MindWanderer

I've been mulling this one over for a few months now. That generic e-piano makes a bad first impression, but the arrangement gets past it, for the most part. I think the electric guitar is fine, but the strings are pretty hard to listen to. I don't expect them to sound real, but they sound thin, like GM MIDI, and it's just not pleasant. Arrangement-wise, there are a lot of good ideas, although I did find it a little drawn out to fill almost 9 minutes. That compounds the voice sample issue, as they lie on top of the most bland segments of music. Right now that's as it should be--you don't want voiceovers on top of complex music--but it means that simply removing the samples will leave large stretches of empty filler. I think that if you took them out, the arrangement would drag even more than it already does, and fixing that is more than a Conditional. There's good stuff here, but between those couple of bland lead synths, the slow progression, and the voice samples, I have to give this a NO (resubmit)

There are definitely still some conflict issues, mostly caused by that thick bass. You can really hear all those layers running up against and beyond 0dB, which results in it sounding squashed, with some pumping and even some clipping. That said, I do think it's an improvement. You can hear all the parts, even though they're distorted. It seems less repetitive to me as well, although that wasn't one of my major crits the first time around. I wouldn't mind seeing another pass on the production here to let those synths breathe some more, but I'm not averse to seeing it posted as-is either. YES (borderline)

The Wolf Among Us was a comic book series that Telltale adapted. I agree that they were just doing too much. Why play Minecraft: Story Mode when you can play Minecraft? Who's associates Guardians of the Galaxy or Game of Thrones with a slow-paced interactive experience? Who wants yet another story in the Batman universe that doesn't clearly explain what it offers on top of the series' existing 70-year history? (I hear the Batman games, especially the second one, were actually quite good, but it takes some digging to find that out.) I enjoyed the Walking Dead season 1, but I was getting bored with it by the end of Season 2. Kind of hard to care about the continuation of a story when all the characters die.

Yes, you would almost certainly get in trouble as soon as Square Enix got wind of it. You can't have any money involved for anything that makes use of their copyrights, and that includes their IP's.

I dunno, I got a chance to play Ninja Baseball Batman at MagWest, it was pretty dope.

I'm amazed no one titled their mix "Crash and Burn." SEGA MAN: I'm not personally a fan of Sonic music, but I love the conceit here. It kind of lost focus halfway through, though. Drunk Man: There are so many clever ideas here, it's actually kind of disappointing that the arrangement rushes through them all without letting any of them shine. I'd kill for vocals. The performance and production have the usual Eightman polish, I just wish the arrangement was a little more cohesive. Crashed a House Party on Fire: Also a very clever arrangement, but the soundscape isn't as tight. It's pretty thin, and that sidechain is overkill. It does sound much more carefully planned out, though, and the two sources are played well off each other. It's an unpolished piece, but I think it hits the compo brief well.

Ah, so many newer games in here. Give me 8-bit Mega Man any day. Groove Bomb: Groove indeed! I'm tapping my feet to this one. It is a little static, though, with not many changes in energy or sound palette. Still, it's a lot of fun, and you integrated the two sources cleverly and smoothly. Ending is a bit abrupt. Grenade Powered Locomotive: There seem to be some off harmonies here. The changes between the two sources are frequently abrupt, and the Charge Man sections don't seem to fit as well. Nice soundscape, though. Glassy Haze: The timing on the strings in the opening is slow. It takes over a minute to get into the meat of the arrangement at all, and even then the energy levels seem subdued throughout--the whole thing sounds like one long intro. Overall it seems thin and incomplete. Planet Killer 2019: 2019? More like 1989! The highs are a little subdued, but otherwise I'm loving this epic 80's soundscape. The arrangement is a lot of fun, although the usage of Top Man is pretty subtle. A few notes seem off, though. The lead is frequently buried, partially due to conflicting frequencies, and partially due to synths with similar timbre stealing each others' thunder. Could do with some more dynamism in energy level. But I'm hoping to see a polished version of this on the panel. Unbalanced: This is mixed awfully quietly. The two sources weren't really integrated at all. I did like the key transformations and the performance, though. Frozen Sky: I can tell you struggled with integrating the two sources, but you put forth a valiant effort. The arrangement is quite static, though, with unchanging energy levels, a drumline that switches drums but not patterns, and not much variation in instrumentation.

There's one thing about this that immediately leaps out, belying the idea that this is a real orchestra: it's super dry. A space big enough to hold all these performers would have way more reverb. That's my only real concern, though. The arrangement is a lot of fun, and both your performers and your libraries are really strutting their stuff. I kind of hope this does get sent back, because I'd love to hear this again with just that one tweak, because it really does make a difference. But I'm not going to reject it just for that. YES

I can't disagree with anything Larry said, though I'd weight my concerns differently. The brass feels slow and the overdriven bass guitar feels fast. I did feel like it was overly repetitive; at 1:41 I thought there was going to be a creative solo, but I had to wait until 1:59, and it was super short. And the ending is certainly a letdown. I also felt like the drums were too loud, especially compared to the basses. It's a good foundation, but more than anything else, those teases of more creative content should be taken to their natural conclusions. The drum writing is great, and there are some nice riffs that just peter out too quickly. Have fun with it, tweak the balance and timing a little, and I think you should be gold. NO (resubmit)

