Rexy

I'm seconding Sir Nuts here. I knew that Stephen had a great voice utilized in more of his original work than remixes, but I never thought he'd take it to a cinematic level like this! The source's brevity didn't stop him from expanding on the structure, separating the B section voices at 0:33 and reprising the A section at 1:12. It does make the arrangement brief as well; however, there's plenty of time to let the vocals preserve the BGM's presence, and the added cinematic instruments carry a complementary subtractive backing. Even the production sounds tight - the vocals are well layered, enthusiastically performed, and felt cleanly processed to the point that I hear an all-male Malcos choir. The backing instruments are also well mixed, with the orchestrated elements having careful attention to articulation. I do have a nitpick regarding the acoustic drums - it's a great tone, but I feel the compression settings are a touch too tight. It doesn't sink the entire track, so consider it a minor observation. As it is, it's a fun exploration of a minimal source, with clean production values as well as an enthusiastic vocal performance. With how everything tied together, I'm happy to see this old-school legend back in the spotlight. YES

Since I took the track out of the inbox, I'll start. Honestly, I like the idea of turning a track like this into a French House inspired arrangement. The use of jazz-like chords and instrument palette served as an enticing backbone for the source, and that's despite how little of it got used. It also paced well, used that familiar B section for the hook, and is source dominant overall. But regarding said source use, this is what I detected: 0:00-0:26 - B section hook 1. Deduct 10 seconds of blank space. 0:30-1:00 - Straight-up sampling of the opening 5 seconds. 1:00-1:26 - B section hook 2, plus a reference to the 'hey' vocal in the source. Deduct 6 seconds of blank space. 2:00-2:30 - Straight-up sampling like before. 2:30-2:56 - B section hook 3, now filled with source, but 10 seconds of it sampled the intro again. 2:56-3:15 - Straight up sampling once more, only this time, it's at its most intrusive. I appreciate the idea of wanting to reference the vocal SFX here, but when they're more dominant than any non-sampled arranging, that becomes a problem. It's possible to keep the samples as they are, but increase the amount of non-sampled arrangement in its place. The A and C sections went unused, so consider adding or playing around with them in any blank spaces. I also feel a high-pass EQ on the sample would be useful as well, if only to filter out the drums and bass. As for the production, it feels heavy on the high-mids. It works for the acoustic guitar as you'd want to hear the string noises, but the closed hi-hat is too overpowering. Lowering its volume is one thing, but it also sounds lossy in its exposed state, so consider making a mid-high EQ cut on it as well. On the flip side, you have instruments like your clavinet at 2:00 sounding too quiet, even with the kick drum and bass taking a breather. I can see that getting fixed with simply bumping up its volume, though do try either cutting some lower-mids on the acoustic guitar or even boosting the clavinet's lowest frequencies. They sound like risky ideas, but it's worth thinking about taking advantage of this groove break. To sum it up, it boiled down to not enough non-sampled VGM, as well as needing another pass on the mixdown. I didn't mind the loops on your backing instruments as they served a purpose appropriate to the genre, and all in all, it was a fun idea to explore. I hope you get a chance to revise it, so keep at it. NO (resubmit)

Once again, Joey, your vocals are sick! The delivery is as enthusiastic as I expect from you, the lyrics delivered on their promise, and they've been well-mixed to the point that I can hear every word. The other accompanying VSTs also sound well mixed, with the saxophone and flute licks having a surprising amount of articulation for their brief appearances - not to mention great use of sweeps and low-pass effects to pace the arrangement. Talking of which, it's an expected direction from you - short and sweet, with those aforementioned subtractive changes and a decision to double up on the source material's A section (0:38, 1:35). I want to say that it works, but the problem that I have is the presence of the source audio itself. I didn't mind it for the 19-second intro, but it became more upfront when the B section got in play (0:57, 1:55) - and even when the A section got reprised during the fade-out, I could still identify the source audio underneath the VSTs. It's more intrusive than I anticipated, which is a shame because the rest of the groove complimented your vocals. Due to this, the track had put me in a corner. In a vacuum, it's a powerful rap adaptation of one of Yuzo Koshiro's lesser-known tunes and a fun album opener for your Video Game Rapper album. However, I'll need some time to reflect on whether the amount of source audio present makes it acceptable as it is for the front page. There have been mixposts with sampled game audio before, but not at this level. Hence, it's left me unsure about where to see the line. [EDIT 11/25: After much contemplation, I too feel the sampling is too much for OCR. It’s a shame, Joey, because I enjoy the concept a lot - so if you decide to rework it, it’s best you remove the audio and rework with your VSTs when appropriate. Keep going and don’t lose heart.] NO

