Jump to content

Chimpazilla

Judges
  • Posts

    3,114
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Everything posted by Chimpazilla

  1. Opening bass sound is super simplistic, and there is minimal other stuff going on at the same time, so it is exposed. I like the beefy beat when it hits, but the drums and synths are sounding really vanilla. The arrangement, as others have mentioned, is generally good. But overall the soundscape is just too simplistic. The drum samples are really basic, and the drum groove is repetitive when it plays. Also, Wes is correct that the pacing of the piece is off. The groove pattern of the drums would suggest that something bigger is coming, but it never delivers. The melodic writing is either completely verbatim to source, or it is noodley, with nothing much in between, making this arrangement melodically awkward. Brad is right that the arrangement is missing countermelodic elements, pads, or any kind of fleshing out of the textures, and this lack gives the arrangement a repetitive feel. There are moments of disharmony, such as at 2:25, when the tails/reverbs of the previous notes mush into the next section. The glitching is awkward when it appears. The glitches are not signaled by anything before they start, and because they happen abruptly they sound like rendering errors rather than a cool effect. I can see why Larry gave his YES, a lot has been done with very simple synths and sounds, and the arrangement works well overall. But ultimately, with writing and sounds this simplistic, it isn't enough for OCR in 2023. NO
  2. That's. A. BIG. Kick. So big. So, so big. WHAT DID YOU SAY you'll have to speak louder, this kick is just so so big. I mean omg, what a big kick this is. Did I mention the big kick? Those are some huge saw stacks. So many frequencies. All of the frequencies? Master is LOWD. Sounds crispy, but could be all the saw frequencies? There are so many of those. They are a little hyped in the high-mids which hurts my ears a little. The mixing could be better. A lot of these huge saw sounds are overly shrill, abrasive, as Larry pointed out. The volume-balancing is fine, but some of the shrill could be tamed and I'd be a little happier. The arrangement is stellar, the mixing of these themes is terrific. The writing is great. Lots of fun little variations as the piece moves along. A little repetitive here and there, but not dealbreakingly so, for me anyway. I love it. And huge kicks are the best kind of kicks. YES
  3. (Listening for "first hit of the kick sounds way out of time") That first kick hit is on the "two and." It's not out of time, and does not sound out of time to me. Interesting choice, adding some nice groove. This isn't the greatest kick sample though, it is so low, adding mostly sub content to the soundscape and missing any kind of top end that would make it cut through better. Other than that, I think the drum writing is fine. I like this sweet little tune. I do agree that the trombone doesn't make the best lead, perhaps the flute would have been preferable, with the trombone playing countermelody primarily, instead. I like the piano/bell combo. The arrangement of the two themes is really nice. The mixing is not ideal, to be sure, but not dealbreaking to me. If this does not pass as-is, I recommend replacing the kick with something that cuts through better, and make sure to EQ it so it isn't too sub-dominant. The other Js have also made some very good observations and suggestions. But for me, it works well enough as it stands now. YES
  4. The mastering is on the loud side, coming in at -7db RMS (and looking like a waveform sausage), but I don't hear any overcompression artifacts. This is a DENSE soundscape. Lots of elements, as the other Js have pointed out. It is tough to mix a track with this many elements. It is way too busy for my taste, but it sounds like it is mixed as well as possible, considering how much is going on. This mixing is not ideal, but not dealbreaker for me. Absolutely epic mixture of these themes, arrangement is terrific. Guitar performances are wonderful. Choir is a bit overbearing after awhile, but fits well. YES
  5. Cubase and SPAN are telling me the peak max is 1.9db, so something has gone wrong with the final limiter in the mastering of this track. I don't hear any artifacts, though. This is a tough one. The guitar and piano performances are very good. I love the concept. I'm not in love with the lead synth because it doesn't quite fit with the rest of the instrumentation in my opinion. Overall, the track is produced well. The drums are on the tame side, and the kick is barely audible. There is something off about the energy of this arrangement for me. I agree with MW that the arrangement doesn't seem to know what it is doing as it moves along. I agree with DarkSim that it is rambling at times, and he also said there's a restraint feeling to the production. I feel like there's a restraint feeling to the arrangement as well, like reining a horse to walk when it really wants to run, if that explains it. None of my crits are dealbreaker for posting this mix on OCR, but I'm not as enthusiastic about it as would be ideal. YES