I have mixed feelings about some of the sounds as well--the strings that start at 2:42, with their strange, mechanical swell and decay, are especially grating. But they're good enough to serve their purpose, as is the arrangement--it's repetitive, but each loop has different instrumentation and some different twists. I'd prefer a more transformative arrangement, but I think this is above our bar. YES

In this case, bass. There's just not a whole lot of bass going on here. There is a bass synth, but it's used for sparse punctuation, and it's pretty quiet. Generally you want some bass that's more sustained somehow, either with reverb, delay, or just notes held longer. You can also add a pad that covers the mid-lows.

Razor Wind: You know a remix nailed it when you listen to the completely original opening chord progression and know what Mega Man theme it's going to be without looking. And what would a Mega Man compo be without heavy use of 8-bit Mega Man SFX? I do have a beef with some clashing notes here and there, and I agree with Gario about that last chord, but otherwise this is pretty darn good. I hope to see a tweaked version of this in the judges' inbox at some point. Digital Redemption: Gario's better at picking out subtle source usage than I am. I barely hear Metal Man hinted at here, not enough that I'd notice if I didn't know it was supposed to be there ahead of time. Same with Air Man--it's more a suggestion than an actual appearance. The arrangement was also really repetitive, quiet, and static. Dopamine: Classic Mak here. There are a few clashing notes, and the shift to minor key was a bit surprising. A smidge more repetitive than it really needed to be, and the ending was a little lackluster, but overall a quality remix. Fire Truck: Yeah, the thin, static soundscape really brings this down. That last phrase of the main refrain doesn't sound quite right. And yeah, it sounds like a one-source remix, and a conservative one at that. Thunder-Crash Tornado Fusion: Strange opening, it's like walking into the middle of a session. When Tornado Man is in the lead, there's some solid interlacing of the two themes. That's what I come to these compos for! On the other hand, the sections with Crash Man in the lead sometimes seem a little out of place. Excellent instrumentation and production. Crash of the Tornado: I'm amused that both of these remixes are jazzy, and the same length down to the second. Soundscape seems just a little flat--the lows could stand to be a bit beefier. This is an excellent arrangement, but bearing the voting brief in mind ("the most important thing to consider when voting is how well the remix incorporates and arranges both themes"), I can only vote one way. Empty Desires: It's actually a solid start. I wish you'd had time to get around that block. Funny thing is, I can totally imagine Ground Man's theme, slowed down, used as harmony to what you've already built out here. Drill Bits: I agree with Gario: cool ideas to integrate the two sources, but there are some harmonic fumbles along the way. Could have been pretty awesome if you'd managed to finish and give those clashing notes another pass.

Vanilla synths and a thin soundscape are my main concerns here. The arrangement is fair, but every single one of these synths is a tough sell--they're very simple and lacking in timbre. The only bass are a couple of simple hums. The leads more than wear out their welcome. I feel like this was probably meant to be AdLib-era chiptunes, and as an OST from that period of PC games, I think this might be OK. I'm going to hold off on voting for now, because in principle, that should be a valid approach, but I'm having a very hard time appreciating it. I'll see what others have to say. Update 10/3: Validation is validating. NO

I'm sorry, I can't really get behind this. It starts off quite minimalist and repetitive, and stays that way for a long time. It slowly adds in a few other textures, which very gradually get more complex, but those notes are harsh, exposed, clashing, lo-fi, and generally unpleasant. Then, when it gets loud, it's seriously, ear-splittingly loud, and muddy besides. There are a lot of interesting ideas, and I respect the artsy, avant-garde approach. But between the production issues and the harsh arrangement decisions, I don't think the result is enjoyable. NO Edit 9/7: To reply to Larry's comments: At no point is it too loud in an absolute sense, but up through 3:17 it's extremely quiet. I could barely hear it at my normal listening volume, so yeah, I did have my volume turned up (and had to very quickly turn it down to avoid ear damage). And loud or not, I think 3:43-5:40 and 7:21-end are too muddy. Structurally, I agree, it's fine. Perhaps I came down too hard on those exposed, dissonant chords, though I'm not convinced this is purely a subjective issue. But the low-fi sounds, muddiness, and volume extremity keep this solidly a NO in my book.

And if you're concerned about bias, you can always have someone else shuffle the brackets and do the selection run-offs. Fortunately this format doesn't have any other surprises. I'll volunteer for that if you like.

