MindWanderer

Opening is really great. The tubular bells and Irish whistle create a great atmosphere with minimal layers. Some mechanical violins at 1:17, but their appearance is brief. Piano joins in to carry the melody; it's a little mechanical but not that noticeable. But then the strings come in full-force: The violins have a length section starting at 1:01, and bass at 1:13, and my immersion is cracked like an egg. By 1:39 the strings are so prevalent and so mechanical that I'm really struggling with it. Then the violins take the lead at 2:02, and man, it's just not working for me. Identical swells every time, no changes in attack or velocity at all. Everything else here sounds so good that it's a real shame, and I'm really surprised that only one vote above even mentions it, and that one brushes it off. There were several moments with notes that sounded clashing, like 2:23, but they don't leap out at me most of the time, I'm honestly pretty close to the fence on this one just because of how egregious that lead violin is. We've rejected remixes in the past for realism that was better than this. I'm voting in favor, because the strengths of literally every other part of this are so strong, but I'm honestly shocked at how many remixers and judges signed off on those strings. YES

It's not often we hear a demake from orchestral to electronica! Started off with some surprisingly retro sounds, but I quickly got into it. There's definitely a "rusty but getting back into it" vibe here: a classic toolkit but used expertly and to modern standards. Sounds great, no complaints. YES

What a gorgeous interpretation. It's very difficult to make a remix using the same instrument and pacing of the original and have it come out so differently, so great job there. Lovely performance. I never would have heard that static on my own, and I can barely hear it even when I'm listening for it. I would vote against messing with it. Fantastic work. YES

Much better mixing this time around. Leads are in the front, bass is in the back. The trombone is still a weird choice, but it's mixed in a way that fits in more smoothly than before. The fake-out ending at 2:39 is a bizarre choice—I don't know why you'd do a hard fade-out in the middle like that, and it just sounds like an error, somehow. Otherwise, I can't find any fault here. It's a very pretty arrangement that suits the source material well. Nice job. YES

I gave the first version of this a CONDITIONAL, so I'm optimistic about this one. It's still not perfect. The bass tuning sounds better, I think, but it suffers from thin and vanilla sound design; it sounds like an ancient FM MIDI among all these ethereal instruments. The piano in 1:06-1:49 is both too quiet and has too much of its timbre flattened out because that section is mid-heavy, and it's a shame because the writing there is great but not sitting in the foreground like it should be. The music box sounds in the end are super, absurdly quiet for some reason; they're not really necessary, but it's weird that they be there at all when they're nearly inaudble. Like a lot of VQ's stuff, there's some really creative, intricate, enjoyable writing that's let down by weaker production and sound design. But while there's stuff that could definitely stand to be improved, I don't think any of it is dealbreaking. YES

I love DarkeSword's competitions because of mixes exactly like this. Compression of Time? A meh track on a stellar OST, never gave it any thought. Using it in a supporting role for a Red Wings remix? Works perfectly. Fantastic job here of mixing the two sources together. I could pick some nits. Nearly every "lead" instrument is muted or flattened and lacks the oomph expected of that role. There isn't a real meaty lead except for a few moments, like the opening violin and 2:23's trumpet. As a result, the track doesn't seem to have any "hooks" or have anything catchy about it. Even the vocals have a soft quality to them, and don't sing a melody, despite occupying the space normally filled by a lead. This isn't objectively wrong, but it does make this hard for me to really sink my teeth into. But as I said, that's more a matter of personal preference, and it's the only criticism I can come up with. For what this tries to do, it's a triumph. YES

I have to say, I'm struggling with this one. The main hook is clearly those 2 measures from Shinobi, which repeat over and over: 8 times from 0:14-0:58, another 8 from 1:10-1:54, 4 more from 2:06-2:28 (which are finally varied up a bit), and finally 4 more with a key change at 3:25-3:48. 24 times altogether, and I'd had enough by the end of the first set of 8. Basslines can afford to be this repetitive; main melodic hooks cannot. Speaking of bass, there isn't really any here. There's a sporadic kick, and that's about it until 0:59. The highs have very little as well: There's a really quiet flute, which only occasionally gets loud and high enough to fill that role. It's not until 2:11 that we get a synth that emphatically sits in that space. It's a very thin soundscape all around, with usually only about 3 instruments + drums playing at any given time, and the simplicity of most of the synths makes it feel even thinner. There are plenty of lengthy subtractive sections that have even less. 2:50-3:01 has some crackling sounds that sound like artifacts. And I agree with proph about 3:26+ having way too much fuzz tied to the "bass" synth (which is awfully high-pitched for a bass, but it's trying), which not only sounds like cluttering white noise, but sounds off-key. 3:48+ all sounds very off-key. Even though there are a lot of interesting, fun riffs that dance around the core themes, I personally found the overall effect to be repetitive, sparse, and unpolished. I hate to be discouraging, because there are a lot of cool ideas here, but I think the execution falls short. NO

