Chimpazilla

I love this concept! But proph is right, it's just too repetitive. The groove and energy stay the same all throughout most of the piece starting at 0:00. The arrangement could use a proper (drumless, ambient) intro, and the drum groove and sounds should morph and change as the arrangement moves forward (adding percussive loops or sfx or something to change the energy here and there). The writing needs variation, and there are many sections in here where an original motif or solo could sit on top of the soundscape (this is actually a perfect source to do such a thing with). So many great ideas here, just needs more variation and interest, and some lead motif work would really be nice. I do like the drumless breakdown, followed by a doubletime drum beat with a few cool fills, that's the right idea. Having a few more interesting fills and drum groove/sound changes in the first 2 1/2 minutes would also help. The mix is super dense, I recommend using EQ to make sure nothing is competing too terribly, especially in the low end and mid/high mids. I don't hear any sidechaining, this soundscape would really be grooving with some sidechaining on almost everything. Primarily, less repetition of the same phrases and ideas and instrumentation, and more unique ideas and writing, and this will be an absolute banger. NO

Hhhhmmm... it is concerning when the artist deletes his link to the track mid-vote, without comment, but ok, YouTube it is. This is a very cute idea, I love the concept. But the arrangement is super conservative, and repetitive. This remix is two playthroughs of the same material, back to back. The guitar samples sound good, although the vibrato on the lead enters the same way at the same intervals, which makes it sound uncanny rather than charming. I think the sample works just fine in timbre, but varying the vibrato timings would help. The overall mixing and volume balancing sounds generally good to me, although I agree with my fellow Js that the low end could be cleaned up just a bit with some EQ so the low elements don't compete. This arrangement is borderline too short at just over two minutes, and the repetitive nature of it (two identical playthroughs) is dealbreaker, but I enjoyed listening to it nonetheless! NO

I voted on this in 2022 so I'll use that vote as reference, even though this is a new file. I give you a lot of credit for being this persistent in your resubmissions! I still think this is a cute and well-crafted arrangement, but the sounds and mixing still aren't getting it done. I said in my previous vote that the soundscape sounded "dated" rather than nostalgic, and I still feel that way, although I feel like it has more to do with the writing than the sounds themselves. These sounds come off as very plain and vanilla, and the simple gridlocked writing does not help. The sequencing of everything sounds stiff and forced. The organ in the intro does not go with the rest of the soundscape at all so it sticks out. The volume has been lowered since last time but it still does not sound right. I agree with Larry about the lead at 0:27, it is not a pleasant sound for a lead, it is bland and low-midrangey and it is doing a phasey thing that sounds comical rather than cool. This lead sound just brings the vibe down rather than up. That little section of lead would be completely improved with a beautiful glassy synth or delayed pluck playing that motif instead. I agree with proph that the call and response in that section is very nice. At 0:42, with no transition or signaling, we are into a drumless breakdown, but the bubbly backing synth sounds weird to me, although I appreciate that it has some filter movement on it. The lead pluck sounds very plain and uninspiring here, and the countermelodic patch is very sharp sounding. The instruments in this section do not work well with each other in my opinion. The layered lead at 0:57 has a similar problem. I think I hear at least three patches playing the motif there, and those patches do not compliment each other well. The whole thing together sounds boxy and heavy with low-mids. A layered lead needs to sound like one patch. I recommend choosing patches that sound more similar to each other, and definitely something with fewer low-mid frequencies; something prettier like a glassy legato saw patch. From 1:08-1:23, the bassline sounds very bland and simple. The sound itself is not terrible, but it is missing something. I honestly think that if there was any sidechaining in this mix (I still don't hear any, anywhere), if the kick was sidechained to this bassline and I could hear it ducking the bass, this little section would sound cool, but as it stands now that section lacks any kind of groove for me. The bass here sounds almost off-timed with the drums, but I am not completely sure. I really like the arp that begins at 1:15. That's a good sounding patch. I wish it would do something interesting though. That would be a fun sound to experiment with automated filtering or panning (NOT too much, keep it subtle) or other kinds of effects. At 1:23 the faux-trumpet lead is yet another sound that isn't well suited to play a lead line. It just doesn't sound sophisticated or modern, it has a ton of low-mids, and the filtered attack gives it a quacky sound that detracts from the more serious nature of the writing and the rest of the instrumentation. This trumpety synth is paired with a tiny glassy bell which sounds great but again the two sounds are so dissimilar and they don't compliment each other well at all, it does not sound cohesive in any way. At 1:47, that's the best lead sound I hear in the entire mix. I would love to hear some filter movement on it, that would be super nice. At 2:01 going into the outro, there's a filtered bass patch that sounds amazing. I want more of that kind of thing throughout the arrangement! Then the organ and choir return for a complete set of organ/choir bookends. I'm not a fan of the organ, choir sounds workable though. The drums throughout the arrangement are mostly on autopilot other than the fills, so the drum groove becomes repetitive as the piece moves along. This arrangement could use some stronger transitional elements to prepare the listener for all the shifts in energy throughout the piece. The drum fills are good for this, but there are many other options for transitions to really stitch the piece together and give it nice flow. Some of the sections have no transition at all. Other than that though, I actually think the arrangement itself is pretty great, it has good energy control and arrangement dynamics. One thing I really like about this arrangement is that care has been taken to change the instrumentation as the piece moves along; no one element outstays its welcome and that is a very good thing! I admire how tenacious you have been while working on this over a long timespan. I still think this arrangement is workable, but it needs to sound more cohesive, more modern and more sophisticated. It just takes time to learn what sounds good and how to make that happen. NO

