Palpable

Not much to add here. The arrangement is very solid, the instruments playing off each other well. The bluesy additions to the Dark World theme were unexpected, but in a good way. It felt all of one piece. The big problem I hear is that the guitar is upfront and has all the high frequencies, while the piano is pushed back and is missing the high frequencies. They do sound like they're in different rooms. Luckily, that is pretty easily fixed with some reverb on the guitar to make it sound more like the piano. Add some damping on the higher frequencies and push it back some so that it doesn't sound in your face. There's some clipping on the piano and a slight buzzing on the guitar that could be fixed too, but I don't think those were as big an issue. I'll go conditional too, because the fix shouldn't take long. Congrats, guys. This was a really nice piece. YES (conditional on reverb)

Take Five is pretty well known. Maybe not as well known, but it does have "five" in the title. It was the first 5/4 song I thought of, in any case. But why nitpick when he's got something so blatantly wrong to make fun of?

Hey, c'mon now, his song is clearly in 5/4. It just sucks.

Bias. Nah, I think in all these cases we're waiting for fixes from the remixer. When we vote something YES (conditional), it goes into the TBP list.

Fuck, that beat is massive. I don't often cuss, but fuck. This is a crazy good song, fantastic production. I can see why AnSo would hold this to a conditional drop in volume, but I actually felt ok with it. At my comfortable listening volume, it felt on the high end of that. It sounds pretty loud, but I think it's dipped in the right areas so that it doesn't give the listener (me) a headache. Maybe it helps that's there a lot of space in sections of this song. Anyway, we have passed songs of this loudness before, Clamato Fever being a recent one. Fishy's breakdown pretty much checks out, but I wouldn't say 0:45-1:08 of Jack's song is a straight usage of 1:10-1:18. He's got the guitar close to matching the vocals for one measure, does his own thing for the second measure, another measure matching the vocals, then half a measure of his own thing, then SEPHIROTH. So out of 24 seconds of song, that's about 15 seconds from the source each time, which in total gives me 148/271 seconds = 55%. Good enough for me. I think even if it was under 50%, the parts of the guitar I'm not counting are certainly Angel-esque, playing with the same notes that other parts of the song do. I like that aspect of this song even if we don't count it as straight source. YES

BGC tried to organize assigning the duty in a rotation, but when you have judges that aren't even aware we're TRYING to organize something like this, it doesn't work. Besides which, we're already plenty behind on the queue and I'd personally rather judges spend their efforts there. I'll try to update the thread tonight or tomorrow.

This isn't true for all rental agreements any more. I'm pretty sure that now Blockbuster actually pays part of the rental fee to the copyright holder in exchange for a much much lower initial cost to purchase the movie. This makes sense because I think they were probably losing money purchasing lots of movies up front to meet high demand, then get stuck with a bunch of overpriced discs as demand goes down. But whatever. I don't see the market for physical media lasting that much longer, which means that a used market probably won't exist either.

Oh, nice. Might do something after all.

Damn, wish I had heard about this sooner. I'm a huge fan of hers and this sounds fun. No way I'd be able to finish something in three days, but maybe I'll grab the vocals anyway.

While I often find myself agreeing with Larry on these sorts of breakdown calls, and did so on Hot Pink of Blues, this one just dripped with source to me. Basically I wouldn't "stop the stopwatch" in the small gaps that Larry does, because it uses the bassline and four-note synth part off and on the whole time, sometimes using the lead melody too, while sticking to the source progression except in the short original sections. Basically I don't want to hold it against a ReMix if the parts from the original don't take up the whole measure/measures. If you use original parts while also using the progression, that's enough of a tie for me to count the gaps. No hating on Larry, I can see why he reached his conclusion given his method of counting, but I found it a relatively easy call. Tony, your mixing/mastering is just fine. This is a scorching track; I love how you bring out the funkiness from the original. Also cool how you touched on pretty much every instrument in the source, one way or another. YES

