Gario

I trimmed the thread - you may post the other remixes in new threads. Glad I could help.

Hey there! Neat arrangements of video games? I think you're in the right place, no worries. If you'd like to know more about these forums I suggest reading the general rules, as well as the more specific rules for this particular section. Just a quick pointer on here, there is a rule for one track per thread, one thread per track. Thus, I'll probably trim this thread and let you post your other track if you'd like. This helps listeners know what they're in for when they click your link. Also, you'll need to give your thread a title that lets listeners know what they're in for. "Castlevania Wicked Child Metal remix", for example, would work well enough for the Castlevania track. Nice Castlevania remix, by the way. No worries, though, you're definitely in the right place; I welcome you to the forums, and I hope you come by often to share and listen.

Electroplex... I can't put my finger on it, but I love that title. Maybe it's because it's something that I would call a remix, but it just catched my ear in the right way. Lots of cool arrangement ideas, even while it sticks fairly close to the source. The ending is non-existent, but otherwise the arrangement works, for me. The sound design on this one is a bit questionable, though. The use of simple synths doesn't really accomplish much in this arrangement. I can understand the use of the square wave (as there are some pretty cool glitch effects in the middle and end), the other instruments sound like basic saw, synth sitar, etc.. Those are some very vanilla sound choices; you would do well to explore more synths, work on the sound design of the synths you have, etc., and choose instruments that make sense together. Most of these sound choices sound incidental, not intentional. The bass in this one is excessive. Look at the spectrum of that on a basic spectrograph (the most basic ones come with Windows Media Player): the bass just dominates over everything else. Looking at the waveform, that bass just takes up all the space you could've used to fill up your middle and upper ends, so instead we have a bass heavy, but otherwise hollow sounding arrangement. When the bass drum hits the whole track suffers from overcompression, due to this. Tone down that bass. The drum set sounds fake while using more 'realistic' samples. They come off as too dry against the other instruments. I like the drum patterns, though - you change things up and keep it interesting. Give some more realism with a bit of reverb, and humanize the performance a little bit by varying the dynamics in your performance. It's a good start, but it has some way to go. Give it a proper ending, make the sound design more interesting, make the drums a little more realistic, and tone down that bass. If you'd like some more suggestions, the WIP Workshop forum would be a great place to go. Best of luck! NO

First and foremost, damn I love this arrangement as a stand-alone track. The atmosphere and soundscape you create is just gorgeous, and it's very distinctive all in its own right. I haven't heard the source before, but it sounds like the game has a pretty strong soundtrack (one of the sources - "This is What You Are" - had moments that reminded me of Legend of Korra, which is a high complement). Your instrument choices are just great throughout the track, and you really let them shine through. While it does pump out some four-to-the-floor beats eventually, it also sits just right and lets the instruments fill the space, as well. It sounds a lot like the Stranger Things soundtrack, with the still pads and building 80's synth arp at 0:30. There's some really great stuff in this. All of that being said, it's not a perfect arrangement by any means. That side chaining is incredibly excessive from 1:59 - 3:29 & 5:03 - 6:36. Some of that pumping is effective in differentiating the sections, but pulsing everything (the theme, the background elements, everything) is very distracting. It's a shame, because it ends up making those sections all sound the same when in fact you make all sorts of small changes in the background. It really takes its time with the slower sections. This may be a matter of personal taste, but I really appreciate that. In the beginning it feels like it builds to a climax twice, which makes the second build from 1:15 - 1:59 really feel like it's leading to something huge. The payoff doesn't satisfy this intense build up, unfortunately, but I did enjoy how you approached it. The source is pretty tough to pick out of this from time to time, and it's a very close call as far as source usage is concerned, but this is how I break it down: 0:15 - 1:15 2:29 - 3:29 (lots of open space, might count as 50% source) 3:33 - 4:03 (Sketchy, as the source is very subtractive) 4:03 - 5:03 5:36 - 6:36 (lots of open space, might count as 50% source) 180s - 270s / 438s ~(41 - 62)% source usage I lean toward the higher percentage here (probably marking it at about 50-55%), but I lay out this breakdown for other judges to see where I'm coming from on this one. Sections like 2:29 & 5:36 have considerable space that separates the source, and 3:32 - 4:03 uses fragments of the source, to keep things interesting. In both cases I could see a judge with a stricter stopwatch knocking those items down and saying this doesn't have enough source, but I personally think this represents the source well enough. There's a lot to love about this, and there's a lot that could've been better on this. It's a close call, and I could see this being sent back due the rather aggressive side-chaining and the borderline source usage, but I think it just barely squeaks by on those accounts. If this does get sent back, lighten up on the use of your side chaining (unlink the compressor from the theme and some of the non-pad background elements), and have a few more elements tie into the source, perhaps in the background of other sections. For me, though, I think it would do well on the front page. YES