This is my first time hearing this mix, I did not vote on the original submission. This arrangement starts with ambiance recorded directly from the game (drenched in reverb, together with the opening strings), we would need to make sure that it is ok to use the actual game audio in this remix. The opening string part is really nice. The huge bass blasts that follow at 0:56 are great, big and badass. I kind of wish there were fewer of them, or at least if elements could be entering one at a time after each bass section. There are five of them with only the game ambiance audio for company. Having too many of them in a row with nothing else added causes them to lose impact. At 1:26, we are into a beat. There's a rather plain synth playing a pattern together with the buzzy synth (is it the same synth doing the bass blasts?). These two sounds don't sound good together to me, they don't compliment each other well. But then there is the drum groove: a very simple kick, hats and vanilla clap. I get that this simple drum kit is mirroring that of the source tunes, but they sound weak, thin, dry and out of place to me against the heavy buzzing synth. The kick is very quietly mixed and lacks impact. The drum pattern itself is simple and repetitive. In the two source songs, those simple drums fit the 90s soundscape and they are mixed more prominently as well. This section is a huge departure from the beautiful strings in the intro and the big badass bass blasts. The soundscape feels disjointed to me. At 1:41, we get what sounds like surf guitar, it is loud and drowning in reverb, which makes the drum elements sound even more quiet and dry by comparison. The guitar is performed well, but it is another odd addition to the soundscape in my opinion. At 2:55, after more game audio ambiance, there is a violin (synth) that sounds good to me, very moody. But this section goes on quite long without doing much of interest. The bouncy pluck doesn't sit well with the violin synth for me since they have such different vibes (the pluck is lighthearted and playful while the violin thing is moody, so I am emotionally confused at this point). Good transition back into the heavier soundscape at 3:40. But now we have violin, guitar, buzzy synth, and the dry 90s drum kit. I do like the guitar soloing in the final passage before the ending. I love the concept of this arrangement, but I feel it isn't there yet. The elements are mismatched both in timbre and processing, and the soundscape sounds too disjointed to me; it takes me out of the feel of the piece and lowers my listening enjoyment. I think even just rebalancing the elements in volume, and making the reverbs match better so the instruments and drums sound like they are more in the same space would help a lot. I also don't hear any sidechaining on anything. I will spare you the entire sidechaining Ted Talk I usually do, but that would add a ton of groove to the parts of the song that have drums. NO