  6. I hear what Larry is talking about with the synth mixing being a bit odd, they are definitely high-mid heavy, causing it to feel "shrill yet lacking sharpness." But I'm not having a problem with that. Everything in the mix is super clear and clean. All the sounds go together perfectly. Master is loud but not overcompressed. The kicks sound good to me and they cut through well. Sidechaining on everything is just right. I love the engine-sound intro, setting the mood immediately. So many fun sounds and sfx in this arrangement! It is super fun to listen to. I wish it were longer, a nice drumless breakdown followed by another busy section would be really nice, but what's here is too good to pass up. YES
  7. Very simple, short, repetitive source tune, which is fine but often makes remixing difficult. Not impossible, just difficult. I hear why Larry is giving credit to this remix, the approach is very creative, cool and moody. I like the evolving textures. But I have to agree with the NOs that this arrangement isn't developed enough to qualify as a standalone musical piece. It feels like a four and a half minute intro with no substance ever appearing. I like what is here, but it is overly simplistic and it feels like a substructure and not a fully developed song. NO
  8. Very good blending of all of these sources, using OoT Forest Temple as the backing and glue. Mixing is a little low-heavy, and I'm seeing a peak max of 1.0db which is odd but I'm not hearing any artifacts. Good use of sfx. Very nice emotive arrangement of the varied forest themes! YES
  9. Ooooooo I love this soundscape right away, nice and beefy! It is a little low-mid heavy though, could use more highs and presence. I appreciate Larry's timestamp so I can just comment on the mix itself. The vocal is great, and mixed nicely up front, I feel like it could have some lows EQ'd out however. Her vocal has just a bit of mid-low boxy-ness. Sax sounds great. Awesome 80s-ish synthwave interpretation of this source. I'm not a fan of fadeouts but this one is handled well enough. YES
  10. The mixing could definitely be cleaner, the mid lows are indeed very dense. I think this is a fabulous arrangement, although I have a complaint that is going to be a bit hard to describe. The drum groove is upbeat and dancey, but the music is not, so it is giving me an odd feeling of disconnectedness. The music itself has very little groove, although the drums are suggesting groove. Maybe if the bass were mixed more audibly it would help because I think the bass is playing a groove pattern that compliments the drums but it is so quiet. The strings and piano are very loud, and they have no groove (and no sidechaining, which would have definitely helped) so it just sounds like a flat wall of sound. The strings are in the uncanny valley and they are so loud, but sequenced well enough to get the job done. The live instruments are played really well although the piano sample isn't the best and the bass is mixed too quietly. The guitar performance is excellent. Mastering is on the loud side but adequate. I completely disagree with Brad that the problem is with the mastering; the problems all stem from the mixing of the track. This arrangement is over our bar but I'm pretty borderline on this due to the substandard mixing and the odd groove issue I have described. I'm pretty sure the issue is 100% due to the unbalanced mixing. But the arrangement and concept carry this for me. The guitar and theramin solos are highlights. YES (borderline)
