MindWanderer

Starts off conservatively: same genre, mostly the same instrumentation, but with a richer tone and some additional layers. Deviations from the original gradually increase until the halfway mark, where there's a breakdown and a brief violin bridge. Then we start another loop, back to being conservative at first, but this time breaking away from the source more quickly and radically, until going into a much more complicated climax, which fades out. It's a little quiet. That's a minor issue, though, easily corrected. I have some mixed feelings here. The tone is great. It's a rich soundscape with gorgeously orchestrated and realized instruments. But for the first half, it's squarely in "sound upgrade" territory. The extra layers add to the depth of the arrangement, but not the character. The cello in particular does sound great; it's the most transformative part of this section, but it is the only notably transformative part. The second half is much more transformative, with a change in tone from pastoral to epic. For about a minute there, there's no doubt that there's original interpretation going on. But then it fades out, folding back on the notion that it's an original creation and seeming more like a snippet from the game's OST. This does a great job of elevating the original piece into something with a much richer tone and grander scale. But ultimately I'm left with the feeling that that's mostly all it is: an elevation of the original piece. Most of the second half is fine, other than the fadeout, but between the conservative first half and the lack of conclusion, I'm borderline on whether this is substantially an original creation. I've started to type out this conclusion several times and keep waffling. Well, when I'm this close, better to fall on the side of YES (borderline)

Very nice. Gives me strong Enigma vibes, which I loved the hell out of back in the '90s. Soundscape is a touch bass-light, but otherwise is rich and full. A little busy and muddy at a couple of points. Great choice to slow down the melody in different ways while keeping the beat the same. Overall this sounds great! YES

Your sax performance is notably better than what we got in "Live for a Who / Oh War of Evil;" even though there are some notable missteps, they're less severe and are covered more by the other instruments. It's also clearly not as challenging a piece to perform. And while the key noises are a bit loud, for me they only barely detracted from my enjoyment. I'm not the biggest fan of the original sections, which seem sort of rambling, especially the repetitive runs, but they work well enough, and feel like they belong. None of these complaints are major enough to prevent my giving this a YES

Absolutely gorgeous. The vocals sound fantastic, and I really love how you've managed to riff on the source while keeping its main hook. The whole thing has a mystical, ethereal quality. I don't think you need to have any concerns about the mastering; overall loudness is fine, better than many of our submissions, and I don't hear any distortion. Strong work. I think this will be a favorite of many. YES

Opens with a heavy, pounding kick that really bothers my ears, especially while it's exposed. I got more used to it as the song went by and more parts were added, but it's still nearly disqualifying in my mind. The lower note in the main hook is difficult for me to wrap my brain around. It sounds wrong to me every time, but I can't tell if it's clashing with notes or just my expectations. Same for some of the low notes in the refrain. Seems like they're taken from The Secret Song, but with chords from Zelda? Maybe someone with more music theory knowledge can pick it apart better. Vocals are mixed a little quietly in the bridge, and are especially hard to make out there. Otherwise, this sounds great. It's an experiment that works. The Frost influence is strong but I think you skirted on the "homage" side of the line without drifting into using it as an actual source (other than the simple arp). The contralto vocals sound great. There are things that could be improved but even still, I think this is good for a YES

Really fun arrangement, sort of a ska/surf rock fusion. It's long but doesn't wear out its welcome too much, although I do think it would be stronger with a bit more room to breathe a few times. The mixing is still a little flat. Both the high and low ends are filtered a little too much, making the soundscape feel thin. The percussion especially feels weak: the kicks are all thwack and no boom, and the cymbals are mostly in the same frequency as the guitars instead of cutting over them. It could definitely use another pass on this front, though I don't think it's quite a dealbreaker. Good enough for me. YES