This is a premaster. Before busting this remixer on frequency holes, I put some quick mastering on the track and it sounds immensely better. Proper mastering can cover a multitude of sins. Even so, I had to crank up the low-lows with my multiband compressor to get it sounding bassy enough, so the low end is definitely mixed too softly and tamely. But why submit a premaster to OCR? This mix definitely needs a volume rebalance. Bass is too quiet, leads are too quiet, mids are too loud, there's a wide-panned pad that is way too loud. The drums are comically quiet. I can barely hear the kick, there seems to be zero sidechaining on any element in the track (oh the humanity!) and the snare and hats are too quiet. The drums consist of one loop repeated over and over which makes the drum groove too repetitive. A good DnB beat should have many, MANY fills and variations throughout the track, and the drums should be mixed loud and proud. The total lack of sidechaining means this arrangement does not move or groove, and that's a darn shame. The instruments are placed oddly in the soundscape. The pad is super wide, and the pad includes a lot of low-mids, and low-mids sound awkward and muddy when panned this wide. It would be better to have the pad mostly centered, with its high-mids and highs appearing more wide. Same for the leads. Leads are centered 100% here, it would be nice to hear the upper end of some of these leads having some side presence. Snare and hats also live 100% in the center, with no side presence at all, so they sound weak. In fact, that pad feels especially odd to me. So, I decided to listen to the track in mono in Cubase to see what is happening. In mono, that wide pad disappears. Like, 100% disappears, not just a little but totally. Whatever has been done to this pad to widen it this much has made it go out of phase. Anyone listening to the track played back on a phone speaker will not hear the pad at all. The most obvious instance of this starts at 1:01. Check out the mixdown in mono and you'll see that pad is inaudible. Despite the mixing flaws, there are a lot of cool ideas in this arrangement, and great synth sounds. The intro could use some kind of sfx or atmo to go with the chippy arp, it sounds very simple and plain until the first pad comes in at 0:10. The ending is disappointing, there is a bit of a cooldown as the drums filter away, but then there is no resolution and it just ends. It feels like at the very least it needs that last note of the phrase to feel complete, as the white noise whoosh is playing. I love the concept of this, and I think it can be great with improvements. I love the shift at 2:02 to chiptune, then back to the regularly-scheduled soundscape at 2:12, awesome idea! I agree with my fellow Js that repetition is a problem, but that could be addressed with a few extra arps, countermelodies, varied lead patches, sfx coming into and out of the soundscape, or more filtering and effects. But primarily the mixdown needs work: volume balancing and placement/panning of instruments. And some sidechaining would be nice. NO

Very interesting arrangement and mix. After listening through this twice, I find myself in agreement with prophetik on all of the points he brought up. The elements don't mesh well together. The bass patch is simplistic with no processing or filter movement on it. The bass has so much tone to it that it plays almost like a primary element (like a lead) when it would probably be better served as a less prominent but supportive element. The bass is so mid-low heavy (having its loudest frequency at about 100Hz) that it sounds oddly muddy, and it sounds low-passed as well. There are synths in the mix that are swimming in reverb (the swirly pad) and other elements like the hats and percussion that are 100% dry so they stick out of the soundscape more than they should. The lack of sonic cohesion feels odd in a way that I'm having trouble describing fully. The same sounds are used throughout the track, and as proph mentioned they are playing the same writing over and over so the arrangement has a repetitive feel. There is a lack of melodic or motivic content in the arrangement, so as proph mentioned, the arrangement is primarily an exploration of textures. This kind of arrangement can work, but only if there is more variation as things move along. The arrangement lacks good transitions. At 0:26, with zero signaling, everything stops abruptly and this huge basslline begins, which feels very jarring. Again at 1:56, a new section begins after a very short break and zero transition. Again at 2:16. And as proph pointed out, no cooldown or outro... it just ends. There are some excellent elements in this mix though. I really like the percussion pattern from 0:56-1:04, and the way that is filtered before coming to a stop, yeah I dig that. I really like that perc sound everywhere it is in the arrangement, it really moves and grooves. From 2:31-2:54 that perc sound changes and varies as it moves along, very nice. prophetik likes that sound too from what I see in his vote! I also agree with proph that this one seems sort of close, because there are in fact a lot of cool ideas going on here, but they just aren't cohesively mixed, the writing gets repetitive and the lack of melodic content hurts it even more. I would love to hear this one again with the mixing improved, transitions added, a proper cooldown and/or outro, and some more melodic content. NO

