Chimpazilla

Very interesting medley arrangement, the concept is solid and the combination of themes works really well. This arrangement is a winner and does not need to be changed imo. But the production needs some improvement. The opening starts super abruptly, and the soundscape is oppressive. There are multiple instruments and choir playing, and it is very midrangey and crispy and overwhelming. The guitar or dulcimer at 0:18 is very bright and robotically played. I like the choir but it is trying to carry the melody which falls apart for me when the dulcimer comes in. To my ears, the dulcimer is playing a countermelody but it is mixed as the primary instrument in that section. The dulcimer doesn't always sound in key with the choir during that section, and the choir is playing a variation of the source material at that point, so my brain is confused. At 1:46 we get the main guitar playing the source motif very clearly with good interpretations. I agree that a real guitar would benefit the track. The sampled guitar sounds uncanny and robotically timed, and the extra notes in the motif line make it sound more fake than it should be, since the attacks are all the same. The outro is the same as the intro, the heavily midrangey choir and pads and dulcimer. The mastering on this track is unnecessarily loud. SPAN is showing me there is some inaudible sub/rumble content below 30Hz for a good portion of the track, which only serves to reduce your mastering headroom. Make sure nothing is playing super low other than kicks and basses, and make sure nothing is letting inaudible rumble through. NO (resubmit)

The intro sure is quiet, but it really sets the mood well. I like it. I really like this arrangement, no surprise there. Great dynamics and storytelling. I love the instrumentation and part writing and all the varied ear candy. I think this one is pretty close but there are a couple of remaining issues as the guys pointed out: - In the section from 1:40-2:17 there are a few sour notes here and there, perhaps have someone go over it with you to figure out how to fix them. It's not terrible, just enough to feel awkward. - From 2:17-2:54 as Larry said, the backing strings and sometimes the piano are playing notes that are out of key. - From 2:54-3:51 the mallet backing instrument is playing a line that doesn't always fit in the key, and the strings are too loud here. - From 4:03-4:36 again there are sour notes in the backing elements. I like the music box ending. So many cool ideas in this arrangement. Generally the mixing is working well other than the loud strings at 2:47 and it wouldn't be bad to address the issues that Brad and Larry brought up. The biggest issue here for me is the out-of-key notes that appear throughout the piece, mostly in backing elements but sometimes in the lead writing. This is something you worked hard to remedy in your last resubmission and you did an excellent job of it, so I know you can do it with this one too. Looking forward to hearing it again! NO (resubmit)

This track is so very lovely. At 1:07, when the strings enter, the soundscape gets very full and busy, because the strings are playing a fast melody at the same time that the choir is singing a melody and the harp is also doing a melody, so it is hard to know what to focus on. There is no way to mix this any better while that many busy things are happening. Each instrument part seems to be trying to be priority rather than supportive or countermelody. No element is truly taking a lead role, which also leads to the crowded and unfocused feeling. The track is currently mixed as well as possible, given this many elements at the same time. With this second wav upload, the mixing is not the problem. Personally I feel that any section of a song should have a lead element for the listener to focus on, unless the track is truly a background cue, in which case the elements should sort of run together to form a uniform soundscape without anything even trying to poke through, so it ends up more of a vibe than a proper arrangement. This arrangement however is straddling both worlds which is what makes it sound too busy for my taste. These are notes for Wes for next time. Is this ideal, no. Ideally some of the elements should be dropped at the 1:07 section, and something lead-like should be added. Is this dealbreaker for OCR though, no. It's a lovely emotive song, short but sweet, full of feels, and people will love it. YES

Co-signing with the guys. This actually sounds really nice to me! But the sampled guitar is too exposed to carry the arrangement. If you could get someone to play this, that would be amazing! It would also be good to have some more interpretation in the arrangement so it doesn't resemble the source so much, and writing variation so it isn't so repetitive. While not necessary, having some backing elements would be nice, even a sweepy pad, string layer, or very light percussion, varied as the piece moves along so it avoids repetition. Honestly I am enjoying listening to this! It's just not ready yet for OCR. I would really love to hear it again with improvements made! NO (resubmit)

It does sound great! But yeah, this arrangement is much too simplistic, conservative and repetitive for OCR. We are looking for re-interpretations of the source songs, with variations and original ideas added, proper arrangements (intro, build, verse, chorus, breakdown, chorus, outro etc.). This sounds like a fun romp through the original song with a beat added. If the original song was ripped and downtuned, I can't exactly tell, but if so, that cannot be included in an OCR arrangement. I actually really like this concept and direction, just needs more personalization for OCR. NO

