Chimpazilla

I agree with proph that these two themes go very well together, and this remix has great bones and great potential. But the sounds themselves are not doing this arrangement justice. The bells are nice, but the full orchestra sounds are too fake to work well. The arrangement itself is good although it has sections of copypasta as proph pointed out. If the repeated sections were varied somehow, in terms of writing or instrumentation, it would work, but as it stands, wholesale copypasta is a dealbreaker. I'll add that the sections are quite different in terms of energy, and the transitions between these sections are rather weak so that the flow is interrupted each time the piece transitions. I love the concept here, and I think this could be a great remix, but the sounds would need to be seriously upgraded, as well as remediating the wholesale copypasta, and more attention needs to be given to the transitions between sections. That said, I'd love to hear it again with improvements made! NO

I hear those two wonky bass notes that Brad mentioned, at 0:26 and 0:30, perhaps check if something happened at those two points. You could check the bass notes in a higher octave to see if they are the right notes (easier to hear in the higher octave, then change them back) This is really super lush and lovely, and showcases the talents of all three artists extremely well. It's a beautiful huge wide-open soundscape that tells a story extremely well. Production is pristine, methinks. Mastering is just right. YES

Listening to the source first, wow it is frenetic. I can already hear how this is an ideal source to be tackled by jnWake! The remix is full of energy and contrast right away, I love the little chippy interludes in between the humongous soundscape. Wow, this sounds so lush and full. Nice energy shift at 0:42, moving into a fuller section at 0:54. The instrumentation is typical jnWake fare, but the addition of the excellent guitars and bass and bits of chiptune is dynamite. The track is mixed so well; it's amazing to hear everything this clearly in a soundscape this full. I agree with Wes, there are a couple of loud/shrill sections, but in the grand scheme of this arrangement it isn't a big deal. Very easy vote on this one, let's do this. Super congrats on the DoD win! It was well deserved. YES

Co-signing with the guys, Brad explained perfectly. This is a very cute concept and fun listen but not what we are looking for. The sampling of the BG song is extensive enough to be a problem as he said. The drum loop is too loud and never varies at all. There isn't enough VGM source represented in the remix, and sampling of the actual game audio is a dealbreaker. I love this style and concept, and wouldn't mind hearing this again redone to be more in line with our standards! NO

I love all these themes! Rebecca and I are both Zelda lovers, so I am extremely familiar with these lovely themes. I agree with Hemo, I love what you did with Ice Ruins! This arrangement is a medley like so many RET arrangements, and like the other ones this flows (see what I did there) beautifully from theme to theme and the arrangement is cohesive as it moves and changes over time, telling a lovely story. The transitions are smooth as heck, especially moving into Lake Hylia, as Larry pointed out. The soft rain at the end is the perfect way to close out the piece. The mixing is fine, everything is clear and gorgeous. Mastering is just right for this style. This is a lovely romp through the icey/watery realms of Hyrule. YES

WOW what a piercy sound right off the bat, ouch. When does it stop? Never, it seems. Whatever this is, I'm seeing an RMS value of -3.0db RMS which is crazy CRAZY loud mastering. I don't see it clipping (looking at SPAN with "true peak" unselected); it is limited at 0db but it stays there nearly the entire time, causing that crazy small RMS value. I'm not even going to try to sort out how this remix relates to the original. Is it too conservative or too liberal, I can't even tell. Unfortunately this soundscape is completely unlistenable to me. The arrangement is completely repetitive due to the same instruments and writing, the samples are terrible and way too loud, the writing is very random and unstructured, and there is nothing melodic or motivic to anchor the piece for the listener at all. Definitely more work required here! NO

This mix does sound very well produced! But ultimately it is a midi-rip of the source. I downloaded the original and since the BPMs are identical I was easily able to cut and duplicate the sections that went into this arrangement, it is the source arrangement with some of the sections stretched just slightly to extend the arrangement, but other than that it is the same almost note for note. We need more than that for this track to be an OC ReMix, but as the guys said this sounds great and there are some cool unique bits in there. We'd love to have a more personalized version of this on the site! Hope to hear it again. NO