This may be the most sausagey waveform I have literally ever seen: So.... alrighty then. It hits 100% full force from the first note. It feels very, very loud. I don't hear overcompression, and the mastering tolerances are ok; it's not overcompressed but it's very dense and it feels oppressive. Wide-panned chugs and rhythm guitar, I agree with proph that this placement in the stereo field feels off since they are SO wide and loud. The lead guitar sits nicely centered with side-presence highs when it plays, but the lead only plays for a small part of the track. The lead is the best-mixed element in the whole mix. There's a tiny arp in there which also seems centered which is fine but it is mixed extremely quietly. The drums seem to sit entirely centered other than a few tom fills. This arrangement is relentless and repetitive. At 2:40 there's a break in the action and this section sounds very cool although the dreamy synth instrument is also panned super wide. Why? The chugs are oppressive to me, because they play so much, and also they sound hollow to me since they live almost entirely between 200-300Hz which is kind of a weird zone to have an instrument sounding this prominent and totally stereo spread. The snare also has a hollow snappy feel to it and from what I can tell on SPAN the snare fundamental seems to also sit at 250Hz. So. Many. Chugs. I like this concept but it is just too repetitive with the same writing for much of the time, same energy level (until the short breakdown right before the end) and the same instrumentation all the way through. No real outro or ending, it just stops. I do like this concept but it just needs more development and variation, and some mixing work on stereo placement and EQ of the parts. As I sit here listening and watching on SPAN I notice the correlation meter is going back and forth from positive to negative. Uh oh. So I put the track on mono, and no surprise, the chugs almost completely vanish. Whatever has been done to get these chugs that wide has caused them to go out of phase. That will need to be fixed. NO

What interesting original source tunes, full of mystery, and so is the remix. I love the emotional vibe that you've got going here, very creepy and melancholy. I feel like the entire first two minutes of the remix are so repetitive; the backing chords (awesome as they are) just repeat over and over, verbatim. The oboe lead with original writing is a nice touch, but it is mixed in quietly and distantly (a lot of reverb and no predelay), and the oboe patch is not very believable. During these two minutes, nothing else of interest is happening, the tabla groove is the same all the way through. There are some drum hits and rolls but they are comically quiet, and with no variation, they are the same each time. Some drum writing variations, and some extra elements or ear candy would really make those two minutes more interesting. I love the weird transition at 2:13! But that same phrase repeats a lot of times. As this section continues, I realize that it isn't a transition but a section unto itself, and nothing else very interesting is happening as this section moves along. That feels like a lost opportunity to really advance the arrangement with additional elements, if not percussion or ear candy, at least some dreamy atmo or textures could come in during this section, to really accentuate the emotional vibe. The filtered vocal during this section does have some loud midrangey frequencies as Emu pointed out. At 3:52 the string patch isn't keeping up with the fast note pattern due to its attack which is a tad too long for that section of writing. Other than that, and the oboe and bass clarinet not sounding real, the rest of the instrumentation works well enough. I agree with my fellow Js that this arrangement has a ton of promise, it is really interesting, creepy and emotional. But it's not quite there yet in terms of production. I agree with Emu that this arrangement could be brought up to par with just a few tweaks and additions. Hope to hear it again! NO (resubmit)

I agree with my fellows that the vocals are sinking this. They are loud, dry, nasal (midrangey), pitchy and wavery. I love the remix concept, but the vocals need another production pass to make them settle into the song rather than riding on top of the soundscape as they do here, and the vocal performance needs to be improved, either through retakes or extensive pitch correction, and proper processing. The rest of the instrumentation is working well, although I agree with Larry that the piano at 0:20 feels bright and out of place. For me it's primarily the vocals that need work since they are the most prominent element in the track. With the vocals sounding better this is an easy yes from me. NO (resubmit)

