Gario

I've not really played too many Touhou games (which is a surprise considering I actually do enjoy bullet hell games), so I'm less familiar with the soundtrack outside some very famous examples. This does sound like it could fit into a game, considering it seems to give some space for SFX. Not sure if that's the intent; if this isn't for a game, this could use a little more EQ balance in the higher EQ range, just to give it some more clarity, and carve into that midrange EQ since that's coming out pretty hard throughout. The composition is subdued, but somewhat intense with those stabs. The almost guitar-like synth is smooth as butter on top of all of that, and just sounds great above the rest of the mix - almost reminds me of that Terra Cresta C64 title track by Galway (the lead at 1:57 in particular). I like it. The instruments are kind of basic, but that's not really a bad thing; if it works for what you want then it works. The production is fairly good, so I think you did a pretty good job on this for what you were looking for. I've been lookin' around lately, so if you don't mind me asking how did you do your visualizer? I've looked at a few options, but I haven't come across something that I wanted to use yet.

Man, Starcraft has some classic music - it's a shame people don't do more arrangements of it around here. This one shows that the Blizzard soundtracks have a lot of potential for some great ReMixes, to boot. The arrangement is pretty clean cut, but the change from synths to guitars adds a lot of character to the arrangement (especially considering how ambient and alien the source sounds). It is a hair on the conservative side, but I think there's enough personal flair to it to give a pass to it. Oooh, I am falling in love with these filters applied to the guitars to create those alien sweeps and other effects. It's really a song that benefits from such wild filters and effects, with much of the song being otherwise static and/or repetitive. It's a really great way to keep things interesting and maintain the illusion of movement in the track. Great production values seal the deal for me. While I could see others perhaps being hesitant on posting this due to it being conservative, I think it meets our bar pretty well. YES

pretty sure that's emu that commented on it with jive this time, not i :3

[This is an automatically generated message] I've reviewed your remix and have set it to Completed status, indicating that I think your remix is ready to be submitted to the Judges Panel. Congratulations! If you feel like you still need to work on your track and want more feedback, you can change the prefix back to Work-in-Progress and we'll go through the review process again. If you decide to submit your track, please change the prefix to Submitted after sending your email. Thank you!

EVAL Well let's see what we've got here. I haven't done one of these mod evaluation things officially in ages, but let's give this one a shot anyway - I've got work to do, and this is a great way to avoid it! Well first and foremost - fantastic production values! That's some really good sounding orchestra you've got goin', here. I like the breadth of instruments used here, too, plenty of woodwinds and brass to accompany the all-too-common-yet-still-beautiful string sections. The pairing of pan flutes with the strings really gives it a bombastic, Hollywood sound (a trick of their industry, if anyone wants to add a little oomph to a string lead - layer flutes over strings!), though on the second pass of the theme changing that lead out a little bit would help the arrangement stand out a little better as it's overuse does make the arrangement sound a hair static. It's not too problematic since the brass lead for the middle section does help break things up, but it's a thought to spice things up. As you say, this is a little conservative, but you'd be surprised on how permissive the panel can be on that front. While minimal, there is definitely some personalization going on in here (don't think I didn't catch that wonderful "Prelude" reference at 1:46, for example). It might still be too conservative, but I think it's worth at least sending over to the panel even if you have no plans on expanding it further. The production quality is definitely there, and the arrangement & orchestration is quite good. The worst that could happen is it gets rejected with the judges saying "It's too conservative", so I'd say give it a shot. Of course if you add some more texture flairs like the prelude at 1:46, or even do some subtractive arranging in the second half of the song (e.g. remove some source elements to give the arrangement some more variety) that would probably be enough to bring this over the top from "too conservative" to "hey, this is interesting and different enough for OCR". Regardless, I think it's pretty well done and I definitely got a kick out of it, so nice work!

Holy shit, you're getting a live performance of this? That's fantastic! Y'all, if you haven't listened to this one before, go check it out, it's a *fantastic* arrangement. It's about an hour long, but hot damn if it isn't a *great* hour of your life.

This is definitely an interesting direction to take the track - I like it quite a bit. I wonder if you could provide a timestamp for source usage? If you have it tagged for mod review it sounds like you'll want to submit it to OCR (that's what the tag is for, after all), so I figure I can help you out a little bit while I'm browsing in here (haven't done that in some time!) - if anything, that's the item that'll most likely raise an eyebrow, but it's not too difficult to nip in the bud with some timestamps up front. Whatever the plans for this, I do think it's a really cool track regardless. Sounds like you want to take a second pass on the mixing and EQ, which I can agree with - sounds like you already know how you intend to improve it. Anyway, enjoyin' the sound on this one!

Oh, this is pretty cool, with some rich pads in the background and nice, twangy bass to ties it all together. I like the variety that the lead has throughout the track, too - doesn't take the track one for one, but it also really feels like an extension from the source all the same. There are a lot of cool background elements that are happening in the back ground, too, though the lead is a touch loud so it's harder to hear that stuff. Great stuff!

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

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.