The synthy intro and outro do not match with the rest of the track at all, as Brad said. There's no source in the intro at all either, which can be totally fine, but the intro is so disconnected from the main body of the track, that when the drop hits at 0:25, it is extremely jarring. The intro appears to be in 4/4, whereas the guitar portion of the track is in 3/4 like the source song is, and there is zero signaling or preparing the listener for this intense change in soundscape as well as time signature. The drop hits suddenly and hard... which is fine, but it just HAS to be signaled somehow, either with hints of guitar (a few notes of source motif or something else) coming in over a longer intro, or some kind of upsweep, or even filtering sounds down to a couple beats of silence, so the listener is aware that a drop is inbound. So to summarize, the intro is fine, even thought is is sourceless and guitarless, but that drop has got to be signalled. At the drop section, the lead guitars are panned so wide. The bass that lives in the middle is quiet and indistinct. The kick and snare are the only other elements occupying the center, that I can hear anyway. There is synthwork going on back there somewhere but it is mixed extremely quietly. I think it is fine to have the leads wide-panned, but the backing synthwork should at least be audible and should have its own place in the stereo field. Leading into the outro, a quick sweep would help with that transition (I don't think it needs much more than that, like it does in the intro). For the fadeout, I recommend continuing just that first part of the melody, fade out on that bit of writing and don't transition into the next portion of the melody at 2:50, because that sounds like the melody should continue, and it doesn't. Just duplicate that first bit of writing and let it fade out on that. I really like this concept (and I love this source tune). The melodic interpretation and soloing is very good! The production isn't quite there yet, but I feel like it's close. I look forward to hearing this again with these improvements made, and having it posted on OCR. NO (resubmit)

This entire track is in mono. I understand that original chiptune could only ever have been in mono, and this remix is done in a purist style. While not dealbreaker for OCR, the mono approach feels like such a HUGE lost opportunity to experiment with surprising blasts of WIDE STEREO after lulling the listener into a false sense of security with the mono soundscape. At 1:01 when the first big blast hits, that's when my ears are crying out to hear things in stereo. The soundscape does feel very cramped, and without utilizing any stereo space whatsoever, it would necessarily feel cramped. There's no way around this in 100% mono. I think the interpretation of this theme is very cool, and there are tons of fun ideas in this arrangement. The instruments feel samey, and the writing gets repetitive after awhile, but again all of that is due to the chiptune-purist approach. The drums are often on autopilot as Brad said. I am leaning toward a NO; I agree with Brad, it is just too repetitive. An arrangement like this could have flown back in Ye Olden Days, but in 2024 this is just too much repetition. To use such a limited mono soundscape, the arrangement and writing would need significantly more variation to overcome the repetitiveness in this remix. NO

Larry: What you show here as RESUB2 and RESUB3 are the same link, one of those needs to be deleted. I have evaluated this track two of the five previous times it has been submitted, and listening to the current version, I am going to quote what I wrote one year ago, because it still applies now: This version is sounding better than previous versions but still has the same mixing problem, it's all highs and sizzle. The lows sound like they have been severely tamed, and the highs are hyped (and already sound too loud due to the lows being cut so much). If your sounds are decent, you shouldn't have to do so much "EQ correction" as I think you are doing and have done on every resubmission. I would pass this version, the sounds are good enough, but the mixing is unbalanced to the point of still being a problem. On each individual track, you only want to EQ such that no low-lows are coming through on anything other than your kick and bass. On an average midrangey instrument, that cut could fall somewhere between 80-100-ish Hz. Do not EQ in a way that cuts or diminishes the fundamental of the sound, that is what is leaving each instrument sounding weaker than it should, the cuts are too extreme. If you are saturating, distorting or otherwise hyping the highs, either individually or on the master, this is done way too heavy-handedly, causing the entire track to sound overly sizzly. On your master, you should not be doing any major shelves or cuts, unless it's just a very gentle-Q low-cut to make sure nothing is coming through below 20-25Hz or so. Whatever you've done here is too extreme. Do you have someone else to listen to this and perhaps help you dial in your EQs? Also, the master is overdriven, there is no need for this track to be hitting -6.6db RMS. The loudness wars are over, and -12 to -11db RMS is better and more reasonable. Getting closer, but not sounding good enough production-wise, yet. NO

I remember this track and I voted on it. I remember thinking it was great but the vocals were sinking it and the synths were dry and blocky. It seems all of the issues I brought up have been addressed and it only took a decade! The vocals now sound amazing and everything fits in together super well. If these are fake vocals, they sound very good! "Fauxcals" bwahahahaha! Yeah this is good to go now. YES

Jewbei!!!! Hey dude, long time no see! Congrats on your marriage! Very abrupt intro, I would have preferred even a short upsweep or reverse-reverb intro, but ok. Soundscape sounds great right away. Bell lead starting at 1:14 is too bright and loud and feels abrasive. I appreciate Larry's timestamp of the source. The arrangement is generally good although it feels quite repetitive. The same leads appear again and again, against the static trance backdrop. There are four nearly identical sections with the piercey bell lead, with extremely minor differences each time (slight writing variation, additional perc loop). The production is good overall, the sidechaining is good although leads could use some slight sidechaining as well, especially that bell lead which feels like it just rides on top of the soundscape most of the time. The master is bordering on too loud but I don't hear overcompression artifacts. Ok after listening through several times, I hate to say it but the arrangement is just too repetitive. It's trance, so having the continuous trance backing for the majority of the track is fine, but with that being the case, the leads absolutely need more variation as the piece moves along. And the bell lead I feel needs to be tamed or replaced, as it hurts my ears if I try to listen to the track at anything other than a very quiet volume. NO (very borderline, please vary leads and resubmit)