Beautiful arrangement. Though it follows the source fairly closely, the source is simple and this adds a lot to it. Gorgeous harmony and countermelody vocal parts, and the supporting instruments stayed out of their way, which I liked. You have to up the volume. Some light compression would help with that, while also bringing out the supporting elements a little (still keeping them out of the way). Filesize, encoding, and mix title have been mentioned. I'd also highly recommend but won't hold you to keeping the lead vocal center. That's very disorienting to the listener panning it left. Unless it's a duet, and even then I wouldn't pan as far as you have. Keep it center, move the supporting vocals to the sides. Great work here, Kate. Hope to see more! YES (conditional)

I liked this arrangement. The guitaring was really cool and I liked the variation between sections. Personalized take on the original, not something I expected. I wouldn't have minded an original section thrown in there for more material, though it wasn't a dealbreaker. It feels short at a little over two minutes is all. Drums were weak, dude. Those definitely have to be improved. You can barely hear them, no body at all. The piano also sounded dry and maybe the articulations or sample could be improved. Strings didn't bother me, as they stuck to long notes and were background elements. If you can fix the drums and piano, I would pass this, it's as simple as that. Please do it! NO (resubmit)

ReMixes of ReMixes are tough because you've got to arrange the source as well as the arrangement, while not sticking too closely to either or drifting too far from the source! *whew* I agree with Larry that you didn't pull that off here, and there were too many elements taken from Rayza's mix and not enough of your own. The style adaptation and effects were cool, but there wasn't any new melodic content to speak of, which makes this more a remix in the traditional sense than an arrangement. I also thought the mix could have been less distant. If you can add some more of your own elements to this, maybe a solo or new countermelodies, chords, something, this could be a ReMix in its own right, as well as a nice tribute to Rayza's song (which it already is). NO (resubmit)

I don't feel like we get much weird time-signature prog stuff here, so this was nice to hear. The intro rhythms are attention-catching but straighten themselves out once other instruments come in, which is a cool effect. I like your guitar tones a lot. There were very large swathes of this with no source, if I got it right. By my count, these parts pull from the original melody: 0:22-0:43 1:06-1:25 3:08-3:16 There's another part at 3:19 that starts similarly to 3:08 but strays after the first couple notes. That's definitely not enough source for this - sorry, man. Like always, if you or another judge has another I missed, I'm all ears. NO Edit (3/11): I relistened to the parts Anso pointed out. 2:23-2:45 is pretty close to the source, with a couple notes moved around. I'd count that one. I wouldn't count the other two sections he pointed out, because they feel too liberal. So it's still a NO for me.

Much better than I was expecting, I enjoyed it a lot. The fact that it struck so closely to the graphic novel paid off nicely IMO, and they did a fine job editing out parts that weren't necessary. I thought the ending was improved too; it's tied to the story better, feels less out of the blue. Gripes: wish they had spent more time on Veidt and his background - you didn't get the sense at all that he was the world's smartest man. Definitely wish there had been less slo-mo - I feel nearly every time a director uses slo-mo outside of action scenes, they're hitting you over the head to pay attention. And yeah, that actress who played Laurie was a really weak link. Good acting otherwise.

Arrangement is conservative in how it handles the melody, but there's a fair number of detours, soloing, and other things that deviate. It's not an arrangement that really wows me, but it's solid. For the most part, I was feeling the production too. The meat of the song: the guitar, drums, and bass sound good. But man are there some weak points to this mix, and Larry called two of them. The detuned piano definitely didn't work for me, and the articulation of those strings also stuck out. I'd also add 2:47-2:57; the horn blast and cowbell felt very out-of-place. Often I'm a fan of unusual moments in songs like that, but this one rubbed me the wrong way and broke the mood. Maybe if it had been developed longer than 10 seconds, it could have been worked into the arrangement more. Of these three moments, only the strings qualify as a production issue rather than a stylistic choice, and on that basis, I'll hesitantly say YES. Each of these moments passes quickly, and the majority of this song is solid work. Good luck to you - songs have been NOed before for having a few weak moments. YES (borderline)

