Gario

Pfft, it's always nice when people make this job easy. Andrew and Stevo made my job easy, here - great arrangement, great performances, great production values. I have nothing but good things to say, here - the guitars are clean, backing instruments complement everything great (piano and marimba are well incorporated), and the change in pace midway is a great way to keep things interesting. Great work! YES

No crits? Aw, you're no fun. The drums being removed helps, but I'm still feeling the other issues that were present still tilts this below the bar. The missed notes were a really easy fix - I'm particularly surprised nothing was done there. I think my prior vote still stands - details on other judgment, minus the drum issue. NO

Mmm, I like this arrangement. I'm with Sir_nutS on the arrangement - it knows when to push forward, and when to hold back. The dynamics shape the piece in a manner that really drives it forward, and the source is quite clear, so great work on that front. On a personal note, I really enjoy some of those clusters you used in the beginning - very tasty. The strings at 3:06 have some strange voice leading. It's minor, but they seem to utilize parallel fifths, at that point. I normally wouldn't mention it, but the rest of the track seems to have pretty good voice leading, so it stands out as a little strange, for me. The mixing and production do have issues, though. While the orchestration is quite good, the mixing tends to get cluttered to the point that the themes are not brought out in a sensible manner, while background elements (such as arpeggios performed by the strings) get more volume than they should. These issues are especially apparent at the beginning (oboe gets lost behind swelling strings), 1:50 and 3:27, where the melody is very difficult to pull out from the overwhelming background elements. At 3:27, there's also noticeable moments of overcompression, as well. When the music gets loud, production quality drops significantly due to this overcompression, which is no good. With all due respect, I'm going to have to disagree on the commentary on this not having correct articulations and humanization throughout, though - while there are a few moments that could use some attention to the articulations, for the most part this shows considerable attention to what attacks and articulations should be used where, does so correctly, and has a great deal of attention paid to the dynamics throughout. The instruments have attack swells when it would be appropriate to do so (like the block chords in the beginning), and the arranger actually changes these values whenever phrasing the lines to lesser amounts, which is the correct handling of such instruments. The staccato strings at 2:34 show a good deal of focus on the control of the articulations of these instruments, as well as the release of the solo viola at 2:32. The legato strings are performed as they should be - unless there's a reason for the strings to swell (such as the chords in the beginning), string players will perform their phrases legato. That is not a mistake in humanization. That being said, the viola at 2:18 does have an unnecessary swelling attack for each note, which makes the phrase sound more disjointed than a performer would normally handle it. The piano at 4:03 (the block chords, in particular) also does sound pretty mechanical - every hit is the exact same, at that part, which really wouldn't happen in a live performance. While I feel the humanization is at pretty solid levels, the mixing and production issues that this arrangement has still puts this below the bar. I really do enjoy this arrangement, though, and I hope you come back with this after fixing the production and mixing issues we've mentioned, as well as addressing the humanization issues that I mentioned above. The voice leading where I mentioned would be nice to correct, too, though that's not mandatory. NO

Aaahahaha, don't scare the children, indeed. Nice story to back up the album - no idea what the producers were thinking, as most of this is really quite cool and un-scary, lol. Really solid stuff, but coming from you that's almost always to be expected, at this point.

EVAL Oh wow, I like this. Your orchestration is pretty damn spot on, in this. The sources are clearly there, and even though it's a medley (often frowned upon), this track seems to tell a story with each source. I'm pretty cool with this, on the source usage and arrangement front. The humanization of the instruments is slick. To take it one step beyond, I suggest learning how to emulate different accents and attacks for the different instruments - there are some moments where I feel the attacks aren't quite right. For example, the strings that descend at 2:42 all seem to have the same attack, where an orchestra would really play the first attack with a down stroke, and hold that stroke for the rest of the notes (thus having the following notes being very legato, in comparison). The trumpets and horns doing the same thing at 3:06 can also benefit from emulating the attacks they would use - the line is played so each note sounds distinct, whereas a real trumpet and horn player would phrase that line altogether, or phrase the line with one note of staccato for emphasis on the second to last note (neat effect, but obviously not mandatory). It sounds like you're really getting the hand of orchestration and dynamics, so this is merely an idea to take your music to the next level. Anyhow, it seems wordy, but in reality your humanization is very solid - these are merely suggestions as to where to take your music next. The arrangement is solid. The orchestration is great. You'll probably pass, if you submit this to the panel. Look forward to hearing it there!

