Chimpazilla

AAAARGGGG

I agree that 2:15 does sound overcompressed. I think the buzzy sfx playing at that point adds to the perception of overcompression, but I also hear some pumping there too so the limiter is definitely working too hard at that point. -7.6RMS is pretty loud for an orchestral track. Not enough for a NO, but next time ease up just a bit or automate volume so you don't get such a compression spike in the track. I love the alternating crispy and clean on those big hits. Track is really well orchestrated and very exciting. This is a big winner for me, I love it. YES

Hey, I have worked with this source before! I love this source. TP is one of my favorite games of all time. I can see this vote going either way, because it really won't be everyone's cup of tea, for several reasons. The source is very well represented, and I love the chord choices you used here, very creative and gives the melody extra moodiness. The arrangement is sort of odd, I wish there was a middle section to break things up, but ultimately the arrangement is good enough. I love the creepy intro. I LOVE how you used the game clips, vocal and otherwise. I'm totally into tasteful use of game clips. You are really milking it in the outro, though, hehe. I still like it. The mixing could be better, though. The grunge guitar backing is too crispy and too narrow/centered, and the sine leads are too simple/plain and too loud and I don't care for the panning of the leads. Drums and percussion (trap hats!) can all be louder. Kick isn't cutting through well. Bass can be louder and more present. At 1:57 you have some very cool sfx that are mixed dead in the center; to me that is a missed opportunity to do some wild panning and stereo tomfoolery (automated filtering and autopan ftw), and at the same time you have simple, loud, panned leads. Imo you have the wrong things centered and the wrong things wide or panned. Also at 1:57, you have a screechy synth that is directly conflicting with your backing sfx stuff (panning or stereo widening the sfx will fix that). This track could really be something special with just a few mixing changes. As Larry often says, I wouldn't die if it got posted like this, but I will be the girl who throws it back for the extra coat of gloss. NO (please resubmit)

^This,^ in it's entirety. What a cool arrangement, but the distortion just kills it dead. For anyone who ever hears it without reading the production notes, it is just going to sound bad, period. I will add that the piano sequencing sounds very stiff and mechanical. I hope you can fix this up and resubmit it, the concept and arrangement are ace. NO (resubmit, please)

I'll bet I know why Larry is hearing this as bright/piercing/crispy/shrill... the track is missing lows. The bass needs to come up in volume in the lowest end, perhaps the entire bass should come up in volume, and the kick sounds weak and thumpy and doesn't have any punch, the kick needs more volume and also some smack to come through the mix. I'll bet those changes alone will make the instrument balance work. I have no issue with the synths used, NutS favors the 80s sounding saw leads, the leads are fine. The Shreddage guitar chugs sound just dandy to me, who needs Willrock??? Writing and arrangement are fantastic. I'll withhold my vote until the low end is fixed up. (spoiler alert, it's a YES once the low end is fixed up ) edit 3/13/17: Listening to the revised version, the bass is now louder but it isn't filling out the low end like I thought it would, since the bass isn't playing in a very low range. The bass might almost be too loud now, but I like it better this way. The highs are tamed now, but there is still an overall high-mid crispy feel to the mix which I think is due to the timbres all having similar characteristics and playing in similar ranges. It's definitely over the bar for me now, but perhaps these are issues to address in future mixes. YES

Cool arrangement of the sources. I feel like the synths used are very simple, like presets with not much change to them, other than the occasional glitch. Presets usually have too much reverb and delay on them, and it sounds here like you left that all in, and they all overlap each other to create a mushy soundscape. A better idea is to turn all presets' reverb/delays way down or off, and then turn them back up slowly (or add your own as an insert) and adjust them separately, so the elements fit into the soundscape where they should sit. The drums are very repetitive and mixed too quietly. The talk lead is too loud, and seems to get louder and also wider over time until it is overwhelming the soundscape starting at 1:30 and again at 3:14. Much of the track sounds too far stereo-spread, leaving very little in the middle or middle-ish. Leads in particular don't need to be so wide, other than the top end. The bass is either too quiet or too stereo-spread or both. The writing throughout the track feels very blocky and forced. I'm sorry to come down so hard on this. I think you have good potential Elizabeth, but I strongly suggest you look into ways to learn to improve your mixing, if nothing else that will make a huge difference to how your tracks sound. NO

