Palpable

Altavista's Image Search apparently gives you resolution choices higher than "huge". But still no minimum resolution filter, just everything AT that resolution. Also I've never used it so I have no clue how it compares to Google at finding images you want...

Pretty cool ideas here. Not that different from the style of the original, but with a much much better beat and some riffing on the elements of the original. The little switch-ups in the beat kept it really listenable for the entire song (though I would have loved some stuttering ). My biggest problem was that although the mood and instruments were similar, it wasn't very connected to the original from a song standpoint. The chord structure is the same, but pretty much all the melodic elements in this are new. I think you'd need some more usage of the source elements besides just the simple chords for this to qualify as an OCR arrangement. Some of the leads are thin, which is what I think led Larry to say this was sparse. The lead at 0:22 can't carry that heavy beat, though the lead that follows it is not bad. Sometimes the sequencing also sounds blocky, like the opening chords or the synth at 2:30. It could use some volume adjustments or motion effects like a filter sweep to make the notes sound different. I did like this in the abstract, and I think with some production work it could be a really tight song, but I don't think it's right for the site because of how loose it is as an arrangement. Hope this doesn't discourage you from submitting more, Alex. NO

Happy birthday! Sorry you have to celebrate with tendinitis. But my leg is almost fully recovered after two and a half weeks of being careful with it, so I wish you the same speedy recovery.

The more time I've spent listening to this piece, the more I've loved it, and my judge decision comments were made after only a few listens and don't really capture my enthusiasm for it. The opening is beautiful, weaving an original motif into the familiar melody so well, you'd swear it was in the game. This could have easily been the whole song, but instead Johan surprisingly pulls out a synth that he imbues with the same care of expression. Very interesting. What makes this a truly classic ReMix for me is when it opens up into that graceful, pulsing beat. Hypnotic. The double-speed section starts promisingly but doesn't sound as polished as the rest. But by that point, I feel he's earned the leeway to try anything.

Like your previous SMB3 mix, this has a simple charm that I like, sort of Smoke on the Water-y. But I thought it was too rough and underdeveloped. Those drums just don't cut it. Too much repetition, and such basic sounds. It needs something to it so that doesn't sound like the same thing each time. The guitars by contrast don't bother me as much, because you've got some human elements there making each repetition a little different. Not a lot of source interpretation either, so including more of the source, or using it in more ways would help. Production was also a killer here. The guitars eat up all the space, probably because of the heavy distortion, covering up the other instruments. More EQ, man! Some minor bits: the opening synth was slightly irritating (tone down those 1.5k and up frequencies), and the crazy panning on the synth at 1:27 was a bit much to take. I'm not sure I see this one making it, because the very simple concept isn't working in your favor this time. It would take some retooling and expansion to have this pass, which might transform it out of what you wanted it to be. I still look forward to hearing more from you, whatever it might be. NO

Wasn't really feeling this one, Joe. There was a lot of repetition in the programmed parts like the drums and also in the structure of the song. The chorus has got the same phrase twice, then the same phrase doubled twice. And you use this chorus three times! Give us some difference in the backing parts at least, if you do something like this. The B-section did pretty much the same thing, repeating the one melody a few times, then doubling it. The transitions between these sections were awkward too. Production is very scrunched together, with the parts blending into each other. EQ should have been used to separate parts more, which might have also allowed you to pull up the song's volume a little without it seeming like overkill. Your guitar performances are pretty cool, but there's a lot of issues here. Spend some time in the WIP to get over some of the basic hurdles, and send us something else when you feel you've improved. NO

I like the concept here, Alex, but I think I usually like your concepts. The execution always seems to be a problem for you, and I'm going to offer the same criticism as previous subs: your original writing is too random. I think you've improved in this regard since the last sub I heard, but you still have further to go. The brass solo at 2:35-3:00 in particular just sounds like a bunch of random notes you put down. You start phrases off on weird beats and make large jumps in notes way too often. These things have to be done sparingly because they really draw the listener's attention. Use it too much, and you lose the listener. For an example of what worked: the brass at 1:52-2:19ish. You've got a short phrase starting on the 1 beat each time, not doing anything weird, but getting slightly modified each time. Usually good writing comes down to keeping it simple. I thought you were making headway with production, but this is a few steps back for you. The brass samples are pretty bad, and there's a general murkiness to this mix that's off-putting. Before the brass comes in, it's missing any kind of high-frequency instrument, which makes it dull. This would take a lot of work to pass, but unlike some of your other subs, I don't think this needs a structural overhaul, so it could help you to stick with it. It would come down to fixing the partwriting and samples that need to be fixed. NO

