zircon

Sounds here are kind of thin, in my opinion. Lots of treble-heavy sounds, lots of muddiness due to excessive reverb/delay. :30 is sparse, partially due to the crappy synth-brass lead, as Larry pointed out. In fact, to save time, I pretty much agree with everything that Larry said in his vote. I would just add that you need to try and mix better. There's a serious lack in bass, generally speaking. Some sounds are thinner and 'cheaper' than others, and you're using reverb on the wrong things (eg. the kick doesn't need any, but the vox/choir sound completely dry.) Arrangement ideas are fine but the production just needs an upgrade overall, and that includes rethinking how to layer up instruments and create a full-sounding texture. I also felt that this was a little too spastic and chaotic. I would have liked to hear parts without that fast-moving melody, but also not empty and half-tempo. Right now, it's too black & white. Maybe some nice big chord motions? Either way, I would take another look at the writing to see if you can pull it off better. You're getting there, keep at it. NO

I picked up an iPod Photo back in Fall 2005 - 30gb - and I haven't had any problems necessitating repair or part replacement.

For this contest specifically, you would have to use Warhead or Mindbender, since I'm looking for remixes of both those tracks. An arrangement may be acceptable also depending on how it compares to the original(s). If you do remix or arrange something else we may still be able to work something out. If you produce something good it won't be ignored. If you do have Z2 and win then yes I will just give you the presets, and give the synth itself to the next best mix.

I had fun mixing/mastering this one; I wish I had the original version to A/B it. The mixing was tricky due to the drum and guitar tone, which I really had no control over, so I had to do some careful EQ to get everything to fit and have the melodic elements emphasized properly. The strings were sort of washed out and pad-like too, which is why I reinforced them with my own samples and synths. The end result might not be perfect but I still think it's an improvement, and compliments the (most excellent) writing.

UPDATE: I now have a copy of Zebra 2, my favorite softsynth, to give away for the #1 remix in the contest! This is a KILLER VST/AU plugin that can do just about any kind of sound imaginable. It normally retails for $200 and honestly I'd buy it again if it were twice that. I'll also throw in all my custom preset banks (over 160 sounds) which include patches I've used in remixes like "Monstrous Turtles" and "Scenes from a Memory", as well as my albums Antigravity and The World Circuit.

Yeah, hardcore snares = 909 w/ distortion. These MPC sounds are way better than any FPC samples in FL.

OK, just wanted to be sure, since zyko said the mix can't be changed at all.

So what sort of plans do we have in mind? Anything more concrete than last year? Preferably reducing the amount of walking and selecting places to eat in advance that would be able to seat us appropriately. Not that I don't mind a degree of walking around, since you get to talk to people regardless. But it would be nice to have a sort of 'home base', you know?

Heard this in WIP, let's see what changed. Intro is nice, buildup at :33 is real solid, and then the big beat drops at :44. I don't have any problem with the drums there - I don't know what Larry is talking about. Sounds very in-your-face which is exactly how it should sound. However I would have preferred less reliance on Amen, and more changeups on the beat in general. The issue with :44 that Larry probably is getting at is that it's too sparse. It literally is just drum & bass, and the bass is also doubling as the lead. I don't think it's enough to work. If the synth was more interesting, with lots of crazy filtering, glitching, or other processing going on, it might work, but as is, it's not enough. I would shift the synth into a bass-only role and make the processing more interesting. Maybe do a chip synth or some other kind of basic melody instrument there. 1:07 is more what I'm talking about. I'm still feeling a lack of distinct harmony. Some kind of sidechained pad(s), strings, arpeggios, or stabs would help to fill things in. You can do that and still sound heavy. Of course then it goes back to the drum+bass only thing. I do think the way the melody is treated is cool throughout, so good job there. 1:54 could be voiced better, in terms of orchestration - the chords are too low, which makes them sound muddy and lack power. Expand the chord across more of the range, IMO, and consider maybe adding brass too. I was also disappointed that this section ended so quickly! You could have turned it into a sweet breakdown at least 2x-4x as long, if not longer. The tom fill at 2:29 is sweeeeeet, love that, but then the section following is kind of low-energy. The melodic interpretation is cool (my only suggestion: more vibrato automation on the synth) but everything else kind of plods a bit. After that it's another sweet build, and then a return to repetition at 3:05, eventually leading to a pretty simple ending. This is definitely on the right track, and enjoyable as is, but needs beefing up in some areas. The riff at :44 is repeated too much for comfort, and is too minimal for being repeated that much. Several of the synths could use additional automation (filter, vibrato), and the orchestral break in the middle can (and should) be expanded more to vary things up more. If you are running out of ideas, use more parts from the source - you still haven't touched the B section at all. Production, generally speaking, is hott. Nice and big sound. I feel like this is maybe 80% of the way there. Please resub! NO. resub

