Chimpazilla   Judges ⚖️

Those chords Flex pointed out are sour indeed. This is a very conservative arrangement, which is fine. But the rigid bassline, synth writing, and repetitive drums give this track a very plodding energy. The hats are sharp, loud, dry, and so stiffly sequenced that it becomes distracting. The synth starting at 0:48 and 2:25 sounds very vanilla and dry, and the writing is stiff and gridlocked. The lack of overall groove due to the stiff and simple bassline and drums bothers me the most I think, same as Flex and Emu. There are arrangement variations as the piece moves along but generally it sounds repetitive to me as the instrumentation never changes. Varying the lead instrument or backing elements or drum sounds/writing here and there would help to break up the repetition. I like this generally though, and the guitar work is very good. But it needs a bit more production love. NO (resubmit)

Seven sources AND it's a remix of a remix.... uh, ok! Since I don't know this OST well (I know, shame on me, I have no excuse!), and Brad and Larry have already voted, I'm just going to vote on the mix itself. I also didn't like the suffocated vocoded vocals at 0:33, (and again at 5:18) but when the real vocals come in, they are clean and clear, perhaps too clean though. I think adding some more processing to the vocals would be good, not to mutilate them but to make them mesh with the soundscape better. I think this arrangement is really ambitious and cool. The instrumentation is good, the strings sound full and well sequenced, and I like the orchestral sounds against the guitars and synths, and there are tons of little glitches and fun ear candy. The guitar bits are performed well and so are the vocals. The arrangement is great, super creative and fun. I completely agree with Larry though, regarding the production. That clap is comically bad, so simple and dry. The drums overall are mixed way too quietly. The vocals could definitely be louder in the mix, and there's a low-heavy feel to the midrange instruments giving the overall soundscape an unnecessary boomy sound (those elements need their lows tamed with EQ), while the bass itself is too quiet in the mix. The vocals (especially the male vocal) have too much low end presence (example, "you" at 1:18 sounds way boomy). This mix could definitely use another balancing/mixing pass. And the piano sounds too stiff and gridlocked, needs a bit of humanization. I don't hear or see the final limiter going nuts as Brad does. I don't see any clipping in Cubase or on SPAN (remember to turn off "true peak" if using SPAN, and if Audacity has that parameter turn it off) and I do not hear overcompression, but I do hear the master is doing some unwanted pumping whenever the kick hits. I don't hear any sidechaining in this mix, and sidechaining (at the very least, of the heavy/low elements like bass, deep strings and pads) would clear up room in the soundscape and reduce the heavy load when each kick hit happens, which will reduce the burden on the final limiter and eliminate that pumpy thing happening in the master. (fast attack and release on the sidechain compressors, 3-ish db gain reduction, ratio of 2:1... keep it subtle but that will really clean things up in conjunction with some EQ on the low ends of things) I was actually planning to pass this even with mixing flaws but reading back what I wrote I don't think I can pass it in good conscience after having said all that. I love this though, and it will be an easy pass for me when the mixing/balancing/master have been improved! NO (please resubmit)

The drum beat is still repetitive, but it is mixed better so the trap hats aren't so loud and prominent. The drum beat itself sounds groovier with the extra kick hits added. The balancing of instruments is much better here, and the sound design is improved quite a bit, this soundscape sounds full and luscious. I love the vocal clips in the breakdown section, nice addition, it adds emotion to the piece (I'm a sucker for well-used vocal clips). There is a wash of distortion over the soundscape during a good portion of this mix that I'm not a fan of, but it adds movement to the atmosphere of the piece, and it is not a dealbreaker for me (I predict Larry will complain about this!). The mixing still isn't perfect, but this is a significant improvement and I'm happy to pass it now. YES

