MindWanderer

Yeah, I'm not getting "dubstep" out of this at all. Nary a wub to be heard. The sound quality sounds really poor all around. The leads, kicks, and snares are all extremely staticky and distoried The fade-out transitions don't work at all for me. It just sounds like the track is ending, plus it's a drop in energy when there should be an increase. The drum patterns do get increasingly frenetic in these sections, which is house-like, and there is a rise, but then the rise doesn't have a drop. The energy levels just sort of fall apart instead of exploding. I hate to be a downer on this, and I'm glad you're getting out of your comfort zone, but you really need cleaner sounds for any time of music, and you need to study EDM a bit more if you want to emulate that genre. NO

The crackle is fixed, but that ultra-high frequency noise is still there. It's hard to pinpoint because it's quiet, but damages my hearing something fierce and now my ears are just ringing. I wouldn't be surprised if most people can't even hear it at all, though. I'll let my ears rest and come back to it later. Edit: 24 hours later and my ears sre still ringing a little, but they're recovered enough to hear what's going on with this track. The noise kicks in at about 0:46.75. It's in the middle of a phrase, so I don't know why it starts right there. I can see it clearly on Clementine's visualizer, though: I have to stop now or I'm going to mess up my ears even worse than they already are. I wouldn't be surprised if this passes, since I seem to be the only judge who can hear it (though maybe proph's wife can take a listen). If it does get posted as-is, it needs to come with a warning label.

I do like that intro a lot! The arrangement on the whole is a lot of fun, with good energy. I enjoyed it. However, production does need some work. The leads are too thin and quiet, dominated by the percussion in particular. There's not a lot of presence in the bass registers except the kicks. Otherwise, this is pretty solid. A lot of care went into the composition, and there's elements of interest throughout. The synth choices are a little vanilla, but they're consistently so, and can mostly pass for '80s synth-pop. Improve the balance and EQ, and use some leads and bass with more vibrant timbre, and I think this will be in really good shape. NO (resubmit)

The rain stick at the very beginning sounded like static to me until it ended. Otherwise, the instrumentation sounds great. Speaking of the instrumentation, it's typical Tripp orchestration, which is to say it's really good. It is quite short, but it's long enough to get the point across, even though it ends a little abruptly. I wish it resolved in a more interesting way, but it's sufficient as it is. YES

That soprano sample sure is uncanny. But it's so uncanny that it's obviously not even trying to be real. And that's fine for an obviously sci-fi-inspired piece. The piece definitely has more musical direction to it than the source material. There are a few moments where some sounds clash or are distorted, but there aren't many, and some can be written off as maybe intentional. It's a nice approach and a good soundscape. YES

Nice gradual transition fron industral synth to more traditional '80s synth pop. Textures are a bit vanilla, but they're clearly intentionally and consistently so. The arrangement does a great job of taking the catchy hooks from the original and building on them, including blending the two themes together. The climax is a little mushy, and the leads could sit a little louder in the mix, but otherwise this is solid stuff. YES

The mechanical performances and thin soundscape leap out at me, followed quickly by a handful of clashing notes in the riffs; these sound like the melody was tweaked but the harmonies left alone, creating dissonance. Even though I know this is all technically from one source, 1:23 is an abrupt transition in style and turns this remix into two pieces that don't sound related at all. And then, as Larry said, the second section isn't really developed at all. It's absolutely begging for a bookend that guides that back into the theme from the first half to both tie it all together and wrap it up. There are some really creative, fun ideas here which I did enjoy. However, what we have here is basically a proof-of-concept. The instruments need to be more realistically realized, and the arrangement needs to be smoothed together and filled out. NO

It's an adorable idea, to turn this into a nursery story. Memorable and unique. I also have some mixed feelings about the concept, though. It's storytelling with accompaniment, not music with spoken word. As a submission that isn't dominantly music, let alone source material, I'm not sure it's not a standards violation. (Now, those spoken words are "source," in that they're taken from the in-game text, but that's a question I don't know that we've considered before.) I'm sadly in agreement with Chimpz about the performances here. The recitation has odd emphasis in places, and goes a little too quickly, with a lack of pauses between ideas. The performances, especially the singing at the end, are loose indeed, with problematic timing and occasionally off-key. The balance is sometimes off, with instruments frequently stepping on each other. I don't want to sound like I'm coming down too hard on this. It's obviously a passion project, and I love the enthusiasm and ingenuity that went into this. I don't think the production is a huge barrier to getting this passed. But I think the performances are not quite where they need to be. NO

First thing I hear is a bunch of quiet crackling and distortion among the silence, and it's definitely mastered far too quietly, so this can't be more than a CONDITIONAL right off the bat. But continuing to listen... well, it does take 26 seconds to get to actual music, not a good start... There's definitely some improvement here, though not as much as I was hoping for. 2:13 begins a 1-minute section of original writing, which is a vast improvement over the original continuing to loop. It still feels a little long in the tooth by 1:53, but that's only for another 20 seconds. I do like the key change and the melancholy little riffs. I'm not enthusiastic about it, but I do think there's just enough dynamism to justify the arrangement. Gate those artifacts out and master this a little louder and I'm okay with it. CONDITIONAL

