Gario

Man, what a great source. Never heard any of the music in that game, but that's a pretty hot track. Sounds absolutely ripe for an amazing arrangement, so I'm glad you're giving us something fresh and remix-able to work with. That being said, there are a few issues with execution that leaves a bit to be desired on this. The 'realistic' instruments need quite a bit of TLC in the humanization department, as right now they sound like... well, sequenced. Obviously they ARE sequenced, but using volume envelopes, adjusting the attack envelop to emulate different articulations, etc., can go a long way in making these instruments sound more realistic. There's quite a lot that can (and should) go into these things in this track to give the instruments a more realistic, human sound. Overall, the production isn't bad; I don't hear too much in limiting or compression issues, and it's nice and loud to boot. However, there are quite a bit of mixing issues that I hear throughout. That clap in the beginning (0:23 - 0:46) just punches through too much in comparison to everything else. When everything is playing at 0:46, the lead is hard to follow, as it's mixed relatively behind other background elements, making the theme harder to follow. At 2:08 there are so many things that are trying to be mixed to the front it becomes tricky to follow what you want the listener to focus on, instead leaving the track sounding muddy. There is a lot to like about this arrangement: the transitions (like at 0:46) roll right into the next portions (loved it), and the change-ups in the soundscape (like at 1:17) really help give the arrangement shape. From 0:00 to 1:17 (and arguably beyond), though, the arrangement focuses on one theme of the source, and drags it out virtually unaltered. It gets rather boring and stale quickly, so it really needs either something else to break up that source in the middle (perhaps during the build-up from 0:00 - 0:46), or the theme needs some real variation. One way or another, the repetition of the melodies of the source is problematic for this arrangement. I see what you're doing, and I think the approach can work. However, attention needs to be paid to the realism of your instruments, the mixing needs to be cleaned up and more focused, and the arrangement needs some more variation of the source so that it doesn't get too stale as the track goes on. I do hope for a resubmission on this one, though. Good luck! NO

Lovin' that kick. It just grabs me in with how much meat it has. I do like the direction it tends to take, too, with those talking synths when it gets to Metaton-EX, and the fast pacing. Great approach to this, in general. I'd look into cleaning up your reverb, though. While it allows the instruments to fill the space, it's creating a lot of mud in the track, making everything crowd too much in general. Once you clean up the reverb, look to see that the mix itself doesn't crowd the mix too much, as well. That's the biggest thing that you need to look for - reverb and mixing. Keep it up!

Interesting approach on this - take a whole bunch of instruments and have them build up over time to something magnificent. While it doesn't do much to stray from the source or incorporate too much original writing, the orchestration and overall approach feels different enough from the source for me to accept it on arrangement grounds. The mixing is pretty solid, the orchestration is pretty on point, and I was generally impressed with the humanization of the orchestral elements. The solo violin has one or two things that bug me - the panning was too far to the left on it, for me on headphones. Also, while humanization was generally good, be careful not to let the attack swell too much on faster runs - moments like 0:19 - 0:21 had the instrument nearly dropping out with faster runs, due to the attack on the sample. The snare and bass drum samples used in the middle/end of the track are quite dry, as well, in comparison to the rest of the instruments. They should at least match the other instruments that you have playing in this. It was quite a shock to start hearing synths in the track, and the first one that hit (at 0:35) was quite jarring, especially considering the rest of the piece prior. I think you're using something like a flanger on it... and it just makes it sound strange against the cool, clean orchestral elements. What's even stranger is that overall that doesn't really come back after the first two minutes - it just comes in, disorients, and before the listener can adjust it never comes again. If you're going to take the listener out of the soundscape that you created, always have a good reason for doing so; that instrument just sounded out of place, there. Overall, I think it's an interesting track. It doesn't take too many risks, but it DOES build off of itself quite effectively. There are a few small issues with this track, but I don't agree that it adds up to a rejection. There's more than enough to love about the track that keeps me interested. YES

You got the chops to make me like Pumpkin Hill. Awesome work, man!

