Jump to content

Chimpazilla

Judges
  • Posts

    3,296
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

3 Followers

Profile Information

  • Real Name
    Kristina Scheps
  • Location
    Phoenix, AZ

Artist Settings

  • Collaboration Status
    3. Very Interested
  • Software - Digital Audio Workstation (DAW)
    Cubase
  • Composition & Production Skills
    Mixing & Mastering

Recent Profile Visitors

20,598 profile views

Chimpazilla's Achievements

  1. The guys explained this situation so well, especially prophetik; I could pretty much copy and paste his words here as my own vote. We do not post remixes that contain the actual game audio, and from what I am hearing, that original audio is in here. The opening bass is so plain, simple and exposed. That sound effect first heard at 0.05 is so loud and abrasive. The patch playing bass starting at 0.05 is also abrasive but could work as a transition element, but it's not a strong patch to carry the bass all the way through the piece. I like the DnB approach here though! To make a track like this groove properly would require some strategic sidechaining, and I hear none happening here. The synths are not the greatest, and the drums are too quiet compared to everything else (something sidechaining would help a lot, in addition to volume balancing). Otherwise, the mixing is fairly ok. Strange outro (which seems to include a lot of inaudible rumble), but it seems like the track is intended to loop. Overall, original audio must be removed, that's an automatic dealbreaker. Synths need to be mixed better or replaced, especially the harsh sounding elements including that sfx at 0.05. Although there's a good little breakdown at 0:41, it is still the source writing (and possibly actual audio) but that is the right arrangement idea. The arrangement and writing need to have some variation, interpretation, personalization away from the source tune more than this, to be postable on OCR. NO
  2. Co-signing with the guys here. This is a competent orchestration of the original, and the beat together with the orchestral palette makes it really lively. The track is low-heavy, and mastered extremely loudly, but the sequencing sounds adequate, realistic enough to get it done. But yeah, it's just too short and too conservative to the source tune for OCR. I would love to hear it again as a full arrangement, with variations and interpretations on the source melody! NO
  3. Ah, here we are in the 90s! I love the orch hits. The vocals are very well done, lead and all backing vocals sound great to me. The instrumental though, by comparison, sounds weak. The instruments are quiet compared to the vocals, and as proph pointed out there isn't any kind of padding, the guitar is carrying the burden of backing chords, and it is barely audible. The piano is only ever playing whole notes. The bass is very quiet in the mix. The guitar solo is nice though! The pacing and groove of the piece is very static; the drums play the same pattern over and over with very few changes or fills. Fadeout ending, boooooo! This mix has a lot going for it, I think with some mixing tweaks the soundscape could feel much more full and balanced. But the arrangement is repetitive, and the bigger issue is that it is a straight cover of the source song. It has the same pacing, energy, general feel, same lyrics. Other than being in a lower key, and the addition of the fun 90s elements, it is the same song. That's way too conservative for OCR. Fun listen though, and really nice vocal performance and processing! NO
  4. I'm thrown off by the rhythm right away. The source is in 3/4, and so is the remix (I think?), but the drums are not accentuating the 3/4, it's like 4/4 patterns smashed into 3/4 which is confusing my brain. I would imagine when working on this track, your brain makes sense of it after awhile, but as a first time listener, I'm very confused by the rhythm here. The synths sound very simple and uninspired, and the lead does not punch through as the guys have said, and everything is very dry. I love the concept, and I agree that it is great to hear you branching out! But the sounds need an upgrade I think, along with a touch of reverb on things so the mix isn't so dry. I agree with the guys about the stacked fifths pad, that's tricky to use as when the note changes, it's an entire chord changing and doesn't always go with the rest of the writing. Better to write your own chords. The transitions where the volume is quickly automated down sound awkward to me (at 1:08 and 1:28 1:58). I get the idea, but the execution isn't sophisticated. With the drums, I think the track would groove much better with a pattern that accentuates the 3/4 pattern of the writing, instead of fighting against it which is what I hear and feel in this arrangement. I don't know how better to describe this, but I feel like this is a 4/4 drum loop repurposed for 3/4 and it doesn't work for me rhythmically at all. It feels hectic and lacking proper groove. NO