Nah, I don't have Audio Cart - I've made my own 8-bit+ sounds for ages (Since at least my first accepted submission, and even a little before that). This track was made in January - long before Audio Cart was available. Really, though, it's just a square wave with the duty cycle set at 12.5, 25 or 50%, as per what the NES would have available. Now you know how to do it, too! Thanks for the comment on the potential clutter, I'll clean that up some more before submitting my track. I think I can make it a touch easier to hear, especially at the part you point out. Thanks for the feedback, and I'm glad you enjoyed it otherwise

Larry, you're an out of touch old man, but that's beside the point. Overall, the track doesn't seem to have very much focus. It follows the source, sure, but since the general dynamic and texture is very similar throughout there's really no build up, climax, etc., that gives the listener any sense of direction. It's just all... the same-ish. I'll acknowledge 2:20 as really dropping down and changing it up, but it's not enough to mitigate the overall lack of diversity throughout the track. The drum pattern really drives this issue home, though - it's pretty close to four-to-the-floor throughout the entire song, but instead of driving the track forward (like that style often does), the slow pacing of this makes it sound plodding and uninteresting. While the production is clean, at 1:36 the theme is held in a light, quiet pad, while everything else is mixed closer to the front, making that part sound odd. The background arpeggio at the moments mentioned by Chimp indeed have notes that are sour. At 0:58, 1:21 and 1:36 the arpeggio part in the background plays notes that directly conflict with the chord being outlined by the melody and pads. Those notes need to be corrected. Overall, the mix feels like it's lacking both in the low end and high end of the EQ spectrum, which gives the entire track a dull, suppressed feel. For the most part, it's simply that the instruments used primarily take up the midrange, so the far ends of the spectrum is just missing from the arrangement, altogether. Yeah, I'm with Chimp and Larry on this, it does feel like a lot of things are off. Hopefully some of the things we're saying here is helpful, though. NO

As an aside, since the artist posted the Workshop eval a few days before panelling it (and because I was late in responding when promised), I gave him my feedback as an evaluation, as well, and he seemed very willing to fix the mixing issues that are present, as well as integrating the Cammy vocals better. I'll see if I can get a better version from him soon.

That's some solid metal performances goin' down, in this track. I'm not familiar with the source, but it actually sounds like quite the hidden gem. This arrangement does a great job covering the overall sound of the source, while playing with the leads from time to time. It's a pretty conservative arrangement, though - pretty damn close to the "too conservative" category, on OCR. The overall mix tends to have the guitars all fighting for the front of the mix, when everything is playing at once. It's not absolutely terrible, but the issue is pretty consistently there. The leads should be clearly in front of the rhythm guitars, which at the moment are pretty loud in comparison to the rest of the mix. The master track could also use a touch of high EQs, as well, as the overall track sounds lacking in that department (Just a little, though - 0.25dB in the high range would cover it). There's quite a few moments in the track where there's really no lead - just texture. While I think those are a nice way to break the music up in a sensible manner, those sections last a bit too long. 1:51 - 2:20, for example, could move to the next section effectively at 2:06. Nothing is really added to justify that second repetition; moments like that sound like padding to a track that's already at a reasonable length. I like this, but little things here and there knock this down. I feel the arrangement could break away from the source just a little more, but more importantly the mix should be balanced so the rhythm guitar doesn't take up so much space, allowing the leads to push through. The repetitive sections that I mentioned should also be truncated - they do not add anything to the arrangement other than length. Tighten those issues up and resubmit - apparently, this game needs some representation on here, and this would be a great track to do so with. NO

Damn, this is awesome as shit. I can recognize the sources right off the bat, but they're all incorporated together seemlessly. The arrangement is amazing. The instrumentation is eclectic (I love eclectic), and those vocoded vocals are amazing. The only thing I can find that could be improved would be the clarity of the vocoded vocals' lyrics, but they're honestly pretty legible, as far as vocoded vocals go. Yeah, easiest pass in a while. Great work, Jorito! YES