Very solid performance, and a great cover for the track. The fade-out ending doesn't really do it justice, and the lower end of the EQ gets pretty crowded with that chuggin' rhythm guitar and synth, but overall it's a sweet sounding cover. As Chimp pointed out, the conservative nature of this track does run against the goals of this site - OCR requires some interpretation of the source for the material it posts. It's nothing against this arrangement, as it's a great performance, but it's unfortunately not what OCR is looking for. Thanks for submitting, though - I got a kick out of it. NO

Final Fantasy Tactics! Such good music, and the theme chosen here is just gorgeous. So glad to see someone giving it the love it deserves - the guitar translates from this particular source's harp fantastically. The added harmonies behind it adds a nice bit of depth that wasn't there before. I will say that there is a fair bit of repetition in this, though. 0:28 - 0:54 is something that repeats almost precisely at 0:55 and 2:08. You certainly could've done more to make those parts sound a little more interesting and fresh, as this makes the arrangement sound a bit static. I will note that the short length does help you a bit: clocking in at 2:38 means that right when the listener is catching on to the repetitions, the song ends. While that's not a small issue, that's really the only thing I can say that would hold this track back. The arrangement, while conservative, is otherwise well crafted, and takes the sources to some daring territory later in the track (roughly beginning at 1:22). The arpeggios and slides just sound pristine, and the overall performance has a great deal of soul to it. This track makes my hairs stand on end (in a good way) - I can't say no to that without a big reason to do so. YES

Mmm, might be relevant: after downloading Keldeo, you should be able to get Hoopa afterward using a code for the mystery gift event, up through the 9th. http://www.ibtimes.com/how-get-mythical-legendary-pokemon-hoopa-keldeo-volcanion-pokemon-x-y-omega-ruby-2425724 I didn't see it mentioned anywhere on here. I'll confirm whether this works or not when I get home tonight.

Wouldn't posting it on here make that 21 websites? Not a bad straight rap track, though. Clean, decent production values, pretty solid rapping. The backing music is a little repetitive, but it works for what you're going for. Nice work.

Oh damn, this is slick as hell. I frankly LOVE the build-up to this one. With a source as familiar as this one, it's very easy to mentally fill the source in the spaces that it isn't there. Dave gave us hell all those years back on familiar sources and yadda yadda, but honestly this wouldn't work with a source that people were NOT very familiar with. It's a very clever approach that resolves a few issues all at once: how to make a song fresh, how to make something in more traditional Trance style that remains connected to the source, and how to make a great piece of music (that last one's being solved by all of us in various ways, though, lol). But yeah, great track by ABG. I really hope he makes a grand re-entrance one day, since his style is really clicking with me.

Woo! Hope this one gets finished soon, it looks like it'll be pretty darn slick.

Mmm, it feels like a cop-out, but I'm 100% with Chimp and Larry on this one. Odd that this is called a medley, but the biggest issue this one holds is its repetitive nature. Using a looping theme like this, while great for a console, doesn't do too great when it comes to creating an arrangement of a source. If you're going to stick with the same format as you have here, at the very least be sure to bring some new ideas with each repetition, or go over the same territory with something changed or different about it. Direct (or near direct) repetition isn't the way to go, here. I'm not feeling the soundscape is too empty here, but I do feel not enough is done with what you have here to keep the listener engaged. This really links back to the repetition issue from earlier, though - things are uninteresting because after the first cycle it's all stuff that the listeners have heard before. I think few instruments can work, but you need to use those instruments in a different manner from time to time to realy get the most out of them. The strings playing that arpeggio, for example, sounds cool for a while, but it either needs another instrument to cover that part from time to time, or it needs to drop altogether in order for the strings to do something different. The humanization is pretty interesting in this one. It's well done, but due to how many elements repeat in this track, you can hear when the lines were copy/pasted. Your humanization is pretty solid, but you can tell when something is a repeat of prior material due to the same humanization techniques being copied with it. Yeah, the copy/pasting of this arrangement is really the weakest element of this track. This is a great start, though - the humanization is solid, and you've covered the source quite well. I think there's some more development and variety that's needed in this arrangement before I can pass it, though. NO

