Gario

Holy shit, that intro fucking nails it. One of my favorite, underrepresented sources from this game and this arrangement sweet-spots the best part of it, from the get-go. If you ever want to get on my good side, that's one way to do it. The rest of the arrangement is pretty standard fair, chunky heavy metal arrangement with some cool leads and soloing. It's pretty good overall, but those first forty seconds are divine. Just deep, heavy bass, subtle arpeggio, subtle use of the source playing above it with that clean nylon. Beautiful. Now that I absolutely gushed on it, let's get into the production, which save for the beginning is a little more questionable. The first thing one can notice right away is that it's a quiet production - compared to other metal tracks on this site, it's very quiet. For the sake of listeners on the site who listen to multiple metal tracks at a time, the overall loudness should be comparable to what others have produced, else they will get sudden jumps in volume listening to other tracks after hearing yours at an appropriate level. Listening to the track, it sounds like you're losing a lot of soundscape real estate in your lower end. You have a solid bass, a rhythm that's heavy in the bass (which sometimes acts as a lead, as well). On top of that, there is no side chaining at all on the bass drum, which completely eats what limited space you have in getting louder before clipping sets in. I'd suggest clearing all of this space up by playing with the EQ on the rhythm guitar a little bit - give it less bass, and lower the impact on the low pass that you're probably using to give it some more upper EQ to compensate a bit. For the more bass-y instruments (like the bass and rhythm), utilize a little bit of sidechaining to the bass drum. Not too much, like in a trance song or anything, but enough to give you more headroom so you can make the song louder. At 1:47, you double the lead at an octave below. Considering the bass issue that I mention earlier, I'd suggest not doubling that lead an octave below - it creates mud, and give you less space to create a louder mix. As a general rule based on the physics of sound design, bass has a larger waveform than mid-and upper EQ, so you need to handle it sparingly. Use it when necessary, as it's important for the foundation of any piece of music, but handle it carefully, as it just eats up the amount of sound that you can get in a track otherwise. As much as it pains me to do this (again, amazing intro), due to the loudness issue, as well as the underlying bass issue that takes up all your soundspace, I'm going to send this back to you this time around. PLEASE resubmit it with the fixes to the overall loudness and less crowded lower spectrum, though, as this is a really good arrangement of my favorite source, and I'd hate to see this fall by the wayside. NO/RESUB

For most people, this isn't a concern due to the nature of attempting to profit off of arrangements (very tricky to do, due to licensing fees and such), but OCR has this page this page that answers your questions in full legalese. Hopefully clears any question on ownership and distribution you may have.

Damn, this is good. The bluegrass plodding and sax soloing all come together to make this one a great arrangement. The source is slow'd and steady, but it's still there, and the embellishments on it fit very stylistically with it, essentially transforming it from a fast Appalachian banjo track to a slower, more blues oriented bluegrass song. It's great. The EQ on the lead guitar is a little on the high-frequency side, but I think that adds to the authenticity of the piece - that tinn-y sound sounds appropriately bluegrass, to me. That organ is a little too loose on the performance, though. I'm sure it's intentional, but it feels like it's just missing the beats rather than giving it the swing you were going for. That sax is awesome, even though the first note it holds on is pretty flat. Great playing all around. I think it's a great track, and I'd be happy to see this one on the front page. YES