  5. Co-signing with the guys. What a cool idea this is! I love the cimbalom as a lead, and the choir and strings make a great background texture. But.... that's all there is here for at least 75% of the piece. The sparse instrumentation reveals the weaknesses of the samples as the cimbalom sounds stiff and mechanical, and every attack on the choir and strings are the same which sounds awkward. And as prophetik pointed out, the strings and choir almost always play unison which is a lost opportunity to add some more harmonic spice to the mix. There is some hard panning here that I don't care for. The cimbalom is the lead instrument, yet it is hammering away about 50-75% left most of the time, and some of the lowest parts of the choir seem to only exist on the right. This feels unbalanced to me. The drums sound exciting when they enter at 3:27, but that's a long time to wait for something new in the soundscape. The drums are intense all the way to the end of the piece, and they are very heavy in the lows, as prophetik pointed out, giving the soundscape a muddy feel. Those brass hits at 4:01 sound alright to me, except they feel thin, as if the lows have been EQ'd off. I really love this concept! It is so eerie. But with such sparse instrumentation, all the elements have to be firing on all cylinders and they aren't quite, yet. Just needs a bit more production TLC to get it there. NO (resubmit)
  6. I agree with all of XPRT's points here. The arrangement itself is good, with good arrangement dynamics. The instrumentation is on the soft side all the way through, which isn't quite working. For example, from 1:06-1:38 you have a heavy kick and bass along with a shuffley-patterned synth and heavily sidechained pad, all of which sound great, but they never seem to kick into full gear and do anything interesting. I can hear this in my mind with some varied percussion and sfx, filtered elements coming in and out, and ear candy making that section really memorable, but as it stands it feels very plain and anticlimactic. Same situation from 1:48-2:21. The drum pattern never changes, and the simple bell lead takes the energy of those sections way down for me. XPRT said it well, it feels more like a sketch than a finished piece. I do think this has a ton of potential though, but the soundscape is very sparse and it just needs more interesting elements especially in the two heavy sections to keep the listener engaged. The volume balancing is mostly adequate, although leads are too soft and quiet. The simple percussion in the track is all in mono. It sounds like no mastering has been done as the track never goes louder than -1.6db peak. The drumless sections sit around -6 to -8db peak which is very quiet indeed. The track lacks any highs other than the snare and hats, no synths seem to have any presence in the highs at all, making it sound lifeless. I would love to hear this again with the sections more fleshed out! NO (resubmit)
  7. I think Wes explained things perfectly here. This is a nice arrangement, but the sound choices are very simple and the production sounds dated. The trap hats are indeed too repetitive (one loop repeated all the way through, no fills or variations) and too loud/dry. The arrangement is laid out very well and has good dynamics, including an intro, verse/chorus, breakdown etc. The drum writing and sounds/processing is probably my biggest dealbreaker, same as it is for Wes. The repetitive drum writing is taking the energy of the track way down below where it should be, and that's a missed opportunity for a very groovy track to exist. Another way to introduce tons of groove is by sidechaining the kick to the instruments in varying amounts (basses and pads get more, plucks/leads/percs get less). I don't hear any sidechaining in this mix whatsoever. At a minimum the bass and pads should get some sidechaining. Again this isn't a dealbreaker in and of itself, but it's a missed opportunity for groove. I think the drum sounds and programming alone are enough to request a resub, so that's what I'm going to do. You've gotten some great advice in this thread, so I look forward to hearing this again with improvements made! NO (resubmit)
  8. This is another tough one for me. I do hear some guitar amp noise, but not enough to be dealbreaker for me. This is a lovely piece, it is definitely ambient, but I find it to be boring. I hate to say that, but nothing incredibly interesting or emotive is happening here for me. It's just the same pad chords repeated, with bits of guitar motif coming and going, and a buzzy synth that doesn't seem to fit with the rest of the soundscape. This plays more like a movie cue to me, for a very simple scene, and not a standalone arrangement. I guess I would like to hear more development than this as the piece moves along. It this arrangement sufficient for OCR, I am honestly not sure and I'd like to see another opinion. ? edit 10-23-24: Listening again now, and the amp noise is bothering me since it is so audible when the lead guitar plays. But my main issue remains the same, it's a nice piece but it just doesn't develop enough as it is currently. NO