Yeah, sorry, but I'm going to come down on the other side of this. There are some subtle twists on the original, mostly in the second half of the arrangement, which I might let slide if it weren't for the fact that the second half is a minor variation on the first half. Melodically and structurally, it's 2 1/3 loops of the same thing. Add the fact that both versions consist of three sections which, internally, consist of several loops each, and the overall effect is extremely repetitive. It's nice to see Lolo get some love (I remember this theme fondly), and the upright "player piano" sound of it works nicely, but I don't think the arrangement is interpretive or expansive enough for the site. NO

Can't argue with much of that. I didn't mind the full-track flange; it was just for a second, so the effect was similar to, for instance, the explosion at 5:01. I did think the panning was a bit severe in places (e.g. 3:07-3:17), making me wonder if my left headphone was working correctly. But those sections were brief. Definitely a top-notch performance and arrangement. YES

An extremely conservative take on this source. It's mostly just a minor re-instrumentation (with a ping-pong organ, one of my pet peeves). The leads of the original (piano and cello) are retained, and the percussion is only slightly tweaked. It also consists of two loops of what sounds like exactly the same thing to me. There are some interesting ideas here, but I don't think it's anywhere near what we look for in terms of interpretation. NO

This certainly is an obscure game, at least I've never heard of it. This is quite a conservative arrangement. It's reinstrumented and has entirely new drum and bass parts, so it's not too conservative, but the melody and pacing sound, to me, largely unchanged. What makes it hard to tell is how static the arrangement is. The drum and bass in particular are basically the same throughout most of the mix. 2:25-3:10 breaks things up a little, but the pacing is unchanged, the drums are still basically the same, and much of the accompaniment carries over as well. And then it fades out, without even an ending for punctuation. As a reinterpretation of the source, or otherwise as a part of a game's score, I think this is serviceable. But as a standalone piece of music, it drags. There need to be more changes to hold the listener's attention, and more deviations from the source would be highly welcome. NO

Ugh, I can't argue with that crit. The bass, pads, and some of the percussion are stepping all over the lead, as well as each other, throughout most of the main section. I really like the arrangement, and I personally thought the reversed instruments were cool right from the beginning, but Gario's dead-on about the balance issue. Please clean it up and send it back! NO (resubmit) Update 9/7: I'm sticking to my original impression here. The drums, crash cymbals, and overdriven bass guitar are far too loud, sometimes even louder than the leads, and the pads aren't doing it any favors. It's not just a few places, either, it's pretty much the whole thing. Maybe we want to formally change our standards--and I wouldn't necessarily object to that--but we've rejected mixes for mixing that were mixed better than this.

This one isn't so hard for me. I'll ditto all of Gario's positive comments, but I don't feel like the concerns he had impacted the mix all that much. I thought the hard panning worked well (and I'm normally a harsh critical of hard panning): it was reserved for brief call-and-return effects, and applied them tastefully and effectively, for the most part. The swing beat was certainly nontraditional and takes a bit to wrap one's brain around, but it didn't come across as a mistake to me, and I didn't find it unpleasant. I'm not a fan of fade-out endings, but this is executed better than most, and I can live with it. I'm happy to give this a comfortable YES

The quality is way up there, I don't have any complaints on technical merits. Production is good, performance is good, arrangement is enjoyable, source usage in the first half is easily dominant with just a short entirely original section... but let's talk about the second half. In the original, only the first minute or so is what most people would consider "music." The next four minutes (about 80%) have a few isolated notes but are mostly sound effects and other ambiance. In this arrangement, the ambient section is from 2:00 to 4:20, just over half the length of the piece. There aren't any notes or rhythm in it at all. So my question is, can you "remix" a source that isn't really music by supplying and arranging your own sounds that also aren't music? It's debatable at best, and I'd argue against it. The remix is even less music-like than the source, although this is the case for only just over half the arrangement. I'm leaning towards passing this--the first almost-half of it (46%) is great, and the second over-half of it is clearly evocative of and in the same style as the source. It stretches the definition of some of our standards, but I think it's consistent with their spirit. I'll definitely read others' comments and could change my mind, but I'll go with a YES

I agree. Complaints that this wasn't "substantive" enough of an arrangement were just off the mark. The emotive playing, the transformation to 3/4, the subtle twists--more than enough to both hold the listener's interest and make this stand out as a ReMix. It also certainly isn't lacking in dynamics; changes in loudness and pace are used to good effect to control the emotional state of the piece. It might be "quiet" from a waveform perspective, but it isn't hard to hear at normal headphone volume. And it's over 2 minutes, with no filler--short but by no means too short. As a sad, evocative piano solo, I feel like this hits all the marks. YES

I love these mixes that take the subtle motifs of a source and remix them into something much more melodic. Without stopwatching it, this definitely sounds like a "Kurast Docks" remix despite having a completely different feel. It's like the Docks were remade in the TRON universe. I don't have a problem with the kick, personally. It's hardly omnipresent--although it always does the same thing when it is there, it's often not there, sometimes with other drums taking its place. And kicks are usually repetitive. The crunchy, low-heavy palette certainly does sound intentional. There's enough in the highs that it doesn't sound thin to me. It's maybe a little overdone--some of the FM synths are pretty plain--but I think it's fine. The ending is underwhelming but it isn't a dealbreaker. Overall, the remix is clever and it does what it needs to do. YES

I feel like I say this a lot, but: Typical Tripp fare. A smidge quiet, instruments are a bit fakey, but otherwise production is more than acceptable. A conservative but expansive orchestration. The three repeated backing notes do get a little old, but it's not really noticeable until the outtro. Seems fine to me. YES