MindWanderer

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

I have to agree. It's very conservative, basically swapping the chiptunes for some basic synths and adding a beat. The two loops are identical after a few seconds in. You've added some fun energy to the source material, but we're looking for remixes that are more transformative and sophisticated. NO

I'm afraid I'm also a NO mere seconds in. This is more heavily crushed and distorted than anything I've heard in recent memory. And as far as the arrangement goes, I'm in agreement with proph as well: I was itching for a change from that shrill, vanilla lead less than a minute in, and it didn't let up for the entire piece. This needs quite a lot of work in production, dynamic interest, and synth selection for starters. There are interesting riff ideas, but they need fundamentals to hold them up. NO

I love this series, the composition being one big part of why. Such lovely use of leitmotifs that mesh with the emotional storytelling. Hugely underrated. But we're here to talk about the remix, not Kan Gao. I'm not a pianist, so I can't really comment on the performance here except that it sounds good to me. I felt like the lighter touch at 2:42 was appropriate, though a more dramatic build to 3:15 and again at 3:32 would have been appreciated. And I thought the ending was just fine; an imperfect ending is a good homage to the source material. An enthusiastic YES

I don't know that I'd call this vaporwave, it's much more engaging and interesting than that genre implies. Really rich soundscape and a beautifully creative use of the sources. I love what you've done here. YES

Nails the brief. Genre-transforming approaches are always a pleasure to listen to, and this one is done expertly. Epic arrangement, fantastic performances. I couldn't ask for more. YES

Yeah, this almost sounds like it was created as a challenge to make something using a minimal set of tools. I wouldn't have been surprised if it had been made in something like Caustic or LMMS. Really basic synths (though you do a lot with them), few layers, and a static sound palette. I do think it makes stellar use of what it does have. The soundscape is rich, and the progression is structurally dynamic. You clearly have arrangement and production skills. You just need to put together a toolkit to show those skills off properly. NO

I can't remember hearing a better love letter to classic video game music. This was clearly made by someone with a real passion. I could listen to it over and over. I've been in a bit of a funk lately and took a break from judging because I found myself being too negative about everything. Listening to something steeped so much in positivity helped a lot with that, so thanks!

I usually don't vote out of submission order, but I saw this one was about to pass and wanted to listen to it first. Wow, what a wild idea! It doesn't sound like VGM at all until the melody kicks in, and then suddenly you realize how it actually was all along. It's clever as hell and sounds great. Fade-ins and fade-outs aren't ideal, but as long as they're not done in the middle of a melodic section, it's fine by me. Brilliant stuff. YES

It's certainly loud. My volume was already a little low, and I had to lower it further. Sounded pretty great otherwise, except that I thought the bass and drums were a little loud and the leads a little quiet up until 1:15. After that, I thought they weren't "a little" so anymore, but much so. The leads are pretty buried, and the kicks are really loud, as are the sweeps. At 1:39 this gets even more pronounced due to the unusual kick pattern; around 1:42-1:45 I can hardly hear the lead at all; in 1:55-2:00 the kicks are the only thing I can make out distinctly. The rest of the piece is similarly balanced. The melody ranges from pushed back to completely buried, and the kicks dominate the entire soundscape. This is an entertaining arrangement, but it's muddy and headache-inducing for me. NO (resubmit)

Well... maybe not all of the fandom will be floored. Don't get me wrong, this is an absolutely epic arrangement. I absolutely love what you've done with the themes and the orchestration. This is right up my alley for stuff I get excited about. But orchestral rock is tough to mix, and I feel like this comes up short. The whole intro is quiet, and after 0:15 when everything kicks in, too busy. There's a white noise sweep that's muddying the whole soundscape and not leaving the actual (sampled) instruments enough room to breathe. Then the main section opens up at 0:48 with a bass that's shockingly loud, after which all the orchestration other than the choir and the orch hits are totally buried. All I'm getting are individual notes where I hear the squeak of a piccolo or a violin cut through for a moment. At 2:05 the brass finally takes the lead for a bit, but the rest of the orchestral instruments are still almost inaudible. The rest of the piece follows this same general trend: there's one, maybe two non-rock instruments at a time that I can hear clearly. It takes turns which instruments those are, but the rest are buried in mud. From what I can hear, the orchestration is absolutely gorgeous, layered, and complex, but I can hear like 20% of it, max. I've been accused in the past of making the job of balancing something like this sound easy. It's not remotely easy! But it is necessary. NO (for God's sake please resubmit!)

Structurally conservative, but with a ton of added textures, notably the vocals. I'm a little borderline on whether it's transformative enough, but it sounds great. The second half branches out way more than the first half; I think the last 45 seconds are actually some of the strongest of the piece. I'm happy with it overall. YES

You called it the "Nanotech Upgrade Remix," and you weren't wrong about the "upgrade" part. This is a sound upgrade, and not a particularly dramatic one except for one or two brief sections. It sounds very good for what it is, but we're looking for something much more transformative. NO

Great stuff. Epic orchestral with Celtic influence is trendy but for a good reason. Excellent violin and piano work, seamless integration of the themes, tons of variety, and excellent production. What's not to like? YES

You clearly had a lot of fun with this! It's a pretty wild trip, and it sounds great. It goes to a lot of weird places, but stays entirely coherent. Strong work. YES

This is a great performance with a great sound, but it's a cover. The entire structure is replicated almost 1:1, and while there are small differences in, e.g. percussion, it's mostly just an instrument swap. We can accept "genre transformations," but they have to be more substantial than just swapping in rock instruments for the originals, and that seems to be pretty much all that was done here. It's a fun enough listen, but we're looking for something more transformational. NO

This is a fun orchestration and re-imagining of the source tune, but I'm finding the balance to be problematic. The bass guitar is quite loud, and the percussion is a little on the loud side as well. The highs are pretty shrill across the board, most notably the celesta, but even the piano and trumpet are pretty bright to my ears, to the point of discomfort. I enjoyed the arrangement a lot overall, but I think it does need those levels tweaked. Do that and it'll be a great post. NO (resubmit) Revision 11/6: I think the revision killed a little bit too much of the shimmer, and it now sounds a little flat, but it's good enough. Definitely no pain anymore. YES

Well, I wasn't here 17 years ago, so I can't comment on how much you've improved, but production quality is pretty good, and there are a lot of good arrangement ideas. Where I have a concern is that development is very slow. The intro is a full two minutes long, with changes to the soundscape introduced glacially. The rest proceeds about the same pace, looping through the source material about once a minute and making notable changes once every couple of loops. You don't need to play an entire loop with one sound palette for the listener to get the idea, and that's especially so when the differences between two loops aren't massive, and you don't need to play through an entire loop verbatim every time. You have spans of several minutes where the drum loops or piano arps are unchanged, which causes a lot of listener fatigue. And then after all that, the ending is quite abrupt. Overall I think that's the main issue here. If you can condense this down so that you can present more ideas in a shorter period of time, and maybe mix up the composition so that it's not full loop after full loop, I think it will do wonders for listener engagement. NO

Great vocal work right off the bat here! I've been evaluating a lot of black metal lately, and nothing against the genre, but it's nice to be able to understand lyrics a little better. Yours are a little quiet in the mix, though; the harmonies, especially, are nearly inaudible, as is 2:36 onward. The lead guitar, while fine for what it is, is a little repetitive and it's sucking all the air out of the vocal space. That's my only crit, though. Otherwise this is fantastic. Let's get this a title and post it. YES P.S. There are some mistakes in the lyrics, not just typos/misspellings, but a few words are different. I'd offer corrections but I can't make them all out clearly.