The intro choir does sound quite fake which is unfortunate. It plays a lot throughout the piece. Ideally, this choir patch should be replaced with something more natural if possible, otherwise perhaps just lengthening the attack on the patch for the longer notes would improve the feel of it. There is so much going on in this soundscape. I get that black metal is a wall of sound, and mostly I can handle that, but here as the other two Js have pointed out, it feels like too much, and there is no way to mix this many midrangey elements in a way that everything is audible and not painful to listen to. This is more of a problem in this arrangement because you are actually trying to convey source-material motifs and melodies over this mid-heavy soundscape. Each writing part (leads and countermelodies) is very complex so it's a lot to take in, melodically. As the guys said, it's hard to make sense of what's what. When the quiet breakdown begins at 3:00, it is very welcomed, and I find that my ears are actually ringing from the previous section. Then that fake choir begins again. This choir sample has got to be swapped for something a little more natural, since it is playing such a prominent role at the breakdown. As Wes said, when it is buried in the backing elements it works a little better, but for me that is primarily because it does not sound like a choir when it is buried, but it sounds like another instrument. Other than that, the breakdown is lovely! As for the source use, Emu and proph could not quite make sense of what was playing where, and I certainly can not either. A timestamp of the source use would be much appreciated, but I agree with the guys that somehow the actual writing has to make a bit more sense, and that can only be achieved by stripping back some of the elements playing in the heaviest sections, and making sure the countermelodies aren't overwhelming any lead writing by being too busy rather than supportive. The track is mastered VERY loudly to the point that I *almost* hear some pumping, it's just on the cusp for me. The final limiter has been pushed hard. It's a bold, ambitious arrangement, really awesome arrangement ideas and the overall track dynamics are great. This arrangement can totally work if it is mixed a bit better and the source melodies are more clear. And I do hope the choir can be improved since it is so prominent in the mix. NO (resubmit)

This is one of the few Zelda games I have not played. (I know, the horror!!!) Yeah the intro has no source, and it's long, but it's super duper cool. Plenty of source once the intro is done. Production is great, I expect nothing less from Gaspode. Great interpretations of the melody, tons of detail and ear candy. I love the bright synths and heavy bass and meaty kick. Good stuff! YES

Awesome direction to take! But I agree with my fellows, the soundscape sounds too muddy and lossy overall. If the backing pads are going to be fuzzy/distorted, the leads should be clean so they can soar over the soundscape, but they are distorted too so everything kind of mushes together. The arrangement works well enough, but there isn't much in the way of arrangement dynamics, because the energy stays roughly the same throughout the piece, mostly because this heavily distorted soundscape never changes, so it becomes fatiguing after awhile. If the backing pads dropped way low or out completely at any point, that would provide more arrangement dynamics. Even with the timestamp provided, I cannot hear the source connections. Perhaps someone with more familiarity with these sources can hear it more easily. I feel like the source represented here has been very heavily interpreted, and often little two-note motifs are being counted as source (which is fine to do, it just makes it harder for me as a judge). I'd love for Larry to take a listen to see if I'm massively missing it, Larry's our source-o-matic around here. But regardless, the mixing issues are holding it back for me. NO

As with all of the VQ tracks I have evaluated, I can hear and feel how much care and attention to detail went into this. As with the other submissions, there is a story behind the arrangement, the instrumentation has been carefully selected to convey a specific mood and tell an evolving story. There are so many textures, sfx and ear candy, and the arrangement never loses interest. This one is actually mixed rather well I think, compared to previous submissions. (Although as with the previous submission I voted on, something has gone wrong with the mastering because it is hitting peak 2.4db, and it needs to be limited at 0db maximum). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Before I write what I have to say next, which I wrote six days ago, I need to say that the Shinobi source song is problematic for me, in that it contains unpleasant dissonance, clutter, and lack of melodic contour in its lead writing. Weird-ass source, imo. I'm having a harder time busting this remix for doing similar things as the source is doing, but here goes. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The problem I am having, as with previous submissions, is that there is so much going on at once, and quite a bit of the writing sounds extremely random and often out of key too, which ends up sounding awkward. The track starts out fine up until 0:25, at which point the flute is already conflicting with the main arp, vocal patterns, and kettle drums. It's several different patterns at once, and none of it makes sense together. This problem persists throughout the piece. The worst section for me is from 2:30-2:52; the patterns are so varied harmonically as well as rhythmically that the entire section is just confusing. I don't even mind the fuzzy timbre at 3:27, I kind of like it! But the arp patterns conflicting at that section is what ruins it for me. For musical writing to make sense to a listener, lead motifs should have some sort of motivic or harmonic contour, meaning the notes don't just bounce all over the place. Also, countermelodies, arps, basslines and supporting patterns need to interplay with each other in a way that makes a cohesive soundscape, and that is not happening here. In a previous submission, Larry described the problem as a "lack of melodiousness.." I hate to say it, but that's the problem here as well. I hate to come down hard on this. There's a lot to like about the track. It has a great ethnic flavor and energetic vibe. The combining of the sources is well accomplished and the arrangement has great dynamics. The attention to detail is off the charts. The mixing as I said is even working well enough (although please use a final limiter, set to 0db maximum). But the mismatched harmonic, melodic, and rhythmic patterns are sinking it for me. Ok I am listening to some Glitch Mob tracks to try to understand what's being emulated here. Wow, their stuff is really unique, full of varied patterns and sounds. The difference is that even though they are really pushing the envelope, the patterns ultimately make sense rhythmically and harmonically even when many of them are layered together. This would be a tough style to emulate, it's a very ambitious undertaking for sure. In all honesty, and please take this in the spirit of helpfulness, I suggest you select a much simpler source song, and approach a remix in a much simpler way, so that you can learn about melodic contour, harmonies, countermelodies, rhythms, and keeping the soundscape more simple, with elements placed purposely and never randomly and never too many at a time. Don't be afraid to cut out ideas that aren't working, even if you spent time on them! Eventually you do get used to doing that! Your arrangements are already VERY good, they just need refining at this point. NO

