pixelseph   Judges ⚖️

Classic source on this one! That ostinato and longform A-B is a major earworm. Opens with a MkII-style EP running the arp ostinato. Initial ride cymbal hits starting @ :09 sounds like they're all the same velocity (somewhere around the 110-127 range) and very up-front in the stereo image; we call this an "exposed sample" because it doesn't sound natural to the way the instrument would be played by a performer. The next synth layer @ :23 comes in with the choir line from the source with an interesting LFO wobble. The timing on the LFO creates a dissonant rub against the rest of the instruments that's unpleasant to listen to for an extended period. This trucks through the rest of the A section, bringing in the arp counter pluck and synth string line. The drum sequencing has some fun ideas, though the lack of velocity variation is still present here (and continues to be a major problem through the rest of the track). @ 1:18, we transition into the B section with some big burly guitar hits and stanky bass guitar. This section is much more in line sonically and dynamically, though rigidly locked to the grid. The live instruments are less rigid compared to the drums and synths, but the overall presentation (while loud) lacks the compelling, groovy element. 1:51 returns to the A section. The tremolo effect on the guitars is a great texture here, and then competes with that warble synth from earlier. Because they're occupying the same role in the composition, and the effect draws a lot of attention, it's important to decide which instrument should be taking focus and which should lay back. I think the guitar is more success here with it but the decision is yours as the arranger! 2:47 gives us another tasty feel change from the drums under the continued A section. The instrumentation is feeling stale and repetitive at this point, mostly because the only changing element is the drum sequencing underneath it all. 3:13 returns to the B section, and it's a little different from last time! Love the variation here, though my earlier comments on rigidity still apply here. Cool bass groove to signal the outro and it's done. @paradiddlesjosh can speak better on to how to make the most of your kit with velocity programming to sound natural; I'm merely going to point out that the feel of the sequencing is appropriate for the style, but the lack of velocity differences cripples the groove AND what I think is the single most important job of the drums in a rock/metal context - the drummer drives the bus. The drums tell us so much about where the song, dynamically, is going. An example of this is @ :44 - the push to open hats tells us we're bringing the dynamic energy up, but the lack of groove on them hamstrings that feel. The big gnarly guitar and bass hit @ 1:00, by contrast, is damn awesome because the drums cue them up nicely! There are some great ideas on this framework, and some tactical changes would bring this up to our bar. Should you choose to take this feedback and revisit the work, I'd be listening for: humanization applied to velocities and timing on all programmed instruments, most importantly the drums; and a more compelling, dynamic arrangement (have elements rest, switch sections around, etc) If you need more ears on this (or other) piece(s) as you work on them, we recommend our Workshop forum or the #workshop channel on our Discord! I want to stress that this is a great start - would love to see this come back to the panel! NO (resubmit)

I missed out on this one the first time, glad to be able to give it a go around on this version. Very cinematic opening with the swells. I do agree with Proph that the scalar pattern differences between the vocal and the rest of the track could fit together better, but aren't a dealbreaker. The flute has some digital artifacting on the vibrato that is distracting, notably audible @ :40, 1:02 - 1:05, and 1:23 - 1:33. Aside from the artifacts, the implementation also feels somewhat mechanical because of the tempo; the other Js have noted the stop-tongued marcato elements on both the flute and trumpet (later in the piece) sounds out of place and I have to agree. I don't think the marcato is a bad idea, per se - just that the current implementation takes more away from the piece than it adds. Lingering on the shorter notes longer could make the phrase sound more compelling without compromising the vision. The arrangement overall leans conservative, though there's enough here to work - the expanded cinematic intro and the rubato breaks (@ :59 and 1:34 - 1:43), combined with the melodic flourishes, are just enough to get over the bar for me. I think this idea has legs, but there's more work to be done to get it across the finish line. I'm aligned with my fellow NOs in that, for me to sign off on this one, I'd need to hear more organic expression from the lead instruments (flute, trumpet). NO (resubmit)

Super groovy source, as expected from a Sonic OST! Not much for me to add that hasn't already been noted by Proph and Wake, unfortunately. As a bassist, I can get behind a bass-guitar-forward mix all day - as long as what the bass is doing is meant to be the focus. As it stands, the bass is in direct competition with both the Omnisphere bells and piano (:00 - :12, :12 - :38). I definitely agree that volume-wise it could be lowered several dB and still have the presence in the mix it deserves without standing on the toes of the melodic phrases. There's nothing inherently wrong with the bass using passing tones to transition chord roots, though you'll want to be careful that the harmony you're crafting between all the layers (bass, strings, piano, pad, and all the reverb and delay) is copacetic. Wake and Proph noted the dissonance/crunchiness @ :38 - :51 where the delay FX on the piano clash with the piano itself as well as the pad/string layers. You may need to automate or duck the delay during those clashing sections or remove that effect in that section. :51 - :55 is such a highlight section, and I also would love more of that feel in this piece. :55 - 1:20 would be a cool spot to continue the tonality of that gnarly distortion guitar since you're recapping the A section here. In general, when reintroducing sections from the piece, it's a good idea to vary parts of that section to keep things from feeling stale or redundant. For me to sign off on this one when it comes back, I'd need to hear: the bass guitar reduced in volume to give space to the piano, bells the clashing/unwanted dissonant notes fixed @ :38 - :51 more variety to the sections after :55 There's a lot of opportunity here to make this one feel more like AshleyXR, and you've got a good foundation established here to build on. Feel free to bring it on back to us after spending some more time with it! NO (resubmit)