This arrangement is awesome, I agree with MW! Really creative use of the source. Even so, the mix sounds repetitive to me, not so much because the same sounds are used all throughout the mix, but more because every single element is saturated/distorted. There is very little contrast between clean and distorted, so it kind of sounds like a wall of grunge, and not in a good way, especially in the busiest parts. I suggest going back through and deciding which things should have heavy saturation on them and which might be better cleaner. The synth that you are using for bass sounds like it is playing lower than it's optimal range so it sometimes sounds like it is straining down there. The really full sections are definitely overcompressed and have no dynamics and I can hear overcompression artifacts over and above all the saturation. Even with that much compression you are only getting a max RMS value of -9.3, which tells me something in the mix is badly unbalanced and/or needs eq treatment (probably some low end rumble, 30Hz and below, stealing your headroom). I feel like the track is going to require a full rebalance, and re-mixing. Some elements such as the low synth starting at 1:45 are much too quiet, making the track dynamics too diverse overall. The drums are fairly squashed in the mix, and the kick in particular can not get through the soundscape in the heavy parts. I get what you are trying to do here and I love the concept... the execution isn't quite there though, but I hope you'll take this opportunity to fine-tune your mixing craft and please do send this back to us again, I look forward to passing it. NO (resubmit, please)

Thanks everyone for the source checks. I agree with the minor mixing crits (bass swells, heavy reverb) but they aren't dealbreakers. Very epic sounding mix! YES

The soundscape is quite full, but I never feel lost. This is lovely. As usual with Rebecca's mixes, I feel transported to the magical forest, and that is always a good thing. I'm not having any problem with realism, the samples and the sequencing are well over the bar. The percussion could be a tiny bit louder. I would love to have a crack at mastering this track to bring out more of the detail, currently the master is on the quiet side and there is untapped potential there for extra shine/sparkle. I dislike fadeouts, I think the outro could have been handled better, but no big deal. Absolutely nothing dealbreaking here, let's go, front page stuff. YES

I see what Gario is saying about this track making a perfect bridge between moods on the album, but as a standalone track I don't think the arrangement works well at all. What I am hearing is a long intro from 0:00-1:36, next I would expect a pretty solid first verse or section but there is none, then there is a soft breakdown from 1:36-1:56 (intro right into breakdown is very odd, imo), a super-short section of beefy material from 1:56-2:33, then a very soft outro. The parts sound mixed well enough to me but the overall dynamics of the track are too great, with the intro and outro being much too quiet. Ultimately though, the arrangement sinks it for me. NO

I love it. Can't wait to hear it finished. I adore Spirit Tracks.

The arrangement is good. The harpsichord is way too quiet to carry a lead by itself, but it doesn't do so very often, and I agree that making the harpsichord louder might not be helpful. I agree that the brass is lacking bite; better samples would improve this. I also agree that part 6 is the most cluttered, melodically. I feel that these are all areas to work on for next time, and that this arrangement is over the bar as is. YES

Larry, this is one of those tracks where, as you often say, the artist may come back to this months down the road and listen and regret how hard he pushed the limiter. Perhaps my vote can be considered more of a conditional. Should we reach out to the artist?

Performances and arrangement are really good, very enjoyable track. Opening guitar has too much delay. The soundscape quickly gets too busy for my taste, the worst offender is the section starting at 1:51. Perhaps part of why it sounds so busy though it that the master is overcompressed. I hear some distortion in the densest parts, over and above any desired distortion, and the crashes are completely destroyed. Cubase is reporting that the track is mastered to -6.9db RMS and that seems quite loud for a mellow rock track. I like the track quite a bit, it is 90% there for me, but I'm gonna be that girl who sends it back for a more gentle mastering job first. edit 2/20/17: MUUUUUUCH better. With the master no longer clipping and the delays under control, I can hear some beautiful melodic detail that was buried in the distortion before. I don't have that overcrowded feeling anymore. I agree with Gario that the track is DP quality now. Nice work! YES

Tough call. The performance is good, but it does sound a bit blocky and choppy, and the pauses don't sound natural, and that may be due to the sample, as others have pointed out. It is very hard to hide flaws in a single-instrument mix. I feel quite borderline about this, but ultimately I think it falls just short. Perhaps look into changing the sample? That transition at 3:12 is very awkward, but with the piano sample sounding more natural, that won't bother me all that much. I agree with Gario about the pedal bleed, but if he hadn't mentioned it I would not have noticed it. NO (resubmit)

This is kind of a bizarre thing. The drops are... odd. They are dubstep drops, but there is no bass, so my bass-loving brain is betrayed and bewildered. There are wubs here, but they are so tame. The lead writing is so very stiff, choppy, and repetitive. I like the slowdown and speedup of the synth from 3:15-3:53, that's pretty darn cool! Although I think some other effects could accompany that element. There are some cool sounds in this mix, but ultimately I find that there is too much straight copy pasta repetition here. The following sections are (nearly) identical: 0:13-0:40, 0:40-1:07, 1:36-2:03, and 3:53-4:20 (although this section has padding). That is four playthroughs of nearly identical material. Then 1:08-1:34 is almost the same as 2:31-3:25 (except this part is more iterations of the same thing), even with some filtering and that speeding up synth it sounds too samey for me, personally. This one isn't there for me yet. NO