Quite an interesting style you've got going on. I've never heard this combination of instruments and sounds before, and I think it works fairly well, conceptually. The guitar is wonderful through-and-through, the drums through 1:50 and a lot of other points in the song, not as much. They seem just a little too harsh for me considering the way the rest of the song moves; they're aggressive and dance-ish. I think maybe some kind of processed acoustic kit might work better. The percussive stuff at 1:50 to 2:16 on the other hand was very creative and worked well in the soundfield. Other instrumentation was a mixed bag. I would have liked to hear more 'modern' synths, not just chiptune style stuff, like Larry. But there were a lot of small details that I could really appreciate, and I generally really like your approach here. The production otherwise seemed fairly quiet. If we do pass this, it needs to be normalized and preferably compressed a bit to bring up the overall volume. Should be easy enough. So the arrangement issue boils down to whether its acceptable to have the main melody being played nearly exactly like it is in the source, with a very similar instrumentation for most of the mix. Does the original writing and expanded harmonies make up for it? I thought there was a lot of creative writing that was added to build on the original. This is a tough call for me. The production is rough in spots, and in particular I'm not fond of the main beats, but I think ultimately this is a creative interpretation that does pass our bar. The melody is not as creatively interpreted as I would have liked but the supporting writing and new counter-melodies, riffs, and harmonies makes up for it IMO. YES

At the moment I'm only offering remix packs for those two songs. At some point in the future I might add more, maybe once I release another album. Of course if you're just doing an *arrangement* and you don't actually need the WAV files, then be my guest..

Prophet BTW just so you know, your remix can really be in any style. If you somehow manage to turn it into, say... smooth jazz, then awesome.

The log Larry posted still reflects my view on TO's interpretation of the original's bassline. Unfortunately, given the breakdown of the actual source melody usage that Larry provided (which I agree with on my own examination) this does mean that the mix consists of <50% source material. I think some very easy tweaks could be made. By simply using the original bassline as is for a bit every once in awhile, or extending the main melody into some sort of soloing, or even just using parts of it as a riff in the sections that currently don't have melody, TO could bring this over the 50% limit. Production-wise, and in all other respects, this is solid, as per usual with our Aussie friend. Just tweak up the arrangement a little more. NO

The orchestral stuff at :30 is too loud, too bassy, and has too much reverb. Everything just sounds built up in the lows, with no clarity or distinction between parts. This doesn't leave a lot of rooms for the other stuff that comes in, so everything after that point is too cluttered. The piano, as Larry pointed out, is very mechanical. This mix doesn't have a lot of dynamic to it - it tends to just repeats the same riffs and patterns over and over while layering stuff over and over. There is no significant change to the chord progression or the level of volume/energy. It needs to flow and 'breathe' more. As it is, I felt that the same short chord phrase was the basis of the whole thing and not a lot was being done to really make it interesting. Also, when compared to the source tune, this could be more interpretive. The main riff is basically used verbatim in terms of notes and rhythm at a few points. The chords are the same. You could add some original melodies, change the rhythms, go to a new time signature, perform a solo on top, use another source from the game, etc. In the right direction, but not quite enough in this department either. To summarize; production is crowded and muddy with some mechanical sounding sequences, while the structure and arrangement could use refinement. Use the Remixing and Works-in-Progress forum to get help & feedback. Keep at it! NO