This is a tough one. It's a very light arrangement of the source, but what's there is simply great. It's sort of an older style jam session that just takes the source and runs away with it. The bubbling sound that comes in from time to time sounds... well, out of place. The arrangement evokes "The Beach", but that bubbling sounds more like "In a lab". It's not technically wrong, per se, but I didn't feel it fit the piece very well. That lead guitar sounds incredibly clean, and it really shines as far as performance goes. The subtle background elements and soft change ups from the bass really help push this piece forward. Honestly, I think this track does exactly what it's supposed to do. It's incredibly relaxing because of it, too - the minimalist element to it just lets what's there shine through that much more. I think it's pretty damn good, myself. YES

Lavender town is always an interesting source to hear arrangements for - so creepy and dark, especially considering it's from Pokemon. The overall feel is similar to the source in this arrangement, but the track does some pretty daring things with the source in the middle and end that pay off, for the most part. The changeup at 1:27, for example, takes it in a new, more ethereal direction, and the new harmonies at 2:56 actually work well with the source. Those new harmonies would've served better had they been introduced earlier in the piece, though - they just sort of hit you, then the song ends. As a rule of thumb, introducing new elements at the very end of a track is disorienting, and it always sounds out of the blue and out of place. If you want to do something like end the piece with those chords, get the listener familiar with those chords first earlier in the arrangement. The production and mixing in this is questionable, at best. The drums from 0:00 to 0:35 sound like they're without any bottom end EQ. It sounds intentional, but with the other instruments having their normal EQ range, it just sounds... strange. Once the bass EQ returns to the drums, the bass drum sidechaining used throughout is incredibly distracting, as it affects every instrument equally. When sidechaining, be sure to only affect instruments that really conflict with the frequency range the bass utilizes. The synths used throughout seem to fight one another for priority in the mix - everything tries to be loud, so it's difficult to hear anything in particular. The arpeggio synth in the beginning is incredibly piercing in the range it's used (though it sounds alright when it drops an octave). I'd suggest lowering the volume of that synth in the beginning, so it doesn't pierce one's ears as much when listening to the arrangement. The production of this is pretty brutal - it will need some work. The balance of the instruments should make wach part clear (bringing out the important parts, subdueing the background elements, while allowing everything to still be heard). The drum EQ sounds offputting in the beginning; either drop the bottom for all the instruments (so it sounds intentional) or let the bass through a little more in that beginning area (perhaps simply dropping the bass drum altogether instead, if you want to hold something back for the 0:35 moment). As far as the arrangement goes, I suggest incorporating some of your ending chords into the piece earlier so they don't sound so out of place at the end. Hopefully some of this helps! NO

EVAL Wow, this is a really subdued track, and that atmosphere really holds it together. In the beginning the woodblock seems to pierce a little bit, but otherwise I think this is a very well written and produced track. One suggestion before submission (if you haven't submit it already - it HAS been two weeks, after all ._.) would be to take the wave to something like Audacity and max the amplification option, in order to push out as much volume as you can. In Audacity, at least, if there are no points where the mix peaks the program will automatically max the output without introducing clipping, and from what I can tell there isn't really a place where this mix peaks - you could probably gain 0.5 dBs without introducing any distortion at all doing so (I can't tell exactly since it's a soundcloud file - can't do it myself). The overall arrangement is a little quiet, so it would only benefit you to do so. Yeah, otherwise this is a great arrangement to submit - I think it'll pass. Nice work on it!

Damn, this is comparably more somber than the source is. That's what you were shooting for, so great work on that front. The source is certainly recognizeable, but you really took it in a whole new direction, and you get brownie points for having a story behind why the direction change (NOTE: Brownie points don't equate to a vote, but they are certainly delicious). I hear what Chimp is saying on the overall "dark" quality of the production (e.g. overloaded on low end at the cost of the upper end), but in this case I feel it adds to the heaviness of the track. It's a nice effect, though she's correct that the snare should not contribute as much to the bottom end as it does (e.g. highpass dat snare, baby). There are also a few moments where I found the lead to be mixed behind the rest of the arrangement, to my dismay (such as at 0:42). It's not nearly extreme enough to warrent a rejection from me alone, but it does take away from the overall experience a little bit. The arrangement is pretty damn slick, though, so minor mixing infractions certainly don't affect this mix too much. Seems like a solid pass for me - great work! YES

