Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GrayLightning

  1. I agree with the complaints about this mix. Especially at times when the soundfield is a bit sparse, the drums' transient energy really cuts through this mix. I wish the drums were more subtle in this case, and like zircon said, less busy. But indeed Vig pointed out they do sound good. TO is so good at this sort of stuff, even though I disagree with the choices he made, I appreciate the talent and skill he does with these sorts of grooves. The piano and guitar work is nicely done, nothing flashy but nice. I like the string additions, but I wish there were supplemental pads going on in the background to thicken up the supporting material, as well as to soften the strength of the drums. I agree the ending is wtf level. Sorry, but this is one of the most unresolved endings I've heard in a while on the panel. Note, unresolved endings can work, depending on the context, but here it just sounds cheap. Still, this is a nicely arranged and executed mix. While I have reservations, the combination of tepid and TO's work does sound good. Borderline YES
  2. There's a lot of excellent ideas going on here. But at times I felt the instrumentation and composition were very thin and sparse. It almost felt like there were only 3-4 elements at play here. Half of the mix almost sounds like you turned on an arpeggiator, threw in some beats and melody and rinse and repeat. I know this may not be the case, but it felt and sounded like that. I think this needs more tweaking, more instrumentation, more supporting material, more relevance to the source tune and finally development (whether that's through dynamics, instrument/synth changes, change of texture, tempo, compositional work or all of the above - something!) This is compounded by the feeling of monotony, due to the lack of evolution or textural change. I love the bass work though. NO
  3. Great soundtrack selection. Crystalis is one of the most underrated ones and I wish more people would mix from this soundtrack. Unfortunately, you chose a bland source, but that's beside the point. The panning is indeed extreme and very wide. In many orchestral set-ups pianos are at the extreme sides so I'm willing to let that issue slide. Personally I prefer my pianos closer to center unless it's burried in a large mix. When there's not much going on, on headphones the extreme nature of the panning can be difficult to listen to. There is indeed a lot of crackling in the 20-30 second range, but it's fairly subtle on my side and not a dealbreaker. This would need to be addressed in my opinion. I like the arrangement concept and ideas, but I felt the ideas were underdeveloped. The orchestration and instrumentation didn't help either. It's very thin and sparse sounding. The melody line with the piano up top is so thin and plinky sounding. I would double that an octave lower to at least give it a little depth or use another sample. The supporting instrumentation and harmonies are in general very thin as well, aside when the piano left hand comes into play. The piano performance is also very robotic. I would work on making it sound less midi-like by making the timing of the notes a little more loose and free-flowing. At least edit the notes by mouse if that's possible to make it less perfect. Also this could do with more velocity tweaking in that regard, to give it more depth as well. Production in general is bland. This needs better samples or production work (better reverb design and eqing) to make these sounds shine. Above average with potential, but at this point, it just falls far short in both the arrangement and production categories. Keep it up there's promise here, I'd like to hear more. It's a NO though.
  4. I have the same reservations brought up by the NO group, and honestly, I don't like this mix one bit. I'll never listen to this one again. It's one of CP's least polished mixes... However, the arrangement is creative and the production, flawed as it is, is certainly passable and of good quality. While I don't like this mix personally, I think it's above the bar. I can't deny the capable combination of the arrangement and production. I did like the section in the 3 minute mark though. Smooth stuff! Solid overall and a YES from me.
  5. Wonderful intro. Very ethereal and dreamlike, I didn't think it was too drawn out personally. My one issue with the intro is there tended to be too much fx processing - when the signal is treated that much, it tends to become lo-fi-ish. After the intro the mix tended to get simpler and more and more conservative in terms of additions and ideas incorporated to the mix. I'd like to hear some more liberties taken with the melody, the harmony or the structure. I think this can benefit from more more instrumentation playing the chords too, maybe a pad to sit in between the melody, the beats and the background fx. After the introduction section, I think the next 5 minutes could be compacted and more focused, it's a fairly long piece. As the other judges said, the execution has a number of pros to be proud of, but the concept and arrangement elements do need to be expanded on with more personalization, direction and polish. Keep working at it, you have an interesting and unique ideas presented here and I'm looking forward to hearing more of your works and progress.