The arrangement is lots of fun, but sadly, I'm in immediate agreement with proph. The mixing is so thin that I initially wondered if there was something wrong with my setup. Everything's crammed into the tenor range. I'm feeling no bass (though maybe there's sub; my setup has weak sub), mids are weak, highs are weak except for a shrill range that makes the whistles and harmonica cut through like a knife. Even the Hammond solo is weirdly flat and high-pitched. It sounds like a cassette recording played on a cheap stereo, just without the saturation. I enjoyed the arrangement a lot, the cameos were cool, but I need another mastering pass before I can vote in its favor. NO

Not many remixes of this source; it's very short, and hard to make much out of. And yet here we are, with nearly 5 minutes that isn't really repetitive at all. I mean, it is trance, so there's some repetition to it, but there's a lot of trance that goes on way, way longer than this does. Nice soundscape, with a rich bassline and kicks on the bottom and an eclectic mix of sounds in the top. I didn't think any of the sound design was phoned-in; even when there are simple waveforms, they're chosen judicously and are steeped in reverb. I do think the ending was a little unsatisfying: there's an ending section but then it just sort of stops. That's my only criticism, though. This thing is aces. YES

I didn't timestamp this, but considering its length, it doesn't surprise me that it falls short. Even without that, because of the way it ends kind of abruptly just after the 2 minute mark, it doesn't feel like a complete remix, more like a proof of concept. The performance, composition, and production all sound great. I love the guitar over a cinematic soundscape; it's a rich and unique sound. If there was another minute of VGM added in at the end, going into a complete ending, this would be a shoe-in. As it is, I have to agree with Larry's NO

Yeah, unfortunately, while this would be perfectly servicable as, say, a sound upgrade to 6th-gen console quality, the humanization is lacking, and balance levels are erratic. There's an overall drop in volume at 1:19, and the strings have a wide range in overall loudness that's definitely digital volume control and not velocity. As Larry said, the arrangement is just fine, this just needs work on the articulations to sound less mechanical, and then some minor loudness tweaks to finish it off. NO

Nice mellow noodling around with the Athletic theme. Lots of changes in lead, style, and accompaniment to keep things interesting, and the Underground break is well-placed. Normally ping-pong stereo bothers me a lot, but in this case it mostly works. Pretty much everything about this is a textbook synth remix: nothing revolutionary, but no missteps either. Ultimately a fun little jaunt. YES

Pretty eclectic mix, combining distorted and clean electric guitar, synth, and orchestral elements. Despite being a bit fakey, it's all pretty well done, except for the percussion, which is both primitive and relentless. There are precious few change-ups in the percussion all the way through 0:46-2:08 and 2:29-3:52: 165 seconds out of a 254 second mix, or 65%. That's a lot, and it definitly wore on me well before the end. Speaking of that end, fade-out, ugh. Especially when it's not a bookend or otherwise have anything to give it a sense of closure. It just feels lazy. That said, the arrangement is fun enough, and there's clever part writing all over the place. Neither the drums nor the fade-out are dealbreakers in my book, though they do bug me. Overall an enjoyable mix. YES

I follow CarlSagan42's SMM videos religiously, so I know the context here. Less wacky than what I was expecting, but there's plenty of randomness in there still. It does stick to one palette pretty closely for a long time. The drums bother me more than the leads, since they're on autopilot from 0:10 to 2:22 — basically the whole thing except intro and outtro. More importantly, there's a lengthy loop: 0:09-1:10 is repeated in 1:20-2:21. There are additions to the second loop: mostly SFX, but 1:51-2:21 does have some extra instrumentation. For me, the repetition is too much. Yes, only 31 seconds is strictly copy-pasta'ed (with SFX added), but another 30 seconds hews really closely to the first loop as well. It's over a third of the entire arrangement, and the non-intro/outtro is entirely two loops of the same thing at heart. I think we need to ask for some more variety and development than what we're seeing here. NO

The drums are a little dull, but I feel like they're overfiltered if anything. I don't think they're too loud by any stretch. As for the orchestral mixing, when you have an orchestra and rock instruments and synths and a choir (even a vocoded choir), something's gotta give. I don't think this could have been mixed much better. It's not perfect, but I can hear everything I think I'm supposed to be able to hear. And the sections take turns being more or less audible. Where I do think this lacks is depth. There's no trebel and no bass. The kick, bass guitar, brass, and cello sections have no oomph to them, and the cymbals and violins have no high end to them. Letting them expand more into those high and low frequencies will give them more space to breathe, and give you more freedom to EQ other parts around them, and add clarity to the whole thing. That said, is it a dealbreaker? Not for me. And not just because we're trying to get this into a mixflood, either. I'd love to see it improved upon but I'm satisfied enough. YES

Thanks, I hate it. YES In all seriousness, there's really no problem with this sort of thing. We really do embrace all genres for the site, regardless of our personal preferences — and some of us genuinely like this sort of thing. The mixdown is a little grungy, but I expect that for this genre. There's a little bit of clipping during the big hits, but again the genre excuses it (though it still should ideally peak below 0dB). I can't see a compelling reason to say no.