Better production, thought the vocals gelled with the backing track now. Didn't mention this last time but I love the harmonies between you and your wife. The added/emphasized bells this time around were a nice touch to bring in more source, though about half the time it strayed far enough that it was just an allusion. Production-wise, I think this is now good enough but... Still not down with the arrangement side of this, no matter how hard I try. Like Larry, I can't hear any connection between the bells and the vocals. The strings he pointed out did sound a little similar to the chorus but used different notes and timing, so that seemed more coincidental and not a very strong tie, intended or not. The bells you added give some needed connection, but even in my previous breakdown, we were looking at only about 1:30 or so of solid connection to the original. This needs a lot more than that. Sorry, but it's another NO. Love the song, but try as I might, I can't find the connections to pass it. NO Edit (3/26): OK, my final final breakdown on this song, taking Justin's into account. I'm just listing what is used from the original, bold is the connections I can hear: 0:00-0:04, 0:08-0:12 - Bells 0:15-0:46 - Bells, violin 0:47-1:14 - Altered violin part, too far to count IMO 1:18-1:21, 1:25-1:28, 1:31-1:39 - Bells 1:43-1:56 - Violin 2:00-2:03, 2:07-2:10, 2:14-2:17 - Bells 2:24-2:51 - Bells so soft the notes are barely audible, can't hear the melody 2:58-3:01, 3:04-3:23 - Bells 3:24-3:33 - Bridge bells felt too altered 3:35-3:36, 3:37-3:38, 3:40-3:41, 3:42-3:43, 3:45-3:46, 3:48-3:49, 3:50-3:51, 3:52-3:53 - Bells 3:46-4:02 - Bridge violin felt too altered 4:20-4:33 - If violin part was played, I couldn't hear it 5:11-5:43 - Bells 127/343 seconds = 37.0% Even counting the non-bolded parts, it'd be hard to give you this one and I can see why Larry stopped timestamping. So much of this relies on the bell pattern for the connection, which plays a background role for much of the song. The fact that you added or emphasized some bells from the last version is telling; you could remove the bells and the song would sound finished. The violin connection is good, the piano playing the bells is a strong foreground element, but that's pretty much where it ends for me.

I was trying to allude to what BGC spelled out.

Andy, you're saying we should buy Jill copies of her own albums? That's not a very good gift, she already has them. Sorry for that. Happy birthday, you two.

If it hasn't shown up in Judge Decisions, it hasn't been rejected, so don't call it off yet! You could be surprised... BTW, absolutely love the Unreal Tournament track in question. It's probably going to be an inspiration for my next mix.

This is definitely Simon's best yet. The production is really crisp and clean, and the arrangement is awesome. Guitar lead... so good. I felt the J-rock comparison too.

Hehe, I thought I put one of these on my post: I meant to anyway.

Just judged a Mega Man X medley earlier tonight, and now this. Ya'll are killing me with these medleys. Takes like four times as long to judge as a normal sub. Larry pointed out that some of the transitions are awkward (0:28 is ), but more importantly to me, a lot of this sticks close to the original material adapted to guitar, organ, and other instruments. There are a few inspired moments like 5:21-5:33 which go for a different mood, but otherwise not a lot of surprises. I don't think this song is quite right for OCR, though you're clearly a gifted player and producer. If you're got something lying around that's a little more interpretive, I hope you send it our way! NO

Sorry Joe, but I can pretty much copy and paste my older vote. The mixing is still really unclear, with a lot of parts fighting for space. I know EQing and fitting everything in can be very frustrating (I struggled with it for years, and still do on occasion), but this absolutely needs more work there. There's a lot of instruments that can be cut in places to get a cleaner, less cluttered sound. For example, try cutting those opening synths in the lower frequencies and reducing their volumes a little if it's still muddy. I'd recommend you experiment more with EQ to get a feel for what you can cut. Pay close attention to the sounds of instruments in professional recordings that have a similar style to your song. You might find that they aren't as bassy or full as you think they are. All the best, man, you've got playing and arranging talent. I'd also recommend hitting up Dwelling of Duels if you haven't already, because your music is up their alley. NO

Not interpretative or varied enough, though enjoyable in its own right. The melody wasn't handled very creatively, and the backing tracks stay on autopilot within a section. The gear changes were fun, but within a given section, there's no surprises. Drums get really tiring. The production needs some work. The lead synth and some of the percussion (especially that handclap) don't give this enough energy. The compression is also high and gives the track no breathing room. You've got some good production ideas like the 1:43 section and that sliding background synth around 3:35 that I'd love to see fit into a more interpretative, polished track. NO