I really like this arrangement - very soulful, and the 'hip-hop' part is tempered with a great classical guitar. It works amazingly well together... and then it's over. It's not just that the song is short, though - nothing wrong with a short song - but it doesn't sound complete. The track builds up to something great (having an introductory section that lasts ~42 or 56 seconds, pending on what you interpret as "introductory"), and it pays off great with that hip-hop + guitar portion, but that's more than a third, or even almost half of the song invested into a build-up. The structure is quite unbalanced, leaving the listener a bit confused. A good rule of thumb to apply to song structure is about 25% maximum for an introduction, or 20% maximum introduction & ending, otherwise the song will feel incomplete. The ending also doesn't do it any favors - it just sort of ends. This exacerbates the incomplete feel that this song gives off. The production is quite good. The instruments are alright, too, though the violin could use a little better humanization, considering it's used as a solo & duet instrument. The vibrato is static - either personalizing the vibrato using the volume envelope or utilizing whatever tools that particular VSTi allows for adjusting that would help a great deal. The attacks on the violin also swell for each note, which kills any sense of phrasing that a real violinist would have. Utilize that swelling attack only in the beginning of a phrase and decrease it for the rest of the notes in the phrase; this will make it sound considerably more human. The drum pattern is very fitting, but it does sound like it's on autopilot for the portion that it's in. Use some fills, and don't be afraid to change it up, even just a little bit. I actually love this arrangement, but it doesn't feel finished. With an introduction like that, you need to give it some more meat. It's tough to give any helpful advice on that front, as that's something that could be taken in many directions, pending on where you decide to take it. While you do that, though, humanize the violin as I suggested, and make the drums more interesting. I do hope you send this back to us when you're done, as this sounds great. NO

Wow, talk about some tasty texture. I agree that the mixing is a bit off (theme being mixed into the background at moments like 0:34, background elements getting lost behind the bass at 1:50, etc.), but these aren't dealbreakers for me. It would be amazing if the mixing was crisp and clear, but it's okay as it stands. The energy is pretty high on this one. The section with the vocals and pads works very well in breaking up the piece, but otherwise the second half of the piece lasts a bit too long, fatiguing the listener toward the end. The stretch from 1:50 - 3:50 begins to sound the same at the end, as the texture doesn't change that much, the beats remain static and the harmonies are recycled throughout (3:10 - 3:19 being the only break in harmonies). The bass (not the wubby bass, the rhythmic one) repeats that same pattern over and over in that time frame. I'm glad to see Larry post that time stamp, as there is quite a bit of original writing in this one. I agree that the three step bass-line and harmonies help link this to the source in the long stretch without the melody, but it's still a bit of a stretch. The arrangement is well organized and fun to listen to, and it's got just enough for me to connect it to the source. It's a tough call. The production isn't quite enough to bring this down below a YES vote, but that whole second half drones quite a lot, too. I think it's still a pass, but it's a very close call, for me. YES/BORDERLINE

I've got to agree with Deia on the two thirds being great, the first third being questionable. The intonation issues in the beginning are quite significant, while later in the piece the performances improve dramatically. The pacing in the beginning could work alright, but it sounds like you're getting comfortable playing the music together before things really snap together at past the 2 minute mark. The mistakes sound like you're getting warmed up before really getting into the meat of it. I really like the arrangement, and I like both the slower and more upbeat aspects of it. However, the intonation issues last for more than a fifth of the piece (the cello, violin solos, and their duets, in particular). Everything after that part is awesome, but I feel the intonation issues last long enough to take the performance a bit under the bar. It honestly sounds like you have the chops to blow this out of the water, based on the rest of the track, so rather than give specifics on what you should do, instead I suggest running through the arrangement a few times with the group, recording each time, and picking the best out of each recording, as far as intonation, feel, etc. I like it, but I think the intonation of some of your slower solo moments need improvement before this can pass. Great arrangement, though, filled with energy. I do hope your group resubmits it with the intonation fixed! --

Not sure if this is an eval, as the first page isn't updated. I'll give my thoughts on it anyway, 'cause I wanna. I still like SFX (rawr), but Rozo is certainly correct - there's certainly a difference between using just using SFX and using them in a way that makes musical sense. Lots of effects throughout this one, and they're at least rhythmic. Not 100% on their use (there IS an excess of them throughout), but that's mostly a subjective opinion. The ring sound is piercing, though - low pass that sucka. There's a lot of fluctuation in the volume, making the track sound a bit unbalanced. It sounds like you're taking the volume knob and trying to find the correct levels throughout the song, which is unusual. Unless you have a reason to fade out or in (like in anticipation for a drop, or as a transition), I suggest keeping the levels more steady. If you want to humanize the sound by imitating the slightly different volumes that occur when a person hits two or more notes, that's likely better done with the velocity of the instrument rather than the mixer volume. Dat dirty bass, tho. Nice dirty bass. Nice soloing on those leads. Surprisingly good use of the panning. Sometimes the harder panning on the leads when they alternate is a bit distracting, though. I like it, but don't make that pan so hard. Hopefully some of that helps.