Hell yeah, another track I can point to for properly programmed guitars! Great velocity manipulation to get the most of the palm mute rhythms, especially @ :13 - 1:08. I do think it maintains that palm mute feel a hair too long personally, but the intro is excellent. Proph mentioned the gating feeling awkward @ 1:35 - 1:39; to me, the gate is nice and tight, though I think the pickup selection on the guitars are taking away from the effect. They're very dark, which works @ 1:40 - 1:42, but that upper octave needs more bite to it. Still, excellent work here! Listening to the sources to get a grasp on this one, I wish there was a little more in the way of interpretation overall across the track. It's not that there aren't moments of personalization (the Wet as a Fish segment @ 2:24 - 3:08 in half-time, the opening of The Return of the Creature segment @ 4:41 - 4:51 are great examples), it's more that this is landing more on the side of cover rather than rearrangement to my ear. A return to one of the other themes, as suggested by Wake, would help alleviate this feeling. The transitions, even the slam ones, don't feel out of place in the style - Metallica's various medleys are the gold standard for me, and this mix walks the same line. Production-wise, this is rock solid. I have gripes with the toms in The Return of the Creature being pretty much all attack with no body to them. They almost sound pitched up to bring their attack out, which gives them a sort-of tabla/conga/hand-drum tonality that doesn't gel with the rest of the presentation. However, that's a nitpick and not a must-fix - getting toms to be phat in a mix with lower-tuned guitars and bass is troublesome to begin with, and that they're audible is good enough. Like Proph and Wake, I too would love the leads to be more forward, and I wonder if they're simply being smashed by the multiband or limiter on the mixdown? I'm finding myself also on the fence here, and I think I'm going to fall on the side of Yes - this hits more than it misses, although I wouldn't mind a second pass on bringing the leads forward and adjusting the toms. YES (borderline)

Hi Goodman! What's here is an excellent mixdown of an immaculate vibe. Nothing I'm about to write in this vote is going to alter that opinion! I agree with Liontamer that this is a much more straightforward remix of the source, where our standards look for additional rearrangement to pass the bar. Below is my stopwatch timestamps for what I feel is source usage (which the sampled audio won't count toward). With 3m:28s (208s) of runtime, I'm looking for roughly 104s of recognizable material from the source track; ideally, it's using as much meat from the source as possible. This one is relying a lot on that Intro 3-note melodic motif while never really adding in the harmony voice from the source, nor diving into the arpeggio of the A or B sections fully. Aside from the transitional tag going from the A section to B section (@ 1:48, @ 2:19, etc), there's not much else that I can directly hear as a strong enough tie. We don't typically count bass note movement or the chord progression as source usage unless they are atypical, which is not the case here. Again, the execution of this track is undeniably good and I don't doubt that it would see success outside of OCR. It just doesn't have enough juice for me to sign off on it being above the bar. NO

Hi H36T! As noted by the other Js here, this is two rounds of the A-B loop of the source with 3 bars to vamp into the second repeat around 1:26. The additional instrumentation on the second repeat is a lovely add; having it arrive earlier in the piece would be better from a personalization standpoint. The strings, choral voices, winds, and piano counterpoint line are doing some heavy lifting on that front (and the chimes!), but there's still more that can be done to bring more H36T to the table. Proph mentioned adding variation in the velocities of notes for more dynamic contrast in the writing, and I agree. Given the title of the track and the direction intended in the write-up, I agree with Wake that a more subtractive approach to your sections could improve the emotional dynamic curve. I'll add that some rubato (gentle deceleration of the tempo and holding the last note/rest a little longer than the metronome) on the ending of phrases would help break the rigidity of the structure and bring more of the emotional weight to the piece. Right now, it feels locked to the grid and mechanical. For me to sign off on this, I'd need to hear more personalization to the piece, primarily in the dynamics of voices or the dynamic curve of the piece as a whole a less locked-to-the-grid/mechanical feel to the presentation NO (resubmit)

Everyone has access to it, worst case is that it requires approval from admin but we will make it happen! Also put me down for “Theme of Laura” from Silent Hill 2. I’ve got a cowpunk version of it I started up for Xaleph’s 1-hour remix roulette that deserves more attention

