Gario
-
Posts
7,532 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
74
Content Type
Articles
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Gario
-
-
This is a nice, clean arrangement of Fear Factory, and I think there was plenty of personalization with the arrangement aspect of this. The production is fairly clean, as well - on paper this sounds like something that could be posted.
However, the instrumentation sounds very... stock, and there doesn't seem to be any stylistic reason to have such simple instruments used throughout. While there are plenty of performative flourishes used throughout (pitch bends, gating, etc.) there doesn't seem to be any attempt at making the instruments take up the space optimally (using tools like delay, chorus, unisons, etc.) or have sound designs beyond a little attack/delay/sustain/release tinkering with basic square/saw waves, so the arrangement sounds dry, thin and incomplete. The drums also are prone to droning; while the pattern changes from time to time (which is cool), there's no effort to use fills to break up the phrases and sections. It compounds the issue with the vanilla textures, as it does nothing but set the beat, leaving the listener to focus on the 'nilla aspects of the instruments.
I disagree that the arrangement doesn't have enough to make it stand out - the licks happening at 2:42 are pretty cool, for example - but you need to have instruments that better stand out and make the arrangement your own. It's not to say I dislike this arrangement - on the contrary, I think while conservative it does enough to make itself stand out with clean production to boot, so overall I still enjoyed my time with it - it just needs to have some more work invested in the sound design and the drums for it to be pushed from "okay" to "pretty damn good". Looking forward to seeing what you'll have for us!
NO
-
No idea why you're being so hard on yourself - overall the arrangement is a pretty solid blend of sources, and the production quality is really quite good. There's a few notes that didn't gel with me (such as at 1:53 and 2:01), but a few iffy notes isn't enough to ruin an entire remix, for me. The lead could've been more pronounced throughout the arrangement, as well, as the textures & bass are more in the front than is idea.
But to be honest, these issues don't take enough away from what is otherwise a great rockin' track. Hopefully my YES vote inspires some more confidence in yourself, my dude.
And don't worry - I didn't do so hot in that round either, if I recall, the competition was just pretty solid.
YES -
Pretty much in agreement with Rexy and Liontamer that this track is smashed to heck - we miss a lot of subtle elements (like that sax at 1:26 - can barely hear that poor guy! EDIT: Ain't even a sax; that's how smashed it is, I guess - can't tell what the instrument is!). Gotta tone down those levels at least a bit, put a little low pass to decrease them upper partials to give you some more breathing room, etc. It's a great arrangement, but the mastering needs some work as it's just too smashed, atm.
I agree that the whistle is piercing, but be careful to not get it lost in the mix all the while (sine waves and the like are really difficult to get to come through in an arrangement - believe me, I know!). One suggestion is rather than increasing the levels to where it stands out to put on some delay and/or chorus, just to increase the breadth of the spectrum that it takes up. Making the sound wider and not louder will help the instrument stand out without piercing through both the arrangement and the listeners ears.
Great stuff otherwise, but like Liontamer said mastering issues aren't something small that can be a guarantee fix in a few minutes so I've got to land on the NO side of this. Looking forward to the finished mix, though!NO
-
I agree that this arrangement is pretty wet (not something that takes it below the bar, though definitely a bit too wet), but I'm not hearing the issue at all with the source usage. I agree with Prophetik and Emunator's stance on this by filling in the rest of a measure rather than granularly counting only space with the source literally playing in it (which easily clears this as far as source usage, in my book), but even assuming Rexy and Liontamer's stance they're missing some source usage that could arguably take this much closer to the bar (with details added where others didn't include as source):
0:21-0:24, 0:27-0:30, 0:33-0:36, 0:38-0:48, 0:50-0:54, 0:56-0:59, 1:01-2:02
[2:02-2:04, 2:08-2:10, 2:14-2:16, 2:19-2:22] (Bass and Piano form the source, sans one note, same rhythm & notes)
2:25-2:26, 2:30-2:32, 2:36-2:38, 2:41-2:43, 2:53-2:55, 2:58-3:00, 3:04-3:06, 3:15-3:17, 3:32-4:05
[4:05-4:07, 04:16-4:18] (Bass and Piano form the source, sans one note, same rhythm & notes)
There's about 4 seconds of silence at the end, so we're looking for 148/296 seconds to make the 50%.This calculates out to 146 seconds.