Sounds like you had fun putting this together, but it also sounds very quickly done. Everything in this is a loop, and the song is basically just you moving those loops in and out. It's way too static. Transitions are practically nonexistent, even when you switch instruments completely. To your credit, the textures are unique and interesting and I think you did a decent job with the arrangement of such a minimal song. If you can do some major rewriting, fleshing out the parts to more than simple loops, this could have a place at OCR. NO

I had this game too but I found it infuriatingly hard. I don't think I even got past level 1. Nevertheless, the music holds up. Your arrangement is easy to listen to. I like the new chords, the new melodies you've added (especially the piano stuff), the general mood. The use of the same melody in the same way so many times was a little disappointing, and I wouldn't have minded seeing it applied to some different instruments, or bringing in the b-section melody. Production had its problems. The leads are thin even in the "3rd gear" sections. Beef up those leads with some fatter leads, and you might want to bring up the backing parts as well. A few of the instruments felt too muffled, like the piano and the cymbals, possibly from your reverb settings. Allow more of the dry signal through, or if it comes down to the sample, try finding a higher quality sample. This is the best I've heard from you yet, Sreyas, and if you keep improving like this, we'll definitely be seeing you on the front page soon. Fix this one up and it could be the one that gets you there. NO (resubmit)

Very cool arrangement, lots of ideas. The switch around 1:25 was definitely unexpected, introducing a very unique electronic texture. It was great when the strings and woodwinds starting coming back towards the end, meshing with that texture. There's not a whole lot that doesn't work, frankly. The ending was a little abrupt but alright, and another minor complaint I had was that the rain sounds in the intro were a little distracting and might have worked better with the highs toned down. The production could be more polished. In addition to the very even timing of some of the more organic instruments that Larry mentioned, the 1:25 section was too loud in comparison to the intro and also a little skewed to the high-end, making it grating. I feel like fixing these two issues, the timing and the levels, would definitely seal the deal on this. I love what you have so far, let's see you close it! NO (resubmit)

An improvement over the last version. Better separation of stuff, and just a more polished, full sound. I think you still have room to go though. The piece is actually too dynamic, not a problem I see very often. The difference in volume between notes of a single instruments (the drums especially) is unnatural. The intro builds sort of strangely too, with the guitar coming up in volume before the drums - it's jarring when the drums finally come up. If you can smooth that out a little, and make the piano and pizzicato strings a little less mechanical, that would solve nearly all the production issues. The arrangement is pretty much the same as last version, and I still would like to see some more action in the bass ranges, and some drums that aren't as bland. The samples there are muffled and rob energy from the song. I'm pretty much just echoing what Larry said; I'd like to see you give it another try. NO (resubmit)

Sounding good, guys! Time to get my own damn track going.

While I appreciate that you spent some real time on this before resubbing it, I still feel like my problems from the last version remain. Drumloop still ain't helping things. Like Larry said, if you're gonna use it, use it in the quieter sections where it won't fight with the awesome drums and guitar you've got going on in the 2:35 section. I feel like the production still isn't quite there. The 2:35 section isn't loud enough in comparison to the intro and it sounds like it's missing highs, almost as if you're running something through a lowpass filter? It's pretty low-quality in comparison to the well-produced intro. The lead guitar in that section is actually harder to hear than the one in the intro so something is definitely off. I don't think I can call this a conditional YES, but I feel like it's only a couple steps away from passing. If you can get that section sounding right (regardless of whether that drumloop hangs around), I would call this a YES. Maybe try getting some help on that production from the WIP forum to seal the deal. NO (resubmit)

I like this one. You hit the nail on the head adapting this piece to the style of the spy songs you mentioned, and the new background writing and complementary writing gives this a great balance of new and old. I don't think there's anything wrong with the samples used here (in fact, I think the sample quality is higher than the typical sub we pass), although sometimes the articulation is a little unrealistic and repetitive, like Larry mentioned. Spending a little more time on that would have knocked this out of the park, and probably given it more repeat play value. As it is, I think it's worth passing anyway. It gets by on having a great mood, very good production, good variety of sections, and solid writing. YES

Very different feel thanks to the changes in the dynamics here. This is very subdued and lonely, where the original felt more bombastic. There are some subtle changes that catch your attention because of the starkness of the piece. I really like this take; the playing is expressive and beautiful. The fact that the structure was nearly identical to the original wasn't an issue. There was more than enough personalization here. YES

Haven't heard this tune in probably 15 years. I remember playing it on my cousin's Game Gear, that lovely device that ate batteries like they were M&Ms. Memories. I also felt this arrangement was on the bland side, but a closer listen through the second time revealed the details. The variations on the melody and chords felt a little contrived, though your entirely original sections were good and the overall sound was very smooth. Ultimately, I'd call it pleasant. It could still stand to be more dynamic, and have the volume levels of the instruments pushed up more. It feels very distant, especially the drums. I gave you a little more credit than Larry, which still only put you around 42% percent. Combined with the good-not-great arrangement, it's gonna be a NO. Maybe you could work the bassline or the supporting melodies of the original into this to connect more of it. Sorry, man. NO (resubmit)

