MindWanderer

Well, this was not what I was expecting from these two sources! Grungy, lo-fi synths with some almost industrial percussion. The "fake guitar" sounds more like a fake erhu during the glides. I don't know what to call this. I was in that compo, too. It sounds good, though! Despite the grunge, everything sounds clear, for the most part. The percussion is on the loud side, but it's not a dealbreaker. The two sources are cleverly interwoven, and it wasn't hard to track what was taken from the source material. It's weird and I don't know that everyone will love it, but it hits all the guidelines for sure. YES

I'm not going to come down quite as hard on this as my colleagues. I love the sound design. I didn't have any trouble picking out the lead, though I agree it could be a bit punchier. Percussion wasn't great, but I felt like it was servicable for the genre (though barely). But I do feel like this is not enough ideas spread over too much time. The 1:07 intro more than wears out its welcome. Then 1:07-2:15 is nearly duplicated by 2:15-3:23. There's a solo after that, but it uses the same tones as the main verse from before and nearly identical percussion. It's also far, far too quiet. I had to jack up my volume to about 95% to hear it clearly. You have over 7dB of headroom on this, and there's just no excuse for that. I'd love to hear an improved version of this, as I did really like the sound of it, for the most part. NO (resubmit)

I like it. It's mellow with a nice tone to it. I'd say that the reverb is a little over the top, and some of the synths occasionally sound like they're trying and failing to be real instruments---the shrill saw at 2:06 in particular doesn't fit well---but otherwise production is fine. The arrangement is a little long and rambling, but there's hardly any copypasta, and it forms a sort of extended bookend. I don't have any substantial objections. It's a fine remix. YES

i came out of this feeling exactly the same way. There's a good hook here, but that's really it. By 2:35 you've heard everything this has to offer. In fact, I could make a case that by 1:50, you know what this is all about, and actually listening through it doesn't come with anything unexpected. There's also something about the mode that strikes me as off. It feels like it's not quite settling into one. Maybe one of our judges with a better background in music theory can put a name to it, if they hear what I hear. I think the foundation is fine, and I don't hear any egregious production issues, for what it is. It just needs more ideas. NO

Interesting. The Chinese instrumentation is odd because it's clearly not a Chinese arrangement, but it works. It's unique and has a great sound to it. There are a couple of moments of minor dissonance, and I do think the middle section drags a little---1:18-3:10 is nearly two minutes that go at a near-constant tone and energy level. There's no copypasta, though. No major complaints. It'll do nicely as part of the album mixflood. YES

Nice and simple approach. Great solo bridge, that's some fantastic lead writing there. I enjoyed this a lot. However, the writing in other aspects left something to be desired. The percussion in particular is a real weak point: the samples are really low-quality, and they're on autopilot for the entire arrangement. They wear out their welcome very quickly, well before the short arrangement is over. The instrumentation never changes throughout: it's always the same lead (until the change to piano at the end), the same pads, the same sweeps. Also the pad is occasionally off-key. Structurally, there's a lot of copypasta going on. There are some mild changes in pads and sweeps between the various loops of the main Gemini Man theme, but you have to be listening closely for them. Mostly it sounds like a brief, lo-fi intro, two loops of the same thing, the bridge, another loop of the same thing, and finally another loop played by piano that's otherwise identical. This is a great start, and you clearly know how to write melody. Now you just need to work on varying things up to keep them fresh across repetitions. NO (resubmit)

Cool premise. As someone who's been forced into Minecraft Pigstep dance parties with my kid, I approve. It's a great arrangement that really captures the style of the DOOM Eternal soundtrack. The bass chugs are iconic and instantly identifiable. You know exactly what this mix is going to be in the one second from 0:22 to 0:23. And it delivers. Production is another story. The soundscape is pretty muddy, very heavy in the mids. The bass has little bass, the cymbals have very little trebel. It lacks inpact as a result. I did A/B comparisons to DOOM to make sure it wasn't an intentional homage, because it is a very unique approach, but no. Here's a particularly good comparison track, where you can really feel the low end of the bass and hear the sizzle of the cymbals. That's lacking in this remix. I love the arrangement to pieces, and the performance is great. It just needs some more EQ work to really shine. NO (please resubmit)