I love this theme, have remixed it myself. I also really like this arrangement. I love all the rhythmic changeups especially. I love the creepy synths and sfx, and the reverses here and there. I love the big monster hits in the middle. Tons of fun detail in the arrangement. I agree with proph though that the reuse of the same instruments all the way through is hurting this arrangement by making it feel very repetitive. I believe some of the sections are copied and pasted into the second half with no changes. (if there are changes, they are minimal) Production-wise, this is a sausage. It is indeed slammed from beginning to end. The mixing is dense as heck, and I don't hear any sidechaining in the mix. If any sidechaining is there, I suspect it is only happening on the bass. In a track this dense, more elements should get some sidechaining (in varying amounts), which will give the piece more groove and also clean up your mixing, preparing it for a clean master. I also suspect some EQ would help, by taking lows off of elements like the pads, plucks and leads, giving the bass and kick more room to breathe without smashing the soundscape this much. The mastering here is balls-to-the-walls and just adds to the oppressive feel. It does not need to be this loud. There is so much to love about this track and I would love to see it posted! It just needs another pass at the production to get it sounding its best first. NO (please resubmit)

Cool arrangement, lots of neat ideas here. But the production needs more work. Right off the bat, the bass that comes in is way too loud and dominating, it is pounding my ears at 90Hz. The synths playing melodies and countermelodies are all playing in roughly the same frequency range, and when the soundscape is full such as at 0:32, there is just too much playing at the same time and it is fatiguing to listen to. It feels like not much EQ has been done to allow each synth to breathe within the mix, and everything is stepping all over each other, in frequency and in writing. From 0:33-0:46 I hear a lead, an arp, a countermelody, and the upper end of a very busy bassline, all mushing together. The writing is all super busy and the synths do not have room to breathe. Listening all the way through, there are several sections that are overly busy like that. Despite several areas with very cool filtering and bitcrushing, the mix sounds repetitive because the timbre of the synths never changes all the way through, and sections of writing seem to be repeated wholesale. The synth that is used primarily as a lead is probably better used for a backing writing part; the patch is cool but it is nebulous and does not carry a lead melody well. A lot of the time, backing arps do not fit harmonically with the leads and countermelodies, and there are clashing notes here and there. I don't hear any sidechaining at all on this mix, so the kick barely comes through. Proper sidechaining of the instruments (bass at a minimum, but I sidechain everything in my mixes, in varying amounts) will let the kick punch through, it will add groove to the mix that isn't there now, it will help clean up the mixing, and give you much more clean mastering headroom. Unfortunately I concur with the guys that this mix is fatiguing overall. It is overwhelming due to the full-time busy writing and too many elements playing at the same time and in the same frequency range. This will need to be reworked. Keep in mind that contrast is key in a mix like this. If you have busy lead writing then the backing elements should be simpler at that point (blocked chords or simple supportive writing, not a busy countermelody and also an arp and busy bass writing). If you have a distorted element, then the other elements should be significantly less distorted (distorted lead plus clean backing elements or vice versa). I recommend soloing two or three elements at a time, that will help you decide which element is the lead in that section (and if so, is it cutting through properly?), and also if the elements are fitting together harmonically and rhythmically. If two elements are really competing, you can also use EQ to give lead elements priority (with a possible boost at its fundamental) and then notch backing elements at the frequency where the lead is primarily playing. You can also make sure some elements (typically leads) sit more centered (at least their fundamentals) and backing elements are wider or even use a Haas to completely stereo-ize the sound. The goal is to create a 3D soundstage where every element has its place to shine! Larry said "you can have arrangements with a steady energy, but the dynamism has to come in other ways." He is so right, that's a good way to put it. The dynamism will come with contrast, as I described above. NO

Those chords Flex pointed out are sour indeed. This is a very conservative arrangement, which is fine. But the rigid bassline, synth writing, and repetitive drums give this track a very plodding energy. The hats are sharp, loud, dry, and so stiffly sequenced that it becomes distracting. The synth starting at 0:48 and 2:25 sounds very vanilla and dry, and the writing is stiff and gridlocked. The lack of overall groove due to the stiff and simple bassline and drums bothers me the most I think, same as Flex and Emu. There are arrangement variations as the piece moves along but generally it sounds repetitive to me as the instrumentation never changes. Varying the lead instrument or backing elements or drum sounds/writing here and there would help to break up the repetition. I like this generally though, and the guitar work is very good. But it needs a bit more production love. NO (resubmit)