Oh, KH Dearly Beloved. Great source! The arrangement takes some time to get into the meat of the source, but once it's there it's very prominent. It does enough for me to keep me interested, as far as the arrangement, so that's a plus. Interesting way to begin the track. Upon first listen, the bass makes it sound like it's off key, but with a few listens it becomes clear that's actually the submediant (6th scale degree). Interesting effect. That SFX at 0:02 (it's like a ringing sound) tricks the ear in a negative way, making the synth above the bass sound incorrect (even though it's not). The intro harmonies would make more sense without that sound confusing the listener, so I suggest getting rid of it, or using it later in the intro at least (when the listener is used to the harmonies that are playing). The mix sounds very crowded. Lots of high EQ noise coming from the trance synths (2:26). The background pads at 1:55 also have this high end EQ issue - it's bad enough to where at 2:21 the music cuts out when the drums do their fill. It's especially noticeable when you have a sweep or crash fighting for that same EQ space, like at 3:15 - 3:20. Don't be afraid to lowpass some of your synths, as it'll give you more sound space to work with, which translates to clean loudness without needing to over rely on your compressors and limiters. The mix may also be overcompressed, as well, though it's hard to tell if that's an artifact of crowding the upper EQ space or not. Be wary, though, and make sure you're not needlessly squishing your mix by overcompressing it. When all of your synths are playing at once, the more 'real' instruments get drown in the mix. The piano at 3:48, for example, is nearly completely lost behind all of the synths when it's carrying the theme. Mix your important instruments closer to the front of the mix while keeping things like pads and arpeggios more in the background - it'll make it easier for the listener to follow what the track is doing. I like the arrangement, and there's a lot of great energy in this. I don't think it's quite there yet - the crowded upper end of the EQ on the synths and crashes/sweeps, the unbalanced mixing and possible overcompression all bring this one below the bar. That SFX in the intro should also be changed, for the sake of clarity, though that's less of an issue than the others I mentioned. I hope you submit this one again! NO/RESUB

Hey there, welcome to OCR! Glad to see you using the WIP forums here I can see you did your homework and got the notes pretty much all spot on - I can definitely recognize the source perfectly. It sounds like you added some additional licks at moments like 1:23, which was pretty cool to hear. The instruments are pretty plain, though - the source used softer electronic sounds, which made all of the instruments blend better. Those synths are very harsh (especially that lead) - for your next arrangement, I'd suggest branching out and using a variety of instruments. Work on making your instruments blend and compliment one another rather than using the same (or very similar) instruments for all of the parts. If you like doing straight covers, you're definitely doing a great job - covers are pretty sweet. It'd be pretty cool to hear a little more personality in the arrangements too, though. Take something that others composed and add some of your own ideas to it. It'll add something that others haven't thought of before, and turn it into something new and interesting! Those are my thoughts on it - hope this helps!

Hey there! Welcome to OverClocked ReMix - it's an honor to see you around here! OCR actually has a history with composers in the industry arranging great music for other games, as well as composers arranging their own video game music, so I'm happy to say it's perfectly within the bounds of the site (and it's always a little exciting, too!). If you want to submit something either for Larry's call-out or simply getting your music posted on here for its own sake, the instructions (format, e-mail to send the submission to, general parameters, etc.) can be found here. I'm excited to see what you have in store for us!

I like this one - it really took a sparse, empty source and made it into something new and fresh. High recommendations from me.