Yup, sounds solid to me. DA does a good job summing up where it hits right: great groove, clean soundscape, clear leads, delicious details throughout. The guitar work has some wonky-ass phasing action, but considering the style here it adds to the charm, here. The ending was a bit of a let-down - a single bass note. I mean, it's better than nothing, but I was a little disappointed, after how tasty the rest of the track was. If I'm to be VERY nitpicky, I'd argue that the overall soundscape feels a little static, but it's nothing that drags this track too much, at all. Not much else to say here, this is pretty great stuff. YES

EVAL Well, I'll say this first - when things pick up at 0:36 I can hear what you're going for, and I can say that it's really fun. The kitch style going here can work, though there are a few areas that I suggest improving before submission. The beginning section leading up to 0:36 leaves a lot to be desired. That exposed saw will turn listeners off before they get to the meat of the track. If nothing else, starting the track at 0:05 (when some of the accompaniment comes in) would help grab listeners. I understand the stacking of textures building up to the meat of the track, but it takes a little too long to get there. You could likely cut that in half and get similar results, and it'll keep the listener engaged longer. When things are all in place, the drums don't quite punch through enough. The bass sounds pretty cool, but that snare doesn't have any presence. Perhaps a slightly longer cutoff, a little reverb on the drum set, some volume, etc., will help give it some presence. The hats form a good deal of the track's drumming variety, so it's important that they're mixed a little louder, as well. Overall, the set needs to be mixed louder in this - it really defines the track. The synth choice you go far can work, and I hear the stereo spreading you utilize to give it more depth - the effort goes a long way to help. The guitar part, while fitting, sounds thin and lacks any presence. From what I hear, it also periodically doesn't land with the rest of the synths (like from 1:02 - 1:04). The timing of the guitar part needs to be tightened up, though the tone of it is alright. The production doesn't have too many issues on it that I can hear. There's one or two moments where it gets a little crowded (like at 0:58), but that's pretty negligible. You're in pretty good shape, on that front. The ending really just cuts off on a cliffhanger, though. Even one more chord to finish it off would've been better (though there are certainly better ways to give it a proper ending than that). Give it a proper ending! I like it, but I think it'd be sent back with a NO/RESUB vote if it were submit today. Hopefully some of the advice here helps you brush it up as needed, though, since it IS a fun little track.

It's sad to hear. It's his choice, though, and I'll respect it. I do hope the album is amazing off-site, though.

Well, for what's here I really do like it. The reverse piano provides a nice haunting backdrop with a pulsing, strong bass drum to give the track a sense of pacing. The instrumentation of the themes that are present works well, even if it is just a variation of the source (Piano vs piano with special effects). The levels on this track are excessively low. Just putting this in Audacity and pushing the amplifier gives me about 7.3 dBs without clipping, and I can easily get another 5-6 dBs if I use some basic limiting. Push all the volume that you can without limiting, so you can match the levels of other tracks on OCR. Mixing in this track is handled strangely. Primary themes and interesting elements are hidden behind the pads/reverse piano and percussion. You'll need to put the important elements of the track to the front, while bringing the pads and such more in the middle or background of the track. Right now it sounds like a wash of sound with some unimportant things getting in the way in the background (which happen to carry the source themes). I hear the issues on the repetitiveness of this arrangement, but it doesn't quite bother me as much as the others. It's repeating the same source material, but the addition and dropping of parts as it does throughout isn't negligible. That being said, it would be a safer bet as far as getting accepted on here to add some more melodic interpretation of the source material, or introduce more of the source to the track as it proceeds. I really like the harmonic combinations throughout this track - very dissonant, very rich, very tasty. I just thought I'd point that out. The sudden cutoff ending is a little jarring, but I can see this being a deliberate ending choice rather than an accident in rendering. I'm okay with it, though I think if it's deliberate it really should be more deliberate sounding (build to the cut-off, for example). If it is a mistake, of course, then give it a proper ending. Overall I think it's a great start, and I think this can lead to a great arrangement for the front page. However, due to mixing issues, volume levels and some sense of repetitiveness in the arrangement I think we have to send it back to you this time. Best of luck, though, and I hope some of what we say helps, here. NO