OCR RnB, I like it. It's something that is very underrepresented, so I appreciate the effort that went into this. This arrangement oozes with style, with the smooth drums and SFX sprinkled throughout. I like the atmosphere that the synths put out; the entire track just has a warmth to it that really captures the old school RnB flavor. All that being said, there's still some work to do on this before we could post it up. The central samples are not well used in this. That flute is incredibly mechanical: every note is played the same, and there is literally no attempt to emulate phrasing at all. Flutists need to breath, and they need to shape their lines to accommodate for this - their phrases are played much more legato due to this, with small pauses at the end of each phrase to give the musician a moment to breath. Listen to some jazz flute performances or classical flute concertos (or solos) to get an idea of how this sounds in practice, and learn to emulate this on your sampler by adjusting the attack, volume and release envelopes. It's especially crucial when it carries the lead for as long as it does - it acts as the centerpiece, and it doesn't perform up to snuff as it stands. The brass sample sounds pretty underwhelming, too. I mean, that's more of a Roland brass patch, so I can chalk that up to being stylistic to the old school genre, but it sounds less 'stylistically' dated and more just... dated in this track. You should probably use a different patch for the brass sound, but that could be personal preference. The soundscape really doesn't go anywhere on this track. I mean, I love the smooth atmosphere, but it just seems to stay in the same place for the short time that the song is there, then it just ends. The track is short so it doesn't quite wear its welcome out, but the static nature of the arrangement is noticeable. The ending really doesn't do much for the track, either - there's really no sense of finality at all. It just sounds like you ran out of time to finish it off and let the instruments all just finish playing their line and stop. The mechanical instrumentation needs work, and the ending needs work. It would be better if the arrangement didn't just do the same thing for two minutes, but what it does is pretty cool, so I think you could get away with the static arrangement as long as you fixed the other two issues. RnB is pretty underrepresented on OCR, so I'd like to see this track fixed up and resubmitted sometime! NO

Yesssss! I'll sign you up as a Soprano, for sure. 'A' two octaves is more accurately 'A' an octave and a half up (rounded up), so I think you'll be just fine. Welcome to the group! We're about clear, as far as a group is concerned; one more soprano!

Batman first stage... Yeah, that's a great source. I'm surprised I haven't heard a straight metal arrangement of this yet, as it works wonders like this. Heavy, some real great licks and solos throughout and just does so many neat things with the source later, this track does an already great source justice. As Sir_NutS mentions, though, it does have a few areas that are rough around the edges. The bass is pretty oppressive in this, first and foremost. I can understand to a point, since it's a pretty iconic part of the source, but it really could've been mixed behind the lead guitar better than it is here. As it stands, it sonically gets in the way of the other instruments. I'd argue this isn't a deal breaker, but the issue is certainly there. The strings are not the best, but honestly they are not a huge focus at all in this. They rarely stand out, for better or worse; They could be better, but I don't think they bring down the track much at all. Looking at the waveform, there's also a bit of overcompression that occurs from time to time. It looks like there was a pass on the compressor at the end, as there's a lot of headroom, so you might consider releasing a version without that last pass on the compressor. It's loud enough, so there's really no need to compress it for volume, here. I really enjoy the arrangement, though; even before the soloing at 2:10, I'd argue it takes it in a pretty different direction from the source at 1:05. It slows it down, cuts it to half time and sounds more like a power ballade for Batman than the straight thrash the rest of the track presents. It's a really solid approach. I agree the ending could've been better, but what's there isn't the worst. I wouldn't be against it if the other judges send it back, as the mixing and production aren't perfect, but I think the good outweighs the bad in this case. It's close, but I think it's just good enough for me. -- EDIT: Listening to it again (particularly for a mod-ish review posted for this track in the WIP boards), I'm feeling the production issues harder than I did initially. I'm still on the fence, but I'm leaning more on the other side of it now, especially after knowing that the artist plans on cleaning it up. If Gtex / AgentXBR reads this, fix this, clean it up and please resubmit, as I really do feel like this deserves a place on the front page, when the production and mixing is cleaned up. NO

