Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Beatdrop

  1. Well all right! Haven't seen you since... ...2004? 2005? Ten years!
  2. I'm with DragonAvenger here. I have nothing negative to say about any of the technical aspects of this; I like all the sounds utilized and it's mixed well. However in terms of the arrangement, it's drawn out at times where it doesn't need to be. The sections she mentioned above are noteworthy, but I'm not saying they should be chopped out completely, just trimmed down to feel more bridge-like and less like they're entire other sections of the song that are unrelated to the overall arrangement. At eight minutes long, I find myself zoning out. Shortening it would make it drastically more interesting and focused. NO (resub)
  3. This reminds me less of Infected Mushroom (at least as they sound currently) and more of someone like Wizzy Noise or Flip Flop, but I digress. I agree that this is very much borderline for a few reasons; namely that the source melody doesn't quite sit right with the style (like Dave said) and that it gets a bit repetitive if only because it has to keep coming back to that melody to center it as an arrangement. The best parts are the more experimental psychedelic parts. I feel like this would be a better track if you carved out the arrangement elements and just reworked it into an original composition. But all the same, I still think it's good enough for a YES
  4. Yeah I'm afraid I'm going to have to agree with Chimpazilla's assessment here. There are light sprinklings of the source, such as at 1:36, but I would venture to say that this is like 95% original composition. It's AMAZING original composition (very, very well done), but I don't think it could be considered a true arrangement of the original track. Not much of a point in dissecting it further than that. Beautiful composition, but regrettably still a NO
  5. I really dig the groove here. It's like Prodigy meets NIN circa mid-90s. The sound choices are excellent; the punchy drums combine very well with the bass synth, which I swear sounds like it's taken right out of "Like No One's Looking" by Mondo Grosso (from the Casshern soundtrack). I love the arp in the background throughout most of the track too. Basically I like all the sounds herein. Some of them are occasionally on the shrill side of things, but they're mostly mixed pretty well. Arrangement-wise, the original track doesn't have a whole lot going on with it, and this is addresses it in a no-nonsense fashion. The differences are subtle, but they're there. I particularly enjoyed the usage of the lead melody at 1:08, which here is used as kind of a high point and build transition, whereas in the original it's basically a "verse" section and is pretty fleeting. Maybe it doesn't run away with the original, but I think it takes it from its Klepacki-esque roots and drives it in a more electronic direction to enough of a degree to easily warrant the 3 minute run-time. Most of the uniqueness of this track comes from the rhythmic adjustments you've made. The contrast between 0:18--where it's rhythmically very similar to the original--and the stuff that happens after the 1:08 build-up section--after you unload the ethnic percussion--is probably what I enjoyed most. It tricks you into thinking it's fairly breakbeat-oriented, jumps into an industrial groove, and then goes right back into the breaks. The drum programming is really a highlight here. One major gripe: the ending is... yuck. Sorry, there's no gentle way to put it. I appreciate that you filtered it back down to mirror the intro, but it cuts too abruptly post-filter. Still, just a minor gripe and not worth rejecting it over when compared to everything else. YES
  6. This was very difficult to judge. Beyond the fact that a bunch of songs are showcased over a ~4 minute span, they're also heavily re-interpreted to the point that they're barely recognizable in some cases. I'll admit I'm not overly familiar with the FF8 OST, but I went back and forth from the source tracks to the arrangement and, despite repeated listens, could not figure out what the 1:12 to 1:48 section was from. Each individual segment of this arrangement is very impressive. The problem is that there are individual segments. In particular, I really didn't like the fact that the section using Retaliation and Love Grows are completely separated from the rest of the arrangement by silence. That section, from about 2:40 to 3:48, is just interjected into the middle of an otherwise excellent interpretation of Slide Show Pt. 2 that utilizes bits and pieces of other tracks. Although it kind of creates a feeling of breaking things up into movements, I don't think it's appropriate in this context. It seems to me like you had too many ideas. Again, each individual part is really well made, and the arrangement of each song is clever and original. But as a whole, it's not cohesive. I honestly think if you just straight-up removed the 2:40 to 3:48 section, I could give this a YES, but until then... NO (resubmit)
  7. So yeah, as has been said, obviously the guitars sound great. Actually, the overall mix is really good, although I agree the vocals sink into the background at various times. Could have done with some level automation to bring them out in spots. Arrangement is (somewhat) conservative, like Jivemaster mentioned, but adapted well. I really like the lyrics you've put together, as well. The vocal performance was occasionally strained; some bits where pitches were only marginally hit and delivery of some lines on the blase side (:28 for example), which doesn't really match the feeling of the song as a whole, but for the most part I thought they were decent. Enjoyable across repeated listens and not a whole lot of gripes to make equates to YES