There's a lot of reverb on this mix, right off the bat. The opening strings have a weird stereo image too. I don't think the drums really fit either; they sound more like big beat or hip hop drums than soft ballad drums, which is what I would think you would want. In general, the mixing/production here needs a lot of work. Too much reverb on nearly everything, hihats are too loud, kick is hard to make out, and instruments tend to step on eachother in the frequency range. THAT BEING SAID... I think the vocals are excellent! Great performance and great recording. Too much reverb, but I mean that aside, really cool stuff. The issue is the backing track, which in general just does not sound nearly as good. Hit the Remixing forum for more help on mixing/EQ, and maybe picking up some better samples as well. I like the arrangement overall. You've added original parts and varied the source tune's melody in the vocal line. Good job in this department. I came away feeling that you really personalized the original song and turned it into something more. In terms of the structure, this mix has great dynamic and a well-thought out contour overall. It's enjoyable to listen to. For example, I like the way everything swells towards the end, how the ending itself doesn't fade or abruptly stop, but uses the glock + piano to close out. Creative stuff. This boils down to production for me. The mixing/mastering could use work as a lot of the parts not distinct enough due to EQ, the string sample isn't that great, the drums don't fit (and are kind of repetitive also), and there's too much reverb overall. You might consider adding some synth sweeps or pads to help mask the weaker strings, and maybe layer up the drums more to create rhythmic interest and variation over the course of the track. I'm probably sounding rather nitpicky but I think this is a great track conceptually, with a good vocal performance and well-written lyrics. I would really like to hear this with the production issues fixed. Please resubmit, and don't forget to use the Remixing forum and #ocrwip on IRC (irc.enterthegame.com) if you need more help. NO, resub

The amount of direct sampling from the source here is definitely a bit too much, even though I like how the kick sidechains it. Plus, The production level is here is pretty nice. The piano/drumloops that come in when the main big beat isn't playing aren't that great, though. The piano is really mechanical and lo-fi, while the drumloop doesn't have much energy. Then from :46 or so to 1:30 its just total repetition, no melody or anything. 1:30 itself is sort of just repeating the earlier piano/drumloop break from before. At 2:01 there's finally some new stuff, and it's actually melodic, but it's really bare and spare with just the simple beat underneath and a bit of other harmony material. This tends to rely on the beat to drive it, and while the beat is good, it's not strong enough to propel the entire arrangement, considering all the direct sampling. While there are some creative ideas with synths, voice sample chopping, and some of the backing pads, nothing is really developed. It tends to default on the same small handful of ideas over the course of the mix. You really need more arrangement of the source tune, varying it up and also layering more instruments into your mix. If you don't want to add any more layers, then at least you should remove the direct sampling and replace it with your own original synths that should hopefully personalize the aspects of the source that you like. There's a lot of melody in the source that could have been used here, but wasn't. There are definitely opportunities to make your remix more developed and expanded, especially considering it seemed like you had a number of creative ideas. Hope you keep at it and submit more. NO

Yeah, while I was tapping my foot to the groove of this one, it's awfully close to the original. You've basically just taken the remix and ported the different parts to new instruments, while adding some simple accompaniment. The production is pretty much fine, though the drums sound kinda cheap and don't have a lot of variation. The main issue, by far, is that the arrangement is so basic. It just plays the theme and fades out. No solos, no tempo changes, no rhythm changes, no changes to the harmony or chord progression, no real funk or groove besides what the original already had. While it's a cool performance of the source tune, we are really looking for creative interpretations of video game music, rather than just covers; I suggest reading the submission standards and listening to more recently posted mixes to get a better idea of what we're looking for. One last small suggestion: use a real bass, or at least a sample of one! The current synth bass is very plain. NO

Stylistically, this is pretty cool. Reminds me of doujin arrangers like SSH. The sounds in general are not amazing (though the pads and guitar are strong) but the production is for the most part polished and clean. I don't really have any major problems there. The primary issue is that this seems to stick pretty closely with the original in terms of tempo, chord progression, harmonies, melodies, etc. There is not a lot of interpretation being done, as Larry pointed out. More original sections, original writing, and variations on the themes from the source would probably put this over the bar as the production and concept are both strong. NO

Haha, the intro to the source tune sounds like a B-side to "Underneath the Rotting Pizza" from FF7, and the whole thing sounds vaguely inspired by "Oppressed People". The production here is kinda off. The drums are heavily filtered/distorted to the point where they're just unpleasant. The hits definitely cause clipping-style distortion regularly, and the piano is buried; plus until 1:01 there's hardly anything melodic to speak of. The wah guitar doesn't really sound that tight, at least compared to the original. The beats at 1:21 are again too trashy and also over-reverbed. When the piano comes in again it's as quiet as it was before. This feels like the backing to a track that should have a lead over it. No instruments are really prominent at all besides the drums. The strings are also pretty bleh in terms of sample quality. Overall, production needs a lot of work, especially in the consistency of the frequency balance throughout. With regards to arrangement, the style is kind of similar to the original, though the way the melodies from the original were presented is varied somewhat. There is definitely a level of interpretation in some parts, but the weak production makes it hard to distinguish any melodic focus, and in fact I kind of felt that this strayed into liberal territory towards the second half, as I wasn't hearing a lot of source there. The structure of the piece is also kind of weak, with basically two very different sections loosely connected, and then a very abrupt ending. There's lots of room for development here. More focus on melody should be your main priority. Keep at it! NO