Giving this a little bump: it's a bit slow this week (and the next week, most likely), but it isn't forgotten, not by a long shot. Christmas definitely disrupts everyone's plans, and New Years has a few plans that will certainly get in the way too (keep an eye out in the Projects forum!), but come the first week of 2017 I'll get aggressive on finding members again. Just don't want you guys to think I dropped this or anything; getting some of the logistics figured out takes some time, is all. Alright, I hope y'all had a nice Christmas, and I hope you guys have a happy New Year!

Neat source. I've been hearing a LOT of Skies of Arcadia music lately, makes me REALLY regret my brothers taking the game back because they weren't into the style all that much. Robbed me of being able to experience it myself, which fills me with sadness. I may one day correct this, but for now... sadness. That's neither here nor there, though - we have a neat little remix on our hands. I like the approach, and I think it could work very well with the source. I'm not sure the execution is up to OA's par - the piano that repeats that bass note sounds quite fake (repeating a note like that with the exact same dynamic and attack is virtually impossible, in real life), and the rhythm guitar that comes in at 0:14 sounds very thin, almost fake itself, which would be a surprise considering you play guitar (and rock it out later on). At 2:00, there are some rather strange note combinations going on, there. I recognize the chord progression, but in general the theme just isn't lining up with the chords below it. It's not TOO problematic in general (since you ARE using some pretty strange whole tone combination chords, it doesn't feel too out of place), but at 2:05 the harmonies and theme are REALLY clashing hard due to the raised 3rd in the melody and the lowered 3rd in the harmonies. You should fix either the harmonies or the instrument carrying the theme, there. Otherwise, it works pretty well - rock/dance is a great combination on this one. I'm not entirely sure on this one - I need to sit on it a bit, maybe hear other people's thoughts on it. --

Is that... electric accordian (like at 0:16)? I can't stand it, but there's nothing technically WRONG with it, I suppose. Just sayin', is all. Otherwise, I like this approach. The track feels a bit heavy in the high EQ end, but I don't think there's anything wrong with the production otherwise. The arrangement is neat, and there's plenty of source to go around. The sounds overall are quirky and weird, which... well, it IS Qu's swamp, I guess, so it makes sense. Not too much I can say about it - there's a lot to like and a lot to dislike about it, and I think it'll be fun to watch everyone say as much in the comment section on both Youtube and OCR. Give it some front page love. YES

This is a tough call, on my part. I do like this, as the arrangement works well as a ballade of sorts. I hear the medley-itis concern that was mentioned, but I think the overall style glosses over that a little bit, for the most part. 3:14 IS a pretty poor transition, though - slowing down then changing the texture and theme is a pretty jarring transition. There are a few performance issues in this that I feel would need to be addressed before I could pass it, though. It seems like the performance is going for a more soulful feel with the slowdowns and pauses that are sprinkled throughout, but it makes the performance as a whole feel disjointed and amateur, instead, like you needed to remember or read what comes next. A little hesitation to accent important moments can add some humanity and soul to the performance, but there's too much of a good thing here. Moments like the opening feel drawn out with little reason, and moments like the 0:59 cadence lose their impact when the technique is overused. The performance is relatively simple, but I don't consider that a bad thing, per se - we don't HAVE to have a Shnabubula or Rachmaninoff performance for every piano arrangement on here (yes, I did compare Shnab to Rachmaninoff). I think it's a charming arrangement, partly due to its simplicity. Overall, the timings seem like they could be tighter in the performance than they are, even outside of the purposeful slow downs. The pedal work could use some clean-up, too (a few sections, like 1:08 has quite a bit of bleeding into conflicting phrases). It's very pleasant, but I think a lot of little things add up. Tighten up your rhythms in the performance, clean up your pedal usage, use perhaps a little less slowdown so that the moments you DO use it have more impact, and transition better at 3:14 so the change in themes doesn't sound so jarring. I think the core of what you have could work, as I do enjoy it quite a bit. NO

