Jump to content

Chimpazilla

Judges
  • Posts

    3,119
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Everything posted by Chimpazilla

  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. "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
  4. 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)
  5. 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
  6. 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
  7. The arrangement works, and I appreciate the dedication to the FM concept in the soundscape, but I'm afraid I agree with my peers. The problem for me is that EVERY element is getting the same kind of distortion, pitch bending, LFO action, so it sounds like a wall of these effects rather than something cool, as it would sound if only strategic elements got these effects, and not every element. There can be no contrast in a soundscape where everything sounds so similar, and it is fatiguing to listen to. It is very difficult to mix something like this in a way that each element is audible. It is all mushing together into a wall of unpleasant sound as they compete to be heard in the same frequency ranges. The mastering is also odd, it is super loud while having a fairly low peak ceiling of -1.5 Props for the ideas here! I recommend scaling back on the effects, and let a few non-effected things come through, for sonic contrast. NO
  8. MW is right, wow everything is dry. I don't usually care for animated gifs but that one conveys the feeling well. Other than that, I feel like the samples are used well enough, other than the high strings sounding impossible during the faster runs (i.e. 1:55-1:59), and mostly when they are exposed. Although not perfect, there's nothing dealbreaker for me with the samples. I agree with Larry that when the drums first come in at 0:42, I'm blasted straight to the 70s by both the tone of the drums and the writing and rolls. The kit really does not go well with the rest of the instrumentation. The arrangement is a winner, I love it. I really like the gentle piano outro. Mixing and mastering are adequate. YES
  9. That's a huge sound right away, drums and everything. Some kind of drumless buildup would introduce the material better I think, it can be short but just a buildup to the drums. When the drums come in they sound very quiet and tame. I don't hear any sidechaining on any element, so the drums aren't cutting through, and the musical elements don't have any groove with the drum patterns. I like the instruments and sounds used here generally, but this lack of groove makes the soundscape very flat. Oh I like the sirens! Almost every element used in this arrangement is sitting in the same frequency range. Without sufficient mixing and effects (stereo placement, EQing to allow fundamentals to come through, strategic reverb to place things forward or back), everything is competing to be up front, making this a wall of sound. The bass sounds lovely and low, but I can barely hear it. Larry and Brad both nailed it that the leads are competing in writing, which is exacerbated by the flat mixing. There should only ever be one primary element playing lead at any one time, and other elements (backing chords, arps, or countermelodies) will need to be strategically placed further back in the soundscape. Elements can take turns being the more up-front element/lead, but when you have multiple up-front elements, it causes a cluttered overly-busy soundscape that is hard for the listener to follow. I agree with my fellow Js that there are too many unpleasant mid-highs and highs in the mix overall. It's fine to have one or two elements with distortion on them, so they stand out, in the context of the entire mixing process. But when everything feels too crispy, the whole mix becomes uncomfortable to listen to. Whether this occurred during mixing or mastering, it needs to be dialed back quite a bit. That ending does not work. The reverb tails are so long that when the chord changes it clashes with the previous chord that is still playing, and it becomes a disharmonious wall of sonic mush. This concept could work, but the reverb from the next-to-last chord would need to be almost completely finished before that final chord plays, to avoid the disharmony. A safer bet would be to have your final chord be something that fits with the key of the preceding chords and writing. The arrangement is great, very creative combination of these two themes! The issues are almost entirely with mixing. I think you've gotten some great advice in this thread, and I hope to hear this again with the improvements made! NO (please resubmit)
