Hemophiliac   Judges ⚖️

Arrangement aspects of this are in a good place. I applaud the changes made to the original to make this your own, there's a lot of really interesting things going on. With that in mind I would like to see some more development of the melody some as well as variation in the percussion within any given section. The fade out ending isn't great, but not a deal breaker by itself. The improvised soloing in the 1:36 is nice, I'm not 100% sold on a few of the phrases here but it gets the job done. The guys already laid this out pretty well. So I'm not going to rehash a ton of it. The major downfall of this is the production. From sound/sample choices and mixing are low quality. I don't even know why there's a dip in the 2kHz range either. There's a ton of mud in the low end and overall a general lack of clarity. Establish clarity between the parts and a more fullness of sound. Neat ideas, but very much lacking on the production side. NO

Clearly there is not enough source usage in this track, it's an original track with a couple quotes from Zelda. Liontamer's breakdown is accurate. By itself that is no. Even if you are being truthful that the vocals are Ace Studio, they fall into the uncanny valley and are not realistic. It took time to add in breath sounds, but there's a few times where a word will blend right into the next word without a break. No time was taken to craft them into a believable performance. The vocals sound over-processed and super pitch corrected into an inhuman perfection. The percussion sounds over compressed and cymbals are sloshy. NO Now, I want to address the question I had previously asked you in the submission thread. At that time you said that the vocals were generated by Ace Studio. This is a non-generative AI virtual instrument. Our policy does allow for that. However, on your YouTube upload you state that they were Suno AI. Suno IS generative AI, and is not allowed. So either you've willfully lied to us and were disingenuous, or you really don't care about what you're doing and don't care about AI theft. Both avenues are not a good look. I personally think you're not being truthful and did not perform anything in this, it sounds entirely generated to me. From vocals, drums, bass, guitars, everything. If I'm wrong, and if that's the case I'll be glad to eat crow. However, they all still sound unreal and inhuman as well as poorly produced. Please rethink your approach to music if you consider submitting to OCR. This is not the place for AI content.

As my fellow judges have already stated, there's not much going on here other than the original source with some different synth choices going on. This is not something we're looking for here, we want to see more of your own ideas developed rather than just the source with new instrument choices. Variation of drums, adding embellishment to the melody, or completely new original material...anything at all to call it your own with your own spin on it is good. This feels incomplete and unfinished. The ending just suddenly cuts off as well. Doesn't seem intentional The production is lacking clarity as well. The samples/synths are filling up so much space it's difficult to make out what's going on behind them. Wither that's due to reverb, long releases, or just pool level balancing between parts it's all contributing to a large wash of sound that adds mud and dilutes the clarity of the track. The style is interesting and I could see this being a early 2000s trance-vibe, but as it is right now this is not ready. NO

This feels and sounds like a more modernized version of the original source. The ability to recreate all of that from scratch is impressive. However, there is a lot of similarity to the original source making this very conservative. Well, that's not what we're looking for in arrangements. I'd like to see more development of the source into more of your own interpretation. Right now this is very close to a cover. Even stepping away for a contrasting section that changes up the texture for a bit would be a good way to vary it up some. Give us more things like the synth guitar at 1:43 and the final 15 seconds of the piece. This is where I see sigtau coming through and less of the original, give us more sigtau! The production is mostly fine as I didn't catch anything egregious standing out to me. On that front I felt like the synth bass was weak and could support the piece more, but this by itself was not a dealbreaker. The drop at 1:57 into the transition was cool! The main issue is the similarity of arrangement to the source and how conservative it is. I could see this developing into more, but as of right now it's not ready. NO