I do like the approach on this one - chill jazz. The source is well accounted for, and the arrangement does enough to keep things pretty interesting (a tall order on such a short source). The e-piano gets pretty repetitive in the background, and the overall soundscape tends to remain pretty static after it picks up the pace past the introduction. I will note that I hear the subtle differences that are there to keep things fresh, but it does start to all sound the same toward the end. It's a short song, so I feel it's not unbearable, but the issue is present. The instruments are a bit hit-and-miss for me on this. Most of the instruments are fairly well done, but there are a few that sound weak and thin, for some reason (such as the sax that carries the theme at 0:51 and the background guitar at 0:17). The mix is pretty borderline, as well. Again, the drums are perfect, as are the background elements (for the most part), but the theme is often mixed a little behind the other elements. The sax at 0:51 and the square at 1:58 (and at similar places for both of those) get drown by the rest of the mix. Those elements should be more prominent than they are. Speaking of the square, at 2:04 (and again at 2:55 & 3:10) it clashes with the background e-piano and chords. You'll likely need to adjust either the theme or the chords in order to make those sections sound right, as there is a note clash at those parts. That ending sounds... strange, but I suppose there isn't anything against making unexpected and strange endings. Lots of small things add up, for me, so while I really enjoyed it I don't think we can pass it quite yet. Fix the mixing issues, fix the off notes, make the thin instruments... er, less thin, and don't be afraid to drop instruments from time to time in order to give the soundscape some more variety (e.g. less static arrangement). NO

Ducktales moon theme! I'd say it's always a breath of fresh air, but their's no air on the moon and you'd probably die if you took a deep breath and... stuff. Er, anyway - solid idea, and I like the arrangement choices that are made here. The themes are present, but many of the notes that fill in between are removed - it's a subtractive approach to arranging rather than additive, and I think it works here. However, it's possible that others may not see it that way; subtractive arranging is tricky to pull off while keeping the themes readily recognizable, and this is about on the edge of that. The execution of the orchestral instruments are not as solid as they should be, however, great arrangement or not. The strings in the beginning utilize a swelling attack without any sort of break, which removes any phrasing that would normally occur in such sweeping lines like that. The brass has similar issues past 0:30, when they carry the theme. Live players won't swell every note like that - it causes too much separation within the phrases. I like the piano, though; it's pretty well handled. The overall room is pretty dry, too - adding reverb to your instruments could add another element of depth to the track to make it sound more convincing. I like the arrangement, but the execution could use some work. Well see what the others think of the arrangement, but I believe a rejection is justified due to the mechanical sequencing and dry space regardless. NO

Happy birthday, Tim Follin, you amazing sexy beast, you! Listening to the source, then listening to this, it just seems like a perfect fit for an arrangement. Strange, spacy and innovative, I think it mirrors the important aspects of the source while transforming it into something unique. Really liking the pseudo-fusion Jazz style this track is rockin'.

Very nice rock orchestra comin' out of this, and it just fits that source like a glove. The source is very readily recognizeable, and yet there are enough moments of guitar interpretation and style differences throughout that makes it something else. I love it. I feel sometimes the rhythm guitar's tone isn't very well defined (often between 'chugs' it sounds like one note being struck rather than a series of notes), but that's a bit of a personal preference than anything else. Some people like that tone, some people don't - I land in the latter category. I looked at the waveform, and while there's not much dynamic variation, I don't see or hear any particular compression issues, per se. Throughout the track there's enough variation in the arrangement so that the track doesn't feel too static, either, so I think they did alright in that area. I DO catch the mechanical instruments in the background, though, and they do stand out when the faster runs are present (such as at 1:50, and in similar cases throughout). For faster orchestral lines the attack envelope should be tighter - don't give the attacks any swell or else the instrument loses its presence, and sounds fake to boot. For the bigger, boomier sections the instruments sound reasonably handled (though the attacks are still a bit too soft), but the humanization certainly has room for improvement. There is certainly room for disagreement on how bad the mechanical orchestra is in this case, but I don't think it takes the track as a whole down to a NO; it still rocks where it counts. Nice work! YES

Well, you still have the held items for the pokemon that you need to purchase from the battle tree - things like the choice scarf and choice specs, as well as any mega stone you want to mess around with. Also, PvP. There's always PvP.