Oh gosh. Nine minutes, ok wow. I think I am going to organize my thoughts into bullet points. It still may sound stream-of-consciousness, but bear with me. Too ambitious: These arrangements are humongous; this one is the longest one yet, of the ones I have heard. Starts with a ton of voiceover work, nearly two and a half minutes of spoken vocal before anything really melodic arrives. That may be cool for a story-type video or audio drama, but it isn't really great as a standalone arrangement for OCR. Stiff sequencing: The piano beginning after the two minute mark is very robotic, having no humanization at all. The organ has the same problem when it arrives. The choir, when it is exposed such as at 4:34-4:55 the choir sounds like an oppressive wall of sound rather than an emotive element, due to having a fast attack and long release, no swells, no motion to it, just a block of fake-sounding, overly loud, choir sound. Mismatched melodic and rhythmic patterns: There are many written patterns in this soundscape, and often they are clashing melodically as well as rhythmically. At 2:45 as things are just getting started, there's a drum beat and brass and a synthy thing, none of which sounds good together and the patterns are confusing rhythmically and melodically. At 5:43, the soundscape is simple and sparse, but the patterns being played by drums and bass/synths just feels awkward. Starting at 6:18, it finally makes sense and I can hear and feel a nice 6/8 time signature. However when the choir joins back in at 6:36, it feels less groovy and more wall-of-sound. At 7:08, once again I cannot connect to the pattern until 7:22 when the drums return. But at 7:22, there are backing chords that aren't helping me make sense of things, and the melody writing feels so hectic and random. Melody lines lack melodic contour, as the notes jump around randomly. An example is 4:07, the melody is so jumpy all the way until 4:33. This may be literal source writing, but it doesn't fit nicely with the other writing here, it sounds forced, like the melody is being shoehorned into this part of the track. At 7:22 all the way to the end, again the lead melodic writing is too random for me to follow, it lacks proper melodic contour and ends up sounding super confusing. This may be verbatim source writing, but with so many sources combined like this, it does not work melodically or rhythmically. The choir starting at 8:21 is playing a pattern that is way too busy for a backing element/pad, and together with the random sounding bassline and lead writing, it is making my brain melt trying to follow along. Too many source songs combined: It is too difficult for mere mortals to sort out all these combinations, lead from this source, bass from that source, choir from something else... and it doesn't always work together melodically or rhythmically. And these are not simple sources, they are complex orchestral pieces each unto themselves, so combining writing from two or more of them at once is going to be an almost impossible task. Tons of spoken vocals, often interrupting the flow. Not a dealbreaker, it just adds to the piece sounding overdone. The mixing is fairly decent considering how many elements play together at any given time, but it is nearly impossible to get a clean sounding soundscape with so many instruments in similar frequency ranges playing together so much of the time. As it stands, the mix sounds majorly overcooked to me. I am so sorry to be giving such detailed feedback that I'm sure will be viewed as negative, but I will say again what I said on an earlier track I voted on. I recommend starting with much shorter/simpler source songs, and build out an arrangement with a simpler instrument palette and simpler writing, with fewer patterns playing at any given time, while learning about combining sounds that work well together, and writing that compliments each other rather than conflicting or making the patterns too hectic. You definitely have strengths in arrangement crafting, just gotta revisit some basics to make it work right. NO

Interesting original for sure! Seems to be in a fast 6/4, with sections of 3/4. Fun stuff. Remix opens so sparsely with just piano flourishes and a ton of silence. I hear why that first instrument to come in set proph's teeth on edge, I'm having that same effect, and even more when the first wind instrument begins. After the harp flourish there's a plucked instrument that literally hurts.... but not as badly as the following violin.... yowza I am 1:30 into the piece and my ears are bleeding from all the screechy sounds. And I am headed toward a literal brick in the waveform, next. I like the buildup beginning at 2:33, the subtle bassline and squelchy synth sound great. The string pad sounds mid-heavy and overly full. I really like the piano reverses leading into the heavy section. When the beat kicks in, so many elements are playing, wow is this dense. The whistle is screechy, and I feel like too many melodic patterns are playing at once, what is the focus here, I can't tell. There's a 4x4 kick, but without any sidechaining, the soundscape lacks groove, it is just a massive wall of sounds and patterns. The drum pattern is simple and repetitive the entire time it plays. The drum pattern's simplicity makes an odd contrast against the overly busy and dense and melodically hectic instrumental soundscape. At 4:29 there's a very sudden modulation to a higher key, which is interesting but almost totally unsignaled (other than a short cymbal/drum riser). The drum groove stays exactly the same as the previous section, and the violin is making my ears bleed. It cuts through, but I wonder what you had to do to get it to cut through this incredibly dense soundscape. I am overwhelmed. There is also a gated synth pattern playing during this section, that doesn't fit with the rest of the instrumentation at all in my opinion. At 5:52 there's another modulation and this one is extremely awkward to my ears. There's a change in the rhythm and time signature here too. 6:06, another modulation. The outro arrives quickly after that, and I'm hearing a synth pattern that doesn't seem to fit with anything I have just heard, and I wonder if that was playing during the previous section too, although it is so dense I can never be sure. MAN this track is loud. -5.9db RMS is the highest number the track hit for me in Cubase, and that is like.... heavy EDM loud.... it's just too loud. But the worst aspect for me is the screechy sounds, this is unpleasant to listen to. All that said, I love the concept! I also really like the arrangement, although it has so many modulations and some of them are executed too suddenly and/or awkwardly. This will require a mixing overhaul to get it to a listenable state, as well as making those modulations make sense. NO

