MindWanderer

That bell LT mentioned does sound off-key, but it's not the only thing to me. There's a synth that first plays at 0:30 that sounds detuned to me, and the instrument that starts at 1:52 doesn't seem in tune with everything else either. Production is kind of muddy, and there are several vanilla or uncanny synths. And that ending is abrupt. However, I'm otherwise not coming down as hard on this as the judges above. I liked the guitar solo, and the static groove made sense in the context of the genre. I didn't detect any total copy-pasting, though there were loops with additions. The tuning and the synth selection are my hangups. Otherwise this is pretty good. NO (resubmit)

I miss this game. The soundtrack never grabbed me at the time, but it's so nostalgic. I do think some of the synths are overused and a little vanilla (e.g. 2:08-2:25), especially justaposed against the excellent guitar and violin, and those fake instruments, especially the trombones, aren't doing this any favors. Fortunately, they're clearly making no effort to pretend to be real. Otherwise, this is fantastic. So much fun, such a dynamic arrangement, and fantastic performances. Great stuff. YES

I have to agree with the above. It still sounds strangely random and inconsistent. 0:13-0:16... are those fret noises? Created by a flute? Why are they only here and nowhere else? Without knowing exactly what you're trying to do here, the overall approach just doesn't make sense. Even knowing, it's hard to follow. If it were easier to map the different instruments to specific characters, maybe it would come across better? I'm not sure. Overall, it's simultaneously too static (repetitive beats, looped sections) and too wild (synths and poorly-sampled instruments coming in randomly). You're trying to achieve something very difficult even for someone more experienced. I encourage you to put this project on hold for a while and work on getting your fundamental production, synthesis, and arrangement techniques down on some less ambitious pieces first. NO

I'm not getting clipping from this on my setup, just a overwhelmingly boomy sound from those kicks. It would have been safer to cut it below 0dB, but I don't see anything above that. I've heard old jazz recordings that sound a lot like this, so I'm inclined to give it a pass on this front. The overly clean sampled instruments are a bit more concerning but again not necessarily a dealbreaker. However, I do think the arrangement is underdeveloped. The general structure is three loops of the same thing, and while there are some changes in the riffing and whatnot that make each loop distinct in an appropriately jazzy, improv sort of way, for me it's not enough. There isn't even an intro or ending to make the first and last loops distinct. I like the approach, but I think it needs to do more to hold the listener's interest. And the votes above mine contain very good points as well. NO (resubmit)

I remember enjoying this soundtrack when I played the game, but this track sure is a whole lot of nothing. The remix adds a lot to the textures, but it's still more of an ambient piece. Not what excites me, but it's done well. YES

I don't think I would have rated this highly for the compo, because this is mostly the melody from FF9 and sometimes the beat from FF5. It uses both themes, but Freya's is absolutely dominant. However, even use of two themes isn't one of our judging criteria here! It's fun and original. The pacing is pretty weird. There's a really slow burn, with 35 seconds of intro, then 47 seconds of build-up, a brief teaser, then a few seconds of music box, and finally the main section kicks in at 1:54. This is followed by an entire minute of music box bridge, and the last 42 seconds is music box outro. Altogether only about a minute and a half of a 5-minute piece is the "main" section. Not that there's anything objectively wrong with this, but it's an odd decision. Balance is pretty mid-light except during the guitar parts, with a lot of stuff going on in the lows and the lead carried by a few shrill synths. That's my only real complaint. Otherwise this is great stuff. YES

I was a YES before, and I see no reason to change that. It's conservative, for sure, but there's a bunch more orchestration added than a single whistle and percussion. For me it's enough. YES

The metal portion, from 1:02 on, is pretty darn good. It's on-key, the balance is great, everything I liked about the earlier version is true and pretty much everything I complained about is fixed. Vocals could be easier to understand, but that's a genre thing. The first minute, though. I recognize that all these flourishes and modulations are intentional. But to me they sound really, really bad. 0:54-1:00 in particular sound like a novice singer hunting for the notes, and 0:18 sounds like an adolescent whose voice cracked. Again, I know this was a decision and not a lack of skill. But I can't get over it. I won't begrudge anyone else their YES votes, but you won't be getting one from me. NO

It's definitely a medley, but it all flows together nicely. If it weren't a medley, each individual section might be borderline on interpretation; they're all presented in a very straightforward way. The orchestration is good but conservative. There's no question about source usage whatsoever; I recognize all but a couple instantly. Not Rebecca's most realistic instrument usage. It's right about where our bar is, I think. Definitely not good enough to fool even the most casual listen. It mostly doesn't grate on my nerves, but a lot of that is because it's so conservative that to me it sounds like a sound upgrade over the original 16- or 64-bit material. There are some string sections that are awfully mechanical, one of which is at the very end, so it leaves a sour taste in my mouth. 0:27-0:33 has this weird instrument that sounds like a lawn sprinkler. If that were present more than the 4 times I hear it (1 of them quiet), I'd consider counting it as a dealbreaker. It sounds like an artifact or other mistake. The rain stick, while identifiable, is also mixed quite loud, and that appears more than a few times; the tambourine isn't much better. This is very borderline for me. I like the arrangement a lot, but we've sent back remixes with realism issues right about where this one is. I'll see what others have to say. Edit: Eh, good enough. It doesn't bother me unless I'm specifically looking for it. YES

I had to listen to this a few times to hear the source connections. Probably the result of it being a remix of a remix. I wouldn't have noticed the lack of sax reverb on my own, but Brad's right, more would have been more correct for the genre. I lost a lot of the lyrics, but that's not a big deal. There's a smidgen of pumping, e.g. 3:58-4:01. Otherwise this is an easy vote. Great tone, tons of fun, really creative. YES

This is easily the most creative, expansive take on Fanfare I've ever heard. The arrangement is a masterpiece. Brad's right about the vocals being hard to understand, but I don't think it's because they're too quiet. The soundscape is overall pretty mid-heavy, and there's always at least one, sometimes two or even three instruments competing with the vocals. Sirenstar doesn't enunciate really well, either; I hear all her vowels and almost none of her consonants. There's certainly room for improvement in the EQ department, but I don't think the lyrics being hard to understand is a dealbreaker; this is true of a ton of professional music. But it's something to keep in mind. Otherwise this is great. YES Update 2/12: Without doing a direct A/B comparison, my opinions stand. The rap does sound more distinct to me, but it's still hard to understand. I think it's more an an enunciation issue than production. I can make out most of it. I still can't understand anything Sirenstar is singing, but it's no worse than before.