First off I wanted to say that I think there's a cool idea here. Translating this to piano and cello to start feels like a no-brainer, but the idea works very well. When the other parts come in (bass, drums, strings, and guitar) at 1:15 this feels more fleshed out as a potential idea for a track. The guitar in particular is the best sounding element in this track with reverb and delay on it, and has a fitting tone for the track. Where this falls is the execution of production and the closeness to the original source tune. Adding the additional band parts is a step in the right direction, but it's still just the same melody and structure around that. More expansion and development of that idea and with more of your own ideas is the way to go. Production/sequencing leaves us with something much to be desired. We're really lacking the human feel here. It's all ice-cold perfectly sequenced with repeated velocities in the piano with line-locked rigid timing early in the piece. Humans don't play the exact same dynamic/velocity from note to note. There will always be miniscule differences between them. The timing won't fall exactly on the beat every single time. The cello sample in particular sounds very low quality and cuts off suddenly when it's done at 0:41. Almost feels like there's no reverb on the piano or cello to help with realism. Drum fill on the toms at 1:41 is awkwardly out of time. There's over a minute of silence at the end. Please double check your submission before sending it in next time. Once again, would love to see further development of your own ideas and expansion upon the source and not just a conservative arrangement on new instruments. The production should also be looked at for more realism with attention paid to humanization of the parts. It's a cool vibe, but not ready for OCR. NO

Very emotive performance here. Absolutely fitting in with the rest of the "Reflections" series that you have been doing. This is a nostalgia of positive feelings. There's some interesting decision making here that was unexpected. The first is at 1:01, the chord change here is unexpected but in a good way. Deceptive cadence that extends the phrase out just a little bit more before giving a more stable resolution at 1:04. The second is the direct modulation at 2:58. This was unexpected and unprepared, but handled well. The modulation catches your ear as it signals a new section and gives a contrasting feel. Bold choices like this can be rewarding when handled well, and you absolutely handled it well. Dramatic rubato and syncopation late into the piece really energize and uplift of the climax just before the key change as well. I understand your concern for this being conservative but this does not feel that way to me at all. There's a lot of personalization in the performance and expression that's not present in the original. Not to mention the lack of orchestration around it, this is a piano reduction after all. Great evolution and storytelling over the course of the piece backs up the strong performance. YES

Sweet approach to this classic source. Piano focused rock is nice. I'm digging the arrangement as there's a lot of melodic personalization with embellishment and improvisation. Kudos there, this is the kind of melodic personalization I'd like to see more of in other submissions. The overall structure is pretty much the same as the source, but with the amount of improvisation and embellishment on the melody that can excuse the closeness to the source structure. As the others have pointed out, there is almost 6db of headroom available. 0:28 this guitar transition was really cool. The guitar soloing late into the track is awesome and really puts your own spin on it while not getting too far away from the source. This is the highlight of the track to me. The mix and production are the major issues here. There's a lofi or lossy quality to this piano sample used. The whole track sounds like it has a gentle high pass and low pass applied to the whole track. I think that's a contributing factor to making this sound muffled and lossy. There's also clutter in the 100-300Hz range that is contributing to an unclarity of sound overall. You've got low drums here, bass, and the left hand of the piano (and rhythm guitars somewhere?) fighting for space. When they're all going together it just clutters the soundscape and contributes to muddiness. It's awesome that you've spent so much time working on this over the years. There's some really sweet spots to this, but the production just isn't at the level we're looking for. If you need feedback or extra ears on mixing passes, I would highly encourage you to check out the discord workshop. NO

There's some atmosphere here that I do like. The upper FM synth bell, pads, and choir pad sound lovely. The vocal chops/sampling at 1:00 were a nice addition as well. I'm however not sold on the dnb elements to the piece. They feel pasted underneath everything else and don't have a cohesion to them. It's like there's two different soundscapes going on with a large divide between them. The ethereal and bright upper elements, and then the harsh and gritty bass and drums. These things don't really feel like they belong together. The b I have to bring up the repetition of the loops next. The overuse of the same loop is very repetitive and loses interest quickly. You do at least change the pattern to something else when the sections change, but within a given section it stays the same. You could slice it up or write microvariation within it to spice it up more. 2:36-2:55 is an example of this. Halfway through you add claps on top to build the energy but the rest of the pattern stays the same throughout. 3:06-3:07 has a note here that sounds out of place. 3:19 is a very spicy harmony choice and it doesn't feel fitting. So to recap, FM bells intro and outro sounded nice along with the upper elements (aside from a few dissonant harmonic choices). However, not digging the divide between upper parts and the dnb lower parts, these don't feel cohesive with each other. Too repetitive could use more variation, this would really keep the interest going on a 5 minute long track. NO