The guys explained this situation so well, especially prophetik; I could pretty much copy and paste his words here as my own vote. We do not post remixes that contain the actual game audio, and from what I am hearing, that original audio is in here. The opening bass is so plain, simple and exposed. That sound effect first heard at 0.05 is so loud and abrasive. The patch playing bass starting at 0.05 is also abrasive but could work as a transition element, but it's not a strong patch to carry the bass all the way through the piece. I like the DnB approach here though! To make a track like this groove properly would require some strategic sidechaining, and I hear none happening here. The synths are not the greatest, and the drums are too quiet compared to everything else (something sidechaining would help a lot, in addition to volume balancing). Otherwise, the mixing is fairly ok. Strange outro (which seems to include a lot of inaudible rumble), but it seems like the track is intended to loop. Overall, original audio must be removed, that's an automatic dealbreaker. Synths need to be mixed better or replaced, especially the harsh sounding elements including that sfx at 0.05. Although there's a good little breakdown at 0:41, it is still the source writing (and possibly actual audio) but that is the right arrangement idea. The arrangement and writing need to have some variation, interpretation, personalization away from the source tune more than this, to be postable on OCR. NO

Co-signing with the guys here. This is a competent orchestration of the original, and the beat together with the orchestral palette makes it really lively. The track is low-heavy, and mastered extremely loudly, but the sequencing sounds adequate, realistic enough to get it done. But yeah, it's just too short and too conservative to the source tune for OCR. I would love to hear it again as a full arrangement, with variations and interpretations on the source melody! NO

Ah, here we are in the 90s! I love the orch hits. The vocals are very well done, lead and all backing vocals sound great to me. The instrumental though, by comparison, sounds weak. The instruments are quiet compared to the vocals, and as proph pointed out there isn't any kind of padding, the guitar is carrying the burden of backing chords, and it is barely audible. The piano is only ever playing whole notes. The bass is very quiet in the mix. The guitar solo is nice though! The pacing and groove of the piece is very static; the drums play the same pattern over and over with very few changes or fills. Fadeout ending, boooooo! This mix has a lot going for it, I think with some mixing tweaks the soundscape could feel much more full and balanced. But the arrangement is repetitive, and the bigger issue is that it is a straight cover of the source song. It has the same pacing, energy, general feel, same lyrics. Other than being in a lower key, and the addition of the fun 90s elements, it is the same song. That's way too conservative for OCR. Fun listen though, and really nice vocal performance and processing! NO

What an interesting prog-rock interpretation of this source tune. All the instruments sound great to me, performances are great, elements are well balanced, mix and master sound very good to me too. I love the synth solo! I would never have noticed any problem with the drums, they sound solid and punchy to me. If they are mechanical, there is certainly enough variation in the drum writing so I don't hear anything wrong with them. I love all the time signature and rhythmic tomfoolery. I love the lyrics, they are creative, real, dark and relatable. I have no problems with these vocals. If there is sibilance, I don't hear it, and/or it is covered over by the high end of everything else. This is a wonderful, moody, well-performed arrangement. I love it, let's go. YES

