Protricity

You guys do realize that the this song is most definately the original song with cookie cutter progression over it, right? That is to say, the lead is not just some synth that sounds like the original, it IS the original song wave. Yes the chords fit behind, (only 2 chords), but none of the non-nsf portion of this song has anything to do with the title theme. The portion at 4:30 is probably the laziest. Percussion isn't attempting to incorporate the 3/4 in the original at all. Frankly this is one of the worst cases of nsf+drums I've seen. I suggest listening to the original. http://www.zophar.net/nsf/metroid.zip Track 1.

Exactly the same as the original less minor minor differences, none of them improvements. NO

Not too much going on in the remix, but thats not the point here. As such, it doesn't really just repeat. Though subtle, there are definately changes. Those guitar/synths or whatever are SOOOOOO COOL. I WANT them. Man. So cool So yea, considering everything, I'm still pretty borderline with this mix. Its not exactly very dynamic. Towards the end, most things just rehash. YES

This gradual trance buildup is a bit too gradual. Its just not changing at all. Now its been 2 minutes. Thats the original nsf exactly with the trance over it. Its like one of those novelty covers you find randomly on kazaa. NO Not so much a remix as the original with typical trance progression stapled over it.

Wow. I'd give this a YES for the rain alone. I want rain so much in this state. WHOA ressonance. Mastering is really off. The mid low tones are ressonating together and causing this huge floody drone. It destroys whatever this song is trying to be. Ok, you can use a mod wheel. Everything gets awkward at 1:35 with the splashy drums. Now the instrumentation is hidden completely except for the huge ressonating drone that wont go away. Hmm, things really cleared up at 2:14, but this song is so problematic already that it can't possibly be helped. Hey!! Bladerunner! That movie rules. NO

Interesting ideas, but as larry said, execution was all wrong. Mastering issues, everything is flooded with reverb, release on all isntruments is too high, everything is washy and messy. Very cool idea. Get good at mastering and execution and try this remix again. NO

Thats a lot of drumloops. Make your own loops/music. Don't just paste them together and call it a song. Uh, thats the original song exactly. NO OVERRIDE

Interesting sound effect song. However, its just the original with tempo changes, and a bass. This is more of a novelty song. Something you'd play behind a pacman flash. Not quite a remix. Hey, I recognize that reason loop. So yea, just issues all round. NO

Stuff like 1:10 is just soo poorly done. mono lead just sounds so loud and so bad. Low sample quality attention, volume issues, and ressonance rip through this song like nothing, and all thats left is a headache. NO

Definately some rearrangement, just not very good. Lots of awkward arranging. The bassline synth is just annoying after a while. Iffy notation, iffy chords. Its just below the bar. NO

Yea, very nice instrument quality. Really remedial remix. We don't generally accept touchup-covers on this site, sorry. NO

Y ea... .. intro... SO, cover of the original with octave bassline. Not on this website. NO

This song gets a no for ripping off my masterpiece: retentions of conflict. NO

Basically larry got this one down. Lots of sample quality issues, especially with the Eq on those strings. Secondly, we have really high standards for piano remixes on this site. This isn't exactly a piano remix cause of the strings, sure. But the strings are nothing but minimal chords. This this remix has to promote something special with the piano or at least some other instrument, but it does not. Biggest issue here is that the song just lacks in the activity department. NO

SO this is basically the original done with some tapa tapa tapa. Cmon, 1:35? Heres a tip. No 1:35 song will ever get a YES from me. NO

This is because I'm racist, Isn't it.

Eh, I wouldn't call it much better than the first version. They're both ok remixes. This one sounds a bit better. The old one has aspects that seem to be missing in this one. So.. I thought we had a policy regarding not touching anything between OCR0000 and OCR1000... Whatever, YES for replacement. no for addition.

That flute is so loud. Repetitive, minimal, and does not go anywhere. You just gotta be more. NO

Exactly what larry said. Very much potential, execution problems, lack of direction. Listen to larry; a fag who knows what he likes. NO

Verbatim with original save some unfit chords. Poor sample quality, drumwork, and the attack lon the hornass r naot veras d..f.s lkasdjfla;sdjkfalsdkfsdlkafj;dkj;falsdfja;sdfksdaafdfNO

Yea, the soundquality in this song is horrible. and .. drumloops.. wow, I'm getting sick of typing this sentence. NO

Daknit seems to still be having an issue with nsf ripping, relying on random sound clips/drumloops, and keeping any kind of semblence of harmony and key. The bass is off key from beginning to the end. Usually when people rip off an nsf and replace the instruments, they use tuned instruments as to avoid ridiculously off key end results. Some people never get the hang of it, apparently. I would recommend not to submit to ocremix again until you resolve the issues I brought up in the first paragraph. NO OVERRIDE

Its ridiculous and bad, but not ridiculously bad. NO

Please don't use N.O. without listening to the whole song, as well as having a very good reason. Lots of songs on this site start out verbatim and then go into arrangement. As far as I"m concerned, there are many instances where this sort of activity should be accepted. I probably wouldn't pass such a song, but I"m just saying.

Man, these were always some of my favorite remixes on this site. But then my friend sent me the original mods. I must say, I'm very disappointed in CJ. I've been a long time fan but now I see he hasn't changed a single aspect of this song. This entire song (as well as the other furries remix) is a complete and utter ripoff. Disappointed.