Hmm... Tricky. This is a very conservative set of mixes, for sure. Very well done, no doubt, but conservative. Production is impeccable, so nice work on that front. I'm all for the rather empty sound design, on this one - it works well, all things considered. The little talking bass adds a really cool twist to the track, and it fits the theme perfectly. The portion at 0:58 - 1:20 are nearly copy-pasted from the earlier section (save for the SFX at 1:15) - it would've benefited from at least a little change, there. At 1:20, though, I like the different drum pattern - that gives it a very different feel than the first section, and it segues into the next section very well. The fade out ending is a little lame, though. It sounds like you could've done more with the track, there, especially considering how conservative that section is. It's close, and I can feel Larry's issue with it. I think there's just enough variety from section to section to pass, though it's really close. Take note of the areas that I pointed out, though (0:58-1:20 being copy-paste, fade out ending, conservative second part), if this doesn't pass - it's very close, and I could see it swing either way. YES (BORDERLINE)

Mmm, I love the blending of electronic and orchestra as an idea - it's something that I like to try from time to time, myself. Good idea, and pretty good implementation. The percussion in the orchestra is spot on - great use of the tympani and glockenspiel. The strings, as mentioned above, have too much swell in their attacks. To make them sound human, only use a little swell on the first note that they play a phrase on, and make the other notes have much less attack. This idea also applies to the brass and woodwinds the you have playing in the background, as well. The piano sounds dry - you got to incorporate a little sustain pedal in there, and play with the dynamics more. It's not called a Forte-piano for nothin'. When the trance section comes in at 0:48, I find the absolute sudden, no-warning approach to be surprisingly effective - it just hits you, in your face, and it gets the listener's attention very quickly. However, this only works once - the sudden cuts and transitions that happen after just sound needlessly abrupt. The drums leading in at 0:54 are helpful; if you incorporate a little more at that transition, and make the trance-to-orchestra transition moments earlier smoother it would make it less disorienting for the listener. As far as the trance portions go, I love that arpeggiation, and the drums have some nice meat to them. The vanilla sounds start to wear on you after a short time, though. When they're blending with the orchestra later, it's effective, but you have long enough stretches of time where you leave the listener wanting some variety in the synths. Consider either blending the orchestra a little more, or incorporating a little more variety in the electronic instruments. The drums, while meaty, lack variety. You do drop the hats and snare from time to time, but it's otherwise the same pattern for most of the track. Spice those drums up, possibly changing the bass beat, hat pattern, etc. The portion of the source that you focus on also seems to be repeated a bit too much. It's a great section, but don't be afraid to branch out, blend other parts of the theme, etc., as the arrangement sounds a bit too repetitive, at the moment. The ending doesn't really sound like it ends... I'd suggest ending it on the tonic, or something, as the ending doesn't quite work, as it stands. I think the idea is really great, and the production isn't bad. The humanization of the orchestra, though, as well as the variety in electronic sounds and drum patterns, do take this one down a bit. The repetitive nature of the arrangement also gets in the way, and the cutoffs past 0:49 are distracting. If you fix those up, this would be a kick ass arrangement. It's not quite there, but I'd love to hear this sent back with those improvements. NO/RESUB

That's some sweet guitar action going on, here. If this were purely a guitar track I'd give it an easy pass - the guitar is mixed well, the performance is spot on, and it just sounds... tight. The drums are mixed a little too far back, but that's not a big issue - they're otherwise on point. The arrangement is pretty conservative, but the guitar licks and soloing over the theme adds enough personal flair to it. The synth work, though, is not very solid, and the implementation consists of mostly following the guitar, where it just sounds like it's in the way. The moments where it echos what the guitar does while the guitar solos over it is alright, as well as the portions where it does its own thing, but even then it's too quiet, and the synth it too thin to be noticeable. It only takes away from your track, overall, and you'd even be better off simply removing it entirely. If you want to keep it, don't use such a thin synth, and avoid simply following the lead guitar - the guitar can handle itself better without the synth. The strings in the beginning (and throughout) are too wet, and they're very mechanical. I like the intro - it's very haunting and sets up the rocking track beautifully - but you must make the strings sound more like a string section - make the tremolo pattern sound like downstrokes followed by upstrokes (having every second stroke sound slightly quieter than the one prior) rather than just having the same volume for every single note. Give the strings some better phrasing, enveloping the volume to shape the phrase (building up a little then decreasing a little for each small section, no more than 6-8 notches, for example). Little things like that can really bring the strings to life, and make that section sound amazing. I really like the meat of this track, but the strings have too much reverb and sound too mechanical. The weak synth unfortunately drags this down, as well. Please make the changes to the synth and string sections, and be sure to bump the drums up a little in the mix, giving them a little more presence. Awesome work, and I'd love to hear this with those changes! NO/RESUB