Very cool arrangement, performances are great, I hear the source very clearly too. This is a really fun listen. Reading Gario's complaints, he's not wrong, the lead guitar is definitely too wet (even a longer predelay would help, as well as making sure there are no lows in the reverb on the lead), lead could be a couple of db louder, rhythm guitars are too loud by comparison. But is that a reason to reject this awesome piece, oh hell no, those are nitpicks in the grand scheme of things. This is a very well put-together arrangement. Let's go! YES

I'm thrown off by the rhythm right away. The source is in 3/4, and so is the remix (I think?), but the drums are not accentuating the 3/4, it's like 4/4 patterns smashed into 3/4 which is confusing my brain. I would imagine when working on this track, your brain makes sense of it after awhile, but as a first time listener, I'm very confused by the rhythm here. The synths sound very simple and uninspired, and the lead does not punch through as the guys have said, and everything is very dry. I love the concept, and I agree that it is great to hear you branching out! But the sounds need an upgrade I think, along with a touch of reverb on things so the mix isn't so dry. I agree with the guys about the stacked fifths pad, that's tricky to use as when the note changes, it's an entire chord changing and doesn't always go with the rest of the writing. Better to write your own chords. The transitions where the volume is quickly automated down sound awkward to me (at 1:08 and 1:28 1:58). I get the idea, but the execution isn't sophisticated. With the drums, I think the track would groove much better with a pattern that accentuates the 3/4 pattern of the writing, instead of fighting against it which is what I hear and feel in this arrangement. I don't know how better to describe this, but I feel like this is a 4/4 drum loop repurposed for 3/4 and it doesn't work for me rhythmically at all. It feels hectic and lacking proper groove. NO

Co-signing with the guys. What a cool idea this is! I love the cimbalom as a lead, and the choir and strings make a great background texture. But.... that's all there is here for at least 75% of the piece. The sparse instrumentation reveals the weaknesses of the samples as the cimbalom sounds stiff and mechanical, and every attack on the choir and strings are the same which sounds awkward. And as prophetik pointed out, the strings and choir almost always play unison which is a lost opportunity to add some more harmonic spice to the mix. There is some hard panning here that I don't care for. The cimbalom is the lead instrument, yet it is hammering away about 50-75% left most of the time, and some of the lowest parts of the choir seem to only exist on the right. This feels unbalanced to me. The drums sound exciting when they enter at 3:27, but that's a long time to wait for something new in the soundscape. The drums are intense all the way to the end of the piece, and they are very heavy in the lows, as prophetik pointed out, giving the soundscape a muddy feel. Those brass hits at 4:01 sound alright to me, except they feel thin, as if the lows have been EQ'd off. I really love this concept! It is so eerie. But with such sparse instrumentation, all the elements have to be firing on all cylinders and they aren't quite, yet. Just needs a bit more production TLC to get it there. NO (resubmit)

I agree with all of XPRT's points here. The arrangement itself is good, with good arrangement dynamics. The instrumentation is on the soft side all the way through, which isn't quite working. For example, from 1:06-1:38 you have a heavy kick and bass along with a shuffley-patterned synth and heavily sidechained pad, all of which sound great, but they never seem to kick into full gear and do anything interesting. I can hear this in my mind with some varied percussion and sfx, filtered elements coming in and out, and ear candy making that section really memorable, but as it stands it feels very plain and anticlimactic. Same situation from 1:48-2:21. The drum pattern never changes, and the simple bell lead takes the energy of those sections way down for me. XPRT said it well, it feels more like a sketch than a finished piece. I do think this has a ton of potential though, but the soundscape is very sparse and it just needs more interesting elements especially in the two heavy sections to keep the listener engaged. The volume balancing is mostly adequate, although leads are too soft and quiet. The simple percussion in the track is all in mono. It sounds like no mastering has been done as the track never goes louder than -1.6db peak. The drumless sections sit around -6 to -8db peak which is very quiet indeed. The track lacks any highs other than the snare and hats, no synths seem to have any presence in the highs at all, making it sound lifeless. I would love to hear this again with the sections more fleshed out! NO (resubmit)

