JJT

don't worry about it. that being said, why hasn't this been moved or locked yet?

wrong forum dude. plus, we remix what we want. read the FAQ.

It's mixes like this that make me glad I'm on the panel. All I can say to the dissenters is that I'm extremely proud that this is featured on ocremix.org So there!

Superior writing. You need to get this recorded by a real brass quintet someday. Do you play a brass instrument? Impressive sequencing on the brass samples, and though there are moments where those samples approach reality, I was still thinking "synthetic" the whole time, which was a pretty frustrating experience. Hell, I'll donate money if thats what it takes to get this done live. Nice work VHD. YES ps - I hope all you fanboys who have historically lamented the lack of Locke remixes are satisfied. Also, alliteration ftw.

The sample quality, arrangement, and sequencing would all need to be improved substantially for this to pass. Definetly not the worst sub we've ever heard, but this is too close to the original to pass. The robotic sequencing might be intentional, but it still sounds amatuerish. It wasn't a waste submitting this, but its not up to our current standards. I'd like to hear some more from you, if you're still mixing. NO

I can hear a lot of room for growth...you guys sure took your sweet time getting this track to move anywhere. Once it does, we're golden, though. The keyboard and guitar work is respectable, and the textures all work. How you string these textures together is the part of songcraft that you guys could stand to work on a little more. Anyway. As far as i'm concerned, this means YES

asjdk;ljdks;lgjas;dklf. Conservative arrangement paired with lackluster vocals. As Jill mentioned, this is done up as a Disney power ballad, and the singer's timbre doesn't match that style at all. It sounds like she's trying to front a NOFX cover band. Towards the middle of the song, when the vocals are more buried, she sounds okay, but her first entrance is really weak, dry, and nasal. To summarize, the overall product doesn't work for me. In order for this to be passable, her voice would have to absolutely carry the arrangement, and I know this is harsh, but I just don't think she's capable of pulling off the genre. NO I'm gonna listen to Sufjan Stevens for an hour until that digi-piano sample is out of my head.

fix the mastering and this gets a YES from me. that's some good writing, that even the sample quality can't bring down. As i've said in other writeups, this suffers from "Princess Bride" syndrome (specifically the brass). The harpsichord also gets overly mechanical as Jesse noted. You want it to sound like a human is playing those lines, not a hardware synth hooked up to Finale. Anyways, my arrangebias is pulling me into YES territory, so there you go. YES (assuming you bring the volume up) as you wish

president, huh? also, you owe me $.25 a "NO" for 2006...so whenever you've got it, just write me a check.

guess you haven't read any of my NO votes on jazz subs.

do you guys think i'm a snob?

I was on the fence with this one for awhile, because it sounds fine. However, I find myself in the larry/zirc/vig camp. This is the basic shape of the arrangement (minus an 8 second break at 1:45): The only time there's any sense of movement, where I feel like the song is going anywhere is at the beginning during the build. From that point on it just feels like it was arranged from a "well, this section is done, what should I put next?" kind of mindset. This mix needs something else, perhaps a B section or at least a bridge. The overal problem I have, though, is that I think the mixer needs to pay more attention to the 'big picture.' You definetly take the listener to a specific place at :28, but by the end of the mix we're still at pretty much the same location, and have done little more than the sonic equivelant of spinnin' a few donuts in the parking lot. NO

Quit sucking up to Dave. It's bad form.

I agree with Jesse re: the lead synths getting buried by the saws. The production, while not terrible, could use a little bit of tweaking, because I think some aspects of this mix are getting lost in the mush. On top of that, however, the arrangement doesn't bring enough to the table. The same ideas get repeated over and over again, and the Mute City section, while a nice departure, was brief and had virtually no interpretation. Melody + boom tiss. This isn't your best work, and you know that. While it's definetly not bad, it's also not up to what OCR's standards have become. It's a shame you lost that .flp file. Hope to see some more submissions from you in the future, Evan. Take care. NO

Feeling what Larry and Andy are saying. The samples for the acoustic instruments are distracting. Either upgrade the samples or spend some more time processing them so they don't stick out of the soundfield like a sore thumb. As mentioned before, how you sequence a particular sample can have a huge effect on how realistic it sounds. The beats wear out their welcome quickly. The occasional drum fill, transition, hit, hell ANYTHING would help. You're definetly interpretting the source material, which puts you ahead of a lot of submissions we receive, but both the production and the arrangement have a long way to go. NO

This is great. Great sequencing, plenty of rhythmic/harmonic/melodic witticisms, all delivered with slick production. Very impressive. If the length of these 4 votes is any indication, this shouldn't be on the panel in the first place. HELL YES

No VGM in the program? Have you no dignity?????????

Pay attention, Larry. His WIP thread is right here: http://www.ocremix.org/forums/showthread.php?t=5967 Anyway, at a certain point, the cradle theme is no longer the focus of the arrangement, and that's a problem. NO

Definitely some interesting ideas here. The arrangement isn't very coherent, however, and the production is amateurish. Your sequencing isn't that bad, you just need to learn how to work with your samples better. I agree with Larry's comments regarding the structure of the arrangement (i.e. sparse leading to super-ultra sparse), so maybe that's something to bear in mind if you revisit this. I'll be interested to hear any future submissions you might have. NO

K, i've compared this to the source. Here are my thoughts... You don't really do much as far as arranging the melody, harmony, or structure of the original piece. The most substantive additions are the supporting elements of the track, i.e the backing synths, bass, percussion, etc. Conceptually these are done well, and I can tell a lot of time and effort went into this. As Larry mentioned, the production could use a little work. I wasn't as off-put by it, but I can definetly see some room for improvement. For example, the drum fill at 0:53 sounds weird, and sticks out of the soundfield like a sore thumb. At 2:25, the lead synths are just SCREAMING, and aren't supported by the bass very well. These are just a few examples of where a little more attention to detail could have improved the overall presentation of the mix. If the arrangement was really slick and innovative, I could see myself passing this. As it stands, though, its a pretty safe trance adaptation. The combination of arrangement and production doesn't put this in YES territory, as far as I'm concerned. This isn't bad though. NO

From a Chris Rock monologue about MJ's pedophilia: "Remember back in the 80's when everyone was arguing over who was better, Michael Jackson or Prince. Prince won."

This is easily my favorite remix of anything off the Pictionary OST.

This is a tough one. Definetly a borderline remix if I've ever heard one. The guitar work is solid, but essentially it sounds like a guitarist jamming along with a MIDI sound file. The drums/bass/pads just don't do it for me. The sequencing is fine, its just the sample quality that ruins the experience for me. The arrangement, though passable, isn't creative enough to save this one IMO. Sorry guys, but this isn't quite there yet. NO

I really hate to just rehash what's already been said but... The percussion seems to be the most neglected facet of this arrangement. Loops aren't gonna cut it here. The percussion needs to compliment the other elements of the arrangement. Here it's just acting as a metronome. This doesn't sound bad. In fact, its very enjoyable in a lot of ways. However, this is going to need a lot more creativity, originality, and attention to detail before it can pass. NO

Been on the fence with this one for awhile. Here's how I see it.. The arrangement works for me, and I think most of the ideas are executed well. The retriggering effect that's such a problem for Jesse isn't for me. That's not to say I think it was implimented in the best possible way. I just don't see it as holding the mix back, so to speak. Finally, the production, while not stellar, doesn't seem bad enough to drag this into NO territory. It would definetly benefit from some retooling, though. Larry's conditional YES makes me more comfortable in stamping my seal of approval, because without his vote, this probably won't pass. BORDERLINE YES