  8. That's my interpretation, as well. I first came to this site a few years before that snapshot, and unfortunately I don't remember if there even was a "mission statement" that long ago, but I don't think the aim of the site has changed at all. It may seem that way because it's grown so dramatically, but yeah, this has always been about paying tribute to the music in games, which has long been considered a slight part of the game itself. It may be secondary to gameplay, but the music in a game can completely change the feel, and I think OCR's always been about trying to draw attention to the feeling the music in a game has helped to convey.
  9. I'm going to go in direct opposition to Chimpazilla's determination here. I actually really love this arrangement. It seems like you recognized the interplay between the two themes and rather than just make this a medley, utilized elements from both at the same time. This is actually really evident during the 1:30 to 2:30 section that Kris mentioned sounded entirely original. I can hear the melody from "Scrap Brain" in the vocals while the guitar is playing parts from "Aqua Planet." That is very, very cool. The end result is something that sounds very Katamari Damacy to me, and that's probably the best endorsement I can give it. The production work is pretty great for the most part. I like all the sounds used, and everything is fairly well mixed. The final mastering is pretty safe, though; for a dancey track, neither the drums nor bass have much oomph to them. On the other hand, leveling and panning is well executed. It would definitely benefit from some multi-band compression. It's easy to find small things to nitpick about in this, but as a whole, I really, really enjoy what you've done, and I think a lot of other people will, as well. And while this isn't standard fare when it comes to combining multiple sources, the way in which you've combined them has resulted in something wholly unique. EDIT: I found myself going back to listen to this again even after I'd already made this post. I think that says a lot. YES
  10. There's not much I can say that others haven't already said. The arrangement is good, but "safe," like has already been mentioned a couple times. A fairly verbatim approach to both themes, but indeed they're blended together well, so I give it bonus points for that at least. The production is really where this takes a hit. I like all the sounds you've got, but the mixing is very... odd. It sounds gutted, like the whole song is notch filtered at a low frequency. Honestly, if only the mixing was fixed, I'd say this is passable for sure. NO (borderline)
  11. I'm really torn on this track. Everyone so far has made compelling arguments for and against posting this, and I agree with all of it. The drums are very distant and could use some emphasis. But like Nutritious said, I don't think they're far off enough to be a deal-breaker. If they were a bit more pronounced, it would be BETTER, but it's not like you can't hear them. The guitar parts are mixed well and performed well. There's no question of source usage--it's definitely all there, and what interpretation there is of it is done well. I particularly enjoyed the latter half. Overall, this is pretty good. The problem is that, having worked on an arrangement of a very short track quite recently, I know that it's possible to generate some originality and variation from the source without deviating so far that it's unrecognizable, so as to add a bit more to this and give it a proper ending. As I was writing this critique, I found myself leaning more and more towards giving it a YES vote up until I started trying to justify the ending. But honestly, it just dies off at the end, and you could have done something more with it. It seems like the ideas ran out, and that's where the remix stopped. Furthermore, the source isn't particularly short, it's just simplistic. And the more simplistic something is, the more it lends itself to interpretation. All of that aside, like I said, this is pretty good. If the ending came more gradually, like the build-up at the start of the track, I could give this a YES for sure, but for now... NO (resubmit for sure)
  12. Just to kinda piggyback on what everyone else said here, it's pretty hard to get past the mixing on this. The panning is really awkward, and makes me feel like the instruments are directly BEHIND my ears. Like behind the lobes. Makes me uncomfortable. Otherwise the arrangement is really straight-forward and, like Larry said, disconnected. I think part of the problem might be that there doesn't seem to be a big stretch going on here from source to arrangement in terms of style or form. NO
  13. Handling of the sources is pretty excellent. Good reinterpretation of the original tracks, and there's a good amount of variety. All of the production work is solid, although I'm not thoroughly happy with the how the drums sound. The kick has moments where it seems like a great fit, and then times where it sounds like a piece of paper stretched over the opening of Pringles can. But the drums are definitely good enough, and like I said, all of the other elements of the track sound really good. Pretty easy YES vote.
