Chimpazilla

I agree with Wes, the bass and guitar performances are loose, and this sticks out against the perfectly timed drums, strings and synths. If everything were performed live, the looseness would be more cool and charming, here it doesn't quite work due to the contrast. I do like the disco feel of the track though, awesome concept. The bagpipes in the intro feel tacked on, however. The writing throughout the piece is relatively simple and the synth choices are generic. The energy of the track doesn't change much once it's established. The big dealbreaker though, as Larry pointed out, is the repetition and copy pasta of sections, as Larry was kind enough to timestamp. I'll add that the transitions between sections are very plain and minimal, nothing exciting to shift between the sections. The ending is abrupt and anticlimactic as well. Sorry to come down so hard on this, I think the concept is solid, and the mixing sounds clean enough, but the arrangement is too repetitive for me. NO

Gian has sent us a new version, mastered so much better (added to OP). Listening again, I wish this track didn't rely on the same instrumentation all the way through, I wish there had been some more changeups. Still it's a great track and still passes for me.

I have the same issue, not to your degree Will (based on your amazingly progressive arrangements!), but I also hate repetition now too. This is also why I bust people so hard for copy pasta.

I have to concur with Mike's vote in it's entirety, his words cover my feelings perfectly on this mix. The mixing and mastering have been much improved over the last version, so I have no issues there, but ultimately the vocals just don't fit. I'll add that the contour of the lead melody doesn't help matters much, as the lead melody jumps up and down in octave a lot, and that would be a difficult lead line for anyone to sing effectively. I do think Jesse's singing is competent though, but I believe it is not well suited to this style of song. NO

I'm not a fan of fade-ins, any more than I like fade-outs, oh well. Opening/closing piano is so mechanical, and it's mixed so oddly, I hear some kind of effect almost like sidechaining with a silent kick. Guitar is so much better when it starts but the mixing here is crowded as heck. Bass is muffly and barely audible. The drums are very distant. The breakdown at 2:29 is so clean by contrast (except for the bass which just sounds like indistinct mud) that it is startling, and the guitar there is much too loud. Performances are really great. I love this arrangement, the simple source is given so much interpretation and attitude. 3/4 metal FTW for sure. Great syncopations too at 3:21. I hear hints of Zelda's Lullaby in the mix too. I'd really like some mixing and balance cleanups before I give this a yes, and some humanization on that piano and mix that better too. It's really close for me though, I love the energy of this mix of my all time favorite VGM tune. NO (but please fix up and resub)

Almost gets too liberal, but I hear the backing groove quite a bit, huh... maybe I'll check the source use more closely later... Other than that, I'm gonna complain that the bass could be louder and the tonal percussion is a tad dry. And other than that, yeah super cool. Goron mixes should ALWAYS be silly, because Gorons are silly. YES

Very cool source tune, bold remix idea! The mix is conservative enough to hear source material all the way through. I really like the intro idea, very creative how you segued into the source material. Overall I think this arrangement is repetitive as it is now, but it has a lot of promise. The production needs some work. The soundscape never changes once it is established. The bass and drums are on autopilot all the way through. That phasey synth is cool, but it gets old quickly. At 1:46 there is some kind of syncopation being attempted but it doesn't work and just sounds hectic. The total silence at 2:19 bothers me, I feel like total silences need some kind of sound in them to bridge the sections, even if it's just a sound effect. Do some changeups to the rhythms, write some melodic variations, introduce some other instruments, improve the groove. Lots to do here, but I do like this so far, would love to hear it again. NO (resubmit)