Real classic FM bass to start off with. Still very basic FM midi stuff, surprisingly so, until the guitar kicks in over a minute in. Even though there's generally something in low-mid-high unless it's a subtractive section, the soundscape feels a little light to me. The arrangement is certainly fun, though I find some of the transitions a little abrupt, especially 2:36. It kind of comes out of nowhere, plus it's a little weird to have this elaborate solo on synthesizer when you have a guitarist. The ending is a little abrupt, too. The sound design doesn't wow me, but I'm not seeing anything here that's a dealbreaker. It's fun and does the job. YES

While breakdowns are always nice to have, I don't think I needed it. The source is distilled to mostly the melody, but that melody is prevalent in the remix. It's a very cool and original take, and I think the arrangement portion works well. I do see where Chimpazilla is coming from, though. The snares and hats are clear to me, but the kicks are a little quiet. I don't think the leads (either the guitar or the sax) are too loud at all; the guitar is muffling the flutes a bit (to the point where it's a bit hard to tell what they are, but not what notes they're playing), but otherwise everything is coming through clearly. If anything, I think the bass is the light end of the soundscape, but not so much that I think it's a problem. If this were to get sent back, the only thing I'd ask for is some separation between the guitar and flute, but even just stereo separation might be enough. Strong work. Creative, catchy, and makes something great out of very little. Let's get this posted. YES

I see exactly how you were inspired to make this. I could easily imagine the OoT theme interleaved within See You At the Top exactly the way you did it. I came to the same conclusion as proph within the first 30 seconds. The Short Hike saw is loud and thick and overpowers the entire soundscape, and the kick causes the whole thing to pump. As a secondary concern, this is quite short. Other than the obvious inspiration of interleaving the two sources together, it doesn't really do much. It feels more like a proof-of-concept than a full song. See You At the Top is a long, complex tune, and you only made use of the intro. That's not to say we have any rule against using only part of a source, but it's unusual to take a source that has this much to it and use it to make something simple and just over 2 minutes long. You have a lot more to draw on here to flesh your arrangement out, and I think you could make a more interesting, engaging remix if you did that. But the important factor is the lack of clarity and balance. Take a look at that first and foremost. NO

Very interesting. I was pretty worried when I saw the source, since these minimalist BotW/TotK tracks are really hard to do anything with, but I think you pulled it off. It might be hard for a casual listener to identify if they haven't played TotK recently, but the connecting material is all there, and it's not hard to put together. The arrangement itself is also pretty minimal, but it's filled with fun, energetic beats. Sounds great for what it is. There's still that feeling of emptiness, but with urgency. Nice work. YES

Really fun arrangement, and equally fun lyrics. I'm not into growls and can't understand them (is pronouncing short E like long I a thing? Never heard it before. Lots of weird vowels), but I like everything else about the composition. Production might have been one of the things DoD voters dinged you for, though. The instruments are inconsistently produced, with most of them sounding like they were recorded in pristine studio sound booths, but the drums sound more open-air. And of course the overdriven guitars being full-panned is a tell. EQ is light in the highs; the cymbals sound filtered, and there's not much else in that range. The female vocals seem quiet at 0:36 and 3:04 because they conflict with the saw synth there. Definitely room for improvements; most notably I'd prefer a mix that sounds a little less canned, a little more organic. But overall this does a lot more right than wrong. YES

Retro sound palette, but it fills the soundscape. I could have stood for a more sophisticated lead especially, but it does the job. Really fun approach to this strangely iconic track. Unfortunately, I think proph undersold the repetition problem. It's nearly wholesale copy-pasta from 2:15-3:25, 70 seconds of a 228 second mix, over 30%. I think I pick up on some tiny differences between the first and second loops—an extra harmonic layer in the last section, maybe?—but they're so small I'm not sure I'm not imagining it. And that's just too much. I'd love to hear this revisited with a more different second half. More modern sound design wouldn't go amiss either, but that's not the dealbreaking issue for me. NO (resubmit)