  14. Let me get this out of the way right now: the guitar is nice. Very cool, well played. I have no complaints whatsoever about anything guitar-oriented in this track. The arrangement is straight-forward. Unfortuantely, as Chimpazilla already mentioned, a straight-forward arrangement of a track from Mega Man tends to ultimately yield a short overall duration. The solo section was cool and mixed things up nicely, but one of the important things to understand about arranging music is that there are ways to add variation without simply adding new sections. Most of the stuff that's from the original is taken at face value and just reinterpreted to fit the new style and instruments. I like the addition of new harmonies, but because so little time is spent on each segment of the original, it all flies past without much time to bask. As a whole, the production work is quite good. The drum sequencing is effective, and while it's obvious that the drums are sequenced, it's not detrimental to the track, because I can tell you spent a lot of time programming in each hit. I want to give this a YES, but there just isn't enough there yet. I'd recommend trying to expand upon and reinterpret the original a bit further, and then this one's good to go. NO (resub please)
  15. Conceptually, this was a really good idea. Never occurred to me how well the original song lends itself to dubstepification. First up, the production quality... In terms of the instruments used, I liked the intro stuff up to :56, although the piano rubs me the wrong way. It's too synthetic to pass for an authentic piano, yet the context that it's in begs for a piano that's more convincing. Obviously, not everyone has access to a piano to record (or even the ability to play one), but I think trying some different sampled piano patches might have been more effective. It DOES work a lot better during the outro, though. I'm torn on the bass synth. It's a pretty cool patch from what I can tell, but because of just how incredibly centered/mono it is, it gets lost. This style really calls for a big boisterous bass, and when it doesn't have one, it just sounds hollow. And that's the problem that I'm having with this. It ramps up strongly to the main section at the 1 minute mark, but doesn't follow through. I'm also thinking that switching out from the staccato strings to something more synthetic and grandiose would help a lot with the transition. I also have some issues with the mixing. I can't really elaborate a lot, but it sounds needlessly busy and not very cohesive, as though there's a lot happening at any given time, but each individual sound doesn't sit well with the next. Also, I didn't like the synth arp at 1:51. At all. Didn't like the patch, didn't like the sequencing, and didn't like the way it blended with everything after that point. The arrangement itself is interesting, and I think it's a different kind of take on a theme we're all probably intimately familiar with at this point. But then there are moments, like 1:27, where it's basically lifted verbatim from the original without being adjusted to fit the style of the song. Almost gives me the impression that I'm listening to the original with better samples laid over it and a dubstep beat/bass. I know I focused a lot on the negative aspects here, and I don't want to give you the impression that this is all kinds of broken, because it's not. It's pretty good, but it needs work. Too many clashing ideas throughout. NO
  16. I can't really say anything that hasn't already been said. It seems like everyone's pretty much on the same page concerning the strong aspects and the weak ones. The recording clarity is really nice, and I agree that everything is mixed well. Good timbres at play. The dryness bothers me even after it starts to fill out a bit more, though. Some reverb would go a long way here. No issues with any performance elements; what's played live is played cleanly. The right-panned guitar at 1:11 sounds a little awkward to me when the rest of the instruments drop out, probably because it's just a touch too soft. The bottom line here, and the thing that seems to be the make-or-break for this track as far as the panel is concerned, is that I'm of the opinion that the arrangement is not substantial enough to warrant the short length. As has been mentioned, although it doesn't really repeat anything, the fact that it can go 2:05 without doing so and then just abruptly ends tells me that there's way more room for expansion on the original. I'm in complete agreement with OA that this sounds more like a good start than it does a finished track. That said... NO (definitely resub)
  17. Wat! Shit, now I HAVE to go... somehow... EDIT: Might be more difficult than I anticipated for me to be at this. My work schedule recently changed, and might be changing again soon, and if it does, I'll ESPECIALLY be unable to go.