I can't actually tell which act this is a remix of. I'm leaning toward Act 2, but somebody help me. So this will be a production and arrangement critique. The writing is so repetitive during the buildup from 1:04 to 1:35 and the bass stabs get out of control loud at 1:22-1:24. At 1:36, I'm ready for a huge drop, and when it hits I hear some nice deep sidechaining holes in the track but WHERE IS THE KICK??? It sounds like you rendered with the kick muted. Also there are wubs in there, but wow are they buried. Those need to be louder, beefier, and wide, with some nice shimmer on them. All the way to 2:40, the writing is so repetitive, it's literally the same patterns over and over. The breakdown is pretty simple at 2:40 but it's a nice respite. Then another buildup... let's see what we get... another looooong buildup, a filter sweep and then..... wait what? This part is quiet. I think that little quiet section is in the wrong place, you hyped me for another drop. When the drop happens finally at 3:52 it is an exact repetition of the kick-free first drop. At least both drops were preceded by the word "drop," which I appreciate because I'm not really sure they are drops. The track needs mixing cleanup, needs an audible kick, and needs that second drop to have some variation from the first drop section. Some changes in instrumentation and groove as the track evolves would also be a very good improvement and would go a long way toward fixing the repetitive feel of the track. I would love to hear this again with those issues addressed. NO (resubmit)

I like this better without the extreme panning of elements (one here, one there kinda thing). But honestly, now the whole mix sounds mono to me, everything is dead center for the most part. This mix would really shine with *some* elements panned wide to BOTH sides, then some elements like kick, snare, and bass and some leads sitting more in the center. Having a wide overall soundscape would really make a big difference, it gives each element a place to do it's thing, and mixing will be easier too. As it stands, I can barely hear the bass, because so much else is right on top of it in the middle. I'm going to say YES anyway, because this arrangement and the performances are just that good. But for next time, see if you can work on your soundstage design. YES

He's right, I do NOT like cut and paste. And I check so carefully for it. Thanks for saving me a bit of time with the timestamps, Larry! The energy of this track stays in one gear the entire time, and the copy pasta is part of the problem. Swap out each section of straight copy pasta with something more interesting, or at least add something to those sections so it has something different for the listener. Those drums sound too upfront because there's no reverb to connect them to each other or to the soundscape. This also is causing the general empty feeling Larry is having. Add a bit of drumroom reverb as a send (and/or some delay for snare and hats), and then you might need to bring some drum volumes down after that. Kick doesn't have much punch now either. This one is close for me, it has a lot going for it. Just needs a bit more variation on those copy pastas and a revamp of the reverb on things, and it'll be good to go. NO (resubmit)

For some reason I can't get this mp3 to boot up in Cubase... but regardless, the mixing sounds good enough here, it's tame and safe, which goes with this soundscape. The drumwork is really simple too, arguably too simple. Other than that, I can pretty much cut and paste Larry's vote here. NO (resubmit)

There are some terrific ideas here, really nice interpretation of this source. I think there are several points where things get too busy texturally and also harmonically. Also the lead synth needs some kind of modulation or filter movement on it, it is very plain and sometimes even piercing. The drums are really weak in the mix. I agree with the other Js that this needs to be longer. The fadeout ending makes this feel like a short preview of a much longer track. The arrangement needs to be quite a bit more expanded than this, and please make a proper ending! NO (resubmit)

I like the idea here, but I have to agree this arrangement is repetitive. Some kind of contrasting section or breakdown would go a long way. The sounds are not balanced well, with some elements being too loud. The clap does indeed do more harm than good because it sounds so generic. The metallic clanking is so cool but it needs more effects on it and/or it needs to appear less frequently. The clicks/pops sound more like rendering errors than purposeful sfx, maybe choose another type of sound for that effect. I'm not a fan of hard panning, and you've got a shaker only appearing on the right side, and then a buzzy synth only on the left. This kind of panning is a personal preference, but I just don't care for it. At a minimum, a balance cleanup is required. The arrangement is repetitive as the source is, which may work, but I wonder how it would be if the melody were brought forward more prominently, maybe even with some variations or soloing later on in the track. This might anchor the track better even while keeping the structure you have here. NO (resubmit)