Hm... the first minute or so is really similar to the original, just with extra synth-bongos and a saw replacing the guitar. Then another loop with some more layered drums and pads. Then some subtractive breakdowns, and finally a climax with everything thrown together. Considering the changes to genre, instrumentation, and energy, the whole package comes across as strangely conservative. I think this is mostly because the melodic structure is essentially unchanged, even though the treatment of it is. This is mastered far too quietly. There's plenty of headroom and no compression. The soundscape is also a little mushy, with lots of layers in the lows but a dropoff in frequencies above 400 Hz. In the mids to highs there's just the lead and a bit of the bongos and cymbals. The cut-off ending isn't doing this any favors. Other than it being too quiet (a fairly simple fix), I don't think there's any single thing that sinks this, but as a package it's underwhelming. A richer soundscape and a more transformative interpretation would do this a world of good. It's a cool and obscure source, though, so I do hope to see this remix evolved a bit more. NO (resubmit)

First of all, let me clarify our policy: We don't generally review works in progress. That's what the Post Your Game ReMixes forum is for. We have workshop moderators there who can review works prior to their being submitted to us for final consideration. And make no mistake, this is definitely a work in progress. It fades out just after the 2 minute mark without really reaching any type of conclusion. More importantly, this is a cover. It's an epic cinematic reinstrumentation of the original source material, which is already done in as close to that style as the SNES could achieve. It's arranged quite well, for what it is, but this isn't what we look for. A ReMix for our site has to be transformative in some respect, not just a sound upgrade or modernization. Production-wise, this is pretty good. The instruments are reasonably well-realized. However, the drums are overpowering: they're very loud and dominate the soundscape every time they hit. They also cause audible clipping, with both distortion and pumping. I strongly recommend taking this over to the WIP forums if you choose to pursue this further, or to take your next arrangement. They'll be able to give you more personalized, and more importantly, more timely feedback. NO

This might have just as well been kept in the same submission thread as the other track. It's the same approach to a similar source with the exact same production. See my vote there. NO (resubmit)

Interesting approach. The source material is simple, short, and repetitive, so this remix basically just uses it as a bassline and builds a wholly original arrangement on top of it. And it largely works. It's clearly novel yet never drops the source. However, when I say "never," I mean never. The simple 12-note bassline never lets up for a second over the entire 2 1/2 minutes. Mercifully, it's a short arrangement. And it does a lot with that simple refrain, from black atmospheric to classic rock solos. Production isn't perfect. It's very quiet overall, especially so for the genre. I A/B'ed it with another remix that happened to be in my playlist, and it was notably quieter... than a Rebecca Tripp mix. So yeah, that's a problem. It's also mid-heavy; just a smidge light in the lows but palpably light in the highs. Overall I think this falls just short on production grounds. It would be a Conditional at best to throw a compressor on there, but I think it would really benefit from some more breadth of soundscape, and that's not a 5-minute fix. I do think it's a fairly simple fix, though, so I hope this gets resubmitted. NO (resubmit)

Production and theme are great. It's creative and transformative for sure. The integration of synth and ethnic sounds is tricky to pull off but always fun. This uses an elegantly crafted soundscape with rich atmosphere. However, it drags. The general tone and energy level are constant for its 4 1/2-minute length. Nothing gets repeated per se, but everything sounds the same. The vox are nearly always there and doing basically the same thing. Same for the bass, the pads, and the drums. I lost interest at about the 2 minute mark and nothing pulled me back. This would be great as part of a score for a movie or game, with great emotive ambience. But as a standalone track I can't get into it. NO

Yep, nothing groundbreaking, but pleasant for all that. The sound palette is vanilla but the spectrum is full. I didn't have any concerns about it being meandering or distorted. I'm happy with it. YES

Yep, it's fine. Does everything right that Rebecca always gets right, and the parts she could do better with are no worse than usual. YES