EVAL Alrighty, the two sources you have seem well represented in the track - as far as I can tell, you're covered on that front. This is a very interesting track, overall - the sounds that it incorporates throughout keep it interesting, even with that relentless texture. The strings are a little bit dry in comparison with the other instruments at 1:35. The other instruments seem to have a little reverb to them, so it makes the strings stick out, in comparison. The instrument (is it a cello?) that comes in as a sort of lead at 1:56 has a swell for every attack, which makes it sound a bit unnatural. Normally I hammer on that more, but in this case it actually works alright - probably due to the mix of synths and non-live instruments with the more "live" instruments. The mix is good - the elements that are up front are up front, while the background elements are... er, in the background. If I see this on the panel, these are likely the things I'll comment on, though I'd still pass it. Nice work.

Hey there, peeps! It's been quite a while since I've shared something I wanted to touch up for submission. I personally think this one is solid, but I wanted to put it out there, for the extra ears. This was something I submit for the Castlevania compo a while back, so I cleaned it up - brightened the sound, re-mixed the channels, added hints of reverb here and there to fill the space, etc. Literally have a whole community who can give this a listen, give some feedback if necessary, so why not use it, eh? Anyhow, this is an arrangement of Castlevania X Clocktower (nearly the same as Castlevania III: Beginning), Castlevania II Bloody Tears, and Castlevania II (GB) Mah track: The Bloodline Bounce Enjoy, and be sure to leave feedback if you got any.

Mmm, the racing mode from Sonic 3. The arrangement is really good - metal with synths,with a peppy style that kind of reminds me of Rush. It holds the energy of the source while introducing plenty of interpretation on the leads. It's a solid arrangement. I think Chimp hits this one pretty solidly - the track is very overcompressed. The balance of the instruments is also pretty inconsistent. The lead is very often too loud when there isn't as much going on (such as at 0:40 - that synth is a big culprit, in general), but in other parts (such as 1:28) nothing stands out at all, so it ends up sounding cluttered and disorganized. The balance of the mix will need a lot of attention, in order to bring out the important portions appropriately without those parts sticking out like a sore thumb. The performances are solid in this, and the arrangement is great. The balance of the mix needs some attention, though, and the overcompression only compounds that issue. Re-balance the mix, adjust the compression so it doesn't smash everything into the same volume range and this should pass pretty easily. NO

Well, I did give it a listen, so here are some thoughts on it. It's a pretty fun arrangement. I enjoy the instrumentation on this - the wubs, the slab bass, the pads and especially the lead work. The drums are meaty enough to act as a solid grounding for this track, too, so it has that going for it. The leads are mixed a bit quiet throughout, though - they get a little bit lost behind the rest of the track. They get pulled even farther behind the track purposefully at 2:49, which works, but they never really seem to come back to the front (even at 3:49, where it makes sense that they would). The vocal clips are a little loud in comparison to the music prior and after. It sticks out a little, but I don't think it sounds particularly poor. I think it'll do alright, on the panel. Sorry I didn't respond sooner - work, and all

Well, this is a pretty fun arrangement. This is the first time I've heard this (well, my second time, actually - I did catch it in the WIP forums right before it popped up here!), so my ears are pretty fresh on this, as well. I enjoy the instrumentation on this - the wubs, the slab bass, the pads and especially the lead work. The drums are meaty enough to act as a solid grounding for this track, too, so it has that going for it. The leads are mixed a bit quiet throughout, though - they get a little bit lost behind the rest of the track. They get pulled even farther behind the track purposefully at 2:49, which works, but they never really seem to come back to the front (even at 3:49, where it makes sense that they would). The dry vocal clips didn't really bother me too much, other than they're a little loud in comparison to the music prior and after. It sticks out a little, but I don't think it sounds particularly poor. Overall, it seems to cover the source, while taking it in a new direction. The leads being as quiet as they are bothers me, but I don't think it's a dealbreaking issue. In the previous decision it seems that the groove didn't change enough, but that seems to have been corrected in this version. I think it's over the bar, myself. YES