I am assuming the bulk of this remix is Stealthy Steps. That's what I hear the most of, and the beat is the same as Stealthy Steps throughout the majority of the track. I also cannot hear Ninja Step. I like the granular intro with the sfx a lot! Neat way to set the mood. The volume and intensity ramp up until the drop at 0:45. I really like the gritty soundscape that's set up and the varying sounds coming in and out as things move along. I really like the inclusion of the phone beeps, super cool sfx. The beat really never changes which unfortunately gives a very repetitive flow to the track overall, but there are so many instrumental and textural changes happening that I'm ok with it. A few variations of the drum fills would have broken up some of this beat repetition, the same fill each time is not the best choice. There is definitely too much sub-30Hz content in this mix, which is causing a loss of mastering headroom, and the master is overly compressed as a result of including these inaudible frequencies. By rolling off these subs, the master could be driven even harder without risking overcompression. But I don't hear overcompression artifacts, in this case "overcompression" means that the track's dynamics are overly flat, due to these sub frequencies being included in the master. Overall, I love this. Tons of variation and fun sfx and writing, great vibe and mood. I'm going with this one. YES

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)

"Apparitions" (Super Mario World Castle theme) Chimpazilla's comments: Another Chimp-Emu collab coming at ya! This was a wip that Wes put together a few years back, but he lost motivation for it, so he sent it to me. I was immediately interested, and I loved the fact that the arrangement structure was already about 90% mapped out, ready to be worked on. I ran with it, I wrote an intro for it, and we shipped stems back and forth but I ultimately ended up with the file. (The next collab coming up for submission is the opposite situation: it was my initial wip, and Wes took over the file! A perfect criss-cross situation.) "Apparitions" is another track where we both worked on it in a frenzy and every idea was a winner. The track was originally intended to be a lo-fi bop but my additions pretty much killed that idea! The result is a half-time chillout groove that Wes and I are both super happy with. The arrangement sounds so eerie and groovy at the same time. Wes is 100% responsible for that utterly astounding outro! I'm sounding like a broken record here, but look out for more Chimp-Emu collabs coming up soon! Release date request: Since the track sounds so spooky-ooky, perhaps it could get a Halloween release? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Emunator's Comments: This song started its life as a 20-second lo-fi demo back in 2021 that never went anywhere. Fast forward several years, and it found new life as the latest entry in our ever-growing catalog of collaborations that just felt right. After hearing Kris' intro, the vibe was completely changed for the better, and it inspired me to get back to work on this, instead pulling more inspiration from gritty industrial sounds and the quirky haunting synth tones of Celeste. This track was always destined to be like this, it just took a few years before it fell into the right hands to get it there! Letting go of a concept to a collaborator, even a demo that has been gathering dust for years, can be extremely anxiety inducing. That said, I can say that I never feel that fear working with Kris. She gets it. She has an innate ability to understand both the existing spirit of a song, and its unrealized potential, and bringing both halves of the equation together in a way that shines every time.

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)

WOWZA this is great!!!! Starts out so strong and keeps delivering. The guitar performances are just dynamite. The synth work and drums are also excellent and all perfectly supportive. The arrangement is full of dynamic shifts and varied instrumentation and rhythmic patterns. Reminds me of some of the best prog-rock arrangements from the 90s like Dream Theater or Planet X. Super professional sounding, this arrangement is groovus maximus. YES

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

There's plenty of high-end clarity coming through for me; there is a ton of distortion and purposeful fuzziness, way too much for my liking, but it's a creative choice. I wouldn't call it lossy, but I definitely feel that the distortion and bitcrushing is totally overdone. The lows are rich and full, I'm checking on SPAN and I don't see any inaudible mud and I don't feel like it is boomy. The primary lead starting at 1:30 tends to be piercy, and also has a tremendous amount of distortion on it. I can only guess that this was done so it would cut through this distorted backing soundscape. The distortion is creating a wash over the soundscape that is grating after awhile. When the piano breakdown begins at 2:05, my ears get a break from the intense distortion. The piano does sound similar to the source tune, but it has been clearly recreated and fits into this soundscape really well, although it sounds blocky and lacks humanization, and it is way too loud. There are some nature sounds behind it that I can barely hear. I like this arrangement a lot actually, but it gets very repetitive after awhile with the same instruments and writing over and over. At 2:18 and again at 2:36 there is an awkward series of notes in the lead writing. I've listened to this several times in a row now, and I am getting a headache from this much distortion. I have to agree with Larry that it is too much. I also feel that the level of repetition of sounds and writing, combined with the arrangement having such long sections without developing very much, is also a dealbreaker for me. The arrangement is generally good and I like the mixture of the two themes, but in those long sections such as 1:17-2:06, and then from 2:06-3:16 it's just the same piano and lead motif over and over and over. Even though you have tons of other stuff coming and going, those sections feel sooooo long to me. Perhaps the repeated motifs wouldn't sound so repetitive to me if they were played with different lead instruments now and then, or with varied backing elements, new drum grooves/percussions/etc. and if the backing elements were less grating. At the minimum, the distortion overall has to be reduced. Also the track is mastered extremely loudly, the final limiter should not be pushed this hard. NO (resubmit)