  9. There is certainly enough source here, the arrangement is fairly conservative, but this is a great arrangement. There are so many ideas here, so much ear candy and variation in sounds and processing. The mix is full of energy and interest. My only issue with the arrangement is that the sections tend to get too long and repetitive, with the same idea being repeated over and over. 3:09-3:35 for example is the exact same writing all the way through, within a larger section playing the same motif over and over in somewhat varied ways. There's something about the production that I can't entirely put my finger on. There is a ton of very hard panning which I don't care for, especially when it is heavy instruments like basses being panned wide. The instruments (other than the guitar) sound very simplistic and vanilla, and there is minimal processing, very little reverb, and the whole mix sounds almost painfully dry most of the time. I am more borderline than proph on this one, because the arrangement is generally so strong. The mixing isn't terrible, things are volume-balanced just fine, but there is something off about the production for me. I'm not ready to commit either way yet, I would like to see another opinion or two. edit: I'm flipping to a NO because the other opinions verify what I was feeling. I do hope to hear this again with improvements made! NO
  10. Cool track! Great mashup of these sources as the guys have said. The mixing is what I would expect from a song in this genre, and the mastering is just right. You definitely nailed the brief you were attempting to do, but sadly I have to agree with Larry that it's too much "Damage Inc." I had a similar issue with a collab I did with bLiNd a few years back that was based on NIN's "Closer" and it sounded way too TrentReznorish and therefore it was rejected (but man was it cool! Jordan had replicated the kick and that bass sound to perfection). I'd love to hear this again with the "Damage, Inc." sections un-Damaged (it would be an easy yes), but as Larry said if that compromises the vision we understand. NO (resubmit)
  11. I think the concept of this is awesome, it's upbeat and groovy and I love the sfx and vocal clips. But my fellow Js are correct that the execution isn't there yet, this needs a lot more polish, varied drum writing, varied instrumentation, varied/interpreted lead writing, more interesting backing/countermelodic elements or padding or chords or something, and a complete mixing overhaul. The synths sound very simple, vanilla and unsophisticated. I agree that our workshop forum and Discord server will be helpful to get more feedback on how to proceed. I definitely hear promise and creativity here. Everyone starts somewhere, carry on and let's hear this or something else from you in the future! NO
  12. Agree with prophetik, cool vibe and idea but this isn't enough arrangement and it sounds too similar to the source song for too long. The voiceovers in the intro are hilarious but I don't think they add much to the arrangement since they are completely detached from the main body of the arrangement. The sounds used are very simple and vanilla, and the drum groove never changes once it is established. I do like how you included bits from the LoZ intro theme starting at 1:22, and the horns, organ and synth vamping near the end are great, if there could be more of that kind of thing throughout the piece, that would sure be fun! The mixing is adequate if not very interesting; the volumes are balanced well enough. If there has been any mastering applied, it's super quiet. I see the loudest peak of the track is -1.5db and most of the piece lives around -5db peak. Primarily, the arrangement is too simple, repetitive and similar to the source song (at least until the final 20 seconds). I do like this vibe quite a bit though, and I'd love to hear it again with the arrangement fleshed out quite a bit more with proper arrangement dynamics and a lot more variation and interest added. NO
  13. The mixing sounds WAY better now, thanks for taking our advice. I don't hear that overly sizzly high end now, and the lows are present and full. The mastering is appropriate and not overdriven. My only remaining complaint is that the kick is way too loud, heavy, and thumpy. While this would probably be an easy fix, I'm not going to send this back again for that, and it isn't dealbreaker for me. I think we have entered pass territory with this version. Good luck with the rest of this vote! YES
  14. Definitely an industrial bitcrushy vibe which is extremely cool. I think the production sounds great; all distortion is intentional and as Flex said mixing and mastering are ace. However I agree with my fellows that this arrangement really constitutes background music and not a proper song arrangement, at least for OCR. The guys explained it well and in more detail, so I'm just co-signing. I enjoyed listening to it though, excellent vibe track and very well produced. Do more please, make a proper arrangement with leads and melodies and more instrumental variation and this will go on our front page. NO
  15. I'm gonna co-sign what my fellow Js have said; they went into significant detail on what the issues are, and I agree with all of what they both said. The piece meanders and draws out the melodies enough to disconnect it too far from the source song, and the writing steps all over itself melodically in many sections. Also, the attacks on the strings being identical and too long really reduces the realism of the piece. Getting better-sequenced samples (with keyswitching, ideally) would definitely help, but I think the arrangement itself pulls too far away from the source song to be considered postable on OCR, although it is a lovely original or inspired-by arrangement. NO
×
×
  • Create New...