This arrangement is conservative indeed. I like the metal interpretation of this source, but this arrangement is also relentless. There is no break in the action at all. Adding a unique breakdown would take this out of cover territory enough for me, personally, and something slower and/or drumless would really give the feeling of more arrangement dynamics. But then there is the mixing. It doesn't sound like much mixing has been done, everything is competing for frequency, and most of the instruments are smack in the middle of the soundscape with the exception of just the hats and crashes. I just slapped a simple stereo widener on the whole track and I get instant improvement. (I don't suggest doing that on the entire track, not on bass or drums anyway, this was just a test.) I agree that the first 18 seconds do not need to exist, and there is a rendering error at the very beginning (at 0:00). All that said, I like the approach, and a few changes would push this over the bar for me. NO (resubmit)

This arrangement is indeed too conservative for OCR. I hear a lot of copy pasta too, including a repeated rendering click on the left side (on repeated listens, I think this may be a snare hit, but regardless it sounds like a rendering click). I dislike hard panning and there is one guitar that only ever appears on the right. When that happens I have to stop to check if my left speaker has stopped working! I agree with the other two gentlemen that the mixing here needs work. When things are full and busy, everything is competing for frequency space and the whole soundscape sounds like midrange mush. I like the concept and the performances are good, but the arrangement and mixing need some attention. NO

The soundscape is nice and full. The leads sound buried to me, they lack presence, they could be so huge and make such a great statement. The lead sounds are good but the volume and mixing aren't quite there with the leads. The arrangement feels quite repetitive overall, especially with the same arp pattern repeating all the way through. Drums could be mixed bigger. I have no problem with vocal clips generally, but I agree with MindWanderer that the quality of these clips isn't so good, and the final clip feels too self congratulatory. Still, nice track. YES

Great soundscape set up right away. I hear cool effects, some hints of wubs that I wish I could hear better but they are buried. The lowest of the low end could use a bit more control. Harpsichord is a bit loud/dry/in-your-face. Trap hats are sequenced well, could be louder and possibly a bit wider. I do love the combination of the orchestral elements with the trap (I did a song like that too awhile back, it is still in the inbox atm). Love the transition at 1:58. Agreed with the other two Js that the kick could be used in a more traplike manner, but this works well enough. Great glitching and fx here. Arrangement is cool, awesome creepy vibe, enjoyable track overall. Ending is a bit of a dropoff and I would prefer some closure. YES

This is a source I know extremely well. This arrangement is very conservative, I only hear minor writing differences between the source and the remix, and similar sounds are used. The remix gets repetitive as well. I would really prefer some original melodies here or there instead of the 95% verbatim I'm hearing. I'm going to revisit this one after seeing what other Js think but I'm leaning towards this being too conservative. NO

Agreed with the gentlemen above. The major/minor clashing is odd, makes everything sound dissonant. The acoustic guitar sounds very fake and mechanical and I don't feel like it goes with the electric guitar at all. The final section of the track does sound quite overcompressed. Very awkward transition at 2:17. Drums sound buried. The track needs a rebalance for sure, but most importantly the chord structures aren't working well. NO

I also did not hear the previous version of this track, but listening through this version, I am in total agreement with MindWanderer. This concept is dynamite, but the execution just isn't there yet. The strings are too loud and present, the celesta is too soft to carry a lead (don't make it louder! layer it with something else, or have it play a countermelody), and everything sounds very quantized and robotic. The track needs more elements of interest, some more ear candy here and there, and somehow the drum track needs to be more varied and interesting. Still some work to do here, but I really do like the idea. Source is well represented, no issue there. I like the swirling synth sound, and the koto, those are highlights. The bass sound is really plain, but works well enough. The ending is much too abrupt, that's a dealbreaker for me in itself. NO

Schtiffles sent a wav version to me last night, linked in OP.

The arrangement and performances get an A+ from me but I disagree that the mixing is top notch. What I am hearing is no mixing at all, but it sounds like the entire performance was recorded on one microphone in the middle. It sounds very good (must have been recorded on a very good mic), but very raw and unprocessed. If this was recorded on multiple mics and carefully mixed, I am not picking up on that, but I'm not an expert at live recordings and mixing. Ultimately it doesn't matter to me too much, the rawness of the recording, the original source tune playing softly in the middle, and the audience responses just give this more character in my opinion. Nice work! YES