  18. This is groovy. I can get behind some deep/progressive house action. Not very much of that on OCR as far as I know. This takes quite a while to really get going, and at the same time, it never really gets going, but at the same time same time, it's constantly going. That probably doesn't make sense, but that's the style. The source is pretty innocuous itself, so I guess it couldn't be avoided. There's no question about the representation of the original; it's all here. Picking up on some major Steve Porter vibes. Production quality is stand-out. Well-mixed. I have no gripes about any of your sound choices; they all fit perfectly. The only negative in this regard that I could pick out is that, unlike Chimpazilla, while I like the clap itself and think it's appropriate for it to be dry and centered, it's just a tad too loud. If it were more subtle, the dryness and centeredness wouldn't stick out. The only other complaint I can make is that it's too long and repetitive given the content. While I get that it's a stylistic choice, I don't think it's warranted here. My recommendation would be to trim some sections down, particularly leading into the 2:45 mark. Everything up to 2:45 could probably be cut down to half its length without losing much. That aside, this is still good enough for me. YES
  19. Maaaaaaan, I dunno. This feels really close to me. The arrangement is great all around; I think you super expanded on the source. This doesn't just sound like a new arrangement, it sounds like Native Faith v. 2.0. I particularly enjoyed the intro's interpretation; really sets the stage. The ending is climactic. What's more, the performance elements are fantastic. I love your guitar work, and although I'm not keen on the carried-over prevalence of piano from the original, I think you actually did an excellent job spicing it up and making it more interesting. On the OTHER hand, I hate to say it (because clearly you've put a lot of work into this), but Clem's totally right about the production issues. While they may have come a long way since the original version (which I'm unfamiliar with), taking this at face value, there's still some significant mixing problems. Once the track gets into full swing, it's pretty much a cacophony of sound that makes it hard to listen to any one element. It seems like the primary issue is a combination of the drums (particularly the kick, which is too boomy for the speed at which it's going) and the rhythm guitar (which sucks up a lot of space, as is most evident during the section at 2:52). I think part of the problem is the amount of reverb used is busying things up too much, similar to if you were to douse some gabber in reverb. Something this fast and this complex is busy enough as it is. It seems like everything in this is competing for focus, and that's not a good thing. Clem hit the nail on the head when he said "Your mix is very full... it just lacks definition and breathing room." Some EQing, panning, and level adjustments could go a long way in terms of helping the various instruments find their own domain. Consider automating your levels, as well, if you'd prefer to just shift the focus between instruments from section to section. Overall, if the drums weren't so distractingly overpowered, this would pass in my opinion. But as it stands, I'm going to have to say NO (Resubmit)
  20. Oh man, dude, there's no question about this. This is awesome. very YES Why, you ask? 1.) Production is slick. Very very slick. Clean. Thoroughly enjoyed it. 2.) No question about source usage, like others have mentioned, while it might be hard to pick out at times, it's because of how radically it's been adapted here. A prime example I could provide would be what happens at 2:19 with the melody from the original at 1:14. Besides changing the instrument, the reinterpretation of the melody itself seats it perfectly into the style, and the backdrop it's set against completely changes the character of that particular melody. There's a lot of really creative stuff happening all over this with the arrangement, and if you're intimately familiar with the originals, I think you can really geek out. 3.) The vocals/lyrics? I mean, "Chili could mean cool but it also means pepper"? I fucking love the vocals and lyrics. I think a really great job was done in editing and processing them. I love the performances, too. My compliments to Final Sigma and W!SE the all.E. Lyrics this sharp should be kept out of reach of children and infants. 4.) No, seriously, I love this.