Arrangement is really nice, lots of variety for four minutes. I thought the 1:15-1:30 section of the synth solo was a little unmelodic, but otherwise, it was very consistent. Great soloing, especially the badass section where the guitar and organ play off each other. Though by a strict breakdown it's probably around 40-45% pulled from the original, I still felt this one was connected enough. Even when the source wasn't being used explicitly, the rhythms of the melodies sometimes suggested the original, i.e., it felt more connected than the breakdown suggested. In addition, the modified chord progression of the original is used for most of this and helps tie it together. Production was good, though I thought the organ was distorted to the point where it didn't quite sound like an organ to me. Very minor. Keeping rockin' out guys. YES

Let's not forget his classic turn as Vincent Ludwig in the Naked Gun. RIP.

Arrangement had a lot of variety, it felt rich. I like the different ways you reference the main melody. It never felt like it was repeating itself, but it still maintained a good flow. There were a lot of small realism and production issues with this that added up. Totally agree with Malcos' comments, that there should be more unison like you use towards the end. Sometimes the instruments just sound too thin when you go for quiet. Do some more doubling but keep the volume low to get the effect you want. It was a little weird hearing a standard rock kit in a orchestral song, but maybe if it was pushed back but had more power it could work. There's a few more small issues here and there too: a percussive sound starting at 1:45 that's too dry, a weak brass sample at 2:03, some too evenly articulated strings at 2:34. The WIP forum might be able to give you some objectivity on what's not working. If you can fix the production problems with this, I'd see no reason not to pass it. Get to it! NO (resubmit)

These two have said it all. Unlike another jazz arrangement we passed about a year ago that had a lot of improv, this one loses even the chords of the original during the improv sections, so you've got no connection to the original for about 75% of this. I love the performances and the ambient crowd noise, and I think your sections that play with the rhythm of the original melodies are magnificent. I wish more of it had been that way so I could pass this durn thing. Still hope to see more subs from you guys in the future. NO

Arrangement was on the coverish side, but there was also some clear interpretation. Starts off almost a near cover but adds some cool harmonies, new rhythms, soloing, and structure changes as it goes along. What pushes it over the border to too conservative is that the original is in a similar style with a synth lead rather than a guitar. If you're gonna keep the sound similar, you need to make more changes to those conservative opening parts of the song. I did like your performances. Vig's comment about it being thin also rings true for me. The leads are a lot more prominent than anything else, and the background sounds too sludgy. The backing guitars need more space and clarity to them. It may mean emphasizing them more in the mids to highs - really, all I hear is the low-end. Play with the arrangement and clean up the production and please send it back to us! I like what you've got here. NO (resubmit)

Sorry, but not suitable for OCR. The songs flowed together alright, but were far too close to the originals. As Larry said, in parts it felt like a sound upgrade. There was a flatness and quietness here that made this a lot less compelling to listen to than it could have been. I just feel like the samples weren't used that dynamically or realistically. They felt distant as well, especially the drums, which didn't help. I think you have some ways to go in terms of improving your music game. Try to balance the instrument levels better and get those samples a little less flat, and I think it would help your music out. But even with better production, this particular arrangement won't work for OCR. NO

I've liked what I've heard of this soundtrack. Gotta get around to playing the damn game. Holy crap dude, you trying to make me deaf? This was way too compressed, loud, and distorted. Once I got past that, there were a few arrangement ideas I liked. The schaffel-like beat towards the end was a cool twist, and the breakdowns and filtered segues were interesting. A large chunk of it is too generic though, just the original melodies with an octave bass and a repeating drum pattern. I think it needs some more countermelodies and variations in melody in those sections, something to play off the original song more. This needs some work, I'm afraid. NO

I'll side with Mr. Head Submissions Evaluator. A little too much of a cover. I do like the raucous style you've got going, but I wished you did more with it. 2:29 was a cool little modification, but otherwise, most of this was pulling straight from the melodies of the original without modification (except instrument). There are some backing parts in the latter half that are new but really just fill in the texture and don't stand out. With a little bit of rework, adding some new or more heavily modified melodies on top of the soundscape you've got going, or maybe some altered chord progressions, I could see this as a pass. Please resubmit! NO (resubmit)

Finally got around to listening to this. A lot different from your stuff I've heard, which to be honest was initially disappointing (only cause I love your stuff I've heard). But it definitely has a late-night vibe I was digging after the initial surprise. I like the Pink Floyd influences. It's a good soundtrack for listening to while working on OCR stuff.