  10. The intro strings/pad sound lush. That lead synth is really nice, but it is bone dry and lacks any kind of filter movement or other effects that would give it needed interest, and it feels like it is right up front and in my face. The backing synth stack also feels very dry and could use filter movement, and reverb would push it to the back where it needs to be. The piano is super rigid and un-humanized as well as dry. Because every element is dry, it all is competing in the soundscape and everything sounds like it is trying to be up front, when only the lead should really be that up front. The drum writing is super simple and repetitive, and the drums are mixed without any reverb, without any impact, and without any effort to put them in their proper places in the soundscape. Also, there needs to be some sidechaining done so that the drums can be audible over the soundscape, and also to give the arrangement some generalized groove; at present it is totally lacking in that regard. Easy fix with some gentle sidechaining on several elements (bass and pads at a minimum, and possibly every element in varying, gentle amounts). Mastering is on the tame side; much more could be done to add a touch of sparkle and depth while bringing the overall volume up somewhat (not too much!). I actually think this arrangement is really nice! There are terrific writing and instrument variations and the elements work well together. But it needs a mixing overhaul, strategically adding reverb and effects to put the elements where they should sit in the soundscape and to add interest. Drum writing could have some variation easily by adding a shaker or percussion loop at different sections, to vary the energy up and down as the arrangement moves along. Piano needs humanization, as well. I hear a lot of promise in this arrangement, and I hope to hear it again with the improvements made. NO (resubmit)
  11. Just to clarify (and I should have done so in my vote), I do not mean that a more abstract source tune can't qualify for remix treatment, just that it makes it much more difficult to do so in a way that people can perceive as a remix, and it ends up sounding like an "inspired by" rather than a proper remix as a result. I suppose actually timestamping this might make the difference here. I admit I am relying on my feelings of it being too abstract overall, and I'm in agreement with a timestamp at this point.
  12. The master seems to be brickwalled at -3db peak, which is odd right away. That initial sound is not pleasant, and not even interesting as a device, it just sounds disharmonious and also too highly distorted. The lead starting at 1:24 is a much nicer sound but it is mixed very quietly in the soundscape and also feels like it has a touch too much distortion on it. Most of the synth choices in this mix are not great individually or in combination. The arrangement itself isn't bad, honestly. The synths would need to be changed out to more pleasant ones. As prophetik said, the arrangement noodles along throughout most of it, without any motivic elements for the listener to grab onto. A track of this length needs to justify itself with some more solid musical ideas, and they need to change and expand as the arrangement moves along so as not to become repetitive. Interesting ideas presented, but this will need much more work in sound design and writing. NO
  13. This mix is lush, haunting and beautiful. I love the distant textures and delicate sfx. The mixing and even the mastering are working well. I love the addition of the digeridoo in the final section. This is a delightful listen. However, I am in agreement with my fellows that this source tune, similar to the "Cold" one MW linked, does not truly count as an arrangement on its own. This is one of many musical themes in the game that is meant to be more of an ambiance than a proper tune. BotW and TotK both use this musical device throughout the games. This makes the creation of a remix out of said material extremely difficult and problematic. I do hear connection to the source as I listen through, but the remix does not feel like an arrangement any more than the source does. I don't feel that timestamping it would help; even with EnoughSource™ this arrangement is going to sound like an "inspired by" rather than a remix. I'm loving it nonetheless! NO edit 2-8-24: The timestamping and another listen to this helps me. I feel like there is enough source. I still think it is much more difficult to remix these ambient/abstract sources, and just for the record I have this problem with all such remixes, from whomever submits them. Gaspode submitted a "Depths" mix recently that I had the same issue with. Just takes a bit more time and effort to identify it. YES
  14. "Phonk?" "Witch House?" Even "meme music" is a new term to me. I guess I'm really out of the loop and not up to speed on my subgenres, sub-subgenres, and sub-sub-sub-abyssally-deep-subgenres and straight-up joke-genres. That said... I really dig this remix! Groovy with a creepy vibe. I like the instruments and sounds, the phat beatz, the full/deep low end, the wide open feel of the soundscape. I am not a fan of that thing taking the place of a snare either, Larry. I get that it's the style/genre/meme/joke, it is purposely distorted, and that can work sometimes but it just sounds like a comical sfx more than a drum element, and it's dry so it sticks out of the lush soundscape more than I'd like. Mixing works fine. Mastering is on the loud side but not overblown. The arrangement and source interpretation are great. The ending though... where is it? There's no outro, it just stops. Gosh, I don't like that. Why not do a few bars of cooldown and some kind of final sound or chord? Even so, I think this passes and it's a super cool and fun listen. YES