  11. File downloaded fine for me. Wow right off the bat, directly into the writing with no kind of intro, the soundscape is established and everything feels separate. The bass as Brad said is fundamental-only and has no synergy with anything else. The piano is washed out and delayed with a very fast, stiff delay, and the drum kit is loud, dry and up-front. This soundscape stays exactly the same until 2:24 when a plucked instrument joins in which is welcomed, but it seems to only be adding further noodling to the arrangement. The bass is just playing the same thing again and again and again, same for the drums. The piano and this pluck are just noodling away and not giving me anything motif-like to latch on to. Everything is playing at around the same energy level and it just sounds frenetic and lacks any kind of structure. I'm five minutes in and nothing interesting has happened and I am wishing it was over already. Seven minutes of this? The pluck drops out at 6:26, with no resolution to its writing pattern, it just stops cold. Ok at the seven-minute mark here is the strangest outro I have ever heard. The drums and piano stop abruptly and the bass pattern continues alone for a quick fadeout. That was straight-up obnoxious, sorry to be so blunt. Nice little noodle, good vibe, but goes on way too long without providing anything interesting. Mixing is inconsistent and disconnected. Seems like a good concept wip for a more detailed arrangement, but surely not ready to stand alone on OCR. NO
  12. I love this concept! I love the chords immediately. The crackle effect though, it is a very short loop that repeats over and over perfectly timed to the grid so it sounds completely unnatural. Was this intentional? To me it just sounds bad. For a lo-fi track, if you're going to have crackle going over most or all of it, it has to be super subtle and has to sound real. I'm loving this vibe, but the arrangement is under-developed at this point and it sounds repetitive. The drum groove almost never changes, giving the piece a very static energy dynamic. The arrangement needs a few more writing ideas and arrangement variations, perhaps some new and different instruments as it moves along. There is no outro or any kind of resolution to the ideas, and even the little wind chime and sfx at the end is cut off too early. I like the vocal, coin and bird sfx although they are too loud and up-front. Overall mixing and mastering are adequate. NO (resubmit)
  13. This is definitely an improvement, but as Larry said it still sounds very stiff and blocky. I still hear a lot of disharmony. Examples are 0:53-1:06, and again at 2:00-2:10 and again at 3:06-3::15. I don't hear the bass super well because it is mixed quietly, but when I really focus on it, I often hear the bass playing very randomly and not in tune with the rest of the instruments. Quite often, the bass is playing a pattern that is too fast and chaotic to be supportive to all the busy writing on top of it. 1:21-1:49 is a good example of what I am saying. Also as Larry said, the percussion does change now and then, which is good, but it isn't quite enough because the energy level of the track stays roughly the same all the way through. I don't think this snare sample is very good, it is very heavy and overly snappy and it dominates the drum groove all the way through. Perhaps changing the snare sound for something softer in the softer sections would help. The hats all hit at the same velocity every time they are playing a fast pattern, which sounds unnatural. The writing in the track is verbatim to the source writing although a few instrument changes occur throughout the piece. Essentially this arrangement is just three playthroughs of the source tune. The Bowser laughing at the end is a cool choice! But yeah, I agree with Larry that it sounds too exposed, and it is obvious that it repeats over and over. Some kind of morphing effect over the laughing would be very cool. And just as with the previous version, the render cuts off before the track and all its reverb/effects are finished ringing out. Lots of improvements on this version! Still not quite there, though. NO
  14. Ooooooooooooo. This is some truly excellent psytrance! Tons of variation in writing, sounds, energy, beat, vibe, transitions, breakdowns and drops. Mixing and mastering are top notch. The arrangement of the two themes is seamless and creative. But does it pass the stopwatch test, that would be the only issue. Psy by its nature does not have a lot of motif, and the motif tends to be on the subtle side. Assuming there's enough source, super easy pass from me. Really nicely done track, I'm digging it. My timestamp attempt: 0:42-1:09 I don't recognize this, is it Terra, altered? 1:12-1:27 Terra 1:27-1:33 Under 1:40-2:07 Under (filtered in) 2:17-2:36 Under/Terra call and response (so well done!) 2:49-2:53 Under 2:56-3:00 Under 3:15-3:19 Terra (first three notes of the motif, and then reversed) 3:30-3:57 Terra (final part of source) 3:57-3:58 Terra 4:04-4:05 Terra 4:07-4:08 Terra 4:09-4:37 Terra Total source use in the remix is 164 seconds, if that first part can be identified. Track is 306 seconds long (which includes silence at the beginning, and drums/bass-only outro). So 54% source, if that first part can be identified. Can another J identify the source from 0:42-1:09? YES (if enough source)