This submission feels peculiar - you aimed for a four-on-the-floor dance direction, but the decision to use 10 bars of 4/4 before leading into another section gives it a pinch of prog. Before understanding this figure, I found it difficult to follow the groove - mostly in part to the deep arpeggio and piano providing the bass. It's a slow and straightforward progression, but the occasional presence on upbeats threw my anticipation off-course. I would suggest sticking to 8 bars of 4/4 per section, as it's an EDM standard, and it would make the track much simpler to follow. Talking of the piano, it provided the bass riff for the source throughout, so you got the source dominance part set. You also sprinkled the key arpeggio in various places, as well as the actual melody at 2:16 - an interesting choice that favors original writing for the core motif (0:53, 1:53, 2:46). But when combined with the previously mentioned quirky section length and the 6/8 source slapped onto 4/4 with its backbone stripped away, it makes the arrangement feel less overt. I get the idea that it's the first time you've made something like this, so it's best advised to bring the source melody away from a bridge and take center stage - both as a hook and as something to play around. Similarly, the production couldn't hold up well either. I appreciate the use of sequenced gates on some of your synths, though applying it to the source melody at 2:16 is an odd choice. Regardless, the soundscape feels empty. You've got bass instruments, percussion, and some mid-high melody lines, but you have nothing occupying the mid-section of the EQ spread. Consider adding a new rhythm section like gated synth chords or a more subtle pad to fill in that frequency space. On top of that, the four-on-the-floor drums can also get a refresher. For sections that don't have the core hook, try playing around with them by changing the kick sequence, swapping the hi-hat to a ride cymbal, throwing in other percussion parts like a tambourine or shakers, or any different idea not mentioned here. I also would feel some judges versed in FL Studio would give some advice to bring the best out of what I presume are default instruments - nothing wrong with that as we've had mix posts with default FL sounds before. Still, it's a more difficult task to polish them up than it is to find nicer organic VSTs for free. Regardless, I had a lot of critiques here. A structure without direction, rough application of VGM, and an empty soundscape are my primary reasons as to why I can't accept it. It would be difficult to bring it into a more acceptable state, but not impossible - which is why I suggest a more accessible option to practice EDM writing with more straightforward 4/4 source material. You've grasped the idea of what makes a VGM arrangement, so I hope you'll learn more with continued experience. NO

First of all, I have no problems with the production. All instruments are balanced and mixed in cleanly, the sound palette choice is appropriate for this ambient DnB direction, and the selection of envelopes here have made your synths feel more engaging. But I honestly wished I could say the same for the arrangement. The source is present, so that's a non-issue - but aside from the genre adaptation and placement of sections to accommodate for structure, there are no further modifications. In fact, from 1:36-4:35, the source is just covered outright. Instead of putting in a second loop at 3:19, I'd like to hear a section that develops the BGM - in other words, a chance to play around with it. Another thing I'd like to hear more development is your percussion. Upon entry at 0:44, I felt the groove initially sounded neat with the added effects in the background and occasional acoustic kit breakdown. However, you've continuously repeated this 8-bar loop, and it outstayed its welcome too quickly. It is possible to make more noticeable adjustments as the track goes on. You could change the pattern of the hi-hats/effects, alter the notation for the acoustic drum fill, substitute the closed hi-hat for a ride cymbal - the possibilities are endless. I'm sorry, Sandro, but repetition and an underdeveloped arrangement are dealbreakers, and I can't accept the track in its current state. It's a shame because the production chops are tight - and I do hope you're able to do another pass and bring the arrangement over the bar as well. NO (resubmit)

ReMixer Name: funkyzukin Game Arranged: Sonic CD [JP] Name Of Arrangement: Stardust à la mode Song Arranged: Stardust Speedway --- For this, I was inspired by the sounds of more modern Sonic games (Such as Unleashed,) as well as the sounds of french house. I guess there's not too much to say about it other than I made it on a whim and I had lots of fun making it. I hope you enjoy it!