Nice use of 7/8 and alternating 8/8-7/8, it gives this a whole lot of character. Yeah, the source is followed pretty closely, but as has been mentioned above, the style and shifting meter give it more than enough personality to pass on that front. The bass sounds a little bit too loose for me, but otherwise I think you've got a good, lo-fi classic rock feel to this that I can get behind. That drum playing is freakin' sweet as hell, too. As an artifact to sticking as close to the source as possible, structure-wise, it does sound like it's dragging on a little bit, even at only 2:45. On top of that, you rely on that phased guitar for a solid majority of the song, and it really starts to wear at you over time. You break it up at 1:25, though, which helps a great deal. It's not a minor issue, but it's not a dealbreaker for me, either. This is a pretty sweet track, regardless of my issues with it. It certainly is clever, and it represents the source very well. Sat on this for a while, but listening to it again there's so much going on behind the relatively static arrangement (drums, fading the guitar, etc.) that I couldn't possible say no. Great work! YES

Wow, now this is funkalicious. It's got a whole lot of meat on it - sexy sax, tasty guitar, great drums, backing strings are bodacious... Yes, bodacious is the right word for this arrangement overall. I can't say anything in the production, as it nails the 70's feel pretty much perfectly. I do feel the intro section (0:00 - 0:24) could've been easily half as long as it was, as it lingers far too long. Once the music really comes in, though, the arrangement is quite awesome. Gotta thank Larry for the source breakdown, it most certainly is close, as far as that goes. I felt a little more connection to the source, though, at moments like 2:10 - 2:22 as well - starting from 1:50, the arrangement plays all the source harmonies in all the right places. As it set those harmonies up from 0:28 - 1:38, it's pretty clear that they're from the prior relatively direct source reference - I almost never lost track of the either the source itself or the presence of the the source, regardless of the soloing. It's not clear cut, but it should be acceptable, regardless. It would've been a safer call had the soloing made use of some more of the source harmony, though. Loved it, and I'd love to hear more from them. YES

This is a tricky one - atypical sources (two of them), and an interesting style, to boot. The structure of the arrangement is pretty simple (AB, moving from one source to another), but it works well enough. You derive more than enough originality in the choice of style, so you're well set, in the arrangement. Personally, while I don't normally like fade out endings, I thought it worked alright in this case. I can see others arguments that this could've developed a bit more into a more substantial piece, but I don't think it's bad the way it is, either. As far as the production goes, I'm not entirely sold on it. As has been mentioned previously, it sounds a little overcompressed, and looking at the waveform it looks like you were trying to keep it running at ~-3.0dB the whole time. There are parts when everything starts playing all at once (such as at 1:39, and especially at 2:02) which sound cluttered and unclear. Decompressing the track a bit would help give the mix a little more space, possibly helping clear those parts up a bit. I think you need to do some more mixing in those parts as well, but decreasing the amount of compression that's happening in this track will make the mixing easier, as well. The drums sound amazing, but they're mixed a little too far back for most of the track. It's minor, but I would recommend giving them a little more presence in the mix, while you're rebalancing. This one is a tough call - the arrangement is pretty good, and the production isn't the worst. I do think that it could be better, though - the density of the mix and the overcompression tip me just on the other side of the vote. Get those things fixed and I think it would be great. NO/RESUB