When you say that Good Charlotte and Blink 182 were possibly influences, I agree they definitely had some factor here. This does sound like that early 2000s semi-emo rock style. I think you nailed that. It's a super fun arrangement that highlights all of the parts from the source at one time or another, and the performances are very solid. I have no issues with them. My problem is with the mix/balance. I can't understand the lyrics without following along with the written word because they are buried by the other parts. Their performance is good, no problems with any accent or enunciation issues. It's strictly balance and maybe some EQ'ing. The other parts are standing more forward to me and they cover up the vocals (except the short bit at the beginning when no guitars are playing). If the vocals were more forward featured in the mix I would likely be able to understand what is being said. Everything else in this is awesome and I wish I could give that a pass, but because the balance on the vocals effects the listening experience the whole way through I can't give it the nod. NO (resubmit)

The subtle changes and execution here are awesome, Guillaume. The variation in the left hand was done to perfection, changing up the part right when it needed to happen. As you said, it has the "religious sonority" you were talking about with the parallel intervals with An Irrevocable Past. Dynamic and evoking of divinity. I also have to mention the time sig adaption, great choice to change it up. This alone contributes so much to both feeling like the original and new at the same time. So expressive, great work. YES

Whoa whoa whoa, who let the crazy CV clone out into the wild? This source is awesome, and this arrangement is equally awesome. It was not hard to imagine it in this rock/metal style at all, and you pulled it off very well. Some of the part writing does get pretty close and dense, but the mix managed to keep them separate enough to still be clear. Tip-toe that fine line of heavy without being muddy. The drums sound great. My only complaint is the bass feeling on the weaker side, it's just missing some "oomph". But frankly it's still fine where it's at. The drop at 4:05 was excellent. Perfect time to bring the energy down and provided a much needed contrast to the frenetic pace we were on thusfar. I'll take my demons shredded with a side of drums, thank you for serving it up. YES

Later on.mp3 This would be kinda the opening bit, and then have some development and build up more to a bigger feeling later on. Definitely a small group sound to start and then expanding out to full band sound. Haven't spent much time with dynamics/humanization yet. First bit.mp3 edit: the upload put them backwards for some reason. The second audio is the beginning and the first is what would be later into the track. I have a title in mind already for the track which seems fitting for the disc as well: "Four Hearts of Fire"

Volume reduction on saxes helped quite a lot. Would've liked to see some alteration of wet/dry level on reverb to push them back in the soundscape instead of them being so "downstage", but this was definitely a step in the right direction. Nice work

Well this one has come a long way since it's initial rough sketches I heard in the workshop. The arrangement is great and follows the typical "head > solos > head/tag" jazz form. The source was adapted to that well, I do like the reharmonization in places and color added to the chords. Lampie's additions on the piano are excellent, keeps it in the right vibe the whole way through. Production could be sharper, particularly with the tenor sax being so forward and close. Pushing it back with the wet/dry blend on reverb to give it some distance would probably help that. I think the alto would probably benefit from that as well, but doesn't need it as much as the tenor. During the tenor solo, there's a few notes that don't sit within the chord perfectly. When those dissonant notes sit held out for longer values and aren't passing they stand out and feel wrong. If improvising isn't something April is very comfortable with, I would recommend writing out the solo or at least putting some "guidepost notes" in there to help. I felt the vibe and phrasing of the sax solo was fitting, just a couple notes that didn't agree. Is this perfect? It isn't, but that shouldn't stop it from being good enough. YES

My complain with the first version was that the balance between parts was off and the humanization of the samples was not ideal. The flute has been improved some by removing some of the chromatic runs, but it still needs improvement on it's humanization. The same goes for the new trumpet lead. Individual notes are static and don't have movement, as well as the line being detached and not legato. Legato samples are not a requirement to get passed, but more attention to their humanization will go a long way in improving the realism. The balance between parts is much better this time around. At 1:04 there's a piano supporting underneath, I don't recall it being in the first version. The part sounds ok, but the piano sample itself does not feel fitting for the style. This version is closer, but still not there as it's being held back by the uncanny valley. Some improvements made, but now other issues have appeared in their place. NO