Seven sources AND it's a remix of a remix.... uh, ok! Since I don't know this OST well (I know, shame on me, I have no excuse!), and Brad and Larry have already voted, I'm just going to vote on the mix itself. I also didn't like the suffocated vocoded vocals at 0:33, (and again at 5:18) but when the real vocals come in, they are clean and clear, perhaps too clean though. I think adding some more processing to the vocals would be good, not to mutilate them but to make them mesh with the soundscape better. I think this arrangement is really ambitious and cool. The instrumentation is good, the strings sound full and well sequenced, and I like the orchestral sounds against the guitars and synths, and there are tons of little glitches and fun ear candy. The guitar bits are performed well and so are the vocals. The arrangement is great, super creative and fun. I completely agree with Larry though, regarding the production. That clap is comically bad, so simple and dry. The drums overall are mixed way too quietly. The vocals could definitely be louder in the mix, and there's a low-heavy feel to the midrange instruments giving the overall soundscape an unnecessary boomy sound (those elements need their lows tamed with EQ), while the bass itself is too quiet in the mix. The vocals (especially the male vocal) have too much low end presence (example, "you" at 1:18 sounds way boomy). This mix could definitely use another balancing/mixing pass. And the piano sounds too stiff and gridlocked, needs a bit of humanization. I don't hear or see the final limiter going nuts as Brad does. I don't see any clipping in Cubase or on SPAN (remember to turn off "true peak" if using SPAN, and if Audacity has that parameter turn it off) and I do not hear overcompression, but I do hear the master is doing some unwanted pumping whenever the kick hits. I don't hear any sidechaining in this mix, and sidechaining (at the very least, of the heavy/low elements like bass, deep strings and pads) would clear up room in the soundscape and reduce the heavy load when each kick hit happens, which will reduce the burden on the final limiter and eliminate that pumpy thing happening in the master. (fast attack and release on the sidechain compressors, 3-ish db gain reduction, ratio of 2:1... keep it subtle but that will really clean things up in conjunction with some EQ on the low ends of things) I was actually planning to pass this even with mixing flaws but reading back what I wrote I don't think I can pass it in good conscience after having said all that. I love this though, and it will be an easy pass for me when the mixing/balancing/master have been improved! NO (please resubmit)