Oh man, this is a trip back in time - so much that only Larry and Darke were in the previous decision. I thought the arrangement was neat and serviceable even back then, but I do understand your desire to give it a considerable production overhaul. Arrangement-wise, there are indeed some similarities between this and the 2005 original - the breakbeat style, Sadorf's treatment of the source melodies, and the structure more or less. I did notice some subtle tweaks here: The intro brought in more source The 7/8 [edit: oops, I meant 7/4 - thanks prophetik] part at 2:07 caught my attention as a fun breakdown The 2:45 section deviated in style and went full contemporary EDM And the ending at 3:28 also did well with combining the C section's melody and the A section's chord structure. Once again, I see it as a knack for demonstrating not only your arrangement improvements over the years but also respecting another person's ideas - in this case, your collaborator. It's obvious to say that the difference production-wise between the two is like night and day. The soundscape now feels vivid when the original lacked in low-end frequencies. The instruments are all clear to pick out and layered well, and the percussion has plenty of punch. Even the piano - an otherwise organic instrument - has a strong reverb that complements the breakbeat origins. I am, however, with Mindwander regarding the piano getting buried under the synths, but it's no dealbreaker at all - just a well-noted observation. All in all, this blast-from-the-past is refurbished in every possible way - hence, I can see it being front-page material. I say this can also be inspirational for anyone else who got their work rejected years ago! YES

I was involved in the previous decision, and even then, the arrangement worked initially. Compared with the original submission, I wasn't expecting a change of chord sequence for the main melody repetitions and additional countermelodies. I was okay with the breakdown at 2:00 last time, though I can get behind the idea of transforming the source's B section. The part beyond it leading towards the ending is more or less similar to what it was last time - using only two core components of the theme and relying on the adaptation to carry it forward. It remains a different take on Jenova, so I'm cool with where it went. My issues last time were with the mixdown, and in this case, I feel much happier with it. The dynamics aren't as squashed anymore, the limiter isn't getting in the way, and I can identify your parts. The change of drum kit to a lo-fi setup now contrasts the rest of the soundscape rather than blending in. I know Sir Nuts mentioned something about there being a wet mix, but weirdly enough, I don't think the cymbals feel wet enough - it's as if whenever they get hit, the tail gets cut short. Nitpicks aside, I got behind the arrangement last time and wanted the production to reach the same level - and it has. I believe it's ready for primetime, and I hope the process of working on this track has given you experience for your next project. YES

It's a bold move packing 11 different sources in the space of 4 and a half minutes. For the most part, they link together seamlessly, got played around when entering the big picture, and follows the dreamy soundscape that you put together. Of all of these sources, I only sensed Ballad of the Windfish getting a reprisal, which makes the most sense given the track's direction. That doesn't necessarily mean hearing more of the others, as long as VGM is dominant. Two things stick out for me, though. Firstly, I sensed two transitions that sounded off. The switch to "Gerudo Palace" at 2:25 sounds jarring and sudden, so it would be nice to soften the change from "Deku Palace" before it. I can say the same for the move to "Dragon Roost Island" at 2:50 - it's a sudden change from not only your moods but the key as well. Secondly, I also like how you decided to overlap "Song of Storms" on top of "Song of Time" at 1:40. It's a reliable technique that reduces the impact of medley-itis, and it's something I would've liked to have heard in other places throughout the track. Going towards the production, I'm impressed with the shaping of dynamics and articulations on your instrumentation, so you've made a positive start there. Yet, I find it interesting that it remains pleasantly minimalist for most of the track, and there's clarity going on between parts, but there's an emphasis on sub-bass frequencies for its duration. They're meant to act as a companion to bass instrumentation, so this is something I feel a high-pass on 50Hz in the master chain can soften. Also, the panning here sounds harsh, with most of the leads placed far to the right. Narrowing down the stereo field can help with this, as is the possibility of moving some of the more important sounds like the piano closer to the center. It's a pleasant direction for a multi-source track, but I don't feel it's quite there yet. I'd like to hear a revision with fixes on the sub-bass and panning, with the transition tweaks also being desirable. It still isn't bad for your first remix, Jérôme. Whatever you decide to do next, I hope to see you submit to the inbox again in the future. NO (resubmit)