The surf rock/spaghetti western tone is basically the same as the original, so I needed to see a lot of creativity in the additional material to consider it sufficiently transformative. I was worried up until 1:11 when the original writing kicks in. At that point it definitely kicks things up a notch in the writing department, so good work there. Unfortunately, the sound quality is a problem for me. Was the intent to make this sound like a period-appropriate cassette recording? Because there's some heavy saturation which sounds like it may have been deliberate. Highs and lows alike are absent, with nearly all the sounds taking up the middle frequency bands. Everything is clear, but it sounds like mush. The violin in particular is so heavily treated that it doesn't sound like a live performance at all; it sounds like it was sampled from a deteriorating audio tape. The trumpet sounds better but still sounds like it was put through the same processing as everything else. Clean this up and give everything a crisper sound and I think this could be great. I can't vote for it in its current state, though. NO (resubmit)

Guillaume's performances never disappoint, and this is no exception. Beautifully expressive playing as usual. You'd never know this remix was based on two source tracks. It does get a little repetitive, especially by the final bookend, but there's more than enough transformation to keep it going. That's the closest thing I have to criticism here; otherwise this is great overall. YES

I hear the connections well enough to trust the breakdown and Brad's verification. Production sounds fine to me. Everything is clear, and while I recognize Brad's concerns about volume unevenness, I wouldn't even bring it up, it's so minor to me. There are about 3 seconds of silence at the beginning that could be pruned out, and frankly I don't see the need for a fade-in. While I dislike fade-out endings, this one was executed just fine, and while I wouldn't lop off a full 20 seconds of it, I would lop off 10 seconds. The arrangement and performance are top-notch, of course. It sounds weirdly like a medley at times, with some slightly abrupt transitions, but the whole is still plenty cohesive. YES

I'd like to take a step back and look at what the artist is trying to accomplish here. He mentioned being inspired by The Lonely Trumpet by Parov Stelar, which was certainly not a connection I would have made even if I'd been familiar with it! But listening to that, I can hear the connections: it's held together by a very simple repetitive synth beat which differs only by being present or not present. It does play with energy levels despite that, and the arrangement itself is quite different, but I recognize the intent. I do think that Trumpet works better than this because its boomy kick and sharp clap fill out the space better; in particular, this remix has nothing in the highs except the violin, with not even the hats having that necessary sizzle to fill out the soundscape. The good news is that the performances are top-notch, and I think the arrangement as a whole works. I think this can be improved without changing either of those things. Go back to Trumpet and listen to what Stelar does to keep things interesting and fill up the space. Play around with the percussion and make sure you're letting some highs get through. You can also use arps, swells, sweeps, and drops to add depth and texture and retain engagement. I definitely want to see this back again, so please do your artists' work justice! NO (resubmit)

Can't argue with any of that. It's a kickass cover, barring some fairly minor production concerns, but the fact that the track consists of two loops of the same thing, which is far too conservative. I enjoyed this, but it's not what we look for. NO

Yep, sounds great to me too. There's something vaguely uncanny about the production---the instruments aren't quite as crisp as they should be for being individually recorded and EQ'ed, but not as resonant as they would be as part of a full ensemble orchestra all performing in the same place at the same time. I'm nitpicking, though. Great arrangement. YES

What an interesting idea! I was initially concerned about the orchestral aspect of it, since that overlaps with the source instrumentation, but the liberal use of analog synths, not to mention the darkly gritty style, makes it a very different beast indeed. That's some killer sound design there, and the live euphonium and especially the cello work beautifully. It's not flawless, though. The high-end synths sound like they have too much of a low pass on them. Even for a dark tone, there should be something with a little brightness to it. I'm also not thrilled with some of the bassiest sections. 1:28-1:39 in particular is squashed and staticky. 1:59 and 2:41 don't sound great, either; I think there's a buzzy bass synth in 2:41-3:04 that's buried just enough so that only the buzz comes through and it sounds like bitcrushing, even though it isn't. While overall this sounds great, those super-gritty bass sections give me pause. It's one of those things that didn't bother me at first but grates after a few listens. I'll see what other judges say, and I wouldn't be sad if this got sent back to get those fixed. But the package is good enough that I think I can give it a YES

