Disco Dan

I thought maybe I had left a webpage open and it was playing a midi in the background, and then I realized it was winamp... playing this song. sorry, if we're gonna let mp's "Phantom Midnight" get through, then let's make that the low end of the bar for piano pieces if we absolutely have to. But this, is quite mechanical. Even if a person COULD play it like this I wouldn't want to hear it. NO D Nice soundfont though

I think we should just delete the thread and pretend it never happened. And to further ensure that no one finds out, we'll have to hack his site, remove his remixes, and we'll have to have him killed. That should tie up all loose ends. But don't forget to delete this thread if you have him killed. D

I... can't remember this music from the game... and I LOVED this game. Oh man, so incredible. The music was so high quality too. I don't know if I can pass anything that isn't top notch as a remix from that game. I do appreciate the use of the guitar and sax samples which sound incredibly real, but there are a bunch of parts that are annoying as well, like the sections between :54 and 1:09 and then again between 2:22 and 2:38. Drum loops ARE utilized heavily, though I don't really feel that's enough to sink the mix. Maybe it's just my speakers but this seems very centered. Hmmm.... I'll come back to this. TO BE CONTINUED

This song has lots of annoying qualities: The horns. I don't think I've ever liked those general midi horns since the day of their inception. And no, I don't know when they were originally designed, but this whole mix sounds very dry, and very empty. It sounds like a midi was taken, with three or four tracks in it, and they were mixed and matched and soloed, and then slapped together in a final product. It just sounds very incomplete. The development is minimal at best. NO D

ok, I know this is locked, but I really don't think this should go up. I'm in agreement 100% with analoq on this one, and if we let this through I think it sets a bad precedent for other mixes and then people are like "it's good, but it's played bad, and I wonder why this got through if there are other better mixes that didn't" and we start that whole damn debate over again. Rob, your vote is hardly thought out though I can understand you wanting to see it move on, I don't see that as a reason to forsake reasoning in the case, or at least explaining yourself. This reminds me a lot of "La Samba De Agua." Live performance. Great arranging, but poor execution. It'd be good to get this music on paper. Hell I might be able to get the band here to play it. Anyway, it looks good on paper, and could SOUND good with the right players, but it really does have a very half-assed (read: high school) sound to it. I wish I had gotten back to this thread before it was locked so I could put a big fat NO on it, but alas. I just hope djp catches this and exerts his veto power again. We'll see.. D

WAY too much of the same thing over and over and over again. Nothing wrong with making a long song out of a short theme, but let's do it tastefully. MUCH more variation would be required for something like this. Though I do like how you changed it from the original 3/8 to 4/4. NO D

ok NO for two reasons: No variation from the original, and the melody is way too subdued and lost within the other "instruments." I'm honestly not very convinced by these samples. I've heard better, though the drums are good. The guitars aren't AWFUL, but they're not good enough (in my opinion) to lead a song. Ok, there's some variation around the 2 minute mark. Nice. But other than that... well, I already voted. Damn, I like ending my posts on a yes or no. Oh well NO D

ok NO Annoying clashing samples. (i.e. they don't blend well together at all) And that bond part is just ... awful. Really off key. I'm not a big fan of the constant canned reverb sound that goes on. Samples are dry enough as it is, but the tinny reverb is almost worse. ALMOST. Anyway, it might have been acceptable if there had been real guitar instead. That might have made up for the absolute bore that the rest of the song created. D

Beat is annoying. Really. And yeah, it's pretty much note for note. Oh well, there's this section at about 2:00 that sounds a little original, but then again, the samples used are so dry and empty feeling that it pretty much ruins it. Oh, that and the fake ending. Plus, I could be wrong, but that trumpet goes flat on every note. NO D

ok satriani... No seriously, I can see this ending up on Kazaa as Joe Satriani - Mario Underground Theme.mp3 Anyway, this is high quality and well played, though pretty damn short, but I suppose that's ok too in this case. Interesting to see how you took a 4/4 song and turned it into 6/8. Good stuff YES D

interesting take on the original. While I'm not against this kind of chord progression remapping as it's creative and different, but apt, this particular mix is giving me the "wha? huh?" feeling. That and the clipping botherered me. Not to mention the sudden ending and short feel. I dunno. The whole feel of it bugs me beyond belief, but I feel that's too subjective to base a vote on, so I'll use the fact that it's really short and the ending is just way too abrupt to give you a: NO D

ok I'm noticing a trend here. And at first it was ok, because like, it was original, but now it's like, they're all like this. it's definitely a ryu7x mix, because it's got his style: lead up to the tune, but give about 2 minutes before we hear anything recognizeable, though hint at the melody using the chord progression and other elements, until finally the melody comes in. It's... very repetitive, and the development is WAY too slow and drawn out. It's one of the things I used to not like about the trance genre (still don't) that they would take forever to get to the point. Ah well, that and there's not much original material here, just the notes from the original, plus drums. I'll admit it sounds cool at times, but it's too... drab, methinks, in its current form, and too copied. NO D