  15. The intro sounds promising, but there's a riser that starts at 0:16, it only goes four bars which isn't long enough to build the energy there, and the final beat is silence which isn't signaled in any way, and it is sloppily done (perc loop still playing until final beat, should stop sooner) which sounds very awkward and more like a rendering error than a transition. When the drop hits at 0:23 it has no impact because the same energy and beat were already established in the preceding buildup section. The plucked instruments have not been humanized so each pluck is the same which sounds mechanical. This is extremely evident with the instrument playing at 1:28 because each pluck happening on beat four is way too loud. The same instrument is playing the lead starting at 1:53, and the lack of humanization is really jarring. The core drum beat plays the same thing through the entire arrangement, although there are good variation loops that come and go. The energy of the piece never changes once established so it doesn't have good energy dynamics. The arrangement is on the conservative side, with all leads playing the same writing as the source for the most part, with notes left out here and there rather than added to or varied. There are multiple similar drum-only parts. There is no outro other than a quick drum flourish. Great concept and great start here, but needs more attention to writing, sequencing and arranging to be a proper full arrangement from OCR. Love to hear it again with the changes made, though! NO (resubmit)
  16. I absolutely LOVE this concept and how huge this sounds in the big wubby choruses. I truly hope this will be completed because I want to hear it and throw it in my favorites list. But it isn't ready. The samples used are very weak (piano, brass, strings, vox). Those really should be replaced as they are so integral to the piece. Everything is mixed super hot and abrasive; there is no need for everything to have this much distortion. It makes everything fight for presence in the soundscape and makes it all feel crowded. Some elements should naturally float to the back and be less prominent, some should be loud and proud in the front. That will give you a more 3D mix. The bass and wubs are AWESOME. The drums are sort of weak. I can hear the kick ok, but whatever you have layered on top of the snare is not a good sound, it isn't dubsteppy and just sounds like a high-end "smack" sound, you need a solid dubstep snare to carry it. Both kick and snare need to be loud, cut through well, and you need good heavy sidechaining (on the bass at least, but also on the other elements with lower gain reduction amounts so it doesn't pump). Speaking of pumping, the overall mix is pumping and not in a good way. The master is smashed to smithereens, while still coming in at -3db peak, which is not good at all. Your ceiling should be more like -1 to -0.5db, but you need to mix this in such a way that you don't have to overdrive your master compression/final limiter like this. My primary suggestion to get a huge mix and clean master is to lower your master input gain by at least 5db before you even begin to write. In this type of mix you could lower it up to 10db, I do this often. This simple tip will allow you to mix at the higher end of your faders without ever hitting 0db during writing/mixing, which will allow you way more headroom for more creative mastering when it's finished being written. I agree with Larry that this is half an arrangement. On top of that, the two big sections that are here are too similar, there needs to be some more variation between the two. Following what you have here, and after varying the two similar drops, I feel the arrangement needs a nice drumless breakdown and another big section, with even more variations in sounds and/or writing to vary it from the preceding two huge sections, and then a proper outro. That would be my recommendation. I love what's here but this is a wip, please finish it! NO (please fix up and resubmit)
  17. This is incredibly loud, especially since there is almost no content below 130Hz. Due to no lows, all the other frequencies sound overhyped. The mix sounds boxy as well as overly crispy. It is a dense soundscape, so the frequency overlap of elements isn't helping things mixing-wise. I agree with Larry that the string and vox samples are particularly weak. I think both should be replaced, I doubt there is much that can fix them on the mixing side. The drums sound like they cut through too much because it's all highs. If we could hear/feel the lows of the kick, it would sound different. But all the lows are cut out. It's like the entire mix has a severe low-cut on it. Why? The mastering sounds loud and abrasive. This may be partly due to the lows having been cut out of the mix, but I also think there's too much saturation on everything and the final limiter is being driven unnecessarily hard. The arrangement is good though! And the guitar performances are solid! I think the writing and arrangement are interpretive and transformative enough and I really like this piece in that regard. NO (replace strings and vox samples, mix such that lows are audible, tame the mastering, and resubmit)