We were there! Sweet to hear this one live on the day, and really cool to see it now as a submission. The live recording came out really well. The drums in particular are crystal clear. Endless is invisible in the best way possible, supporting without overpowering. My only nitpick is the guitar could be louder, but really this not a problem. Fun performance, absolutely fresh take. Easy vote. YES

There's an energy here for sure, but there's many issues. This is a highly conservative arrangement. Outside of the percussion it's nearly identical to the original source. This is also repetitive to the point that it honestly gets tiresome before we even get to the 2 minute mark. The original isn't very long before it fully loops too (~50 seconds). I would suggest to add some of your own interpretation or change-up some elements from the source. Not only will that help with the repetition but it will add one of the biggest missing elements from this piece: your own unique interpretation and ideas. Having a drop at 1:40 was a good idea, but it's still just playing the same thing, just with less parts. The texture and dynamic contrast is good, but we need some new ideas! Consider adding more textural shifts later into the track or cut repeats to reduce the repetitiveness. The drums don't have much punch to them and honestly feel over compressed. In terms of sound design much of the synths are very plain and vanilla. They could be much more sophisticated and interesting sounding. I don't like to say anything straight up doesn't sound good, but the whistle that enters at 1:53 is unpleasant. Not only does it stand out, but it lasts a long while, it just keeps going and takes a while before we get a break from it. I like the energy you're trying to bring, but there's simply too many problems as is. NO

Huge heavy metal sound here. The big metal energy is definitely a highlight here. So I'm immediately recognizing the sources as each one comes up, thank you for the breakdown. However, this feels more like a medley than one cohesive song. If there was more material bridging the gap between each song with more fleshed out transitions, it would be better fitting. We get fills between each, but that's not always enough development for it to not feel somewhat sudden. This kind of medley might work well in other places, but that's not what we're looking for in arrangements here. There's a gentle low-mids to mids (~300-1.5k) range scoop and I'm feeling that the bottom end is very full. To me it's not ideal in clarity. The bottom is bigger than the leads, and my attention is more drawn there. As others have mentioned, the synth leads aren't as forward as they should be. The scoop could be partially to blame for that. The lack of clarity seems to get worse as the song progresses, 4:41-4:53 for example. There's an additional drum element here (toms?) combined with everything else just being too much fullness and contributing heavily to muddiness. Performance of the parts sounds good, well timed, but the production and medley-nature of the arrangement are the drawbacks. NO

Sweet, high energy D&B! This is rad. Complete with utter madness in the middle, just how I like it! I have to say, book-ending the wild time changes and drum parts that Madness has with more "regular" dnb in the beginning and end worked very well to create a very interesting contrast. With regards to the Mad Luca section in the middle, I would've liked it better if the individual parts were clearer to the ear. They have a good energy but something about their sound design and mixing choices made them harder to follow the melodic lines here. Not a dealbreaker though. Aside from that the sources are both well represented throughout with clear and distinct sections for both. The production is not bad, the low end rocks and the kick is coming through nicely! Success from chaos! YES

You're right, I did say that I enjoyed your work in progress before, but felt like it needed more. I still feel that even though this one is pretty close right now and feeling borderline. I love the addition of the choir parts and the oboe, they sound beautiful. More adaption and parts added to this that would put this over the bar in terms of arrangement as we've had even more conservative stuff pass before. See: https://ocremix.org/remix/OCR04768 for an example of such. However, in that case there was also genre adaption going on for more personalization. This one feels almost like the same genre even though the instruments are changed. The opening is particularly very close to the original, until 1:07 when the cello enters and is giving some countermelody. The humanization and rigidity is also something needs to be brought up as well. I love Seph's suggestion of adding rubato to bring some more life to the piano part, right now it's very locked into the grid. Also the dynamic range is very small, more contrast and variation would also help the expression really shine through as well. Right now it's more robotic and not as expressive as it could be. Beautiful, but not up to par. NO

