3:05-3:35, 3:40-4:07. That's about 42% of the song, which is below what I usually pass. The rest of the time I heard no connection except for some chords here and there, nothing solid enough to count. Pieter used his own modified chord progressions in this track, it never matched 1:1. We've probably passed something with this level of source usage before, but I'm hard-pressed to call this dominant. NO