Hell yeah! Be sure to add it to the Events Calendar 🙌

Oh yeah, that source is killer! Haven't gotten to check out Risk of Rain 2 yet but played some hours of the first one, very enjoyable. Opens with some dark chords on the rhythm guitar and some nice groove from the kit, with the bass coming in after with some filtered delay. The feel here is a bit looser than I'd like, and the delay on the rhythm guitar and bass make some sour notes in spots (:22, :30, etc). I'm a fan of the vibe, just there's some lacking here on the mixing execution that's holding this one back. One note about the delays on the guitars and basses - all the delay choices are mono, and when there's a walking groove going on in the bass (see @ :24), the notes start to clash. Consider ducking the delay while the bass is playing, and panning the delay to the edges of the stereo field (using a ping-pong delay or automating the instrument in one speaker and the delay in the other). :28 gives us the lead guitar, which has a nice neck pickup clean tone. Love the way the chord changes @ 1:01 set up the breakbeat change @ 1:13! This breakbeat section is incredibly muddy. The rhythm guitar is all but lost - some of it is from the amp tone and some of it is from where the chords are being voiced. Consider shifting the voicing up an octave here, or double-tracking the rhythm with a higher voice and separating them with panning left and right - they are competing directly with the bass here. I noticed earlier the drum mix was pretty bright (lots of information above 12khz) and while it's serviceable in the intro, here in the breakbeat section, the kit's sibilance buries everything else. The kick, in particular, is all beater and no body - is it being swallowed up by the bass and rhythm guitar? I'm hearing similar issues in the next few sections, though I'm now hearing the rhythm guitar is slightly out of tune after the second breakbeat passage around 2:40. I like the neck tone of the lead guitar during the calmer sections, but it lacks the leading presence during the breakbeats. Bridge pickup and a different amp tone would make a big difference here, though if the drumkit's mix isn't adjusted, it'll have trouble coming through. I'm going to echo Proph and jnWake here - there are some interesting ideas here that are being held down by the mix and stringed instrument performances. For me to pass this, I'd need to hear: A tighter recording of the bass and guitars Variation on the voicings of the instruments - chords, amp tones, etc Another mix pass to cut down on drumkit sibilance and make the delay FX not mask the source instruments NO

Sheesh, that source material is like 90% A section, 10% B section. :P The opening has some evolving synths, putting the A section melody in the bass with a low-pass sweep. There are lots of small changes across the sound spectrum despite maintaining the actual A section for 2 and a half minutes - the filter sweeps, adding the ride cymbal to the drumkit, then ride bell for time-keeping, side-chain choral synth. There's an over-reliance on drum fills here, like Proph mentioned - I do hear different fills in places, but the majority of this early section uses that same tom run-down. I am a fan of slow burns, but I'm feeling like the piece is dragging hard by the time we reach the break @ 2:33. The change up to the B section here is great, though I can't help feeling like it's arriving late from a macro sense. The drums in the second act of this sound noticeably different, which is another welcome change, though they suffer from the same issue the earlier drum kit does in that these are one-shot samples that are static throughout. In a shorter piece, this would be less grating on the ear - 2 minutes for each section, and the snare sounds basically never change throughout, makes the whole groove feel plodding. @ 4:22 we get a more exploratory section that focuses on the side-chain choral element, feeling much more like another B section from the source. We add some sweet bends @ 5:05, and it trucks through into the outro and out. There are elements here that are working great - it's super easy to grok different instruments from one another even with the mix being loud, and I do really enjoy the filter sweeps and sidechain bounce! However, I'm in the same boat with jnWake and Proph - this one suffers a lot from overly long and repeated sections, which exposes the static nature of the sound palette. For me to sign off on this one, I'm going to echo Proph specifically and say: less repetitive drum fills, and a more compelling composition shorter sections would be preferable, but more interesting rhythmic or dynamic changes in each section would also work. NO (resubmit)

Hellllllll yes! There’s a One-Ups album I keep coming back to (Songs for the Recently Deceased) that is super inspirational for this! Not sure what piece I’d do yet but it would be in the same vein as that record for sure

I'm a Norvak novice, and I can certainly see things to love in this work! Everything in the source is represented in this track and then some, like the key change around 1:21 and the brief polymeter phrasing around 2:52. Nice little shuffle on the hats starting @ :31 to play with the grid established by the basses at the start of the track. The change-up @ 1:21 is refreshing, though I wonder how much more dynamic shift could have been attained there - @ 2:31 gives us our first taste of a break from the oppressive beat and I would have prefered to have it a minute sooner. Just a minor nitpick, though. That syncopated bell synth @ 2:52 is cool as hell, hitting us with some 9/8 against the 4/4, and is easily my favorite part of the track. Recap of the A section @ 3:15 feels good with the additional leads on top to fill the space. Trucks around the tried-and-true "root | 4th | root | 5th | 4th | root" blues motion before dropping us into the outro @ 4:20. I'm not a fan of the lack of prep on the out, given how much time is dedicated to working around the blues harmonic motion, but it doesn't sink the whole track for me. Like proph said, we don't judge based on potential but on what is. The production is loud but clean, the arrangement is clever, and the oppressive Doom vibe is on lock. YES