Cool mix. The production is polished and clean, with good mixing/mastering, but at the same time it's got a gritty & lo-fi sound on a lot of the instruments that really works. The texture evolves throughout the course of piece, even though the actual dynamics don't change that much (volume-wise) which gives it a feel of motion - I don't really think it needs to be cut down at all. Arrangement is also great. This mix exemplifies how you can do a lot with not only the melodies of a source, but the chord progression and harmony riffs. The mixer has added original writing that really fits in with the source material and the end result is definitely solid. My only possible complaint might be a lack of more direct melody usage, but I think there is more than enough arrangement derived in some form from the source tunes (be it an arpeggio, chord progression, backing riff, rhythm, etc.) to qualify it as an OC ReMix. YES

Very nice mood. The arrangement is quite creative and the instrumental texture is chill, between the smooth keyboards, nature FX, and wah guitar. Ultimately though, as much as I hate to reject something that can't be resubbed, I feel like I'd otherwise have a double standard because I have personally NOed other mixes with clipping issues. It happens at least three times that are obvious and a couple of other times that are less obvious. Additionally I thought the guitar tuning was a little more noticeable this time around because (as Palp said) there are times where you can reference it directly with another part and it just doesn't sound spot on in pitch. Sorry man, I just can't quite let this one on as is. NO

This is pretty creative as compared to the original "Living Waterway". Really introduces a different mood and changes the melody/harmony in an interesting manner. Production is fine, not too mellow but not too in-your-face either. It works. It boils down to the level of density and the repetition factor. Despite the layering of the drums over the course of the song, I think this is just a little too drawn out given the lack of substantial variations in the sounds. Path-ology was definitely stronger in that regard. Though it had a static drumloop, there was more going on so it got covered up more. At least, that's how I look at it, and even that mix was pretty borderline. Less repetition, more patterns. NO, resubmit

Yeah, samples are a big downgrade from the sound quality of the original, which seemed like a super-polished combo of live and sequenced instruments. Stylistically, it's just about the same as the original. Same beat, same instrumentation, except your samples don't generally sound as good, such as the cheap bass and the piercing, buzzy brass. Your acoustic guitar isn't terrible, at least the strums - the lead isn't so good. It also seems to me that you stuck closely with the arrangement of the original in terms of melodies and rhythms, at least based on what I heard in that video link you provided. I suggest rereading the submission standards & guidelines. We are not looking for simple recreations or performances of video game tunes, but unique and creative interpretations that expand the original piece. As is, this does not pass our bar for either arrangement or production. NO

Up to :41 I thought the sounds were pretty nice, good chill groove. But one of the piano instruments at :41 seems to be kind of out of tune, and really at that point everything is just a little too washed out and reverb-heavy. The synths at 1:20 weren't bad, contributed to the chill groove. Once the prelude melody comes in, at this point, I'm feeling like this really needs to be a little more built up. 2:23 is what I'm talking about, better layering here, with some nice variations on the prelude melody on the piano in the background. Still, the pad + piano feel mushed together and not appropriately separated. At 3:03 the change into uptempo dance/trance was rather surprising. It took awhile for any percussion to come back in, and when it did, it didn't quite match the feel of the rest of the instruments. I would have changed the drum samples to punch through a little more. All in all, the level of interpretation was good, and I liked your ideas. However, the arrangement does seem to be drawn out, with a lacking sense of pacing and dynamics. It doesn't quite flow like it should; I feel like if this were more like 4 minutes or so, it would have been stronger. Production could use some tuning up at times, mainly the mixing and excessive reverb, and the percussion in the brighter prelude section. You're on the right track. An excellent early sub, keep working at it. NO

Piano riff at :08 to :15 in the remix SEEMS to correspond with the synth chord progression right off the bat in the source tune. But it's not quite playing the same chords, even though the rhythms are the same as the synth in the original. The underlying way the harmony moves in the remix does match up with that of the original (not 1:1, structurally) but that aside, I'm not hearing the melodic connection. The guitars are close though. Production isn't bad, but conceptually it's very similar to the way the original is set up. As strange as it sounds, try to be a little MORE interpretive with your concept, while being, uh, less interpretive with the melodies. NO