  6. I agree with Vig for the most part. I think the arrangement here though subtle and simple are nicely thought-out. The samples are good, but the production, mixing and mastering is bland. I don't agree with the tambourine being that loud. Listen to any london or media ventures production - they can be this loud. There are plenty of genres where the tambourines can be this dominant as well. In this case, I think it works fine. But while I agree with Vig, the underdeveloped qualities of the mix nag at me a bit. I'd like to hear some more. Tough one as I'm borderline, but NO.
  7. To think Jon almost didn't submit this! I told him he should, once he fixed the clipping issues and as that is done with... Jon is consistently probably one of my favorite pianists in the scene. His style is so organic. My only beef here is the performance flubs, but they add a sort of realistic charm to the piece. I wish that aspect was a little more clinical though. But overall, I enjoyed this one a lot. Superb arrangement, nice production, and inspite of some flubs, extremely capable performance. Ending was a little abrupt though. Also this just might be my overall favorite fzero arrangement to date. YES
  8. I thought this project initially had a lot of rocky roads, but it has really come through. Lots of great strong material. I was particularly impressed with the Malcos/RTF collabs - their chun li mix in particular. I thought this should have been the headlining track of the project for OCR. Superb stuff. Also enjoyed malcos' solo work like the dhalsim mix. You've really grown in the last year and have polished your mixes more than they used to be. Congrats especially to Shael and Malcos for the work in this project, you guys really got this one through.
  9. The mix itself is very good, as to be expected of Vurez. But I do not see how this falls into the vision that Shael initially stated that this should be urban, electronic, beat oriented. In the SF2 site it says "The arrangements contained herein have been designed to be evocative of dark, pseudo-romanticized urban imagery: abandoned playgrounds and crowded street markets; back-alley block parties and hole-in-the-wall bar dives, scenes that are, I hope, befitting of a tribute to one of the most iconic games in arcade history." I'm a little confused on how this mix from a genre perspective was found acceptable, but txai's was not - irrespective to the difference of quality between the two. I listened to pretty much all the mixes of the project yesterday though and thought Shael and Malcos did an otherwise great job with the project. The Malcos and RTF collabs in particular were delicious. Congrats to those involved.
  10. I'm now using the sig Doulifée made. Thanks! It looks great.
  11. Thanks Doulifée. I'll take you up your offer and I'll pm you details soon, once I find some kind of background for it.
  12. My secretary, Larry, provide me with a source file please. Chop chop!
  13. I'm out of the loop here lately, but I wanted to ask you guys who is known for making consistently good/classy sigs for others here? I need a new sig as I've been using this one for like a year now, time for a change!
  14. Too repetitive, too mechanical....the simplistic note structure gets really annoying after a while. The whole concept is lacking in cohesion and direction. Production is ugly to boot. The instruments/synths just generally sound so thin and brittle. This needs a lot of production work. I do like the drumwork though, to some extent. I wish it had more humanization and change ups. The best advice that can be given at this point really is for you to keep practicing and making new mixes. Through experience and time you'll get better. At this point giving more tips on this piece itself won't do as much good as your own personal learning. It's pretty decent work for a beginner - but considering the standards here, this needs quite a lot of work and polish. Don't be discouraged, just keep at it. Please post in the WIP/Completed forum in the future and get further feedback. NO