To be honest, the group seems to be coming together a little faster than I expected (what a nice problem to have!). I think we need to work on the next few steps of this beast: First, we all need a place to meet, convene, etc. which would work better than the PM messages on here. OCR's PM system is great for coordinating between a few members at a time, but I'm finding it difficult to actually send messages to groups larger than five on here. I will try to get get an OCR Discord channel established in the next few days, and I will send invites to everyone who agreed to be in this choir to that channel and we'll continue to coordinate there (Meeting times [if any], availability, etc.). Once that is established, we need to figure out a method of receiving and delegating music. As I said, I have one complete acapella score (A Lufia choral arrangement), and DS394 has another score that he wants assistance with (a Star Fox arrangement, orchestra + choir). With two pieces this is fine, but if we were to receive more we'd need to agree on how we select what we sing. It may or may not be an issue going forward, but it needs to be discussed, at least. Finally, we need to figure out some basic rules when it comes to how we sing, for the sake of consistency, quality of choral recording, audibility of the lyrics, etc. Unlike solo vocal music, choir requires a great deal of coordination among the members, and if we don't establish some ground rules the choral music will sound like a mass of sound rather than multiple talented voices singing in unison. Let's face it - we can make a "wall of sound" with a sample choir, that's not what this group is about. On that last note I have some ground rules that I know from the university choir I attended back from 2006-2008 that I'll post when we have , but I'll likely discuss it among you guys as well and tweak it as necessary. There isn't any specific way that's considered the "right" way, as long as we ALL follow the same rules. It's time to really get the ground work done to make this a reality, now!

Oh shit those are the same source. I didn't know that, lol. Welp, that makes my job easier! The arrangement is slick as all hell. I swear the source just annoyed the hell out of me since it SOUNDED like it was supposed to be an antecedent/consequence... and then didn't have the second half of it. This really take that shape and makes it into something that both fits AND constantly refers to the source for material. I will point out that the direct references are lacking: from a strict count... 0:00 - 0:26 0:28 - 0:53 1:53 - 2:13 71 Seconds Direct source usage 171 Seconds total arrangement time ~41% Source If looking only at direct source usage this is a little lacking. However, I still think this is a pass even on that front due to how the source is incorporated in the non-direct source parts. The theme is cut up, rearranged and placed over different harmonies in order to create something completely new out of the source, which really blew my mind as to how clever that was. 0:54 - 1:05 1:09 - 1:19 2:16 - 2:27 2:30 - 2:40 42 Seconds of Indirect source 113 total source usage ~66% Source in the arrangement I know, I know, it's a lot of words and numbers to say that I think the source checks out fine, but I think it'll help others that look at it and think there isn't enough source in it. Anyway, as far as production goes, I think it was quite good. The fake trumpet theme that carries through is a little piercing, though - it could've used a little mixing down so the other elements could shine through better. I also feel that, while the arrangement itself was spectacular, the soundscape was a little static. The breakdown in the middle helps keep things interesting, but the overuse of the trumpet as the melody carrying instruments is noticeable. Minor critiques to an otherwise great arrangement, though - I loved it. Nice work! YES

Damn, this is an amazing ensemble. You guys rock all kinds of worlds, including my own. Loving the big band performance, overall; I'm glad you manages to get everyone you could to get involved and produce such a kick-ass piece for us. There are a few oddities that I should point out. The live aspect (this really IS live) could've been toned down post-production (the laughter at the VG part in the beginning, for example, could've been toned down), and the applause could've been faded out to end the track a little bit better. I would also have suggested perhaps mixing in the direct VG portion in post production, too - that part would make more sense to us the listeners if it was balanced better in the recording. That all matters... if this were going to be sent back. I really don't see that happening, since this is just an amazing performance AND recording overall. The overall mixing is top notch (EDIT: Top notch for a live recording, that point wasn't too clear initially - it was very likely done with a multi-mic setup, as it captured individual sections better than a single well placed omni could), the recording quality is pristine, the performances are tight, and the love that went into this just oozes forth. I would be shocked if this got anything other than an enthusiastic YES from my fellow judges. Amazing work, you guys! YES

