Chimpazilla

This is not a good looking waveform, it is brickwalled with over 6db of headroom. Why oh why? I have not heard the original submission so this is my first hearing of this arrangement. Nice sounding bells right away. The lead bell is very loud when it arrives at 0:18, compared to the bass and drums. At 0:54 it is just bass guitar and drums, and the bass sample sounds very simplistic, dry and exposed all by itself. Having some backing element or some kind of sfx or just another element to add interest to such a simple section would have helped add interest and nuance to that part of the arrangement. I like the buildup that follows, with the reverby bell and filtered-in vox choir. The Christmas bells are lovely! Although all the bells are so loud against the bass and drums. The drums are mixed quietly, the samples are simplistic and the writing pattern is repetitive. The kick is barely audible over the bells. The mixing here really isn't ideal, the volume balancing is not good and the bells feel disconnected from the bass and drums as if they are not part of one track. I see in the previous vote that the Js had a problem with repetition. I haven't heard that versions so I can't compare but this version is also quite repetitive. Not quite dealbreaker repetitive for me but right on the cusp. I think I need a few more playthroughs to decide if repetition, simplicity, unbalanced mixing and the strange brickwalled mastering are passable or dealbreaking. ? just not sure yet Edit 12-19-23: Larry's vote reads as a clarification of everything I was hearing and feeling. I re-read my own vote and I share his thoughts exactly, and my vote needs to be a NO (resubmit)

I feel like there are some disharmonies here and there, just enough to bug me. Examples: 0:32, 0:51, 2:11-2:31 (what is that arp doing?), 3:23. Really there are too many instances of harmonic dissonance to count. I also think the transitions between mismatched chords are not smooth and they feel very clunky harmonically. The bass and also the primary bell arp are causing this for me. I would be very interested to see what @prophetik music has to say about this. Brad, am I hearing this wrong or do you agree? The bassline's writing is very busy which doesn't work well under so much other busy writing, and the bassline writing is aimless as well and often the notes are out of key. The bell arp plays continuously and loudly during a lot of this arrangement, and it eliminates any possibility of hearing a lead when it plays since it is so up front. All of this busy and disharmonious writing is bugging me after two full playthroughs so far. The soundscape is nice, but the mixing isn't great because everything wants to be upfront so the mixing lacks depth while still sounding clear/clean. The arrangement is generally good. But since the instruments stay essentially the same throughout the arrangement (and with the busy writing) it feels repetitive to me after awhile. Most of the time I'm not hearing any dedicated lead (not that this is absolutely required, but it makes the mix disjointed to listen to, and I suspect this is more to do with mixing than writing). This soundscape and writing is just too random and noodley for me, and the disharmonies put the final nail in it. I love the concept, but I think more attention needs to be paid to which element takes the focus at any given time; there is just too much competing to be heard throughout the majority of the arrangement. NO

This is a lovely cover, but yeah it is a cover until the three-minute mark as others have pointed out. After 3:00 it is entirely original, making this an awkward arrangement for a remix. The little bit after the fakeout ending is really not needed, imo. The guitar playing is beautiful although I agree with Brad about the tone, it is a tad sharp. I also agree that the hammer-ons sound like errors. I really like what's here, but the arrangement is too conservative for OCR. NO

I haven't heard of Nujabes before; listening to some of his tracks on Modal Soul now. His style is heavy on smooth jazz, simple/repetitive drum loops, lo-fi production, piano loops. The production sounds so minimal and dry to me, feels very flat. I get the aesthetic, but I gotta say I'm not a fan of it. Ok on to the remix! Wow that's a warbley piano. The piano playing is fantastic, I love the interpretation, but it is really making it hard to pick up on the source song. And this is a source I know extremely well (too well, it is an earworm). The source motif is more implied than played. I can definitely grok the source from 0:00-1:04 and 2:19-2:43, even thought it is super sparse. From 1:10-1:55, this section is 100% interpretation, and while the playing is ace, I get no recognizable source in that section. So that works out to 53% source, if all of the sparse motif is counted. This is going to be a tough sell. I understand the vibe you were going for, now that I listened to a few Nujabes tracks. But a simple, repetitive beat paired with an unchanging backing soundscape played in an energetically static way typically does not pass on OCR, unless other elements of interest are added. This is a very simple and repetitive arrangement. The snare is so dry and upfront, and the piano sounds like it is playing in another room. The piano playing is very good, the piano sample and its effects are on the odd side. I will be interested to hear other opinions on this. What happened at the end? In the middle of playing, with no slowdown or resolution to the ideas, the track just... ends. This is a dealbreaker for me, even if I overlook everything else I have mentioned. I'm not really sure how to suggest improvements, since this was such a specific vibe being emulated. For me though, this arrangement is not developed enough for OCR. NO

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

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

(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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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)

There is more than just detuning going on, there is some flutter and wow, and it is very heavy and feels disorienting especially since it is so exposed. I'm going to agree with Brad that this is unpleasant to listen to, but I respect the concept. This soundscape sounds like it could appear in a 70s sci-fi movie like Logan's Run. There is definitely an audience for this esthetic. For what this is, it is done well. No outro, just a cold stop. I am not a fan of this type of non-resolving ending to a track. This arrangement is conservative to the source as Brad mentioned (at least until the 3-minute mark after which I am losing the plot), but I don't find that to be a problem as everything has been modified so much. It is certainly not a cover! This is a weird one. I am not going to reject it on those grounds though. I'm not sure what to think of this one yet, I'll be interested to see a few more votes first. ?

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

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)

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

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)

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

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)

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).

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)

I am very familiar with this source, being a diehard Zelda fan myself, and having played thousands of hours of BotW and now TotK, in both of which this song is featured. Both games contain a lot of sources that are quite ambient, and this source is no exception, but it does have just enough motif to make it easily workable to remix. What an interesting take on this source! So many unique sounds in this remix, is that throat singing? Holy cow I love it. The throat singing is loud and surprising but it gives me chills. The instruments used in this arrangement are so cool, what an interesting vibe, so many different feels all in one package. It still feels deeply spiritual and floaty, yet groovy. I love the unique off-timed drum groove. Mixing and mastering are fine, although the master is on the loud side but extremely clean. Great mix of distorted and clean sounds, providing excellent contrast throughout the arrangement. Plenty of source in the arrangement; that arp is almost always audible, and the lead motif is played beautifully with lovely and appropriate instruments. I really like the personalization of the writing that starts at 1:49. I'm really enjoying this! YES

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