  21. I'm also inclined to (mostly) agree with Mr. Nutritious. Over all, the arrangement is really solid. Despite what Justin said about the intro, the source usage is blatantly obvious. The lead that comes in at :13 is the melody taken almost verbatim from :17 into the source. In actuality, the arrangement isn't just solid, it's really damn good. The way you intertwined the two songs worked awesomely. On the other hand, despite how amazing the arrangement is, the song does in fact have a substantial amount of production issues. The overall mixing needs some work: I definitely agree that the rhythm guitar elements are too loud, and this becomes most noticeable towards the end; the hat and ride cymbal are in dire need of some humanization and rebalancing against the rest of the drums; and the mix as a whole could benefit from some mastering tweaks to give more definition to the lower range. Despite these negatives, there are a lot of good things about the production. I especially enjoy the instrument choices, although as Justin also mentioned, the piano could use work. Otherwise, I think this is a really dynamic track with a lot happening throughout. There's really a lot of great ideas all over this, it just needs some more polish for them to shine through. NO (absolutely resubmit please)
  22. YES - Conditional My initial impression was to vote for resubmit, but having re-evaluated this for a fourth and fifth time, I honestly can't find enough wrong to lean that way anymore. The arrangement is stellar; the original song is entirely transformed. Listening to the source, I wouldn’t have thought it would translate well into DnB, but this takes the delicious cake. I especially love the way you worked in some of the sounds from the original version, like the guitar-ish lead at 2:11, while still making them fit right in. However, there are some mastering/clipping issues revolving around the drums. It’s most noticeable around the 2:21 mark during the single kick drum hits. While I don’t normally think mastering issues alone are enough to warrant a NO vote, in this case, they significantly detract from the listening experience. The clipping becomes less evident through other parts of the song, but the drums are still just overpowering as hell and could use some toning-down. In my opinion, just make some minor tweaks to the compression, ease up on the drums a tiny bit, and this is cool by me.
  23. YES (conditional) Personally, I happen to really like this. I didn’t particularly enjoy the original, but done up in this synthy-proggy-rock a la Casiopea really works. I thought the ending was a little anti-climactic, though. The guitar especially warrants uber props, because it just SOARS. All of the appropriate rock fusion keyboard sounds are here, and the drums fit right in with that style. In terms of production and arrangement for the style, this is picturesque. Really loved the performances. However! It’s drenched in reverb. I get that it’s supposed to have kind of a “live” sound to it, but the reverb is frankly overwhelming and distracting. Would love to hear a version with the reverb scaled back a little. I think it could also work wonders on the definition of the drums. It’s a bit short, but all that means is I have to go back and listen multiple times, because dat guitar. So yeah, turn down that reverb a bit, and we're in business.
  24. YES I’m gonna be the dissenting opinion here. There’s not much to say about this, really. The arrangement of the source is straight-forward, but holy crap does it work well. I was kind of “eh” when I listened to the source, but rendered unto metal, it’s pretty badass; bonus points for the transformation. While I don’t think the production is especially bad, it could use some tweaking. Definitely strong in the lower mids, and the lead guitar really washes over everything. The drums could do with more volume and more punch. The performance is--as far as I can tell as a non-guitarist--flawless, and in this case, I think that’s the most important factor. It showcases strong instrumentalism and reimagines the original. Plus, it’s so short, it can’t possibly become uninteresting, and I find myself wanting to listen to it multiple times consecutively. At the same time, it doesn’t feel incomplete despite its short length. So, yeah! I honestly have very little negative to say here. If it weren’t weren’t for the ineffective mastering, this would sound quite professional.
  • Create New...