Oh, I do remember this track from when I reviewed the BadAss 3 album. I frankly thought the approach was perfect, for what this is - it just brings 28 Days Later straight to my memory. It's a very slick way to reinterpret the source, here, and the preformance quality is fairly high, to boot. There's one thing I remember from that review that continues to be an issue here, which is the mixing at 2:15. When that guitar shreds at that point, the mix gets muddied and cluttered, and possibly even overcompressed. It would've been great if the mixing was cleaned up there, bringing that guitar part down a little bit so the other instruments don't cause compression issues when they decide to stand out. The arrangement is absolutely perfect for the album (acting as a bridge from the softer moments of the album to the more heavy portions), but for OCR it needs to stand well on it's own, too. Thankfully, the arrangement itself is flowing and makes perfect sense. The sources used are a little tough to hear, due to how it's rearranged. The piano part, for example, is a reference to the RE: Umbrella Chronicles arpeggio, but it breaks it up into three groups of two notes, rather than the original's two groups of three notes (with the last two notes per repetition remaining the same, more or less). It's tough to hear, but the shape and tone of the arpeggio remains intact enough for me to count as source. We'll see if other judges agree with that, though - there is an argument to be made whether that counts as source or not. I really enjoyed how the RE: Umbrella Chronicles theme plays out from 1:55 - 2:34; it slows down over the more consistent repetition from the piano, emphasizing different notes but retaining the original source almost precisely. It's a very clever way to transform the source, so I tip my hat to you. I hear the theme from RE5 slipped in at 1:34 - 1:47, and though it's very small it blends seamlessly there. I'm not linking the choir parts as you said, personally, but that's a minor complaint from my end. Concerning the issue with the movie part, that's in reference to the drums at 1:55 (it references the drums from 0:28, as linked on here). I don't see a problem with it, as it's completely unnoticeable unless someone specifically points it out. I think it's a pretty cool touch, referencing materials related to the source that aren't from the game like this in as subtle a manner as was done here. Obviously I don't encourage the use of outside source material for ReMixes, but this is a case where it's nearly unnoticeable and doesn't detract at all from the arrangement of the VG sources. Overall I think there's a lot that can catch listeners off guard on this, but despite the issues that I have with the mixing I feel it's within the bar. Good luck with the rest of the vote! YES

Surfin' through Hyrule's Palaces... Very awesome 'Pipeline' sound to it - I loved it. Fun fact: my dad was (and still is, when he can be) a surf dude. He was one of the Palos Verdes beach boys who helped pioneer the whole surfing craze in the 60's, so I'm actually SUPER familiar with this style, growing up with it. The arrangement works great, with those surfer solos and licks, as well as some of those 'pipeline' runs. The sources are well tread, but there's just... so much love put into the details. The twangs, the extra runs, the style of the solos, etc., just all scream with that surfer style, and I love every bit of it. There's a heavy over-reliance on reverb that permeates the entire track, but a lot of the music at the time (Pipeline, Secret Agent Man, Beach Boys music, etc.) had that tendency, which in this case helps with the authenticity. The drum mixing, as mentioned by Chimp, is light, but again that's consistent with the style that you're going for, here, so I'm not going to consider it a fault, per se. I hear some pretty loose playing throughout the track, but for the most part that adds to the surfer charm. I will mention that the slides at 0:28 & 0:33 go excessively sharp, though. That's not a stylistic mistake - don't use style as an excuse to get TOO sloppy in the execution. It's no dealbreaker, but it IS something to be aware of. Overall, the 'issues' that I have with it generally come with the genre, here. I understand if others have some issue with them, but I hope they consider that you wouldn't get the sound that's achieved here without those 'issues'. The biggest thing that I still hold against this (and, incidentally, is the easiest to fix) is the levels of the track overall. It's a very quiet track, but considering there are only one or two places where the highs spike it's incredibly easy to gain a lot out of this: amp the entire track to its max (gaining ~0.344dB), do a soft limit @5dB, then amp again to the maximum available. You gain a lot of volume with virtually no quality degradation. I love this track and think it would be an amazing addition to OCR, but I will add the condition of doing a quick limit and volume increase before passing this. It's a literal three minute fix using Audacity on the export, so I please make that fix for us! YES EDIT: Got a fix sent in. I could argue it could be even louder, but I appreciate that he gave us a decent 2-3dB boost, anyway.