If we calculate in sections with the same texture but over different chords that would also include 2:05-2:07, 2:11-2:13, 2:17-2:18, and 2:23-2:24, which would easily take this above the bar with those additional six seconds of source. Subtractive arranging with the source and spreading it over two instruments is still source usage, in my book.
It's got da source, and it's well produced. It's an easy front page track, for me.
YES
-
A little tougher to evaluate than I initially thought; while I would love to just say this is a MIDI rip with a solo on top, there are some differences from the source that pulls this a little away from that (added harmonies, textures, solo, etc.). It's a close case, and it's definitely conservative, but I think it's *just* different enough to squeak by on that front.
The instrument quality is good, but there really does need to be some post production effects on this to really tie everything together (reverb, stereo separation, etc.); right now the track sounds raw and dry, as if the instruments are playing from a sampler rather than having a performance (which, I mean, they are, but the whole point is to make it sound like they're not). The ending is also pretty abrupt, like the arranger wasn't sure on how to end the song.
This is a much closer call than I thought, but I do think that the instruments should have more post production to help create a more realistic sounding arrangement, and that ending definitely needs to sound like an ending rather than the end of a looping track. Good stuff, almost there but not quite there in my book.
NO
-
Some great synth/guitar blending going on in this one, with slices of the remix in fact sounding top tier (3:55 is just a great blend of instruments, in my opinion), and it has some nice arrangement ideas throughout to keep it fresh, including a rippin' guitar solo. This is an arrangement with a lot going for it.
It's not without criticism, though, on both the production and arrangement fronts. As others have pointed out, that synth at 0:11 sticks out like a sore thumb. It blends well with the arrangement later, but at the beginning it's grating, even painful if the listener turned their volume up to hear the rumbling bass below it. Tone it down in the mix at that point, or do something so the instrument isn't so piercing at the onset like run it through a low pass.
The guitar playing is pretty cool in this, and the solo is really slick (when it's good), but at 2:47 it goes off key, with the licks at 3:00 sounding like you miss the rhythm and/or notes. Considering how solid the rest of the guitar parts are it's a really strange contrast. The smaller synth solo at 3:18 has similar off-key issues, as well, though not as pronounced as the guitar.
I don't mind the ending quite as much (anti-climatic as it is), but the combination of the synth in the beginning and the strange soloing takes this one below the bar, for me. It's an easy pass once these things are addressed, though, so I look forward to seeing this one again!
NO
-
This is really quite an arrangement of Megalovania; this is more subdued yet sublime than I'm used to for this arrangement of our favorite killer boney boi. The arrangement is easy to hear the source in, yet it also takes it's fair share of liberties with the harmonies and structure compared to the source. It might not be the approach everyone is looking for, but I'm lovin' it so far.
I could nitpick some of the vocal performance (it sometimes wavers on the tuning, like coming in sharp at 2:14), but the biggest concern that I have on this is the dryness of the arrangement and the limited EQ range of the arrangement as a whole. Every instrument in the arrangement is dry to the bone (haha skull joke), and the entire arrangement sounds like it was sent through a low pass, killing anything above 5kHz. It's not a hard fix - a small touch of reverb on the track and shaping the EQ to have more higher end on the track - but it's a necessary fix as the arrangement sounds squished as it stands.
I really enjoy this one, and I think the biggest fix would be quite easy, so I hope to hear this one come back our way soon!