Those first two hits made me JUMP out of my chair, like for real. Wow! Got my attention there. The soundscape quickly builds into one of the most epic soundscapes I have ever heard. I love the triplets that everything is playing. The mix is a wall of sound but the mixing is clear enough to hear everything. The guitar work is phenomenal in this arrangement. Oh when the tin whistle comes in, that's a great contrast, love it. The mixing sounds very good considering such a dense soundscape, things are well placed in the soundstage, although I agree with XPRT that the guitar solo is on the quiet side (which is a shame because it absolutely rocks). My biggest nitpick is with the brass that begins at 4:18, the attacks on the patch are not keeping up with the fast writing so that sounds uncanny and behind the beat. I also agree with XPRT when he said "This thing is an absolute fucking banger." It is indeed! Truly excellent track, let's go. YES

I think Wes explained things perfectly here. This is a nice arrangement, but the sound choices are very simple and the production sounds dated. The trap hats are indeed too repetitive (one loop repeated all the way through, no fills or variations) and too loud/dry. The arrangement is laid out very well and has good dynamics, including an intro, verse/chorus, breakdown etc. The drum writing and sounds/processing is probably my biggest dealbreaker, same as it is for Wes. The repetitive drum writing is taking the energy of the track way down below where it should be, and that's a missed opportunity for a very groovy track to exist. Another way to introduce tons of groove is by sidechaining the kick to the instruments in varying amounts (basses and pads get more, plucks/leads/percs get less). I don't hear any sidechaining in this mix whatsoever. At a minimum the bass and pads should get some sidechaining. Again this isn't a dealbreaker in and of itself, but it's a missed opportunity for groove. I think the drum sounds and programming alone are enough to request a resub, so that's what I'm going to do. You've gotten some great advice in this thread, so I look forward to hearing this again with improvements made! NO (resubmit)

This is another tough one for me. I do hear some guitar amp noise, but not enough to be dealbreaker for me. This is a lovely piece, it is definitely ambient, but I find it to be boring. I hate to say that, but nothing incredibly interesting or emotive is happening here for me. It's just the same pad chords repeated, with bits of guitar motif coming and going, and a buzzy synth that doesn't seem to fit with the rest of the soundscape. This plays more like a movie cue to me, for a very simple scene, and not a standalone arrangement. I guess I would like to hear more development than this as the piece moves along. It this arrangement sufficient for OCR, I am honestly not sure and I'd like to see another opinion. ? edit 10-23-24: Listening again now, and the amp noise is bothering me since it is so audible when the lead guitar plays. But my main issue remains the same, it's a nice piece but it just doesn't develop enough as it is currently. NO

There is certainly enough source here, the arrangement is fairly conservative, but this is a great arrangement. There are so many ideas here, so much ear candy and variation in sounds and processing. The mix is full of energy and interest. My only issue with the arrangement is that the sections tend to get too long and repetitive, with the same idea being repeated over and over. 3:09-3:35 for example is the exact same writing all the way through, within a larger section playing the same motif over and over in somewhat varied ways. There's something about the production that I can't entirely put my finger on. There is a ton of very hard panning which I don't care for, especially when it is heavy instruments like basses being panned wide. The instruments (other than the guitar) sound very simplistic and vanilla, and there is minimal processing, very little reverb, and the whole mix sounds almost painfully dry most of the time. I am more borderline than proph on this one, because the arrangement is generally so strong. The mixing isn't terrible, things are volume-balanced just fine, but there is something off about the production for me. I'm not ready to commit either way yet, I would like to see another opinion or two. edit: I'm flipping to a NO because the other opinions verify what I was feeling. I do hope to hear this again with improvements made! NO

I'm in agreement with Brad and Wes. This is a significant improvement. The elements are clearer, most especially the vocals. It's still crazy crowded and fast paced, and I also agree this snare isn't the best snare sound ever, but this version gets it over the bar for me. The guitar solo is a highlight! Cool, fun stuff here. So good! YES

That source tune is weird! Does it have timing issues or is my brain broken? The snare seems normal but the kick seems to be having a seizure? I'm with Wes on this. The sections of this arrangement do get rather repeaty as they move along, but the sections themselves don't repeat verbatim later in the track. There are a lot of fun changeups, instruments, ear candy and sfx. I do think more could have been done within each section to spice them up, some extra or replaced element every eight bars would do it. I dig the synth guitar, it adds to the cheesy vibe but it has been programmed and mixed very well. I find it totally appropriate. And I'm an absolute sucker for great vocal clips. Fun stuff! YES