I know this source SO well. Listening to just the first section of 0:21-0:48, I can hear what has been done with 0:12-0:24 in the source, but I don't think it is sufficiently identifiable; it's more of the backing chord structure of that part of the source since the motif notes are not there. (are they there, if they are I cannot hear them) Same exact thing from 0:49-1:04, and 1:05-1:52, it is like the backing chord structure of the source, shifted to minor, and with no motif. Same for the final section. This is not enough source for me. It is fine to interpret source in a remix, but when it is SO deeply buried, I have a very hard time connecting it to a source song or even enjoying it as a remix. In this case, the genre is completely changed (which is fine!), the tone is changed from happy major to grungy minor (also fine!), the chord structure is suggested but the motif notes are totally absent (this is my dealbreaker). All these things together have buried the connection to the source song for me. Hearing this without knowing what source is being remixed, I would never know this was a Super Mario Sunshine remix (and the most iconic and earwormy theme therein!) To me (and I would imagine to most listeners, although I can only speak for myself) this is an original song. Other Js (like proph above) may feel differently. This may sound negative, but I do love the concept! I think if the motif notes were at least hinted at, I wouldn't have such a hard time connecting it to the source. The arrangement structure is fine, although the instrumentation and writing get repetitive after awhile. The final big section is identical to the first big section. The screamy saw feels very hot and sizzly and isn't doing much of interest other than playing blocked notes. In the middle section there's another synth added with some vibrato on it, adding a very tiny amount of sonic variation. The mixing is very flat and grungy, which is fine, but there is indeed a giant scoop at 400Hz, what's that all about? This is making the track feel bottom-heavy while at the same time quite piercy and shrill. The track has also been master-compressed heavily which adds to this effect (although it does not appear to have overcompression artifacts). The mastering level appears to be fine. (0db peak and -11dbRMS) Overall, I like this concept a lot, but I can't identify the source song at all, it has been interpreted too deeply for me (again, others' mileage may vary!), and the mixing needs an overhaul, direct repetition is too much in the arrangement, and the mastering compression should come down just a bit. NO (resubmit)

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)

That source tune with the 90s brass stabs! The remix does dive right in. Bass sounds great to me, as does the vibraphone. The bass is walking all over me. The balancing and mixing are fine, the master is sort of loud for this style but it's completely clean. I love this, minimal and cool! Waitress, I need another cocktail please. No, I haven't had too many already. YES

Very cool source tune, gives me Tangerine Dream vibes. It has a mixed time signature element, I hear what I think is a fast 6/4 and also 4/4 sections. Cool arps to start with, but the lower sound is boxy to my ears and very loud. This sound is super prominent at 260Hz which is making it boxy. I love the bass when it comes in. I hear what Wes is saying that some automated filter movement or filtered-in start to the sidechaining on the bass and/or other elements would help this thing groove in the intro. By the time the pads and chips come in, the soundscape is better filled in. It's a luscious soundscape, I love it. Feels like floating out in space. Also giving me a very mellow Donkey Kong vibe. When the kick comes in, I am loving this groove, because the 4-on-the-floor is totally unexpected! Great way to quickly ramp up the energy. The kick is somewhat tame and lacking beef for my taste, but it's audible. The sidechaining is heavy for this small of a kick sound, giving the soundscape a pumpy-ness that isn't warranted by this kick. In the final section/outro, that first synth returns at 3:08 with the 260Hz spike. It's not a bad sound, but it is boxy. It is boxing my ears! A few production issues, but nothing holding this back for me. Other than my mixing crits, I love this arrangement and soundscape. Very lush and spacey. YES Edit 6/12/24: New version corrects the 260Hz problem and adds movement in the first half. Sidechaining has been reduced to match the (still small!) size of the kick. Sounds better.

I sent the votes so far to Aaron today, and he told me he made some EQ automated cuts to my mastered wav, to remove two spots of loud sibilance, and he said he sent that to Larry. He should have just pinged me! I don't bite! (hard, anyway!) So we talked about it, I made the changes and re-rendered the wav. For those who have voted, this should not affect anything, as it is just 1/4 of a second of total revision. But he was right, those S's were too loud.

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