  18. Ooooo cool concept for this source! No intro, as Brad said, opens right up into the source material. I like the concept for this a lot, but it is loud and cramped right from the start as Larry mentioned. The intensity has no chance to build which is a lost opportunity for arrangement dynamics. All the sounds used throughout the track are there from the first moment and although there are additions as the piece moves along, the core elements never change. The lead never changes, and this lead is somewhat abrasive while not doing anything too interesting other than some delayed vibrato. Some filter movement on an LFO would be nice. To keep this interesting, varying the lead between sections would be a good idea. Either do something different with the lead in terms of effects or writing, or have another lead take over for a section or two. The mixing isn't too bad overall, but the lead feels really wide, too wide, and seems to be a little louder on the right (or is this just my ears?). The lead can be wide but needs to have at least some presence in the center, the lowest part of its fundamental frequencies for sure. Wide highs on a lead are always nice but it feels disconnected from the rest of the track when all of it is stereo-spread 100%. The mastering is way too loud. The waveform is a sausage and it is clipping like crazy, the master limiter is being overdriven massively. As for the arrangement, it needs a bit more work to add interest. A buildup intro would be good, doesn't have to be more than a few bars but we need something to introduce the piece. The sections here are basically the same writing, making one section more original writing-wise would be good. A proper drumless breakdown somewhere in the middle would be most welcomed, followed by the fullest section, then a cool-down and/or outro. There is no outro here, it just stops. This all sounds negative, but it is a really good start I think! Cool vibe and concept, just needs more finesse to make it a proper EDM arrangement. Hope to hear it again! NO (resubmit)
  19. I like this, it is very epic and well instrumented and performed. I have no issue with the buzzy synth. But WOW those spoken vocals are loud! Like, jump out of my seat and hit the ceiling loud. Also, at 3:37 the lead guitar is very loud, too loud. Then at 4:14, the acoustic guitar comes in comically loud too. My thoughts mirror Brad's almost exactly. I really like this track! Great arrangement. But for me, those volume balances are a dealbreaker. Elements need to be leveled better so they don't stick out this far out of the mix. Mastering seems fine, even the mixing is fine, it's just the volume balancing that needs to be revisited. This is more of a fix than would warrant a "conditional," but I think it still should be a pretty quick fix. NO (fix volumes and resub, please) edit 11/4/23: Vocals are still loud, but the balance is now a lot better, and the vocals now fit better into the soundscape. YES
  20. I have to sadly agree with Brad that there isn't enough arrangement here for a full remix. The instrumentation is nice but it is really just a cover up until 2:44 with minimal additions to it. The additions brought in starting at 2:44 are very nice but that should have happened somewhere around the one-minute mark. As Brad said, the first 68% of this mix is too conservative; basically a cover. Then, just as things are getting interesting and it feels like the soundscape is still on full blast after the big section, there's a fadeout. Even dropping a few instruments out after 4:06 would feel like an ending is coming, but all the instruments are still playing as they were in the previous section, during the fadeout. I am one of those people who feel that fadeouts are disappointing generally, but sometimes they work. Here, it just doesn't. There is a lot of repetition in the writing. The drums sound good but they play the same thing over and over once they begin. I also agree with Brad about the cello having the over-consistent vibrato making it obviously fake, although I do like the sound of it and I also like the note slides. The instrumentation is nice, but I'm with Brad, too much of this arrangement is the original source tune. NO
  21. This is really cute and upbeat, and the instrumentation is full and lush. What a happy little arrangement! I can tell that sampled instruments were used, but I don't hear anything jumping out as too uncanny to work in context. As for the mixing, I don't hear the lows being a problem as MW and Emu did, and I do not hear low or low-mid mud. The drums are on the loud side, especially the snare. The snare does have a ton of lows in it, which may be adding to the muddy feeling Wes has about this mix. The high end is indeed shrill, but not dealbreakingly so. The master is super loud though, coming in at -7.8db RMS which is in EDM territory, and the peak is set to 0db which often times allows clipping to come through (not sure why?). I would recommend turning the final limiter down so the RMS value is more like -11 to -10, and set the ceiling to something more like -0.5db or even -1db. That said, the mixing is not dealbreaking to me. I like the track and I'm going with it. If this version does not pass as-is, I suggest lowering the drum volumes (especially the snare), taking lows out of the snare, and reducing the master limiter gain somewhat and lowering the overall ceiling too. YES
  22. I just talked to Jordan, he asked about this and I told him the vote was going south due to the repetitiveness. He is going to make changes to it right away and resub before this even gets closed out. Hold further votes until then please. Edit: He made the changes already and the OP has been updated with a new link.