Love me some Lufia 2. One of the few OSTs out there where I'm legitimately happy to a remix of literally any track on there. And it's a huge OST. Really fun idea. I definitely grok that trauma of resetting the puzzle over and over again. Although not sure about the "pro gamer move" reference. This is a long track, but varied to an impressive extent; no danger of this wearing out its welcome. I agree with proph that both the individual synths and the track as a whole are missing some soundscape. Bass presence is ridiculously weak, like cheap audio cassette player quality. Those poor kicks are trying to hard to break through, when they're there at all, and there often isn't an instrument at all that I would label "bass." And the sound design is very late '90s/early-2000s; synths these days generally have more complex timbre. I'm extremely ambivalent about this. On one hand, the production is not at the level we normally look for. I can't remember the last time I've even considered YESing a track with this little low end. But the arrangement is so much fun and filled with so much obvious passion. I'm 100% with proph that in a perfect world, we'd get a version of this that was EQed properly and had more sophisticated sound design. Such a track would be one of my favorites on the whole site. But if it's a question of having this version on the site or not, I'm still going to lean on the side of YES (borderline)

Death on the Snowfield is a great comparison. Superficially similar to the original, but with changed pacing and instrumentation that alter the entire mood. Sometimes less is more. A lead, an arp, and some tasteful pads and sfx are plenty to convey a mood and transform a theme. It's a little short, but I don't know how you'd lengthen it without it wearing out its welcome. This absolutely does everything it needs to. YES

Well, here's another genre I had to research in order to evaluate a submission fairly. Although I learned that rāga is more of a framework than a genre, so there's a lot of wiggle room there. But I still tried to approach my listening from the perspective of Indian classical music, which is can be quite minimalist, even moreso than this. From that perspective, this does everything it needs to do, in spades. It's a clever and complete genre transformation, well-realized. (I'm not as surprised as Emu by the direction—I'm sure I've heard Koopa's Road on sitar before, but I can't place it.) Nice original writing that fits right in, and fun riffs on the theme that keep it fresh despite the repetitive structure. Great job. YES

Okay, I'm not going to listen to an entire hour-plus-long OST to review one track. This also opens with an 81-second rendition of the main TMNT theme song, which is originally from the cartoon. Our guidelines say the following: The music must have been composed specifically for the game or first published (or recognized) as the game's soundtrack. Movie themes such as Star Wars or licensed songs from games like Gran Turismo do not qualify. Any incorporation or arrangement of source material not from games (mainstream, classical, etc.) should be extremely limited. So that's immediately disqualifying right there. As for the production and arrangement, proph hit all the relevant notes. It's a thin, treble-heavy soundscape, and the arrangement is an overly-conservative medley with no connective tissue. proph gave plenty of good advice, so please take it to heart. NO

I know this source like the back of my hand, so the fact that I didn't pick up on the melody until 20 seconds in means that the mixing really could be improved. The bass, drums, and chugs just stomp all over it. I understand that the melody line is often not the loudest part in heavy metal, but it still shouldn't be quite this hard to pick out. The subtractive stuff really is quite neat. Too hard to hear, but it's riffing on the melody in a creative way that I don't hear often enough. It just skirts that line between "uses the source" and "is inspired by the source." It's tough to judge vis-a-vis our standards. Here are my timestamps: 0:03-0:32 (direct) 0:48-1:13 (subtractive) 1:42-2:03 (half direct, half subtractive) 2:03-2:08 (direct) 2:35-2:38 (direct) Total: 81/180 seconds = 45% Ugh. Even giving generous credit, I can't come up with 50%, and I think some of our stricter timestamper judges would come up with even less. It's a real shame, because other than the mixing, I like what I'm hearing a lot. I absolutely want to see some of those ideas on the panel again, whether it's a revision of this or something new, but this submission has to be a NO