  15. Was it the room-correcting software left on during render? I have made that mistake myself. (In fact that mistake is SO easy to make that I decided to ditch the room-correcting software and apply treatments to the room and re-calibrate my ears instead.) Low end still sounds a little anemic to me, but this is much mo betta. I still think a little touch of multiband compression below 125Hz would be super nice, but this gets the job done. I still love the track! YES
  16. The master is driven hard indeed, and the track does not have a lot of dynamic range as a result, but I don't hear any overcompression artifacts. But still, -8db RMS is fairly heavy-handed on the mastering side these days now that we've realized the futility of fighting the Loudness Wars. For a three minute track, I feel like the intro goes on too long before the lead motif begins (0:00-1:02). The intro is a very slow build, with elements being added one at a time. The guitar that starts at 0:15 sounds very fake and stiffly sequenced (although I love the reverse transition!). The vox starting at 0:23 sounds weak; I get the gimmick but it is more comedic than cool. At 0:30, the sound playing the arp is very vanilla with no effects on it and isn't doing anything too interesting. At 1:01, there is a combination lead consisting of steel drums and a flute, and both of them sound stiff and fake. 1:33 is the bridge section of the source tune, and in the remix, a similar string patch is used to the string patch in the source. I feel like this string patch (and also the one in the source) are too slow in their attacks to keep up with the fast writing and it ends up sounding awkward. This could be fixed easily by layering something with a faster attack right over the strings. There is a ton of creativity in this arrangement, lots of instrument changes, sfx, filter transitions and additional ideas as the piece moves along, full credit is given for that! I love the bassline throughout the track, super creative writing for that bassline. I wish the bass sound had quite a bit more beef to it though. I also wish there was a section with the lead writing personalized, or a lead solo, or something to break up the verbatim source-tune motif writing. My favorite part of the track is the lead starting at 1:56, finally a lead that has a bit of movement to it! It needs to be louder, stick up front a little more and perhaps have some light reverb on it. Most of the instruments in the mix sound like they are very dry. You've actually done a very good job placing the various elements in the soundscape, with some things more center-focused and other things like arps sitting widely in the stereo field. Excellent work on that! Careful with autopanning though, as it can make some people dizzy especially on headphones; keep autopanning instruments from panning too widely and/or too fast. The ending is abrupt, short, and disappointing, but not dealbreaker. Wes is correct about sidechaining. I can't tell what if anything in the mix has sidechaining on it, perhaps the bass does? I can't tell, but he's right that sidechaining most of your elements in varying amounts throughout a track like this will let your kick punch through well, and will give the entire arrangement much more groove. If you're going to do this, the bass should get the largest gain reduction (somewhere between 6-10ish db GR), then plucks and leads and even percussion loops should get less gain reduction (like 3-6ish db of GR, in varied amounts so it isn't all the same), all with a very fast attack and release setting. Sidechaining like this will also allow more overall headroom for doing a clean mastering job, as it stops things from competing for volume and frequency whenever the kick hits. All of that said, sidechaining (or lack thereof) is not dealbreaking my vote on this mix. Just like with Wes's vote though, my vote reads like "death by a thousand cuts." I want to emphasize that there is a LOT to love about this arrangement! So much creativity going on here, and it is a fun, upbeat arrangement. For me though, the cheap/vanilla sounds, stiff sequencing and lack of reverb and/or other effects (delays, filter movement on the leads, etc.) is killing it for me and making the arrangement lack finesse. These sounds, sequencing and effects would have gotten the job done back in the day, but not in 2023. I hope you will work on this more though, I'd love to hear it again with improvements made! NO (resubmit)
  17. That is exactly what I'm saying, Gario! Ironically, additional sidechaining will help clear up any unintentional master pumping. That two-octave lead is the worst offender, to my ears anyway (plus it's loud).