The arrangement is very conservative, but the parts never vary so even with the varied instrumentation, the mix sounds very repetitive. The writing feels like only a few patterns repeated again and again on different instruments, and they are very strictly quantized and rigid, which is a problem especially with anything that is exposed like the bassline in the intro, and the piano that begins at 0:16. The drums are weak and buried. This has more work to go, but it is a good start. NO (resubmit)

Source is easily recognizable. Deia covered the issues quite well. That vocal is really nice, but the added syllable at the end blows the effect. The vocal is so ethereal, and then all the other synths sound dry and blocky by comparison, and the synth sounds are on the generic side. The synth writing is generally rigid which doesn't match with the flowy vocal, but it may work better if some tasteful reverb/delay was applied to the synths. The drums are weak in the mix and the writing is repetitive. Sidechaining your kick to the backing synths will help also. I agree with Deia that this is a good start, and I would also like to hear this again! NO (resubmit)

This sounds like a luscious long intro to a much more complex song that never arrives. NO

The mixing here isn't optimal. The guitar lead sounds small and buried in the dead center, while this humongous brass plays in grand stereo, and if it weren't for this panning, they would compete dreadfully for frequency. The drum kit is weak and buried, rhythm guitars sound distant. The guitar performances are fine though, imo. The arrangement is working fine too. It's just the mixing. I think Brandon can mix better than this, honestly. Still, it squeaks over the bar for me. YES

I hear enough source, and this is an interesting interpretation of it. The mixing here is ok but I think the mixing could use some cleaning up as I hear all the timbres competing for frequency space and lots of overlapping reverb. I think the bass sounds pretty good. There's a super loud hat in the intro that is distracting. In the second half there are some long backing notes that could stand to have some movement or interest added to them (not a dealbreaker but would be nice). The arrangement is somewhat odd though, it feels like a bunch of different time signatures although I think it's mostly all 4/4. The lead writing lacks contour, as the melody jumps up and down and it's really hard to follow throughout much of this mix but especially in the second half (doesn't leave me with a memorable lead line or hook in my head after the song ends). Perhaps this is the effect of trying to superimpose the 3/4 source writing onto a 4/4 reinterpretation. This has to be done carefully to maintain the melody in a new groove pattern, but in this mix the melody sounds really random and hectic to me. Maybe also that is what is causing the mix to sound very strange time-signature-wise. I know you can make this awesome with a few more tweaks. I'd love you to take another pass at the mixing and fix the issues brought up, and perhaps give it a try to make the melody parts make more sense. This might be tricky because you've got all your backing stuff written around this melody you've got here, but I hope you'll give it a try. NO (resubmit please)

This is straight-up cool. I'm loving this. The other Js have pointed out some of the odd choices in instrumentation and sampling, but I feel like it all works to tell a very creepy yet groovy tale. Dem drums, they are tasty. This arrangement and even the distortion-heavy mixing makes me think of what a Redg mix would sound like if he suddenly produced trap. I wish there was more source in here than mostly just the backing arp, with just a couple of short sections of melody, but this source use is working for me. Is this the original game audio? If it is, it is sped up and distorted so I'm not sure. I really do like this track. The mixing is just too much on the muddy side at the moment though. I suggest looking at all the very good crits from the other Js and cleaning up the mixing as much as possible. Also, your mix is only hitting a maximum of -5db, so this feels like a pre-master. When you send it back, how about mastering it properly so the max is 0db (without being squashed of course). Please fix it up and send it back quickly! NO (resub please!)