I personally never understood why people like the Lavender Town theme. I find it more grating than creepy. And then I hear this. Holy crap. I also haven't heard of "atmospheric black metal" as the name of a genre before either, but I sure recognize this. It's been in a lot of dark games I've played recently, like Oxenfree. And this source is an excellent use of the style. One of those "didn't know I wanted it until I heard it" moments. The leads being buried is fine by me; it increases the atmospheric presence and is typical of the genre. I agree that the mixing is slightly flat; it's hard to avoid in this genre, but the leads could be a bit brighter, and you've got some hard limiting going on for large chunks of the track that could use some breathing room. There's even some pumping in the loudest parts, most audibly 4:11-5:10 but also 2:28-3:55 and 6:08-7:07. Fadeouts are also almost always undesirable, but this one bothers me less than most. Atmospheric stuff can fade out, it's fine. Not great, but fine. Yeah, I'm good with this. YES

There's a lot I like about this. The general tone, with the Korg melody over the Behringer bass, sounds as good in practice as it does on paper. Beautifully chill. However, you absolutely lost me at 3:45 when the random drum solo pops in. You could make that work with more intentionality, but honestly I don't think it does with the rest of the piece at all. And it goes on forever. And then the section after it is is a loop back to 1:42, with what sounds like a wholesale copy-paste job. It would probably work if instead you transitioned to a climax here, e.g. a loop with some extra layering, such as an arp or counterpoint. I do have some production notes as well, although they're pretty minor. Your bass has good timbre, but it's too quiet and the frequency distribution needs tweaking. It caps out at -15dB (which should be -12dB; you have about 3 dB of headroom you could stand to get rid of), and is almost completely flat from 0-120 Hz. This particular genre needs bass with oomph. It should be louder in general, especially in the 50-100 Hz range. You can put a high pass at 20-40 Hz to give yourself more wiggle room in the audible frequencies. Pump up the volume, especially the bass, and come up with a different ending, and I'll be excited to put this on the front page. NO (resubmit)

Interesting dark synthwave take on a simple romantic source. Definitely not something I saw coming! There's some rich bass layering going on here. It sounds great on my setup, but I do wonder how it would sound on a setup with a strong bass response. It's pretty light in the highs, though clearly you were going for a darker tone here. Some of the choices are a little weird: some strange timing here, some weak leads there, a touch of dissonance. There's some structural repetition, but each loops makes at least some notable change, e.g. shifting the lead up an ocatave, or swapping or removing the bass synth. I will say that even though the one change is a big one, it's still just one change, and the loops could stand to differentiate themselves more. Also, there's no ending to speak of. There are a lot of little things that bug me about this, but none of it is substantial enough to merit a NO. Overall, it's creative and it has a great tone. There are tweaks I'd like to see happen, but I'm also okay giving this a YES Update 4/13: I just want to make it clear that I saw Larry's vote. I don't believe in counting fractions of a second, and rounding those off makes the count only 5 seconds short of 50%. And his count also skipped a 4-second break in the middle. Heck, there's even 3 seconds of silence at the end that could be trimmed out and doesn't need to count against it. Calling this not dominant source usage is nit-picking IMHO.

The sub doesn't come through on my budget headphones, but the production is certainly fine. It's not tremendously layered, but nothing's unclear. As for repetitiveness, sure. But it's trap. It's supposed to be. There are a lot of repeated ideas, and each loop goes on for quite some time, but the track as a whole is progressive. I have to think about it, but I don't think there's a problem on this front. The one thing that gives me pause is the energy level. That's extremely static. There's a brief breakdown, but no risers, only one mini drop, and minimal changes to the beat. I think that contributes to the feeling of repetition more than actual copying or looping. As a result, I'm borderline on this as well. It's certainly lackluster for a bLiNd remix, but if a new musician submitted it, I'd lean towards passing it. My main objections are more subjective than objective. I wouldn't be sad if this got sent back, but it earns my YES (borderline)