Loud, loud, loud! I know it's the genre, but I still had to drop my volume to 2/3 thirds of my usual listening volume. And the opening (and ending) sound like 95% literally random notes; it sounds really similar to what happened in old programming languages when you overflowed the frequency range. Growling vocals are totally indecipherable, but that's understandable. The sung vocals are also 99% indecipherable, and that's less so. It's hard to make out the words even in the vocal solo. Oh, it's Brandon, that tracks. He's always had great pitch control but not so great enunciation, and this is no exception. I can barely hear the guitar melody either; it's all drum kit and overdriven guitar. And because the melody is so hard to hear, and that's where the Shovel Knight is, it loses a lot of that connection. I have no doubt it would pass 50% timestamping, going carefully and listening carefully, but it's a weaker link than it needs to be. While I personally think the mixing should be improved, I respect that most fans of death metal don't expect, need, or particularly appreciate clean mixing. (I actually really enjoy well-mixed death metal, but not most of it.) I'm not a fan of this, but I think it does what's intended. YES

Far too quiet, right off the bat. Even maxing out my player volume, about a 50% increase in my usual volume, it's too quiet to hear clearly. From what I can hear, there are quite a few issues, but proph covered them pretty well. The soundscape is minimal, the layers aren't in the same key, and the arrangement is underdeveloped. I hate to be harsh, but I think spending some time in our workshop areas would be helpful to you. NO

I'll be honest, I didn't really think getting improved performances was in the cards. But you managed to pull it off. It sounds really good now. No complaints. YES

I missed the first version, but I certainly don't hear anything problematic with this one. Sounds clean as anything to me, even the section proph pointed out. Really nice job filling out a soundscape with very few instruments. I wasn't expecting something so chill with a title like that, and because it's a little slow and ends inconclusively, it feels short and incomplete, but that's my only beef, and it's no big deal. YES

A surprisingly odd remix. It's quite quiet, even though there's hardly any headroom and it's clearly been through a leveling process. Part of the reason it feels so quiet is that the synth leads are pretty quiet, especially the saw, which is having to fight for space. The arps, kicks, snares, and hats are stomping all over the leads. But it's also quiet in an absolute sense, and I had to turn my volume up nearly to maximum to make it all out clearly. Fake ending at 2:11, with a complete restart and swap to the other source; though it takes only another 25 seconds to tie Within the Giant back in, it does so with a mostly different sound palette. Some really weird harmonies in there, too; if proph hadn't weighed in first, I would have tagged him to explain what was going on here, but it sounds unpleasant nevertheless. Very loud SFX in this section. 2:58 on is really busy, and it's hard to make out anything but the lead guitar. That fades out to another almost fake ending, and we tie back into the first part with the vocoded flight attendant. That's only about 30 seconds, and then yet another fake ending and non-transition, this time oddly to a section that's not all that different from what came before. It begins to fade out yet again before abruptly pumping the volume back up, to its loudest yet, at 4:40, with so much going on that even the electric guitar is slightly smothered. And finally, it just ends, with no resolution. I'm afraid I have reservations about both the production and the arrangement here. There are so many awkward transitions, most of which are completely unnecessary, given how similar the sections before and after are. The changes in volume seem capricious, and combine with the mixing issues to make it hard to make out. The section with The Chase just doesn't work for me, because it sounds like Within the Giant is just playing on top of it without consideration to harmony. There are a ton of good ideas and some fun sections. The guitar work is good, and the guitar solo especially is a highlight (although, again, it's brought down by production issues, the clashing bass line, and the fade-out mid-ending). I'd love to hear a version of this that's cleaned up and tightened. NO (resubmit)

Yeah, the garage-y tone is definitely a turn-off, notably because the synth is so quiet you can barely hear it, even on headphones. I think it's actually playing nearly the entire time, but is frequently inaudible. Otherwise it's a nice fun arrangement. I agree with Larry: ask Mauricio if he can clean it up a little, just so we can appreciate everything he put into it, but if not, it's still a YES

I'm afraid I have to agree. The drums vary in intensity but never in pattern, and the second half is pretty similar in structure to the first, so it feels longer and more repetitive than it really is. I don't think the production is all that muddy, but it is loud, and the brass slips into the uncanny valley at times. Also the female vocals sound really strained on the high notes (0:26 and 0:47, for instance). I'm not totally on board with the moog-like synth used, either; it's really out of place in an otherwise quasi-medieval orchestral piece. Lots of great ideas and a good foundation here, just needs some tweaks to get it over the finish line. NO