Fun fact - I played drums for a very short time for a screamo band out of high school, with a singer that shared the same name that I did. We sucked, and frankly we never played in any shows, but that's beside the point. Point is, it's interesting that we don't have any screamo music on OCR yet (to my knowledge), so I'm hoping this fixes this issue here. Well, first and foremost the performances are solid and well varied. The screamo is exactly as it should be - it punctuates just enough to where you can make out the words. Good screamo isn't easy or trivial, so I applaude your scream singing. While short, the arrangement seems to do a good job with the material from the source. The breaks from the source are welcome and fit well with the music. The dearly beloved at the end was a slick way to end the track, too. The only complaint in the arrangement department is that the opening fades in, which seems like a strange choice. I wonder if there's any reason you did that rather than let the music just start at a regular volume level? Normally a fade-in is used in order to sound like the listener is coming into the middle of an ongoing song, but that doesn't seem to be the case, here. I think the one issue that I have with this is the balance of instruments. While there isn't too much in the way of crowding, the wrong instruments just seem to be mixed to the front of the track, pushing back more important elements. The screamo parts should be clear, and should be placed at a prominent place in the mix, but instead they seem mixed to the middle, having things like the synths, pad & rhythm guitar mixed to the front. This seems to be an issue that pervades the entire track, so this isn't a minor thing. I think it's a great track with one glaring, un-ignorable flaw: the mixing. I hate to send this back, as I really want to see this posted on here, but I think you need to rebalance the mix so that the synths and pads don't get pushed to the front, while putting the vocals in a stronger place in the mix overall. Please resubmit this, as this is an under-represented genre on here. NO

Hmm... I'm really feeling the opposite on this one. The beginning was pretty neat - almost had a '28 Days Later' effect with that guitar tone and lighter steelstring for the arpeggio. The later portions of the song sounds like the weaker side of the arrangement on this one. That's not to say it's terrible (the arrangement has some pretty cool things going for it overall), but I did feel it wasn't quite as well executed as the introduction. Getting more into specifics, the tone of this is set up really well. The dark bass against the arpeggios and thin steel theme creates a great deal of tension, preparing the listener to the heavy rendition of the track. The plucking of the bass strings sounds a little inconsistent - some strikes are more... er, striking than others, but it's nothing that's breaking the song overall, here. I didn't have an issue hearing the tuning of the bass, myself - it seemed to be playing the right notes in tune. As the guts of the track comes in at 1:15, the issues that more generally afflict the track become apparent. The steel string arp that was supposed to be tying the sections together just gets drown in the mix, to the point that it shouldn't even be there. Interestingly, there is a section later where that part returns strong enough to overcome that rhythm, so if you want an idea of how to balance it look to 3:51 (I know, one has overdrive/distortion and the other doesn't, but just use that as a reference to the mixing balance). When things pick up at 1:23 the mixing gets a little better, but throughout the track themes are drown by that rhythm guitar. The music at 2:07, for example sounds dense and muddy, making it hard to hear the main line. The performances are alright. I feel the playing is just a little too loose, though, such as at 2:23 & 2:31. It's not bad, but the guitar runs sound like there's a hint of hesitation behind them. It's not much, but it does make the playing sound a little looser than it should. This isn't the end of the world, but it's still noticeable. There are also some artifacts in some places (such as the fingers sliding up the strings & other guitar setup noises at 1:10 - 1:15) that should've been cleaned up post production, so I'd highly recommend cleaning those sounds up. The arrangement is pretty good, overall, so my biggest gripe is that the mixing often throws the rhythm guitar too close to the front, and when things get especially busy the soundscape gets crowded and messy. On the bright side, though, these are all issues that can be fixed post-production, so I don't think there's a need to re-record any parts (unless you want to tighten up the parts I mentioned earlier), but I do think the mix needs to be cleaner before I can pass this one. I do hope to hear a fixed version up here soon, though! NO