I'm just gonna say yes because everyone else said no. And now I'll justify that "yes" with the following reasons... It's a complex tapestry of tonal and rhythmic variations that play on the original while remaining true to the tune. I think this is definitely OCR quality, and should be posted without further delay. YES D

oh boy. I can see the flames coming when this verdict goes through. While their wording might have been a bit harsher, the point is obvious. It's kind of like that scene in fight club where all the people try out for Project Mayhem and they get verbally shat upon on the front steps. . . Anyway, the drumming in this arrangement, while varied, is quite annoying. The instruments are quite dry, and while that's fine if you're doing a live jazz set, it doesn't really work here with the big bass drum, and the very raw sounding slap bass. Not to mention the harmonies on the strings sound very empty. Enough? NO D

it sounds like only one or two tracks got rendered on a more full song. Honestly, it sounds like the background strings and arpeggio harps got rendered and everything else was forgotten. Is there supposed to be more to this? as it is, it's waaaaaaaayyyyyy too empty/simple. NO D

ok it's not EXACTLY like the original. In fact, it's missing a lot. And it's very simplistic. Kind of like a dumbed down version of the original, with drums. Anyway, I feel it needs to be filled out a good bit more and varied a lot. Otherwise, it's too ... drab. NO D

I'm gonna have to agree with what Digital Coma said here. It's ... well. It sounds rushed and unfinished, or finished in a hurry. I like the beat. It's kind of catchy, but it's really dry. The distortion in that intro bass thingamy is clipping as is the pad that comes in over it. The whole thing really sounds incomplete to me. NO D

I'm also torn. It's a pretty ... well it's a subpar recording, and it's a subpar performance, but the arrangement is good. .... Yeah, gonna get back to this again later. D

YES I've had this one for a while. Like, months. I told him back then, "This is OCR quality," or at least I thought so. anyway, I like the use of synth and the tempo changes aren't as annoying as they could be. It sounds like a standard dance track with a good intro and outro and could possibly be used in a club (at least I see it as possible). D

Indeed. That's the part I'm most impressed with. You took a totally acapella solo voice piece and added a chord progression and listenable rhythm. Very impressive considering how little there was to work with in the original. Actually, come to think of it, the original is really dry and boring (though I guess it's part of the atmosphere) and I can actually listen to this one. Just never was a fan of solo vocal music. As for the choppiness and cutting of the vocals/sounds, that's part of the genre. If you don't like it, you wouldn't like the genre. Good stuff. D

So I saw the game title and the immediate word association was "Russell Cox," so I asked him to take a listen and clear up the issue, and he said: So I think that clears it up and besides that the drums are like "BANG BANG IN YOUR FACE" the whole time, to an annoying degree... at least in my opinion. But anyway, hope that clears it up. The obligatory NO D

Wow... showin' your (young) age! BT, for reference, did not pioneer the phrase "trip the light fantastic." It's been around for years and years, and you'll probably find multiple artists have used the title throughout pop music history. Anyway, as for this mix, it's quite well done. As per usual, Monsignor Pretzel, has a knack for combining all the right sounds in all the right places. Though I wouldn't call it trance, I would call it high quality. I really dig the flanger used on the syncopated synth there. Can't say I'm a big fan of the ending, but it ends as any standard DJ mix would end, with enough beat for him to mix into something else, but no real sense of ending. If you listened to this song through speakers, listen to it again with headphones. You miss the subtle panning and stereo nuances without a close-up approach. Check out the addition of the panned synth at :43 for a good example. Plus the mastering is just godly. I put this in the playlist, and then put my Chronotrigger mix after it. It just didn't stack up. I need to really work on EQ'ing. While djp and I don't always agree musically, I have to give him credit for having some of the consistently highest quality mixes on the site. Anyway, well worth the download, and probably makes good fast driving music for late at night through empty city streets lined with sky scrapers... D

er, I really like the choice of instruments and the arrangement, and maybe it's just me, but I'm hearing a lot of clashing notes, but maybe that's in the original. I... dunno. I'd better listen to the original first. ::goes searching for the original:: Well, after listening to the original, it seems you've completely overhauled the chord progression, which isn't so bad, as I really dig where you've taken it, but it seems you've left the melody and accompaniament in tact enough that there are notes that just weren't intended for your new chord progression. I'd go through and weed out those notes if I were you. Until then, 'cause I'm a nazi, I say: NO D

hmm, not much added to this mix outside of the pads. I mean, even the leads are the same. Hmm, actually I think the original lead was an "electric guitar" but the original samples are so bad, it's hard to tell. The drums are slightly different, and the bass is in 6/8 time instead of the 4/4 from the original. I dunno. The instruments are of pretty high quality, though. And the ending seems ... eh. I'm kind of on the line about this one, but I'm leaning towards no, since the thing just repeated the same thing instead of really varying, so: NO D

Ok, the good outweighs the bad in this. It gets a yes from me. So... YES D