I legit find it hilarious that a user named Cole Train didn't immediately listen to a jazz album. Just a tasty bit of irony to that, I think. The album as a whole is pretty damn great, by the way - it all comes together in a nice, jazz'd up package that never really breaks the overall atmosphere. If you like jazz, regardless of your feelings about the game music itself, you'll enjoy this album a whole lot. It's rich, the improv is great and overall the performances are tight. I mean, if you like Chronotrigger you'll love this album, too, but that almost goes without saying, at this point.

Is this WIP not reach the end? It can be pretty tough to guage how a lot of what you've got going here affects the track as a whole. Sounds like it trails off at the end, so you're probably not done yet. You're probably aware, but the master of this is VERY quiet. You're likely doing this for the sake of the album (I assume this is for the Lylat System CLEAR album), but on the boards here I do suggest maxing out the volume in Audacity (using the Amplify tool) prior to posting it. It lets people hear whether or not there are issues with the EQ or limiting easier; if it's not amp'd to the maximum, it can be tough to tell whether raising the volume would cause production issues. In this case you're lucky - I can push 14 dBs without issue - but it can be an issue for other tracks, and it's impossible for others to tell without the right tools at hand. I like the overall soundscape, though. Synthwave sounds like a natural fit for this source. You've got to be careful with your instrument blend, though - with so much going on in the background it can be tricky to make the theme/melodies stand out without having them be crowded out by the other instruments. I hear some pulsing from time to time in the theme, so be careful with your mix and be sure the most important elements are coming through clean. The introduction wears its welcome out pretty quickly, and it never feels like it picks up the pace to make up for it. It's tought to guage, though, since this might be an incomplete arrangement; in a 6-7 minute song the introduction could be satisfying, but a 3-4 minute song would suffer greatly because of it. Just as a rule of thumb: 20% is a decent length for an intro, and 25% should be the absolute cap. Anything longer will leave the listener unsatisfied with the rest of the track; long build-ups need large resolutions. This doesn't feel like a grand enough resolution for such a long intro. There are some wrong notes in this arrangement. The passing note in the guitar at 0:18 is a half step too low, and every similar occurence (such as in the orchestra hits, at 0:41 for example) is also the wrong note. Compare to the actual source and listen to the difference - it's pretty stark. If you were using a MIDI for reference, always compare it to the actual source as well, whenever possible. The bass has a few oddities in it, as well. At 1:30 it leaps up a tritone, which sounds pretty... janky. You should avoid leaps like that in the bass in particular, as they're difficult to lead into and out of in a way that doesn't sound disjointed and random. Following that, from 1:32 - 1:34 the bass clashes poorly against the theme, being a half-step higher than what's being played above it. I don't QUITE suggest moving the bass a half step lower, since that would be the exact same note as it was two chords ago, but it does need to be changed to something different. I'm being pretty tough on it, but it does have a lot going for it. I like the soundscape of it, the arrangement has a lot of slick flourishes to keep it interesting and overall the production isn't too bad. I look forward to hearing a more complete version of it.

Wow, almost have all the parts covered. All we actually need now is two sopranos and we'll technically have enough to make magic happen. Of course, choirs are better the more people are involved, so please don't shy away just because we technically have enough in your section - bigger sections means better sounding choral music! Glad to almost see the initial threshold is almost crossed, though. Gets me pumped to get some real work started sooner rather than later.

If you joined I would be very happy. As far as the range, you're right - I mis-typed that part. As it reads now the tenor goes lower than the bass, lol. I'll fix it to make it correct, thank you.

And I caught my first Sun/Moon shiny - a motherfuckin' Bagen. I was actually trying to fish for a lv. 12 Salemance with the SOS system, but I saw the shiny and temptation got the best of me. So I guess I settled on a shiny pseudo-Legendary... I think I'll live.