  23. Wow, I am torn on this one. This arrangement is really well performed and sounds great! Although I agree the bass could have more presence and could sound more distinct, as it is now it seems like it is almost loud enough but the low end feels nebulous and unfocused. But man, this arrangement follows the source tune almost note for note on every instrument. As DS said, the drums are the most rearranged element in the mix, the rest is verbatim other than a couple of minor flourishes at the end of phrases. That is REALLY conservative. This is essentially a well-performed cover of the source song. The genre has been modified, but that seems to be the only change from the original source tune. The key is the same, the tempo is slowed down ever so slightly. So, genre change plus very minor tempo slow-down. Our standards say: "MORE THAN ONE" of the techniques is the key phrase here. Does this count as "more than one?" Is the complete genre re-imagining of the source tune enough? I think sadly I have to agree with my fellow Js who feel that a cover is not enough to be a ReMix. I'd love to hear it again with something in the arrangement changed, added, a breakdown in the middle, a unique guitar solo etc., that would be absolutely amazing! I would request also that the mixing be addressed to bring out the low end a little more clearly. NO (resub with a little more originality)
  24. Definitely a medley, but I agree with MW that it flows well enough to sound cohesive. I also agree that the realism isn't perfect, but it works well enough for me. I don't hear anything jumping out as too awkward. That "lawn sprinkler" thing is weird though, and the rain stick is annoying to me, especially since it is hard-panned to the right. I do not like hard panning, generally. I am enjoying the sweet forest atmosphere and birds. This is a lovely romp through Hyrule forest and I recognize every source, they all fit perfectly with this theme. The instrumentation is well-varied, whimsical and lighthearted. The mixing is working well, and the mastering is closer to what I would consider normal than Rebecca's previous submissions. My only real gripe is that rain stick, why did it need to live loudly on the right side? If this mix doesn't pass as-is, I would request that the rain stick either be replaced (at least a few of them), and/or mixed more quietly and centered. Other than that, I really like this one. It holds my interest all the way through and feels very good to my soul! YES
  25. Interesting anecdote: My husband Steve was in a band called Mariah in high school, waaaay back in the day. Steve played guitar, they had a drummer named Mark, and the bass player was John Middleton. John now goes by Johnny Lee Middleton, and he is still the bass player for the Trans Siberian Orchestra which was an offshoot from his other band called Savatage. They all still keep in touch. Johnny Lee has the interesting side-hobby of beekeeping. As for the remix: Oh yeah, I can hear the TSO influence! Gentle intro, busting out into some truly excellent guitar playing. Elements are balanced really nicely. The soundscape is often quite full, but all elements are audible. I'm loving the varied and interesting 6/8 arrangement and competent performances, wonderfully full of emotion. Terrific stuff, let's go. YES
×
×
  • Create New...