NO
-
Well, this is an interesting approach, and the arrangement certainly compliments the transformation to verse/chorus type arrangement. The metal balance doesn't quite have enough bass in the mix (especially those kicks - they really don't pop enough), and save the guitars there doesn't seem to be enough spread in the mix, but otherwise the production sounds fairly decent. The arrangement's got some good solos and some poppin' vocals, and it honestly doesn't overstay it's welcome - it's just the right length. I could nitpick the tuning of the vocals a bit, but I think it goes with the Iron Maiden style that Cyrus is going for to have the tuning be more raw so I don't mind it as much.
I have to thank Rexy for the timestamp layout, too - that did help me in the trickier parts to see what I was looking for. To my ears it sounds like give or take a few sections it checks out on that front fairly alright, as well.
I think it could use some improvements in the spread and bass balance, but I don't think that's quite enough to take this one under. Nice work, y'all!
YES -
To be honest hardstyle doesn't click with me - couldn't tell you why. Regardless, I can hear when it's done well, and I've got to say this is done pretty well here with those thick drums and pulsing textures & pads. I hear the source in this throughout, and the production values are pretty solid, which isn't easy to do with drums that go as hard as these do. The repetition of 1:12 - 2:01 & 3:29 - 4:16 is a bit hard to miss, though; while throughout the rest of the track most of the repetitions and the like have subtle but interesting variations to them which keeps things fresh, there's a minute at the end where the only difference from prior material is a vocal clip that ends the section the second go around. Considering this is about a fifth of the piece, I think this could've used something to make it at least a little more distinguished from the rest of the track, especially since this is what closes out the arrangement.
I think it's close, but I'm afraid that much directly repeated music (not just mostly similar, but exact repetitions) is going to land me on the other end of my colleagues this time around.
NO -
Mmm, this is a very warm track; it definitely is something that I can just sit down and relax to. The soundscape is very well done, keeping things fresh throughout with a variety of leads over the rich pads and thumpin' bass synth & drums. Overall, while the themes are fairly conservative in their use the blending of them into the Breath of the Wild textures was quite interesting to listen to.
The production in this is good, but not great, mostly due to the over use of limiting to get more volume out of this. That kick in particular has all sorts of limiting/clipping artifacts on it, which while it doesn't sound terrible in this low-fi environment doesn't really sound great, either. Could've used less volume pushing limiting on this, or an EQ tweak on the kick or other instruments in the track so that we're not swimming in that bass whenever the kick hits. Heck, even using some more sidechaining to give the kick some space would do this some good.
Production criticism aside, I think this has a lot of strengths that both make up for and accommodate that issue, so despite that I think it could still use a spot on the front page.
YES
-
This sounds really pretty. I don't hear much connection to the source, though; the chords are different (which is 90% of what this source is), and the backing texture is only faintly connected to the backing plucked instrument in the source.
Not too sure I can add too much to this other than I'm not hearing the source in this, other than that it's very pretty to listen to.
NO
-
Huh, a Bramble remix that doesn't use the texture that it's rather famous for? Color me interested. Arrangement-wise the harmonies are pretty clearly connected to the source, and the vocals calls back to the source enough to make it clear what this is an arrangement of. To be honest, it's different, and I kind of like it.
That being said, there are places where this track would benefit from another look. The drums are dry and don't blend well with the airy nature of the pads. Some reverb on them so that they sound like they're in the same room as the rest of the instruments would help quite a bit. The guitars and electric vocals suffer from the same issue - too dry, so they don't sound like they're in the same space as the rest of the instruments.
The lead guitar solo (which sounds pretty cool, btw), would be helped quite a lot if either the low pass applied to it was lightened up, or if the EQ was balanced on it so that it sounded brighter if no such low pass was applied. Right now it sounds like it's coming from a recording from a different track, with how little it meshes with the rest of the song.
The biggest overall issue with the track is that it sounds like nothing is blending, so if you could smooth over it with some room effects and brighten the sound of that solo guitar this would have a much better shot, unconventional as the arrangement is.