Oh gosh. Nine minutes, ok wow. I think I am going to organize my thoughts into bullet points. It still may sound stream-of-consciousness, but bear with me. Too ambitious: These arrangements are humongous; this one is the longest one yet, of the ones I have heard. Starts with a ton of voiceover work, nearly two and a half minutes of spoken vocal before anything really melodic arrives. That may be cool for a story-type video or audio drama, but it isn't really great as a standalone arrangement for OCR. Stiff sequencing: The piano beginning after the two minute mark is very robotic, having no humanization at all. The organ has the same problem when it arrives. The choir, when it is exposed such as at 4:34-4:55 the choir sounds like an oppressive wall of sound rather than an emotive element, due to having a fast attack and long release, no swells, no motion to it, just a block of fake-sounding, overly loud, choir sound. Mismatched melodic and rhythmic patterns: There are many written patterns in this soundscape, and often they are clashing melodically as well as rhythmically. At 2:45 as things are just getting started, there's a drum beat and brass and a synthy thing, none of which sounds good together and the patterns are confusing rhythmically and melodically. At 5:43, the soundscape is simple and sparse, but the patterns being played by drums and bass/synths just feels awkward. Starting at 6:18, it finally makes sense and I can hear and feel a nice 6/8 time signature. However when the choir joins back in at 6:36, it feels less groovy and more wall-of-sound. At 7:08, once again I cannot connect to the pattern until 7:22 when the drums return. But at 7:22, there are backing chords that aren't helping me make sense of things, and the melody writing feels so hectic and random. Melody lines lack melodic contour, as the notes jump around randomly. An example is 4:07, the melody is so jumpy all the way until 4:33. This may be literal source writing, but it doesn't fit nicely with the other writing here, it sounds forced, like the melody is being shoehorned into this part of the track. At 7:22 all the way to the end, again the lead melodic writing is too random for me to follow, it lacks proper melodic contour and ends up sounding super confusing. This may be verbatim source writing, but with so many sources combined like this, it does not work melodically or rhythmically. The choir starting at 8:21 is playing a pattern that is way too busy for a backing element/pad, and together with the random sounding bassline and lead writing, it is making my brain melt trying to follow along. Too many source songs combined: It is too difficult for mere mortals to sort out all these combinations, lead from this source, bass from that source, choir from something else... and it doesn't always work together melodically or rhythmically. And these are not simple sources, they are complex orchestral pieces each unto themselves, so combining writing from two or more of them at once is going to be an almost impossible task. Tons of spoken vocals, often interrupting the flow. Not a dealbreaker, it just adds to the piece sounding overdone. The mixing is fairly decent considering how many elements play together at any given time, but it is nearly impossible to get a clean sounding soundscape with so many instruments in similar frequency ranges playing together so much of the time. As it stands, the mix sounds majorly overcooked to me. I am so sorry to be giving such detailed feedback that I'm sure will be viewed as negative, but I will say again what I said on an earlier track I voted on. I recommend starting with much shorter/simpler source songs, and build out an arrangement with a simpler instrument palette and simpler writing, with fewer patterns playing at any given time, while learning about combining sounds that work well together, and writing that compliments each other rather than conflicting or making the patterns too hectic. You definitely have strengths in arrangement crafting, just gotta revisit some basics to make it work right. NO

Interesting original for sure! Seems to be in a fast 6/4, with sections of 3/4. Fun stuff. Remix opens so sparsely with just piano flourishes and a ton of silence. I hear why that first instrument to come in set proph's teeth on edge, I'm having that same effect, and even more when the first wind instrument begins. After the harp flourish there's a plucked instrument that literally hurts.... but not as badly as the following violin.... yowza I am 1:30 into the piece and my ears are bleeding from all the screechy sounds. And I am headed toward a literal brick in the waveform, next. I like the buildup beginning at 2:33, the subtle bassline and squelchy synth sound great. The string pad sounds mid-heavy and overly full. I really like the piano reverses leading into the heavy section. When the beat kicks in, so many elements are playing, wow is this dense. The whistle is screechy, and I feel like too many melodic patterns are playing at once, what is the focus here, I can't tell. There's a 4x4 kick, but without any sidechaining, the soundscape lacks groove, it is just a massive wall of sounds and patterns. The drum pattern is simple and repetitive the entire time it plays. The drum pattern's simplicity makes an odd contrast against the overly busy and dense and melodically hectic instrumental soundscape. At 4:29 there's a very sudden modulation to a higher key, which is interesting but almost totally unsignaled (other than a short cymbal/drum riser). The drum groove stays exactly the same as the previous section, and the violin is making my ears bleed. It cuts through, but I wonder what you had to do to get it to cut through this incredibly dense soundscape. I am overwhelmed. There is also a gated synth pattern playing during this section, that doesn't fit with the rest of the instrumentation at all in my opinion. At 5:52 there's another modulation and this one is extremely awkward to my ears. There's a change in the rhythm and time signature here too. 6:06, another modulation. The outro arrives quickly after that, and I'm hearing a synth pattern that doesn't seem to fit with anything I have just heard, and I wonder if that was playing during the previous section too, although it is so dense I can never be sure. MAN this track is loud. -5.9db RMS is the highest number the track hit for me in Cubase, and that is like.... heavy EDM loud.... it's just too loud. But the worst aspect for me is the screechy sounds, this is unpleasant to listen to. All that said, I love the concept! I also really like the arrangement, although it has so many modulations and some of them are executed too suddenly and/or awkwardly. This will require a mixing overhaul to get it to a listenable state, as well as making those modulations make sense. NO