  15. Liontamer is the new Prot afterall - without the gravitas.
  16. I agree with the previous voters, this isn't as complex as TO's other mixes, even his recent one we just yesed is several marks above this one in my opinion. I have to say I didn't like the original source of this, it was really simple and eh, so it was very interesting to hear what TO did with this in comparison. I think TO did a great job with the arrangement esp. when comparing both material. The groove is sweet, as is the bass line - to be expected of TO. Production is definitely solid as well. Really no complaints except the ending felt rushed. Solid, capable and no reason to NO this. Nice work TO. YES
  17. The original is simplistic, old, repetitive, and ugly sounding. It really does show the amount of creativity you've put in this mix. The beginning parts underwhelmed me a little, especially when you had the orchestral snare playing, it sounded out of place. Also for some reason it sounded much more upfront than your other orchestral instruments. Usually you'd want to put that further back. Even if going for the london and hollywood sound usually those drums/perc that are put up front are the more exotic or electronic stuff. But fine... After that part though things really start to pick up when the synths and the beat start to come in at around the one minute mark. After that this one won me over. The pads, sounds, dense textures were great. This reminded me of a Phantasy Star Online soundtrack touched up. Some of your sounds are throwback sounds, there's lots of choir synths that harken back to the late 80s but you use them all so well. Component synthesis works so well collectively here that it's really a greater sum than the whole of its parts. The production is generally good, especially for this genre. I don't necessarily think this really needs more treble, as a lot of music of this nature works best with heavier middle and bottom frequencies, that's what gives it such density. If however this doesn't pass and you were to tweak, larry's EQ advice only works for winamp - those don't correspond equally with music software EQ. I would work on rolling off the EQ at the mids instead and boost in the 8-12K range by at most 3db. EQing greater than that will make this very unnatural sounding. The composition and arrangement in this is great, especially when you compare it to the shallow original. This is what remixing is about to me. You brought in so much personalization and style - your synths are fun and interesting - it's a kaleidoscope of absorbing textures. Perfect synth and instrumentation choices (except for the orchestral snare). Has a few issues, but this is one of the most interesting mixes I've heard in a long time, pure joy and very chill! YES
  18. I don't see why this is being rehashed again as we discussed all these issues already. But fair enough, djp should see this and read why there are apparently some who need more direction on what we are to do, not to mention why this singular issue has been much debated as of late. There are huge production issues here outside of being a chiptune by its nature. There are limitations placed for reasons that don't conform to OCR standards. Like it being in mono, intentionally (at least I hope this is intentional). In this case this is even limited more than Figaro. There has been a signaling from up top that some judges are purely missing out on the site's mission statements of 50-50 rule, regardless of whatever sub rule djp gave previously prior. This isn't a midi site. If you want superlative compositions with subgrade production I recommend you or the readers of this thread go to: http://www.classicalarchives.com/ or to a much lesser extent vgmusic.com (if you want to be relevant to this sphere). I personally do not see how the fundamental core mission statement/rules (whatever you want to call it) aren't so clear. So while we didn't get a formal and finalized recap from DJP that has led us down this circular path again, we did get a panel decision that represented a form of stare decisis (from the panel perspective anyway). But I do agree with Liontamer overall on what the endgame here needs to be... we collectively apparently need more defined/clarified rules from DJP.
  19. I can't believe larry didn't notice this was in mono. Geez. This is in MONO, and frankly sounds like it. Once I heard it I thought something foul was going on. It sounds so flat and dimensionless. Why is this in mono? It sounds like the stereo width is collapsed. Use reverb, delays, stereo widening tools - anything. Also there are double and quad panning techniques that can also help if used smartly. Not to mention, do encode this in stereo, regardless of whatever recording and production set up you are doing. The mix itself, is actually pretty good. I'd like to hear more expansion here. This feels so underdeveloped and the abrupt ending doesn't help. I'd like to hear this expanded with at least another minute, up to two. The performance is generally good, but there's some flubs. Production has a few issues, beyond the mono issue. Could use some eqing and definitely reverb. But I like the neutral nature of the sound. Fix these issues and I'll be YES on this. NO for now, please resubmit.
  20. Generally rigid performance, velocities could be smoothened out much more especially in the lower layers of the dynamic range. The lower ones especially sound especially muddy, like the beginning passages. I like the composition, but the robotic playing and sparseness doesn't help and I think better arrangement pacing could help this a lot. Can't say I liked the ending portions, it sounded like you were constantly hitting the keys so roughly and so consistently at the exact same velocity. It adds to the robotic nature of the piece. Production is basic and very bland. Abrupt ending. Not bad at all, interesting composition and arrangement but lacking in all sorts of polish categories. NO. Keep at it, you have potential.