NO
-
Oh shit, I really like this soundscape - I'm actually kind of jealous as to how well these instruments blend. The reverb on the backing arp texture bleeds a lot into itself which creates a bit of dissonant soup if you listen for it, so drying up that reverb would probably make a marked improvement to an already delicious soundscape.
The arrangement does a lot with the opening melodic portions of the track (0:00 - 0:11 in the source video that we have), and rather than following the source clean throughout this arrangement instead builds off of the motifs established in those first eleven seconds and expands on it, sprinkling flourishes of those leaps and steps throughout so that it sounds connected, yet different. Aside from the sour note in the melody at 0:54, this is really well composed and sounds cohesive overall, but I can't in good conscious consider sections like 1:39 - 2:17 as connected to the source in a way that an average listener would catch. It's well done and is connected to the source in theory, but in practice the connections are just leaps and steps that are common to virtually all music. This is what I come to with a stop watch, when counting all obvious source connections:
Cutting 2 seconds of silence off of the end of the track we have 254 seconds of source, so we should be looking for at least 127 seconds of unambiguous source before we need to do a deep dive into how the motifs connect to the source:
0:00 - 0:24 (pretty straight source usage), 0:38 - 1:14 (pretty straight source usage), 2:17 - 2:36 (Texture is from the source), 2:36 - 2:52 (Melody is from the source, reharmonized), 3:34 - 3:53 (Melody is from the source, reharmonized)
114 seconds of source out of 254 seconds, or about 45% of the track is recognizably connected to the source.
1:39 - 2:17, 2:54 - 3:34, and 3:53 - 4:12 connect to the source very loosely with some callbacks to motifs from the original material (which is another 97 seconds of debatably loosely connected material), and I'd be open to an argument from folk that maybe we can pull about 20% of that material using a more finely tuned stopwatch to consider this enough source for OCR, but I think it's better to consider the sections of music more broadly than that; most people aren't going to listen to a leap and think to themselves "Aha! That's a reference to 0:07 of the source!", after all.
I guess I talk a lot when I have to reject music that I personally really enjoy. Love the soundscape, and I really enjoy the composition elements of this track, but as it stands now I don't think we can take it. If you were willing to make some of the sections that make allusions to the source material more clearly reference the source I think we could easily post this, but right now it's a little too much your own composition in this and not enough source from Secret of Evermore.
NO
-
Well the worst case scenario is that you'll get rejected (and I do try to be nice about it, whenever I'm the judge, lol), so whenever you decide to make any sort of remix there's no harm in giving it a shot :3
-
Shit, this is good - excellent sound design, great production, and an overall solid (if conservative) arrangement. There's some excessive silence at the end of the track (if I'm being generous with the release, at least from 2:50 to the end), but that's easy to clean up.
Why am I looking at this here when it could be posted on the front page instead?
YES
-
Oh, those are some cool instruments you've built for yourself, and I like them clusters in the harmonies.
Nice stuff goin' down, here.
-
Hello, mostly dealing with a mental breakdown with mounting pressures of work and... well, bullshit, all through last year. I'm trying to ease back into the swing of things but it takes time. Sorry that the progress of an album relies on the back of someone who is, let's just say, mentally exhausted.
The Lufia album is something I need a lot of mental energy to work through, which I've been recovering slowly but surely. Not that fair to most of the good folk who worked on it, but I'm only human at the end of the day.
... also, is this the first time I posted in the public forums in a year? Sheesh, things must've been rough.- Jorito, BLAHMASTER and Abadoss
-
3
-
This is a nice, conservative little arrangement you've got going on, here. It follows the source quite closely, but there's enough personal charm and interpretation here and there to where I think the arrangement would work well on OCR. It's got a minimalistic opening with a really cool section at 1:38 where the source textures get some room to breath - it breaks the track up really well, in fact.