It sounds "primitive" because it's jungle! Haha! Nah, I hear what MW is saying, the synth patches are indeed on the weak side. The bass is huge and awesome (and I love the varied types of bass processing, distortion and bitcrushing), but it sounds overblown because the other synths do not have a similar level of beefiness and badassery. Even the snare is falling a little flat for me, it should be smacking me in the face and it isn't. The other issue is that the master is UBERLOUD. I'm seeing -4.8RMS which is like, louder than Skrillex loud. The bass is surely causing that; it probably needs to come down a few db and also be EQ'd to make sure nothing below around 25Hz is coming through. Everything else about this arrangement rocks. The two sources are seamlessly combined, and the energy of the piece has awesome dynamics. Plenty of details and ear candy. The writing is varied and cool. The drum writing is great and the filtering transitions are excellent. I do find this to be a layup, even if I think it could kick harder with better synth patches or processing on the synths and snare. YES

As the others have said, there's a ton of personality to the wind parts in this arrangement. It's a very light and fun concept. But it's falling short for me as well. There isn't much going on here besides the various winds. There is no bass instrument or lows to speak of, other than the kick drum. The drums are comically quiet, and also the pattern being played is extremely quirky but also repetitive, so the energy of the piece never changes from the first moment to the end. The drum pattern really needs some more variation. To me, this sounds like an extended concept wip and not a completed product. The wind performances are great though, I don't believe they need to be changed. But it should be mixed better. The flutes are too loud and also shrill, and as I said the drums are way too quiet. Some kind of simple bass accompaniment would really help, at least during the big choruses. Even just a sampled standup bass playing on one and three would do the job, as the winds are already playing busy patterns. Here's an example I slapped together quickly. I really like this cute concept and the performances are great! It just isn't quite there yet, production wise. I don't think it should take too much to fix it up. NO (resubmit)

I agree with the NOs unfortunately. This is a super cool track, everything about it is great, the arrangement, instrumentation and performances are stellar! But it was mixed inside a potato I think. There's no bass presence, and what is left is all midrange and it's all competing to be heard. Drums are comically quiet; the kick has no low end so it is barely audible. Snare is super quiet too. Hats and crashes may be ok. The track seems to lack any kind of mastering, and the peak is -2.2db which is unnecessarily quiet. Awesome arrangement. Gonna be a great track to post on OCR, after it is mixed and mastered properly. NO (resubmit)

I know this source like the back of my hand, and yes the motif is hugely obscured in the first half. Larry's timestamp did help, but I can clearly hear the notes being played, in a totally different way from the source; the emphasis is on a different note than in the original (up until 2:13 at which point the source motif playthroughs are more straightforward). I generally love Michael's work and this track is no exception. I love the sparseness and the interesting sound design, as well as the reversed bits of motif. As Larry said, fun little audio experiment. I'm on board. YES

This may be the grooviest 8bit original tune I've ever heard, holy shit. Ok on to the remix. Beefy kick right out of the gate, blowing my ears in, in a good way. Retro sound palette for sure but it sounds great. Oh man, this beat hits hard. Love it. The production on this track is ace. Unfortunately, I have to agree fully with Mind Wanderer. The repetition in this arrangement is too egregious. I cut the track in Cubase at 2:16 and layered 2:16-3:25 over the section of 0:00-1:16, and they are identical, with two exceptions: the intro of 0:00-0:15 is double the length of 2:16-2:23 (with clap entering halfway through), and there are a few extra notes written into the lead writing at 3:02-3:10 compared to 0:53-1:02 (with the same lead instrument as before). That's a very tiny amount of variation. I soloed each part back and forth multiple times and could not find any other differences. Darn it, I really like this track, but that's too much repetition. I'd love to hear some real variation introduced into the second half, enough to distinguish it from the first, then this will get my hearty yes vote. Guys, we recently voted NO on a track by bLiNd for overuse of repetition, even after he went back and made subtle changes that just were not enough variation because what he changed was the exact same type of sounds. This track is even more blatant repetition than that track was. This one should not be getting YES votes at this time, just my $0.02. NO (I really dig this, please vary second half, and resubmit)

Opening vocal is lovely, just a hair off pitch but just barely. The main vocals both male and female are similarly not perfectly pitched and they sound quite dry too (although I suspect they are not dry), and Cyril's vocal sounds strained, as MW said. The vocals also compete badly with the guitars. This could be fixed by finding the vocal fundamentals and notching the guitars at that frequency gently, along with raising the vocal volumes and lowering the guitars somewhat. The guitar work is excellent. Drums are good but mixed a bit quietly. The arrangement is really good, although it lacks a proper outro, ending cold instead, which is awkward. The mixing and production could definitely be better, but the arrangement, performances and creativity here win the day. YES