Jump to content

Disco Dan

Members
  • Content Count

    452
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Disco Dan

  1. So you're like 40 now, but you've got 40 really good years. Wishing you the best and hoping for another 40 or so years to come!
  2. This thread is lame. Ahh, life before responsibility. I get nostalgic sometimes.
  3. Impressive. This is actually a really solid mix. My only complaint would not be the quality of the piano/string instruments, but their volume. I can barely hear the beginning and end of the song, and then the middle is quite loud. But quite good, too. The whole middle section, I loved. Not a huge fan of the slower parts, but one kind of gets over that with a varied, jumpin' midsection like this had.
  4. I think any artist would be lying if he said he didn't care what the public thought of his works, so I won't pretend to be any different. That being said, I can say: Wow. Thanks for the reviews! It's been a long time since I've had that slightly-inflated ego feeling! And I'd like to respond to a few of your remarks, so I will. It kind of hit me while writing this, that it would make sense to build up and then drop into the original sounds, but I couldn't bring myself to just sample it, so I had to try and emulate it. I STILL couldn't quite get that synth-harp sound that they use for t
  5. I have this habit. If I'm going to do an arrangement of a theme, I see what's already been done with it, to make sure I don't cover old ground. And if it's been covered, then I have to make sure I cover it better. Or more thoroughly. Or with astroturf. Anyway, I may or may not be working on an arrangement of this same theme, so I came to the OCR archives to see what existed, so as to not duplicate any efforts. So I found this mix and the previously mentioned Techtris TypeZ mix covering the Type B music. Now see, I never had a gameboy (Sure, I played my friends' Gameboys from time to t
  6. I was going through my "temporary mp3" folder tonight with the intentions of deleting and organizing files because, like my room, it's a mess. When I was judging remix submissions, I'd forget to delete the tracks after voting on them, so that made up a good deal of it too. ANYway, I stumbled upon this track while weeding out the crap, and was pleasantly surprised. It's very unassuming, and sticks pretty much exclusively to the original, but I couldn't help thinking that I had no idea what I would do to make it better, because it seems perfect as it is. It's one of those songs that gives me
  7. But in all seriousness, my issues with this song have already been brought up: tuning, precision, lack of dynamics, incoherence of the middle section, sudden cliff-drop ending. These, I feel, outweigh the pros, and push it over the line for me. The recording quality is not bad enough that it's an issue for me. It's the other issues that put it in this category. So I reiterate my earlier vote of NO. Not awful, but not great. D
  8. OH! Like John Cage! Or something ... I don't know. It's not BAD. Not really my STYLE, but that doesn't mean I can't appreciate the fact that work WAS put into it. Unfortunately, though, at times it sounds like someone was throwing down notes and beats randomly and didn't really have a good idea of what it was going to sound like when played back. But there are other parts that indicate a semblance of musical knowledge. Random, but I'm gonna give it a YES. D
  9. YES This song will do great to put me to sleep at night! Oh wait. There is volume now. Hark. I hear an increase of velocity. Quite well done, actually. I can't tell if it's live or not. The ambience is convincing, though I've heard some really good samples, soundfonts and plug-ins that can mimic that same sound reeeeeeeeeeeally well. Either way, it's played live, i.e. it's not sequenced. So for that, you have bonus points from me, so... Oh wait, I already voted. D
  10. Nice samples! Actually, they're not all THAT bad. But given their use, I'm reminded of a Blue Mountain E-Greeting card. I'm sorry. That's the driving force behind my NO. The arrangement isn't spectacular, but it's not awful either. I can't tell what's from the source material and what's original to this mix. Also it's ... very short lived. Ok I already voted. Enough chat. D
  11. I like the beat. I will not lie. It turns me on. And on and on and on. Etc. Not so much a fan of the synth leads. They seem really runny and muddy. As has been said, not much in the harmony area. Pretty much bass and lead. And the repetition is actually getting to me. And I can take quite a bit of repetition. NO D