Very rich interpretation of a pretty empty source. I really enjoy the overall re-interpretation of the chords that's present in this arrangement. Changing things from simple chords to 7ths, 9ths, etc., and reinterpreting just what each chord is allows you to expand on the source beautifully. The chiptunes and guitar blend quite well together. I'm not sure downgrading your drums through 2A03 was such a good idea - that bass drum has nearly no presence, which does affect the track negatively. The rest of the percussion is alright, but that bass drum is very weak. The end has about ten seconds of silence that should be sliced off, too - no reason to have that, there. Thanks for providing the sample that you used - I think that should cover you, as far as complying with site policy for SFX usage. This is a very powerful re-imagining of this source. The faults that this holds are pretty minor in comparison to what it brings to the table. It sends chills down my spine, so needless to say I love it. YES

First and foremost, yeah, this track is arranged very often, but let's face it - it's a great source. The arrangement focuses on the real guts of the source (at least, the most recognizable part) before exploring the other elements present. It's a good idea, and a good way of putting your own spin on something like this. The guitar playing and drum work is spot on in this, but the other instruments sound pretty mechanical. The piano doesn't utilize any dynamic range from what I hear, which is atypical for that instrument. The strings, on the other hand, have the same attack swell for every note, the vibrato is ever present (string players will only use vibrato for longer notes), and are also pretty dynamically stagnant, like the piano part. When sequencing "real" instruments, it's always important to make them sound as close to a real performance as possible. Very often, the strings carry the theme, but it gets lost behind the attack swell every attack it has. This issue is compounded by the fact that the string part holds the same range as the guitar part, so it gets a little lost in the mix, as well. When everything is going all at once, it's wise to avoid having many instruments doing something in the same range - the violin part would be easier to pull out of the mix if it were playing at a higher range than the accompanying guitar. The Fus-Ro-Dah part at 2:24 gets drown out by whatever other sound effect you have there, as well as by the other instruments present. It would have a better impact if it were mixed closer to the front of the mix at that point. It's not bad, but I think it needs some real TLC involving the humanization of the instruments. The violin part especially needs some attention, as it often carries the theme. NO

Holy shit, this combination works incredibly well - I was not expecting this at all. It changes the Zelda theme completely, and yet... it makes perfect sense. Granted, the first three notes of Zelda's theme occur in Moog town, as well, but kudos for expanding on that idea. I'm on the fence, as far as this being a track that doesn't develop enough. On the one hand, it presents a solid idea, and takes it a few places with that build-up. On the other hand, there's a second half to the Zelda theme that I know could be expanded on, here. There's also the fact that I hear the Moog portion being followed quite closely, as far as the form of the arrangement goes. Not to say this is too conservative (blending the themes like this alone means you took quite a liberty with it), but perhaps branching away from the structure of Moog Town a little may generate a few more ideas. At 1:49, there is some distortion that pops up. It's not technically clipping, as the track never gets above -0.5 dB, but it sounds a lot like it, as if there's a hard limiter that the track is hitting against. You should certainly look into that distortion and clean it up. Overall, I really like what is here, but at the same time I agree with Chimp on both the clipping and development of the track. I will also suggest breaking away a little from the form of Moog Town, in order to help generate ideas as far as developing the track goes, though that isn't mandatory. Great work, though - I still got a kick out of this. NO