Had I known about it, I might've gone. One day heads up won't give me time to prep for it, though. Alas!

Mmm, Tuba. Not enough of dat Tuba soloing action around here, and you do a pretty good job. Aside from a few flub'd notes, you hit the right notes with a nice warm tone, so great work on that. The breathing does disrupt the experience somewhat, but I understand that Tuba is certainly one of those instruments that takes too much air to circular breath so that's unavoidable. Two suggestions on how to alleviate that issue as much as possible, though: first, find a place that would not be too disruptive in the arpeggio to breath, and be consistent to that point (say, for example, the third note of the third arp on the run up, and the fourth note of the last arp on the run down). Second (and this is even more important!), don't play the notes that are missed, but instead continue with the music as if you played them. Missing a note due to breathing is glossed over by the listener, as they can imagine what was supposed to be there without any trouble, but messing up the meter by stopping to breath is disruptive. Prioritize playing in time at the cost of a note or two rather than stopping the music to breath, then continuing again. It really is cool, though! Not often that you get a solo instrument like that on the WIP boards, and it always sounds cool when it's done well!

I suppose I can go through these one by one, see if that helps: 1.) Much like many things in life, it's not what tools you use, it's how you use em'. Soundfonts are acceptable, as long as you can handle the instruments in a manner that make them sound either realistic or interesting. I know that Darkesword has a few tracks posted that used older or free soundfonts, so I know it's at least possible. 2.) FLStudio, to my understanding, prevents you from saving a project, but is otherwise fully functional. It's pretty good to learn with, but that does become a hindrance when it comes to making more complicated projects. If you're on a budget, I hear Reaper is an entirely free DAW demo which only limits you by giving you guilty reminders of how you should buy it one day. It's very good, comparably as good as FLStudios. 3.) As far as samples are concerned, it's certainly a case-by-case basis, on here. There are a few certainties on here, though: Square Enix samples are off limits, due to the company's request a few years back. There are a few sites (like freesound.org) that offer some absolutely free to use without credit, so that's a viable, safe option (I use them quite often in my own arrangements). Others have used various SFX from other sources, so it's not strictly forbidden, but using too much can raise a flag or two if the samples are from obvious sources (other songs, movie clips, etc.). It's something you can play by ear, or you can use those aforementioned free samples, if it makes you more comfortable. 4.) Well, glad you asked! Take a look into our workshop forums - look at what others do, read what others have said to the music that's posted there. If you're working on some things, feel free to post them in there, and posters on here often will give you great advice that'll help you learn and grow. OCReMix is a great resource for learning your craft, so check the forums out!