Unfortunately, this is an instrument swap of the original. It consists entirely of two loops that are structurally identical to the source, ending in a fadeout, just with different synths. It even plays at the exact same speed. We're looking for more interpretive arrangements than this. Otherwise, production is fine. Synths are a little vanilla but sufficient. Same with the electric guitars: they're clearly fake, but they're not even trying to be real, so it's fine. The main issue is the structure. NO

I was a little concerned about the arrangement initially, since it seemed like a conservative cover with vocals added. Fortunately, then it got into metal. The arrangement is still conservative, but the performances and change to genre are sufficiently transformative for our standards. Now, let's talk about that vocal performance. It certainly doesn't lack in energy, but I think Larry did a disservice by pointing out a couple of off notes and flatness. It's off-key a lot, too many times to count. Some of them are attempts to be stylistic that are just ill-advised, since they slide across clashing notes, but many of them are just missing the note they should be hitting. Many of these are in the intro, where they're exposed and hard to ignore. Unfortunately, auto-tuning would also flatten out all of the intentional catches and glides, which could sound good. Larry's also right about the vocals being mixed too quietly, but it's throughout the whole thing and not just the intro, and I disagree that it's passable. The instrumental arrangement and performance are great, but the vocals aren't carrying it through. Connor, this isn't your first rodeo when it comes to vocals, but I notice that you've racked up a fair number of NO votes on this front in the past. You've pushed problematic vocals over the top with previous resubmissions, so I'm hoping you can do that again here. NO (resubmit)

An atmospheric take that would almost be a sound upgrade if it weren't such a transformation from "impending violence" to "mysteriously threatening." I would have preferred something that stood on its own as a song, with an ending and more of a defined progression, but it checks all our official boxes. YES

A good chunk of this goes back to our long-standing debate over whether something counts as source if you can sit down and map out how it's derived from the source, even if it's hard to hear on a subjective level. And that "subjective" part means we won't all agree on whether we can hear it or not. That's fine; that's why we have multiple people vote. If Larry can hear where each part comes from, just by listening to it and not analyzing it, then I'm not going to knock him for a YES vote on those grounds. I will knock a YES vote where that's not the case, and more importantly I will knock an effort to strong-arm people into changing their votes on the grounds that they should be able to hear it and if they can't it's their fault.

I'm in agreement with Larry about the extent of copy-pasta: it's just shy of 1/3 of the total runtime, which is definitely too much (my own rule of thumb is that 25% is about the limit). I also wasn't the biggest fan of the heavy phasing sidechain. It's so impactful that it's dominating the overall tone of the piece, over the musical aspects of it. It's a cool sound, but it should have a supporting role, not a leading one. There's a fair amount of ducking used for effect even during the piano solo sections, which to me felt distracting. The repetition is the main issue, though. NO

I was one of the NOs, and Treyt asked me to preview his revision before he resubmitted. I did tell him he overcorrected and it's overall too quiet now, which is still the case (there's almost 2dB of headroom), but it's not horrendously so. He also seems to have introduced a very loud machine-gun kick at 2:10-2:21, which was not the best idea. I'm almost CONDITIONAL based on those two issues, but I can live with them. I wouldn't be upset if this got sent back to have those addressed, but I'm okay giving this a YES

Well, you certainly set yourselves a challenge here! To get the hard part out of the way, I think the performance is great. Solo trumpet isn't my personal idea of enjoyment, but it's certainly valid, and it's executed very well here. The tone is clear, the production is clean. I have no objections on that front. I'm not as thrilled with the arrangement. The transitions are frequently really abrupt; with no accompaniment to act as connective tissue, this is an extreme challenge, especially when the two sources don't have much in common. 2:53 in particular starts to feel like it's just doing whatever. I understand the intention of it, especially given your explanation, but it sounds really random and disjointed. There are a lot of sections, such as 1:18-1:31, that I have no doubt are in fact from the source material, but don't sound like it at all. I can't tell if you're playing a part that wasn't originally melody, or if you're just riffing in a way that becomes unrecognizable. I really like the ambition of this, and I hate to reject TSori's epic performance here. But I feel like it's ultimately too disjointed, and the more liberal parts are too hard to grok on multiple levels. NO (regretfully)