  21. I was impressed by the WIP when I heard it, but admittedly was not too familiar with the source. After hearing the source though carefully, my opinion on the mix was softened some. The sequencing is generally solid. But I wish there was more going on here, at least to fill out the soundscape. Even minimalism uses interesting processing or dense sounds so that it's not so vacant. I thought the arrangement concepts were fairly straightforward and at times there's dichotomy between the liberal take on the mix via CP's parts and the aforementioned bit... Zircon called this ("There's no real connection to any earlier part of the mix, and the transitions across the board don't work. It sounds like there were a lot of ideas but none of them were fleshed out. Rather they were just put in somewhat haphazardly. Finally, the ending is awful. It just putters out without any sort of resolution. PLEASE change that."), while I wouldn't go that far, I too thought this could be polished some more. Production is generally plain, it almost sounds like the samples are completely untreated. The flute does sound forward although technically it vis-a-vis its recording. But personally that doesn't bother me - I don't think orchestral needs to follow typical orchestral placement - it can follow the studio concept of treating things individually, even if we say have a flute that is infront of everything else. I do wish the instruments had some more tail here, and as I said the lack of treatment makes it at times sparse in general due to the thin instrumentation. I think more reverb would have made the soundscape more interesting. Drums sound thin, and very very intimate. Like it was recorded in a small room - in relation to the orchestra. I wish that too had a little more reverb and density. The guitar is the highlight, I have no beefs with that at all. Like Liontamer pointed out, I think Christian's work and personal ornamentation with the performance helped this a lot enough where I am torn to give this a yes - even some of the issues floating about, but given I have enough reservations - very, very borderline NO. Hemo you're probably one of the most improved mixers of the last year, so don't take the decision too harshly. Keep at it, you're this close.
  22. Well the old versions, drums were far too loud. I'm not sure if you decided to reduce everything in relation to that as well, but now the other elements are quieter as well. I hope you're not using normalization to handle this aspect of the mixing issues? I think the personalization here is done better. I do like your classic synths and your leadwork is great. But like with my first vote, the mix is suffering from sparseness issues. There isn't much going on other than the lead and beatwork at times. This is much better mind you in the aspects I criticized on from the first version. In short: - Increase the volume of everything a little more (except the shrill lead in the beginning when it's so high up/that is fine as is). Especially the lead and definitely the harmony. - More harmonic work, thicker sounds. It's still feels empty. - Beats in the last one were too loud, here it's a little too soft. - Better groove and drumwork additions. - Think of expanding the structure some at least for a break, by adding some more expanded melody or harmonic ideas of your own while integrating with the mix as is. I agree with darke, this has a lot of charm and style. I dig. There's also creativity going on here. But I still think this needs more per the issues I brought up before. Keep it up, this definitely is worth working on again and resubmitting. Few beginners are ever in such a good position to pass OCR as you are, so I recommend you try again. NO, but you're getting much closer. Keep it up.
  23. Buzzy synths (though at least they sound thick) in the intro are annoying. The texture of the mix quickly wears out its welcome though. I do like the synth lead playing near the end though, the one with the plucky tone. Balance is off. The deep sounding hand percussion is too much for example. It's constantly hitting far away from center and taking up too much space. I know you're going for a left/right hand type sound, but the way it comes off here it's like the sound is bouncing back and forth in an annoying way. A lot of the instruments sound too centered other than the buzzy synths and the orchestral hits. I think you could pan the triangle a bit further out of center. The mix is indeed sparse. You have the percussion and synth taking up most of the space. This could do with more harmonic support, some pad, something to thicken up the atmosphere. I do like the vibe of this one though, apart from the synth choices. The percussive work is generally good. I liked this one more than liontamer did, the concept is really good, and it's a good framework. But the execution and polish is definitely sorely lacking. I hope to hear more from you in the future though, with more attention paid to the details. NO
  • Create New...