The mixing on this track leaves something to be desired, though. The lead gets buried behind the backing bassline and textures starting from 0:14, and it really doesn't let up for the entire track. There are moments like 0:45 where the square texture spikes in volume and shoots to the very front of the mix, where it really doesn't belong. Bass and textures should be there to support the leads in songs like this rather than overpower them.
There are a few places where the notes went sour, too, like at 1:31 (something in the background clashes with the melody line), but primarily there is a lead note at 0:47 & 1:29 that sounds a half step lower than the source. If that's intentional then it doesn't sound bad, per se, but considering how conservative the rest of the source it I'm not sure if this was the intent.
At 2:40 there's a lot of dead air; you could cut everything past that point and lose nothing, so I suggest you do so.
I like the direction this track takes, but the mixing is too distracting for me to give it the YES vote. Balance the mix better so that the bass doesn't drown your lead and that square texture doesn't overpower the song at intermittent moments and we can see where to take it from there. Also take a look at some of those notes in there and make sure that this is what you want, and fix any sour notes that arise from your decisions.
NO
-
Hey, another Reason mouse-only, makes-his-own-synths brother in arms, here; it's rough out there, but we do what we can.
Alright, so to start I think it's a fabulous idea to take that underground texture, flip the key of the source, and re-arrange the harmonies under the familiar melody of the track. Funny enough, it now sounds more like the castle OST because of the change to minor (every song is a variation of the same theme in that game), but I get where you were coming from regardless. The flip to double time and switching the instruments in the second half of the arrangement was also an excellent idea, and breathed quite a bit of life into the track to keep people's attention throughout.
The instruments used, while not an issue on their own, tend to overcrowd the mid range of the arrangement, so the mix is muddy as a result (which also makes it more difficult than it should be to hear the melody throughout), with the pads and melodic saw that play together being particularly guilty of crowding the same area at 0:34 - 0:45, which gets better when it enters another octave; it could've probably been in that register the entire time without losing too much contrast, and would sit better in the EQ register. The 25% duty square that comes in at 1:54 also crowds the same range, though because it's timbre is so much more distinct it comes through the mix better regardless.
There's one other issue that hurts this one, and that's the amount of repetition that goes on from 1:54 to 2:39. The theme & counterpoint, while being a neat variation of the source, essentially repeats four times over the same harmonies established prior. This track is a pretty short arrangement, and while I enjoy the theme you built it doesn't merit direct repetition like that. Give the listener something more to listen to over that section - some more variation, something different - and you'll better hold their attention to the end.
The fade out ending is a little anti-climatic, as well, though I don't think it hurts the track enough to put much weight on it.I think this is an enjoyable little arrangement, but the repetition does hold it back, for me. Give that section something more for the listeners to grasp and I'd give it my blessing. The midrange could be better handled by shifting an instrument or two around, too, though that's not the primary issue holding this one back.
Enjoyed it, glad to see a brother Reason mouse user, so I hope to see it come back to us with the minor necessary adjustments necessary to bring it over the top.
NO
-
Wow, this is a pretty cool arrangement of such a short track, and the production/performances are pretty spot on, to boot. It is a short track, though - very short, at 0:53 - so while there's no hard rule against this the rule of thumb to follow is to make sure the song sounds like a completed idea without any fluff.
For a track of such length there is quite a bit of repeated material that pads the length a little bit (0:00 - 0:06 & 0:07 - 0:13, 0:13 - 0:19 & 0:19 - 0:25). I understand the approach, and normally wouldn't be this picky on thematic repetitions that are so short, but considering the length of the song in it's entirety this is more than 25% of the track dedicated to directly repeated material.
That isn't to say that to "fix" this you should add variation or whatnot to sections like that - by design, those short repetitions make the theme sound more established and defined. This simply demonstrates the downside of providing such a short track - because the arrangement spends so much relative time establishing the source, the listener is led to expect something more substantial from the arrangement rather than having the track flame out at 0:53.