This certainly comes across as an older effort, right off the bat. Not only is the synth choice pretty vanilla, but... well, frankly, it's a little messy. There's an immediate wall of sound, with really loud sweeps and kicks and quiet leads. This gets better at times, but worse at others: take a listen at 2:11 for a bit where the lead is nearly inaudible among a wash of arps, kicks, and even a triangle wave that's trying to act like a bass but is squarely in the trebel range. I also caught what sounded to me like severely clashing notes at 1:03. Otherwise, it's a fun arrangement, with an infectious four-on-the-floor beat and a lot of twists and turns to hold the listener's interest. Just needs to have the production cleaned up. NO

Opens with a really rich soundscape. Bass+piano+synth is a classic for a reason. Great job using a different sound palette to take a melody and elevate it without changing its essential components at all. It's clearly a remix of Aria, and of Minecraft in general, but so much more. It is a little short, but that may be a good thing, because it's done everything it set out to do. The ending could be a little more conclusive; I wouldn't mind if it were extended by just a few measures to give it a chance to wind down. Great job overall. YES

You're not alone in struggling through Baba is You. My most common complaint with puzzle games is that they're too easy. This game kicked my ass backwards and forwards. Still haven't finished it. This is a very difficult source tune to remix. It's weirdly toneless and very long. I think I caught enough connections to qualify, though. Very basic, old-school sound palette, but the soundscape is full and the tones are used appropriately. It's very '80s without quite being synthwave. The leads sound a little thin at times, but overall it works. The arrangement is a little meandering, but then so is the source. I think overall it works. YES

This indeed quite a long piece with some repetitive motifs, especially the xylophone arp, which takes only one break (2:00-2:20). This definitely would have been a more engaging piece if the xylophinist wasn't going for 4:23 of a 5:23 piece. I definitely disagree that it "demands your attention;" lt lost my attention very quickly! However, there isn't much in the way of copy-pasta otherwise. It feels repetitive, but without actually repeating. The soundscape is indeed rich and deep. If the idea is to just chill out and steep yourself in the sounds, it does a good job of letting you do that. It works. YES

Not sure that this needs both sources referenced, as they're nearly identical. It's a nice house take on Aloy's theme. I think the melody of the theme is easily recognizable, and it's clearly present and dominant here. I don't agree the master is too quiet. I only see about 1.49 dB of headroom here, and while it's a little quiet, I can hear it clearly at my usual listening volume. I do think the lead is too quiet in the mix; but I think most of the times when it's really too quiet to hear (like 1:19), it's a stylistic decision. I wouldn't call this a dealbreaker. YES

I'm as enthusiastic as LT about the arrangement. Great intermixing of the themes, all used clearly and cleverly played into and against each other. I enjoyed that tremendously. Unfortunately I'm not in agreement with him about the mixing. The bass absolutely dominates the mix. I have to strain to hear the leads in 0:45-1:03, 1:19-1:47, 2:15-2:44, 3:13-3:28, 3:50-4:12, 5:37-5:52, and 6:21-6:35, and even when I can make them out, all the timbre is crushed out of them. 1:33-1:47 is the worst, I'm actually using my imagination and knowledge of the source material to fill in the parts I can't hear. Those are just the most problematic parts; balance isn't ideal anywhere but the piano parts. On my fourth listen I finally noticed there was a choir in places, but it's almost completely buried. I definitely want to see a version of this get posted! Just not this version. Take it in for some loving rebalancing and it'll make an amazing mixpost. NO (resubmit)

Wow, it's been almost 20 years since we posted a The Coop mix! Unreal. I'm not a pianist, and I know some folks here have opinions about piano performance, but I'll leave that to them. What I hear is a clever arrangement that uses the melody of the source almost exactly, but utterly changes the tone into something new. The playing sounds great as far as I can tell. The recording is oddly bass-heavy. I don't have specific advice about improving that, again because I don't have experience recording live piano; you could certainly EQ it but I'm sure there's a more elegant, natural way to improve the tone. Sounds great to me otherwise. Welcome back. YES