Wow, listening to this in a vacuum, I felt the orchestration sounded fantastic! The instruments sound clear, the brass is well articulated, and there's some excellent care to dynamics and stereo placement for the other parts. The crazy chord writing and moments where it changed to 6/8 time signature breakdowns gave me those Phantasy Star Online vibes brought up in the comments, and combined with the more melodic parts of the original sections, it felt like a fun ride from start to finish. But there is a problem with this, unfortunately, and that is source use. Here's what I picked out: 0:06-0:15, 0:18-0:24 - transformed version of the arpeggiated piano (section A of Other Promise) 0:32-0:59 - melody as heard in Roxas's theme 1:40-2:07 - melody as heard in Roxas's theme 3:20-3:55 - melody as heard in Roxas's theme, then goes straight into the C section of Other Promise. 4:14-4:25 - Intro of both sources After crunching numbers, I sensed only 40% of the track with source present. I'm afraid in its current state I can't accept it based on that alone. I do have some ideas on how to remedy it. You can go over the original sections and figure out ways to add elements from the theme(s) in the background. You can cut the original parts short, allowing for more emphasis on the source. Or you could look at adding different Kingdom Hearts BGM as references into the original writing in a similar way to my first suggestion. You don't need to take all of these ideas all at once, but I'll be very grateful if you do decide to revise it. Honestly, production-wise, I admire the lengths taken to create something mesmerizing and powerful. I hope you'll be able to revise it with more source content - it's one I'd love to see on the front page if you make those changes. [EDIT: 2020/07/24 - After seeing Larry's timestamps, I compared them with my own. First of all, wow - I am a complete tosspot for not catching the theme C section at 2:21. Secondly, the main reason why I didn't count notes trailing off during the Roxas melody sections is that the notes in the original were 1/4 notes and were treated as such in the arrangement. Thirdly, I couldn't hear the first soundalike section, but caught on to the third. It's brought my stopwatching to over the 45% mark, which is already clutch territory as it is. Thankfully, the production values and overall framework have supported the ideas, and I now feel barely confident in seeing it on the page. Jamaal, this will definitely be a noteworthy debut - but I hope for future submissions, you should watch out for how the source spread goes.] YES (borderline)

I honestly don't mind the reverb on the lead. The track aimed for a chill and more minimalist direction, and a wet melody felt ideal for filling in space where other instruments are absent. The parts are mixed cleanly with no overlap, and they all have their place across the stereo field. The arrangement feels more borderline with two run-throughs of the theme, a subtle subtractive change-up with the arpeggio in the second one and a peculiar decision to swap backing chords for bars 5-8 and 9-12 in the main melody. It took me a while to get used to it, but it stayed in key and differed from the source material's character. I do have two nitpicks regarding the production. Firstly, there's a peculiar mixture of wet and dry synths that drive the direction forward. The piano has some clean reverb throughout, plus a concentrated delay in the ending. They not only let the piano absorb more of the sonic space but also add more of a sense of intrigue to the setup. However, I'm not too sure why some of the backing parts felt dry as a bone - particularly your arpeggios. A touch of room verb would've let them fit in the soundscape more, but I do appreciate the light echoed delay and respect the choice as an artist's decision. Secondly, I sensed an emphasis on treble and higher frequencies. The main contributor is the constant sweep, which zooms up and down on the frequency spectrum at erratic times. It has a surprising amount of power and occasionally gets heard over any other instrument that isn't the melody, bass, or drums. This critique isn't a dealbreaker, either. But I advise you for future submissions to keep the volume on higher-frequency sounds low for health and safety. With everything weighing up, the track barely passed the bar for me. The arrangement doesn't feel too exciting, and the production has an emphasis on a timbre lesser explored. Still, it's clean and serves as an example of simplicity applied well. I hope that after the decision gets done, you can learn something from this process for future submissions too. YES (borderline)