  12. The thing that bothers me about this mix is that it never settles on one thing for more than a few bars at a time. Well, not really until 1:30 or so. But there is also some evidence of "one knowing what to do with notes." My only other complaint would be that only the second half of the original song is really included in this mix. The first half being only played with in the first 20 seconds or so. I'm quite torn on this one, but I'm gonna go with a YES for the original work and energy that is created with this song. And the pad work is decent. Yeah. Neat. D
  13. Not really jazz like the Duke, and not really "smooth jazz" (a misnomer if ever there was one) either. It's a bit more unstructured than classical jazz in that, while it comes together as a whole very well, it seems most of the time as if the individual players were doing their own thing instead of playing as parts of a whole, more like a jazzy jam session than a song. However, it's not quite to the point of being Phish on dramamine. It's not really my cup of tea, to be honest. While I appreciate the performance skills of the players involved, the piece as whole doesn't keep my attention
  14. For the record, neither McV nor myself were aware of the others' intentions of remixing zelda 3 pieces. And I'm glad we weren't. Because this is quite beautiful and haunting. McV has never had trouble picking instruments that sound right together and then writing GOOD parts for them, and this is no exception. Nice time signature changes also. From 4/4 to 5/4 to 3/4 to 6/4. And I only wish I had beaten this game more recently, 'cause I don't recognize that ending theme for the life of me. Beautiful regardless. A seamless mix of styles. Awesome ending. I feel like I'm not saying exactl
  15. Often I feel obligated to add something new to the reviews before saying Yea or Nay, but in this case, I'm going to stick with a simple NO for the reasons already stated. D
  16. ReFX Slayer. And not used very well. Everything else has been said already. NO D
  17. Jazz sometimes seems to many like "any music that has a few dissonant notes in it to make it sound different," or "all music that has a certain instrument set." I think this falls into the first of those statements, with a touch of the latter. Maybe I'm just being picky that the title calls the song "jazz" and yet I've heard maybe 2 jazz chords in the song. In addition, the encoding is fairly bad. It almost reminds me of music I'd hear when turning the TV on to the community channel, right before turning on the VCR 'cause it's set for channel 3. This is due partially to style, but a lot t
  18. Very nice sounds. VERY nice dynamics. I'm torn. It DOES have some of the best dynamics of any piece on this site, but it lacks a lot of compositional innovation. I'm going to have to come back to this, and hope that everyone else voted before I do, so that I can relieve myself of responsibility. D
  19. it's like... OVERCLOCKED REMIX PRESENTS: EINHÄNDER E-GREETINGS!! D
  20. I'm picking up distortion all the way through this song. For the majority of the time, actually. And as far as sound quality has come these days, this general midi set isn't going to do it for me. I don't think it would be that hard to find some higher quality samples to replace the ones used. The lead is fine, but mainly because that's a synth anyway. Sound quality aside, the distortion is killing me. It could be an illusion though. The more I listen, the more I'm wondering if it's the distorted reverb on that snare rimshot that's creating that distortion sound at the top of the spectr
  21. seeing as I've already posted twice, I'll post again. I don't know about the validity of the first 3 votes seeing as they're basing it on the idea that the remix is too close to the original. I'd like to get the opinions of some people with more musical training before locking the thread. D
  22. after listening a second time, I can see a SIMILAR motive in the original as in this remix, and while it has nearly the same rhythmic values, the notes are different. The melody has been altered to the point where you could sell this as an original and never have to worry about being sued for copyright infringement. So, once again. Very very very nice work, BUT, comma, it's way too original. D
  23. What is there to remix in this?? It's like... trying to remix something by debussy. I think I hear one motive from the original here. But it's distorted quite a bit. I'm having trouble accepthing this as an arrangement of the original. Though I love the quality of the sounds used and love this as a piece. It's quite beautiful and haunting. I'm just having difficulty placing it with the original. Great original, but until I can figure out or someone else can point out where the original and this coincide, I'm gonna have to give it a no. Put this on an original album though. It's good
×
×
  • Create New...