I came to the same conclusion as the above by the time I'd reached the one-minute mark, and that's less than halfway through! This basically coasts on the core conceit of just playing this track really really fast, and doesn't have enough additional ideas to flesh it out. Far too many loops of the main hook alone, and then the whole thing loops 2½ times. There needs to be more development. NO

When I saw what games you were combining, I knew instantly which track from Double Dragon 2 you were using. Best track in the game, IMHO, and so unique compared to the rest of the soundtrack. I don't know what it is about Mega Man that makes everyone put game SFX in their tracks, though. 2:26-3:05 is a pretty big chunk of repetitive mud. Six loops of the same melody on top of an extremely cluttered soundscape. I could make out some differences between the loops, especially the last two, but I had to pay close attention and I could tell there were layers I just couldn't make out. 1:40-1:52 and 4:24-4:37 have some weird syncopation in the percussion that I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around. I don't think those are dealbreaking issues, though. It's a great idea, and well-executed overall, though there is indeed a lot of room for improvement on the mixing front. YES

What a sound palette! The industrial synths combined with the woodwinds and the vocals make for something I've never heard before, and it sounds great! I would have liked more of the vocals: opening with them and then having them return only briefly a couple of times was a bit of a tease. This is lovely and creative. Strong work. YES Edit: Just rubber-stamping the 3/12 update. Still a YES.

Yep. Great take on these sources, and seamless integration. For a first time mixing electric guitar into a more complex soundscape, you did a great job; many veterans and even professionals don't do as well. There's some complex layered part-writing that was a ton of fun to listen to. Fantastic job all around. YES Update 10/23: The kicks are pumping a little, but they were nearly inaudible before, and overall things are cleaner. Still a YES from me.

Loud! I had to turn my volume down about 25%. Seemed like a pretty conservative approach for a while, especially with Mega Man 2003 already in the catalog. Gets a little muddy in places, e.g. 1:29-1:40 is a real mess. But my, that drop at 3:59 is juicy. I was worried about this justifying a 5:30 length, but that sure got my attention. Fun stuff. YES

Oh my yes. I don't have much to add; this is gorgeous from beginning to end, with beautiful expression and a dynamic arrangement that isn't content to sit in a mellow groove. This will be a favorite of many, I think. YES

I'm just not hearing the major issues described above. Yeah, some of the instruments are pretty mechanical; the staccato strings are particularly bad. But I don't expect orchestral realism in a piece like this. I'm not finding the vocals too loud for a vocal piece, but the enunciation is pretty poor; I didn't even realize until my second listen that it's in English. I think the arrangement is perfectly sufficient as well. I'm not the biggest fan of the change in genre at the halfway point, but even the first half has enough orchestration going on to pass our standards of personalization. It's creative and entertaining. YES

I don't think the mixing is as problematic as all that, but I did have to turn my volume down a lot. 1:47 - 2:58 isn't too bad, but 4:45+ is indeed way too loud, and distorted. The hits at 4:00-4:20 are pretty crunchy, too. Address the levels and I think this will be in good shape. NO

Really neat approach, and such a rich sound. I will say that the piano lead is awfully quiet, and is hard to hear in 0:53-1:22 and 1:50-2:24 under the big string swells. I lost a few notes in there entirely. While that's not exactly a nitpick, I think the strengths of this outweigh that one issue. Good job. YES

I concur with all of the above. I'd even emphasize the production issues here: the big boomy drums are introducing some audible pumping and distortion, to a point where even if the arrangement were transformative enough for our standards, I'd send this back for production alone. NO

I didn't have a problem with the guitar either, nor the repeat since it did different things with the chiptunes each time. There's nothing earthshaking here, but it's fun and it works. YES

It's a nice chill mix. The problem is that it's repetitive as heck. The main hook is 0:18-0:26, and it repeats 8 times unchanged, not counting the fadeout. After 1:35, there's no original content, it's just a loop of most of the first half. The sound quality is fine for what it is, it's just that this arrangement is effectively only a minute and a half long. Add some more content to hold the listener's interest and I think this will be in good shape. NO

This is mastered very quietly, with 6.66 dB of headroom for some reason. Easy enough fix but an odd decision. I have to turn my volume to almost maximum to hear it clearly. Better than clipping, I suppose. Otherwise, this is definitely an improvement. It's been lengthened, and the new material isn't just padding. However, the instrumentation doesn't change much throughout, other than the faux-instrumental intro and bridge, and 2:24-2:38. And then the last section is just the same thing, speeding up, with "hey" effects. For me, the overall presentation still falls short. The sound palette is basic and static, and there's still not enough dynamic interest to hold my attention. Still, strong work improving on the initial submission! NO

I don't hear the balance issue unless I pay close attention, and otherwise this sounds fantastic. Rich orchestration and lovely choices for electronic enhancement. I hear a tiny bit of crunchiness on occasion, but it's minor and easily overlooked. Excellent sound otherwise. YES