I had actually not heard this one before, and that really speaks to how productive Wes has been lately! Sips River is such a lovely source, and this track is amazingly written and performed. I was all set to YES this and call Larry an old man, but as I neared the end I found my ears were hurting from the heavy-handed mixing and slammed master. I actually reached out to Wes to offer my final mixing services. I do feel that even with this vision I could get it a little bit cleaner, but he shared his inspo track with me and cruelly forced me to skip ahead to around 4:30 in the video. I was all set to tell him that this Sigur Ros song was "wall of sound" yet mixed more cleanly than his, until I got to that point in the video. He asked me if I liked it, and I had to honestly answer, no I don't. But this was his INTENT. Ok, ok. I was already leaning toward a yes because this mix is good enough for OCR's bar even though I don't like this mixing style. So I am going to yes it, the arrangement and performances are too good not to have posted on the site, but dangit Wes, stawp it already with the walls of sound! YES

Cool track! Great mashup of these sources as the guys have said. The mixing is what I would expect from a song in this genre, and the mastering is just right. You definitely nailed the brief you were attempting to do, but sadly I have to agree with Larry that it's too much "Damage Inc." I had a similar issue with a collab I did with bLiNd a few years back that was based on NIN's "Closer" and it sounded way too TrentReznorish and therefore it was rejected (but man was it cool! Jordan had replicated the kick and that bass sound to perfection). I'd love to hear this again with the "Damage, Inc." sections un-Damaged (it would be an easy yes), but as Larry said if that compromises the vision we understand. NO (resubmit)

I think the concept of this is awesome, it's upbeat and groovy and I love the sfx and vocal clips. But my fellow Js are correct that the execution isn't there yet, this needs a lot more polish, varied drum writing, varied instrumentation, varied/interpreted lead writing, more interesting backing/countermelodic elements or padding or chords or something, and a complete mixing overhaul. The synths sound very simple, vanilla and unsophisticated. I agree that our workshop forum and Discord server will be helpful to get more feedback on how to proceed. I definitely hear promise and creativity here. Everyone starts somewhere, carry on and let's hear this or something else from you in the future! NO

Agree with prophetik, cool vibe and idea but this isn't enough arrangement and it sounds too similar to the source song for too long. The voiceovers in the intro are hilarious but I don't think they add much to the arrangement since they are completely detached from the main body of the arrangement. The sounds used are very simple and vanilla, and the drum groove never changes once it is established. I do like how you included bits from the LoZ intro theme starting at 1:22, and the horns, organ and synth vamping near the end are great, if there could be more of that kind of thing throughout the piece, that would sure be fun! The mixing is adequate if not very interesting; the volumes are balanced well enough. If there has been any mastering applied, it's super quiet. I see the loudest peak of the track is -1.5db and most of the piece lives around -5db peak. Primarily, the arrangement is too simple, repetitive and similar to the source song (at least until the final 20 seconds). I do like this vibe quite a bit though, and I'd love to hear it again with the arrangement fleshed out quite a bit more with proper arrangement dynamics and a lot more variation and interest added. NO

The mixing sounds WAY better now, thanks for taking our advice. I don't hear that overly sizzly high end now, and the lows are present and full. The mastering is appropriate and not overdriven. My only remaining complaint is that the kick is way too loud, heavy, and thumpy. While this would probably be an easy fix, I'm not going to send this back again for that, and it isn't dealbreaker for me. I think we have entered pass territory with this version. Good luck with the rest of this vote! YES

Definitely an industrial bitcrushy vibe which is extremely cool. I think the production sounds great; all distortion is intentional and as Flex said mixing and mastering are ace. However I agree with my fellows that this arrangement really constitutes background music and not a proper song arrangement, at least for OCR. The guys explained it well and in more detail, so I'm just co-signing. I enjoyed listening to it though, excellent vibe track and very well produced. Do more please, make a proper arrangement with leads and melodies and more instrumental variation and this will go on our front page. NO