As far as the arrangement goes, it sounds like a lot of love went into this. Guitar, synths, fast paced drums, and even some wubs - all it needs is a kitchen sink and it's good to go! It's a very tasty blend of instruments, and I got a real kick out of it. The guitar playing was pretty good and the synths were pretty clear. The wubs were not quite as powerful as I would've liked - if you're going to add wubs, go big or go home. It just didn't go big enough, so they sound out of place. as a result. There are moments in the track where the bass falls behind in the mix (such as at 0:44 - 1:10). It makes the track sound like there's no bottom, at times. It's not a severe problem, but it would've been better had the bass been balanced a little better with the rest of the track. The arrangement was pretty sweet, personal grudge against the source aside (fun fact - I didn't enjoy the source). I enjoyed your arrangement much more than where you derived it from - it was making me dance a little in my chair. Little mixing issues and weak wubs aside, you did a great job on it. YES

Goldeneye music, man that brings me back. I used to love that game, and it had a great soundtrack, to boot. It's a tough one to handle for the sake of this site, though, due to how often it references the 007 theme song. As that does not originate from the game, it can't be counted as source, and relying on it too heavily may cause the separate issue of using too much outside source in your mix. It's not necessarily your fault, as the source makes heavy use of the 007 theme, but this arrangement utilizes too much 007 for the site. Aside from that, even if the source didn't use the 007 theme as much, the arrangement does stick a little close to the source, as well. I'd argue that the guitar and piano do add some nice creativity to the arrangement, but the structure is basically 'Run through the source once', which doesn't quite cut it. I really liked the guitar that was in this track, but I feel it was nearly lowpass'd out of existence. It just sounds muffled - you really need to let more mid- and high-end frequency to pass through for it. From what I can hear, it sounds like there's a huge amount of reverb on it, as well. You don't need to make the guitar that wet, unless you're going for an early 80's sound, or something. The other instruments do not sound humanized at all. If you incorporate "real" instruments, you need to pay special attention to whether or not the instruments sound like it was really performed. There are a few ways to do that, from changing around the volumes for each note to shaping the phrasing using said volumes. Varying the different envelopes (such as the attack value and release value) can also be essential to making the instruments sound realistic. It's not easy, and it takes spending time studying what each instrument would realistically sound like in order to change these values meaningfully. The quick and dirty of it is simple - would the musician play something like that? If not, it's probably not humanized enough. The entire track does seem to have a low pass on it. A little low pass isn't bad, as it clears up some headroom from frequencies that people can't hear, but too much and it makes the mix sound muffled. Lighten up on it for your upcoming tracks. As mentioned by Liontamer, the instruments don't sound like they're mixed properly, as well - instruments that sound like they should be in the foreground (like the guitar) sound like they're in the background, and background elements (like that piano) sound mixed too much in the foreground. It's a fun track, but aside from the humanization and low pass issues, it seems that the arrangement relies a lot on the 007 theme song. While I like it, I don't think this is something the site can accept. I would recommend giving the WIP Workshop a look, as the people in there can help you get a good idea as to what this site is able to accept, as well as help a great deal on your mixing and production. Good luck! NO

Mmm, I really like the direction you took this one. That acoustic guitar sounds great, and the elements that you add that aren't acoustic fit very well, as far as the source is concerned. I'm not sold on that ending - fade-outs are a bit boring - but it's not the worst crime in the world. Nice work

"Nick? NICK!" "Fuck me running..." ^ One of the great lines from metal, and it came from Nick. We'll miss you, man.

Well, I really enjoyed the arrangement of the source material - there's a lot of originality in the harmonization of the source. The vocals are quite well placed, and I kind of appreciate not using the original text (it's funny, but this sets the mood better). You kind of go for a more old-school electronic sound, which stylistically works pretty well. I'm not feeling this production at all, though. The mix is very overcompressed - virtually all the sound that you have gets lost behind the bass. Looking at the waveform, every peak of the bass just completely squishes the other sounds that are playing. On top of that, the mix is redlining throughout, so even while compressed there's still clipping throughout. Even without looking at the waveform, it's easy to hear that most of your instruments are just getting lost behind that bass. The vocal clips are impossible to distinguish once the music is in place, instead just sounding like washed out noise. I can't see any other fix other than mixing that bass down enough for the other instruments to come forward, or dropping some of the instruments when you want to go with that full bass sound - everything together simply doesn't work, as far as production goes. You need to get a good balance of sound before you compress everything. On a relatively smaller note, I felt the drums were on the weak side, when it was just bass and snare. They sound thin, like they're there just to fill the space. The toms were pretty cool, though, and sounded like they had a better presence, so I know you could probably find something with more definition than that. Before I can consider this for a post, you're going to need to fix the compression and clipping on this one - it's not at acceptable levels, as it stands. I would also suggest looking into defining the snare and bass better, as they just sound too thin, to me. NO