Interesting sound palette. It uses mostly stock, vanilla synths that have been prevalent for a decade or more, but they're all used thoughtfully and produced well. Stylistially there's no reason this couldn't have been posted almost 10 years ago, but the level of competence is through the roof. And even though it's an eclectic mix of EDM, chiptune, dubstep, and metal, it all hangs together coherently. None of the huge variety of arps, wubs, or SFX seem extraneous. Great pacing, great energy, great arrangement all around. YES

My intiial impression is that this is one of the better Pixel Pirates remixes we've had on the panel. Good groove, pretty clean mixing, interesting embellishments. Production isn't perfectly clean, though. There's an instrument that creates a lot of white noise. It's most noticable at 1:15-1:29, but it's there almost the whole time starting from where it goes electronic. I can't tell if it's an out-of-control sweep, or way too much tail on a cymbal, or what, but it muddies up the whole mix. It gets even worse when the tambourine or the SFX are added (e.g. cheering crowds). It also gets pretty muddy when the lead drops into the lower pitches. It isn't selectively EQ'ed, so this causes it to overlap with the bass. 2:25-2:52 is the worst example here because there's just so much going on: the orchestral harmonizing, the crowd, and things I can't even pick out. I can't hear the vocal part Kris mentioned at all; I'm only assuming it's here somewhere. I tried several times to hear those dissonant chords, and I can't make out anything that sounds wrong to me. This is really close, IMHO. The writing is really good, and the production is passable most of the time. The cut-off ending automatically demotes this to CONDITIONAL at best, but between the bothersome white noise and the occasional muddy sections, especially the climax, which has a lot of cool stuff going on that I can barely hear, I find myself leaning more towards a NO (resubmit)

This is a great example of how to do original writing that fits right in with the original. I kept re-referencing the source tune thinking that the remix was too conservative, and it's absolutely not — the writing is just so smooth that it feels like the additions were always there to begin with. The new solos are an absolute delight, full of infectious energy. I see what Larry means about the vanilla beats, but I disagree that it's a problem that has to be fixed: percussion exists to support the piece, not to stand alone as its own interesting and engaging component. Certainly creative part-writing for the drums is a plus, but when everything else that's going on is so good, it's really not necessary IMO. I haven't played Genshin Impact, so the source material wasn't familiar to me; it came across as fine but not especially memorable. This remix is exceptional, though, and I'll definitely remember it. YES

It's a tough one to timestamp, for sure. I hear a lot of bits that sound like extensions or transformations of the arp and bass sections of the original, but Kyle can do it more justice than I can.

I'm in instant disagreement with Larry about this not sounding muddy. The bass is really loud and steps all over the spectrum, crushing the poor leads into mush. The SFX suffer even more; the laughing, chittering Gremlins are only identifiable when they're exposed, then turn nearly into static as the bass steals all their air. However, the composition is pretty darn good. The original solos are absolute fire, and I love how you incorporated synths that are vaguely reminiscent of the ones used in the movie's theme song. I have to agree with Larry about the verses feeling repetitive: it's a 15-second clip used 5 times, meaning a full minute of the track is copy-pasta in this way. I thought the bookending worked great, though. Clean up the production and reduce the repetitiveness of the main hook and this will really be a bright light in our catalogue instead of being all wet. NO (resubmit) Update 1/22/24: Mixing is much, much cleaner, great job! A few of the synths are a little too quiet, e.g. the octavo lead at 0:32-0:46 and the pad I didn't even realize was there until 1:18. I'm not doing an A:B comparison, but it didn't feel repetitive to me this time, either. And the original riffing is just so good. Feed me some of this after midnight, please. YES