  18. I love the heavy kick and deep sidechaining on the bass right away, but when the first lead comes in at 0:13, I can barely hear the kick anymore. That lead (or, two leads, one an octave higher than the other) is way too loud and has zero sidechaining (or, not very much sidechaining) so it is just dominating the soundscape, drowning out the percussion and backing arps. At 0:41 there is an additional lead sound added, that one is nicely wide and heavily sidechained so that's good, but overall the combined lead is too loud and feels pasted on top of the soundscape instead of nestled into it. It is actually a bit fatiguing to listen to in this condition. It doesn't help that all the leads used are very heavy in the high-mids. The piano breakdown is lovely, although it feels almost too sparse following such a busy section before it. I wish the breakdown had just one or two extra elements in it like maybe a percussion loop to keep it attached to the rest of the material. Not a dealbreaker, just a comment. I wish a few more varied timbres had been used to keep this mix interesting, as the writing is on the repetitive side. An instrument changeup, primarily for the lead, would have helped. This is very borderline for me and I'm actually fine if it passes as is, but I feel that the leads are just too loud and too dominant, and that one lead (or the two-octave layered lead I mentioned) needs a touch of sidechaining (or, more if there is some now) to tuck it into the mix better than this. The mastering sounds fine to me, my issue is mostly with the volume balance of the leads and the level of sidechaining of the leads. So, the other votes are saying "too much sidechaining" and here I am asking for more sidechaining. I honestly think that what Gario is hearing as a "static mass of pulsing sound" is not from master overcompression but from too-loud and under-sidechained leads! Call me crazy, but that's how I hear this! NO (resubmit, borderline)
  19. The mixing and balancing work well enough, although the overall master is on the quiet side. I am hearing tons of harmonic dissonance though, throughout the piece there are areas where notes seem to clash, at least to my ears. The drum sequence does not change once established, the level of energy stays mostly the same, the writing seems to be mostly copy and paste, and the instruments are the same all the way through, giving the piece a repetitive feel. Is there more to the track, because this render cuts off very abruptly at 3:19, with no type of cooldown or outro, it just cuts off cold. More work to do on this one in terms of writing, removing disharmonies, adding variation and interest to the arrangement, and rendering the entire track including any outro. I do like this concept though! NO
  20. Drums are very weak, especially the kick as Brad noted. I'm not sure I understand what is being portrayed in the first minute, I cannot connect it to the source tune. The guitar is super loud and dry when it comes in. The mixing needs a lot of work and mastering seems nonexistent. I can't recognize the source material at all; I would need to see a source-use breakdown before I could really comment on that, but I don't hear it in a cursory listen. This arrangement comes off as extremely loose and noodley. This concept could work, but it needs to be mixed much better than this, and the source connections would need to be more apparent. Edit 11/9/23: Listening again with Promise source. I finally hear the motif from the Promise source, starting at 2:16, played suuuuuper quietly on a piano or plucked instrument way in the background. The motif lasts from 2:16-2:48. After that, from 2:48-3:20 I hear the arp pattern from Promise(reprise). From 3:20-3:52 I think we are back to Promise. From 3:56 to we are back to the section 2:16-2:48 but without the source arp, so I don't think we can count that as source. After that, all the way to the end, I don't hear any more source. So if the source has truly been deconstructed and put back together, it has been done very stealthily. I still think the drums sound weak, and the arrangement is very noodley and not mixed well. Still a NO
  21. All the changes I asked for in the first round of voting have been made, and Brad did a great job helping, but I sadly have to agree with MW and Wes that the first minute of this track blows the whole deal. The rest of the track works great and sounds amazing. But the vocal in that first minute sounds so forced and so awkward and unnatural, and no amount of pitch correction or mixing is going to fix that. I don't know what to suggest, but it just doesn't work. I'm really sorry. Perhaps MW's and Wes's suggestions can be put to use. I suspect there will be listeners who cannot get through that first minute to get to the remainder of the track, which is a shame. Wes explained the situation perfectly, in my opinion. NO