This one feels like a throwback to early 2000s OCR trance/dance music such as artists like FFmusic Dj. That's rad. I would have liked this more with the piano line being more humanized with more variation in velocity, but at the same time I recognize that in this genre more rigidity is normal. Surprisingly this isn't as in your face or hard-hitting as I would expect from this genre. As jnWake noted, there is more space to work with to get a bigger sound. That's not at all a knock on this track in particular, just something to consider for the future. No problem with source usage here as there's plenty of being used as well as new sections that are filled with your own interpretation and material. This could have also had a more substantial and definite ending as what is here now does leave you hanging without landing on the 1 or tonic. I don't necessarily feel effuse with praise here, but at the same time you got the job done with solid production and a good arrangement in a throwback-style remix. YES

I want to start out by saying there's some good personalization here and embellishment on the source material that is uniquely you. Good work there. The arrangement is ok, but definitely would not hurt from being expanded upon further more. Use of articulation was also executed well, aside from a couple of the trills. Specifically the trill at 1:01 and 1:07 both sound like they have notes in them that don't fit in with the other parts. 0:47 I'm not sure if it's the trumpet, trumpet + flute, or one of the string parts going a chromatic glissando here, but it's not sounding very idiomatic or good. For being a "treble" chamber piece, the trumpet is overpowering the other parts for most of the piece. It really makes this feel more like a solo trumpet piece rather than a chamber ensemble. Right now it feels like foreground and background parts only. Bringing that trumpet back into the ensemble so it sits amongst the other parts and is a group would be a benefit. A suggestion I would make is to consider swapping a part to a lower instrument like a cello to round out the low end some. That's not a requirement, but a nice to have. I don't have as much of an issue with the samples used as prophetik did, but having them be up front and exposed as they are now does not help them feel more realistic. With a track this short, everything would need to be firing perfectly on all cylinders to pass. Expand this out more, add more variation or another contrasting section, and work on the blend of the parts so they are working together as a group. The personalization is a good start here, but it needs more work on production and arrangement to get it over. NO

Good follow up to your previous work. Fits right in as a continuation of the story you're telling. The arrangement and orchestration choices are very well done. The dynamics are mostly handled well, and the tempo rubato in the beginning was a nice touch for some extra humanization. 4:17-6:02 was a particularly sparse section and before the timpani joins at 5:20 there could have been some light background textures added to help this space not drag so much. The long slow burn crescendo that follows after was good, and included some spicy harmonic choices that I liked. 7:04 is where things fall short for me, it's the climax and delivery of the theme as we've expected it finally. The upper strings' attack doesn't feel fitting to the drama of this moment, too legato and not enough bite. 7:22 there's a sforzando or fortepiano that didn't seem to work right. The cut to piano there is very abrupt and you don't really have the reverb tail to follow it so it sounds very unnatural. The other thing that felt unnatural was the harp coming through very clearly in the crescendo build to 7:01 and after. In reality the harp would not cut through a full double forte orchestra. While I do have some criticisms I don't feel they were deal breakers and the strength of arrangement and orchestration choices outweighed a few minor issues. YES

Don't need to get too deep on details because this is really solid! Secret Uematsu source I have never heard before, and it feels both like and not-like him as well. Beautifully executed arrangement, the source is fully dominant and it's full of the perfect piano embellishments I would expect to hear. Not everything needs to be super complex or virtuosic to be good and beautiful. YES

Mr. Norvak is back once again with more dark and heavy EDM. After getting through a complete listen through, the number one thing I'm happy to see is that this doesn't suffer from lack of repetition like some of the other submissions of yours I've heard in the past. Good job changing up the sections and adding contrast where it's needed. The master hits pretty hard, but I'm not hearing any over compression or artifacts. The bottom is nice and thick but not too overpowering. The biggest complaint I could make here is the relative lack of dynamics, even in the sparser sections it's still pretty loud and powerful. More dynamic changes within a section could do wonders to help evolve the soundscape. However with the overall lack of dynamic changes the contrast in sparser sections was good enough for me not to feel the piece is too static. The sound design is good with clean production, and there is lots of personalization here. YES