Leave it to Redg to make an evil, creepy sounding source seem friendly and tame compared to his remix! This mix is no exception. I feel like I'm in the bowels of hell listening to this. The source starts out with two chords (after the drum intro), and the remix starts out with two chords also, they are in the same key but not the same chords (source chords are minor, Redg's are major which makes the remix even creepier). I'm honestly not sure if this chord structure counts. Somebody help me here. At 1:16, all hell breaks loose rhythmically, it's cool but what the heck is going on here, if I try to keep the beat it looks like I'm having a seizure. There's no source melody until 2:35. I love the sad, resonant, whiny synth playing the lead, it makes me lose all hope. The melody is there loosely from 2:35 until the end at 3:48. The melody is playing for 73 seconds out of 228 for the entire mix, or 32%. Someone tell me what you think about whether the chords can be counted, because otherwise this cool/odd jam is just too source light for me. edit 3/15/16: Thank you Larry for helping to qualify if those chords count. If it works for Larry, it works for me. I will just add that it makes for a really tough call when the source is marginalized to this extent. YES (borderline on source)

new version: Remixer name: Redg My website: https://soundcloud.com/redg-sound UserID: 41181 Game arranged: Doom Name of arrangement: Helljam II Name of individual songs arranged: Sign of Evil (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pK-SVsrj3BQ) skeletons/mistakes

The instrumentation of this source and the remix are as different as night and day but the arrangement is conservative enough to hear the source throughout. Wow, what a change in feeling with this source in orchestral! I think you did a great job of adapting the "schizophrenia" of the source into the orchestral soundscape. The added DnB beat starting at 2:22 is terrific and fits right in. The sequencing here is pretty natural, the long brass notes could use a little more humanization but this works well enough. I feel like the overall mixing/mastering is low-heavy, with some of the highs appearing to have been rolled off. The drums are quietier than I'd like, especially hats and crashes, which would have added some more excitement with a little more volume. I'd love a little more sparkle on the overall mix, some mid-highs and also some high "air." Aside from that mixing crit, this is good to go for me! YES

Laarx (http://www.jonkelliher.com) Crash Bandicoot 2: Cortex Strikes Back The Wrath Of Tiny Tiny The boss battle against Tiny in Crash Bandicoot 2 definitely scarred me as a kid. While he was one of my favourite video game characters, he was also the hardest boss i had encountered in my youth. I remember hearing the music repeating over and over to the point of insanity, so I felt it was only right to depict the battle as an epic "Star Wars: The Phantom Menace"-esq fight scene. I found that since the original source is pretty schizophrenic it was a challenge to get the sections to flow well into one another. However, by adding some original melodies in the choruses I was able to at least give the song some sort of loose form.

Oof note choice at 1:40 and again at 1:54, the verbatim source does not work there with your backing harmonies, gotta change the lead notes at those places. This is produced VERY well. Unfortunately I have to agree with Wes though, the samey lead writing gets very old, it's always the same sound and it's pretty vanilla, and the source writing is verbatim and blocky too. The backing elements really don't change or evolve either. WOW that bell breakdown at 2:54 is cool, what a fabulous idea, it puts me right in Clocktown on the final day! But right after this breakdown, at 3:22 it's back to the same lead sound and backing. I do love how you've creatively written the Song of Time there though. You have really woven these themes together so well. You've also made 3/4 sources work well within a four-on-the-floor context. This arrangement impresses me. Darn that stagnant lead sound. Darn that samey background sound. The drum groove gets old too. This is so good but it could be amazing with some lead, backing, and drumming changeups, and those few non-harmonious notes fixed. I'm right on the fence, as Wes is.

I switched to Cubase two years ago for all the reasons you listed. For me FL just didn't cut it, and I was tired of having to change buffer lengths etc. only to still have pops and stutters, and crashes in my bigger files. I have a new computer too, not quite as awesome as Flexstyle's but still pretty good (quadcore, i7, 3.4GHz, 32 gigs of ram). I have my Windows 7, Cubase 8, and all VSTs on a 500 gig SSD and all my samples on a 2TB HDD, and everything runs smooth as buttah using Cubase, even with Omnisphere, Alchemy, etc. loaded up. I'm also hearing very good things about Studio One though, and I'll bet you'd get very good performance out of that too.