  22. "Default FL Keys" yep, sadly it sounds like that, super mechanical, tinny and expressionless. The intro goes on too long without adding anything else to build up to the next section. Kick sounds great when it enters, but the piano playing those blocked chords is too simplistic. The bass sounds good but it is hard to hear over the arp and piano, and it is struggling to play the lower registers clearly. This section goes on way too long. At the 2:00 point I am really hoping to hear something else besides the arp and blocked piano chords. You have entire LONG sections that, once established, do not do ANYTHING else. At 3:00 there's kick and clap, and really good sidechaining on the bass. But it's the same exact arp and piano chords. At least changing the patch playing the arp would have helped here. This is another LONG section that, once established, continues without any change, nothing new to add interest. At 4:00 there is a new element added, and long overdue. I like this pad-like element, but it sure would be nice to add another element that could play over the top of it like a proper lead, because thus far there has not been a lead of any kind. This would be an opportunity to do some soloing or even add a motif or melody from another source, optimally from the same game or franchise but could be from another game or franchise, or could be something original that you write. The ending cuts off before the final note finishes playing. This track is twice as long as it needs to be to convey the ideas, each section needs to be cut in half unless you have something super interesting happening during that section. At present there is nothing interesting happening during any of those long sections. The same arp and piano plays all the way through and both of those sounds become stale in the first minute. This is a good layout for a track but it isn't complete. It needs to have many more unique ideas to keep the listener engaged. Sometimes even with good writing ideas, it can be clear as you're working with it that a section is too long and needs to be cut in half, so you may need to do that while thinking of ways to add interest to each section. Great start, just needs more (ideas) but also less (length). NO
  23. I like that triplet groove! I also hear no sidechaining, which is a shame because the mix lacks groove as a result. I really like the synth choices. I believe it sounds more muddled than it would otherwise due to the lack of sidechaining. Although it IS a dense mix with a lot going on in similar frequency ranges. Sidechaining all of your elements, in varying/gentle amounts (heaviest on bass, next heaviest on pads, but you can also sidechain plucks and leads, I even sidechain my percussion loops lightly for mixing clarity), will glue this soundscape together, it will allow your drums to be heard better, and will add 100% more groove to the feel of the piece. The writing is repetitive, which is a shame for such a short mix. You're dropping an outro on us, just as my mind was wanting to hear a proper drumless breakdown, followed by a buildup and one more huge section before a proper outro. This feels like half a song, to me. The render cuts off before the final sfx has finished playing, that needs to be fixed. All that said, I DIG this so far, it just doesn't sound complete! Please do some strategic sidechaining, you'll be amazed at how much groovier it will be. And if you can extend the song, while not repeating anything wholesale, that would be excellent. Changing out some sounds as the track moves along would also go a long way toward breaking up the repetitive feel. I hope to hear this back! NO (please resubmit)
  24. That initial chippy synth has some autopan on it that is disorienting to me right away, it is so wide and the rate is super fast. The drums, bassline and backing synths are very rigidly timed. I hear that off-key chord Larry mentioned. I think both Brad and Larry covered most of what I would also say about this track: the sounds are simplistic and robotically timed, and the writing is repetitive. The drums are stiff other than the drumrolls which are actually quite good. Most of your elements are sitting in the dead center of the soundscape so much that I actually checked it in mono, and I can't tell that much of a difference other than that auopanned synth and some reverb here and there. That's a missed opportunity to utilize more of the soundscape to make a 3D mix. Intro and outro are pretty much bookends. The solo is a very nice touch, you'd do well to add even more writing personalization throughout the piece. I feel like you have a solid start here and you may want to drop this into our workshop forum for further feedback and advice. NO
  25. Wait just a second, let me grab my brain from off the floor, it fell out just for a sec..... Alrighty. WOW. Insane sources, yes. Stupid amounts of detail in this remix. Awesome arrangement. I agree with the dudes that the drums are louder than the rest of the soundscape so they obliterate it now and again, and sometimes the mix is so crowded that, well, my brain falls on the floor. Still, YES
×
×
  • Create New...