Well, this is... definitely not the sort of music I normally listen to. Takes a bit of work to wrap my head around. There's actually not much repetition. There is one notable loop: 0:14-0:54 is repeated at 1:46-2:26. Also 1:06-1:19 and 2:37-2:52 are nearly copypasta. A total of 53 seconds out of 3:41, 24% of the arrangement. Other sections are similar but not identical. My own rule of thumb is 25%, so this is close, but also a certain amount of repetitiveness is typical for the genre. Otherwise, everything seems to be on point. It's remarkably well-produced for club music, though it is quite loud. The Lavender Town theme is used thoroughly and appropriately; though I honestly don't understand why people love it so much, this is a great use of it. I can't see any reason to hold this back. YES

Its volume was certainly the first thing I noticed; I had to turn my volume down quite a bit. But then we get a fun groove driven by that buzzy bass, and some run riffing on the theme. A bit conservative structurally, but there are more than enough twists on the theme to stay different and interesting. 100% agree with proph on the bass being problematic: it's too loud and it almost never lets up. It's quite fatiguing. It really would have been nice to have a different bass from time to time. That said, the bass being too loud is really the only production issue. The percussion is great and the other layers work just fine. Arrangement-wise, even though there isn't any original writing, the pieces of the source material are rearranged into something sufficiently novel. An ending would have been nice to have, but that isn't a dealbreaker either. Lots of room for improvement here, but also much stronger work than many of your submissions. I'm happy to give it a YES

Starts off sounding like a sound upgrade, but 10 seconds in diverges into original writing, where it stays until 0:52. There are hints of Brinstar's chord progression in the bass here, but that wasn't cited as a source. Fortunately, that and 1:11-1:33, and then 3:27-3:45 are the only sections that aren't clearly from the source, so, at 69% source usage, it's technically within our standards. It's just really weird for a remix to have so much original writing up front. The lead horns sound terribly fake. Sometimes you can get away with fake instruments in an otherwise all-synth mix, but this is not one of those times. It's just unpleasant, exposed, and in your face. At 2:40, there's an interesting call-and-return section with a new synth, but the "return" part is so quiet it's almost inaudible. 2:49 brings us back to the Item Room theme, overlaid on a loop of the Norfair theme. I don't think it works; there's no harmony, the timing is different; they just don't go together. At 3:05 there's some transformation that brings it back together, but it only lasts for 10 seconds. 3:25 has the Norfair theme weirdly start a loop and then immediately fade out, to be replaced by a return to the original writing, which is a loop of 0:32-1:11, then abruptly cuts back to Item Room as a bookend. There isn't any one thing here that's a dealbreaker to me, but between the sound design and the disjointed layering and transitions, I have too many concerns. NO

For other judges: here's a timestamped link to the track without the voiceover: I'm stlll researching whether the track actually appears in the game.

Very conservative arrangement here. The sound palette is very similar overall, with similar industrial backing instruments and a similar theremin lead. The remix does condense the theme to focus more on the melodic elements and less on the interstitial ones, but overall the sound and feel hew closely to the original. The fade-in intro and fade-out ending add to the feeling of being ripped directly from a game. Overall this comes across as more of a remake than a remix. It's an enjoyable listen, and the production quality is top-notch, but all in all I think this falls short on interpretation for us. NO

Wow, 8 minutes of solo organ. That's a hard sell to retain interest. Even without direct repetition — which would be impossible in an improv piece — I frequently found myself wondering when it was going to be over. The sustained drones add to the feeling of monotony. That said, there's a bit of genre bias here on my part. I'd have a hard time remaining engaged with any 8-minute long organ solo, and I can't deny that it's a valid style of composition. It's just not for me. The length is pretty much necessary to convey our required amount of interpretation (I checked out more of Woody's discography, and there are plenty of shorter arrangements that wouldn't meet our threshold.) And given that this arrangement is literally irreproducible, and can't be resubmitted (except for production tweaks, which I see no need for here), and can only be a YES or NO, I see no reason not to give it a YES

I don't agree with Emu at all: this does feel like a pasted-together medley. The transitions are abrupt and even change keys sometimes. There's not a lot of transformation, either; the sources are more or less transcribed verbatim. And of course the ending just fades prematurely, not even on a loop. In addition to the textures never changing, they aren't great to begin with; this buzzy, bland lead wouldn't be a good choice even if it were used only briefly. And the kick is extremely loud and boomy. I encourage you to hit up our workshop forums for advice going forward. It doesn't do you or us a lot of good to submit a bunch of remixes to us that all have the same issues. On our forums, you can get tailored feedback faster and iterate more, rather than waiting months to get a full panel vote. NO