Well, this is a pretty conservative arrangement. It's as Sir_nutS says, there are little changes all over that make it pretty distinct, but the source is unmistakeable. The pacing of this arrangement is also completely different - whereas the source is fast paced, this track takes a more chill'd pace. I hear tons of synths in the background of this, doing tiny little things in the background almost constantly. Unfortunately, many of the synths in the background are so wet that the smaller flourishes in the background become incredibly difficult to hear, which makes a lot of the song sound the same, from part to part (even though it actually isn't). I like the drums that you use in this, but the primary beat sounds like it has a little copy-patsa action going. The break in the middle changes it up, but overall the pattern is pretty similar throughout. I love the bass drum used, though I think it could punch through just a little bit more. The bass notes in the square seem to have a few odd choices throughout the song, which while they sound intentional, they also sound off. Since the bass repeats the moments I'm thinking of also repeat, so I'll point out the first time these bass notes come up. At 0:40 the chord is based on scale degrees 5/7/2, but the bass remains on scale degrees 1/3, so it sounds odd there. At 1:10 the bass does a little arpeggio of the root chord, but the third is raised for no reason that I am aware of, so it sounds very out of place in comparison to the rest of the track. The chord that's being played there is also 5/7/2, so it's strange (but not completely odd) that the bass arrpegiates 1/3/5 there. There are a few notes in the background that clash against the harmony as well, aside from the bass moments pointed out above. At 1:09 the bass does a cool thing with that 7th scale degree where it raises up, but there's a texture in the background that holds that lower'd 7th scale degree that clashes with the bass. It'd be best to simply drop the note in the background texture (or change it to something else completely), in order to resolve this conflict. At 2:06 there's a lowered 2nd in the harmony that doesn't sound good, nor does it sound intentional. It should be changed to a normal 2nd scale degree note. There are a lot of little issues with this track, but the overall feel of it is actually quite solid. A poor note here and there wouldn't affect me much, but having so many notes sound off is throwing me on this arrangement. The wet reverb levels of some of the instruments are also getting in the way of the cool background elements that you have to keep things fresh, so it ends up sounding like it's all the same (even though it isn't!), so it would be a good idea to decrease the reverb and/or release of your extra wet instruments. The drums also seem a little lacking in variety, in the overall pattern it uses - changing it up once or twice more would help get more mileage out of this. It's good stuff, but a lot of little things added up to my vote on this one. EDIT (04/20): This applied to v1; there were significant changes made that addressed many of my grievances. Apologies for not returning to this one in a timely manner. --

Well, I'm not familiar with the Kingdom Hearts series, but from what I gather it has a very solid soundtrack. Fortunately this source doesn't disappoint - nice, dark energy pulsing from it. The arrangement does a nice job transforming it into more of a rock ballade. The mix is generally a nice, balanced mix with clean production values. In the beginning the acoustic guitar sticks out in the mix, though it seems to correct itself at 0:34. Mixing the acoustic guitar from 0:00 to 0:34 like you do at 0:34 on, so the acoustic guitar doesn't punch through as much. The arrangement does a great job incorporating the source while adding it's own spin on it, but there's a single issue that dogs the arrangement consistently throughout - the bass doesn't seem to act like a bass in this. Functionally, there is no bass that holds the harmonies together - the bassist has a tendancy to follow what other instruments are doing, at the cost of giving the song a solid bottom line for the rest of the instruments to play off of. Moments like 1:25 - 1:59, for example, hold the bass at the 5th of the chord in question, which sounds incredibly odd. 2:11 - 2:33 sounds like the bass is following one of the accompanying parts rather than allowing the rest of the harmonies to build off of it. I'd detail more cases, but past the 1:25 mark the issue is consistently there. This isn't a slight against the bass performance - it's well played, certainly - but the part that it plays doesn't function well as a bass part. There are two ways to address this - either the bass could be performed again to function as the bottom of the chord (with embellishments, but still functional), or if a lower bass part is added to the track that can act as the functional bass. Either fix would work. Aside from the slight mixing issue in the beginning (which is an easy fix) the bass is the only issue I take with this song, but it's such an important part of any arrangement, and it's such a consistent issue throughout this track that I have to consider it a dealbreaker. With a more solid bass this would be an easy pass, but without that the chords simply don't sound right throughout the arrangement. NO

Well, you can still submit to OCR on your own - as far as how you distribute your music otherwise we don't have a say. It's your music, after all. From OCR's content policy page (Submission agreement, point 7): However, if you're planning on having the music distributed via a label, be sure that OCR's policies do not conflict with their own (if they require being the sole distributor of your music, for example, that would be an issue for them). While other distributions shouldn't cause problems on this end - it's still your music, after all - it perhaps could cause some issue with your other distributors. This is OCR's content policy, so you can look this over and see if it will cause any issue with any other distributor you plan on utilizing. Hope that helps!