This track feels like a great idea that isn't quite finished yet - the material in the middle of the track sounded like a fantastic expansion of the source, and to be honest the track sounds like it could really build off of such arrangement ideas into something that sounds more fulfilling (which if you add to this arrangement I'd love to see it back here). For what it's worth I enjoyed the heck out of it regardless, even if I was looking for more given what was here. Keep at it, and hopefully this doesn't discourage you since you've got some real arranging and performing chops on display here!
NO
-
Wow, this sounds like a metal arrangement heavily influenced by the "Halloween" franchise, holy shit I am digging this style. Setting the arrangement to the swing of 6/8 rather than the 3/4 the source is set to is a nice touch, too - you can often get a lot of creative mileage out of that alone. Whatever mixing issues were present in the prior seems to have been fixed, since I can hear everything just fine in this, and it all sounds very well balanced. The ending is a little strange, but that could very well be personal preference on my end.
This is pretty great, let's get it up on the front page.
YES
-
Deus Ex, what a classic soundtrack, with this being one of the real gems of the soundtrack. Been playing it again lately, too - can't really help it, it's a classic.
This one does sound like it ripped the theme from the MIDI file that's on vgmusic.com. While I normally don't mind as long as it's merely used as a springboard to something more personal (as you've used it for here), the MIDI gets a lot of the arrangement simply incorrect, ranging from the classic bassline being out of sync with the rest of the track to the backing textures simply being about a 4th lower than they should be. It's distracting, unfortunately - I suggest listening to the Youtube source and seeing if matching your elements to the source improves your track in any way.
Distracting as that can be, the bigger concern is the production on this. When the pads and other instruments come in on the track, the mix gets quite crowded and suffers from some limiting issues. The mix needs to be overall lowered so that the limiter isn't hit quite so hard when everything comes together, and the pads holding the thematic elements need to be backed off in the mix so that the other cool and interesting instruments have some room to breath in the mix.
There are some really cool elements in this track (like when the space opens up for that cool texture at 1:32 - that gave me some chills), but the production holds this track back from the front page. While I think the source is recognizable as it stands, I would also suggest listening to the original source and seeing if that bassline could be adjusted so that it better matches the source (mostly so that it doesn't sound off rhythm throughout the track). Nice work, hope to see it in here again with some adjustments.
NO
-
Very clean, very elegant. the arrangement is minimalistic, but that's not to say that it's straight forward - there's a lot of subtractive changes that make for some nice, interpretive arranging. The backing instruments (like the pads & light percussion) certainly add some depth to the track overall, in nice, subtle ways.
Production is solid, too, so how about we get another solid Rebecca piece on here?
YES
-
Chrono Trigger, Zeal, but it's not... a Zeal remix? Tricky!
Ooo, this is pretty smooth - I like the soundscape on this one, and the arrangement does some nice trickery with the texture by making that backing arp set to double time - gives the arrangement a nice kick. The arrangement is fairly clean, too, with a nice mix to top things off in the production department.The largest risk this arrangement runs the risk of getting static with many of the elements of the track being used for significant stretches of the track, but there's some decent effort taken to break up the overall arrangement so that the instruments and textures don't wear their welcome out. There's still only so much that can be done with Schala so it still feels a hair long in my humble opinion, but that's not something I'll knock.
The only criticism that I can really lay down is that the ending sounds a bit abrupt. Could be intentional, but considering how wet the instruments sound throughout this could've benefitted from letting the instruments ring out for a beat longer. Otherwise, pretty solid stuff, could use a home on the front page.
YES
PRC426 - Mega Man Finds His Way to PRC Again (Mega Man X5)
in Competitions
Posted
it's funny, I actually wanted to put out a quick little thing for this, but I didn't like what I was making so I scrapped it (sowwy, maybe next time)
i did end up making this tiny voice clip that i super wanted to put in there, so i'll share it anyway, lol
fun source, glad it was picked