Slow and haunting in the beginning, builds to something big. This works very well - excellent wind writing (woodwinds sound fabulous in this - they're not easy to work with). Brass is powerful, and the piano really gives the rest something great to build off of. As far as orchestration goes, this is absolutely great. I giggled at the Xylophone at 0:32 - effective, yet subtle. That guitar is the weakest link in this arrangement. It doesn't seem to serve much purpose, and the tone is very bland. It's mixed so far into the background that I feel you could literally remove it completely and lose nothing in the piece. I would consider doing so, but it's not too important - it doesn't add much, but it doesn't detract too much, either. The arrangement is on the conservative side, but there are some really great parts that you write that builds off of what you have earlier (original trumpet writing at 1:36, chilling vibraphone at 2:14). The strings have some really nice part writing that's hidden behind the steady staccato in the beginning, too. Conservative, but has just enough interpretation to pass. Good thing, too, because I really like this one. The fade-out ending leaves me wanting more, and is a little bit disappointing considering how well it's built up. I really feel it makes the song sound incomplete, but I suppose it's better to leave the listener wanting more than it is to overstay your welcome. It's not good, but it doesn't ruin the experience too much. Yeah, it's great, despite the guitar and ending. Send it off, I say! YES

If you use an emulator, there is often the ability to separate the channels, in order to listen to each individual line on its own. It's very nifty, for dictating a source. Generally, it's in whatever sound options the emulator has. I'd give specifics, but I legitimately forgot exactly how the particulars work, since it's been forever since I've last worked with it. It's not difficult, though - find an emulator, get the ROM (if you own the game already, of course), and tinker with the options, and you'll eventually figure it out. As far as not remixing CD based soundtracks... C'mon, give em' some love, too! There's plenty of great music on that side of gaming that you'd otherwise miss out on, don't limit yourself if you don't need to

Legend of Dragoon love! Awesome! Big fan of the game, and I'm very glad to hear the soundtrack get some love on here. You have a very smooth, relaxed arrangement, and I absolutely love the lo-fi direction you went with the guitars and drums. It's chill, and it works great. The arrangement is very plain, and it has a pretty static soundscape. It relies quite a bit on the additional flourishes in the guitar portion and melody in order to set itself apart from the source, but I'm not entirely convinced that it's enough. The overall soundscape, while great, doesn't really develop - it stays in the same place throughout the entire song. Fortunately the song is short enough to where it doesn't create too much of an issue, but it would be a good idea to change up the texture once or twice in the track (drop a few instruments, perhaps utilize a new synth for a section, etc.). The ending is a bigger issue, though. It just sort of ends - that doesn't do this mix justice. This track really needs a more substantial ending than what you gave it, and it would be very helpful if the arrangement took a few more liberties with the source. The production is quite good. I know you're going for the lo-fi sound in the guitar, and it works for the most part. At 1:04, though, the guitar harmonies punch through too much - due to a combination of the poorer quality recording and mixing it louder than normal, it sounds jarring. Mix that part down, making it match the guitar levels of the rest of the track. I like it, but that ending kills it. While the conservative nature of the arrangement, static soundscape and the slip up on the guitar mixing at 1:04 affect it as well, that ending is what made me vote as I did - give it a more substantial ending, fix the mixing at 1:04 and play around with the source & soundscape a little more. If you do that, you'll easily have my vote, as I think this is a great track, and very close to being a pass. NO/RESUB