Well there, welcome to OCR! I do hope you find what you need here. As far as this arrangement goes, this isn't a bad start - the energy is high, and it plays around with all sorts of goodies (like the little glitchy moments in the melody from time to time - very nice). The arrangement does have a few flubs as far as harmonization goes (such as at 1:06 and 1:17), but overall it matches the source fairly well. The arrangement sounds a little bit static, from time to time, due to how you keep the same sort of energy playing throughout the track. I like the meatiness of the bass drum, but it does seem to drone on, after a while, so watch out for that. There are moments in this track that just get too dense. Be sure to be careful about that when you're arranging music - you want the elements to be distinct. 2:42 is an example when there's too much going on for the listener to hear anything that's going on - mixing parts like that to where the important elements stand out while the background elements are still clear is tricky, but it can really make your work shine. I'm sure others on here will also have helpful information for you, as well, so I hope you do hang out, give others feedback, share dat sweet, sweet music, etc.

Haha, oh man, I can totally feel where you're taking this, and I love the concept. I didn't think this would sound great as a Bach-toccatta fugue style track, but you've convinced me that it could work. I love most of the ideas that you present in here, and I'd argue even when the arrangement is a little more stilted it works for the style you're shooting for. The style seems to constantly be in flux with this track, though. The organ polylines that plays throughout rings 'Bach', but then there are other elements that take me out of the arrangement. The drums, the vocal clip, the synths, etc., all seem to be reaching from different genres and styles, and in this case I don't think they mesh very well. While I'm not one to say pick a style and stick with it, you do need a little more focus on what elements you deem important, and work on making those elements stronger rather than stacking other things on top and seeing if it works in the end. Part of what contributes to this idea that the instruments and styles don't mesh is partly due to the differing levels of quality and reverb that each has. The drums are incredibly dry in comparison to everything else, for example, and the synth is pretty vanilla and uninteresting (as far as sound design goes - it has some really cool themes and lines). I personally think the vocal synth is okay, myself, but I can see why Chimp would say it's pretty fake sounding, as well. I think there's an exporting error in the very beginning, there. As far as the rest of the production goes, it has some pretty noticeable clipping throughout the track. Looking at the waveform it's easy to see it hitting the ceiling all over the place. You need to pay attention to your levels and make sure you're not clipping, there. I do have to say I still enjoy this track quite a lot (the arrangement is, again, very clever), but it has some issues that hold it back as far as production and instrument quality goes that I can't ignore, unfortunately. NO

This is pretty neat. Listening to the source, this is quite the change from the upbeat, more electronic arrangement from the game. I appreciate the sense of flow that this arrangement has - the orchestration knows how to change from light to heavy, using this to shape the arrangement in a way that the original just couldn't. This track does a great job using the space to produce something... er, special. The orchestration is quite good, but the sequencing of the instruments is fairly mechanical. Instrumental lines don't utilize dynamics that often - instruments are made loud and quiet in order to create those aforementioned moments (which is great), but dynamics can and should change from note to note in order to shape phrases and lines of music, as well. The choir sample is pretty obviously fake, as well. It sounds like a sample I might use in some more electronic music I create, but in this context you're trying to imitate a real orchestra, so it takes the listener out of the experience. Watch for that flute, as well - it's quite piercing when it comes in at 1:40. The production seems alright, but pay attention to when many things are playing at once, such as at 2:16. It becomes to parse the instruments out when some instruments are so dominating in comparison to others, and everything sounds like a mess. Tweaking the dynamics or mixer at points like this could help considerably when trying to clean up the soundscape, when it gets crowded. I have some issue with the choice of chord progression, such as with the piano at 0:27. Moving a chord in it's entirety up and down simply using transposition makes for some blocky chord progressions that feel stiff and unnatural. Some genres can get away with it to some degree (Rock & Roll or Metal, for example), but orchestra isn't one of them. I would suggest looking into learning a little bit about voice-leading between chords - it's not mandatory (many listeners don't catch these things, honestly), but I think it'll help you improve considerably if you learn a thing or two about it. Ultimately, I really do enjoy the arrangement, but the execution does leave a lot to be desired. Listen to more orchestral music, study how instruments use dynamics to phrase their melodic lines, their articulations, etc., as this will help you make more realistic productions in the future. I hope this helps, and I hope to hear more from you! NO