Did somebody ring for my attention? I agree with Larry in that the arrangement is solid stuff - and thank you so much for putting the source breakdown in your video performance! It's a cohesive framework that focuses way more on "Birth of a God" and uses occasional motifs from the others. The presentation does have that sweet jazz fusion stylization to it, with the appropriate sound palette, drum writing, and backing keys. It's a pleasant listen. Regarding the production values, I'm also in Larry's frame of mind in that the soundscape is thin. Your performance is tight, so I can't fault that at all. But if you're working with organic instruments like jazz guitars, it can take some further post-production to make them sound more realistic. I appreciate that you showed off the Evolution Strawberry guitar VST as your primary sound in this case, so it made me analysis so much easier. You've already demonstrated the use of keyswitches to get different articulations for your guitar sound, so you've made good progress already. But it is still possible to take it further. Look at the effect keys at the far right of the keyboard. Pressing them at appropriate times can add a muted or sliding effect into the performance, varying on velocity or how high up the virtual frets they are. It won't do anything about the flat attacks, but they can show off more of what Strawberry is all about. Take a closer look at the Tone and Setup tabs. Odds are you've done the former already with the number of guitar tones currently present. But the setup tab has a lot of custom options for the pick position, the static attack/release, the number of guitars multitracked, and other variables. See if playing around with them can add more life to the tone. And while I'm on it, consider setting up envelopes. All Kontakt sounds can have their settings mapped to one of these. By programming one in, you can change more of the tone/timbre on the fly. A more realistic guitar sound is one thing, but let's say for some reason your present tones are quadruple tracked and still sound flat. If so, consider layering a warmer guitar/synth underneath to add more fullness to the leads. If you would instead stick with the one sample, try getting more mid-range warmth from an external EQ effect or by altering the tone. Similarly, boosting the appropriate frequencies on your drum kit can add more fullness, as can delay and compression when necessary. But don't do too much on the overhead, as it'll make them sound less organic and I doubt they'd work well in a stylized setup like this. Nevertheless, that's a lot of production crits from me. Keep the arrangement as it is - it's already fantastic as it stands. But do experiment further with Strawberry's settings and consider further processing the sound for added realism and thickness. I believe it's possible to get posted with the sounds you have, so I do hope you get the opportunity to revisit this. NO (resubmit)

Ooh, I can hear that Moroder influence! Having listened to the three listed tracks, I got the idea that there's a lot more emphasis on melody and textures - and this is no different. Right off the bat, the framework is robust and explores the first half of the source, breaks down, goes to the B section and returns to the A section for a calming finish. The BGM is not only dominant, but there are more melody timbre combinations than I can count on one hand! There have been plenty of opportunities to play around with them, starting simple with rhythms getting altered with the third run-through of melody A at 1:36 and the syncopated feel on the intro arpeggio at 2:08. But when the call-and-response kicks in at 3:24, it equally experiments with melody B's timings and adds new improvisational writing, and the ideas continued to develop when melody A returned at 3:40. These are fun changes that both keep the source's familiarity and make it sound like Moroder could've composed the source himself! Now, I was one of those people that got asked to look out for the production values while Mike workshopped this track. Hearing this finished form, the choice of timbres are varied and excellent for this EDM sub-genre. They're also all identifiable in the mix, and they have contributed to this playful atmosphere going on. Stephen's voice also made those vocoders pop as usual. I know Mike saw it first-hand, but the pitch shift on said vocoder at 2:33 also caught me off guard in a positive way. It's a tight package that made me spontaneously do the djp - a sign that shows he's making retro grooves right. With all this fun and attention on the arrangement and production, I can see it on the front page. I'm also shocked that OCR hasn't received a new submission for this game in 19 years, so consider it a refresher on that part too. Good work! YES

I like the energy on board as well. You took Hidenori Shoji's trademark rock-funk and towed it into funk-funk thanks to that sound palette. The synths are well-modulated with some sweet LFO action, the e-piano in the background added a pretty later of warmth, and everything feels so clear and distinct despite this loud mixdown. On a production level, it got me sold. I had to think carefully about the arrangement, though. It's a safe structure with two loops of the source, a spot for comping and a refrain of the melody's B section to finish. It isn't bad at all, as it shows the source material is dominant. Regarding repetition between the two variations: yes, I agree that 0:20-1:00 and 1:21-2:01 are entirely identical, and by the same extent, 2:35-2:48 is equal to 0:47-1:00. But at the same time, the subtractive arranging throughout via the backing elements does enough to demonstrate changes to the source's composition. The synth solo itself didn't feel random to me - it stayed in key, and the way it playfully bounced around is appropriate for the genre. If this does get sent back, or you want to improve on your craft for future submissions, I second the prior critique about changing up that entire 1:21 section. I also like how you changed up the sweep fills at 0:18 and 1:19, so this is also something I'd like to hear more of as you segue in and out of similar sections. By looking at the sum of the parts, the production is clearly over the bear while I feel the arrangement barely scraped it. Its strength lies more in the genre adaptation and subtractive writing, and both have done enough to stand out from the source material. Do take our critique to heart when working on future submissions - I'm all for seeing you get to that next level. YES (borderline)

Arrangement-wise, I'm impressed! It feels more like a classical composition that takes elements from the four sources and even makes modifications to adapt to its shady character. I like how "Slew of Love Letters" and the C section of "Sword of Fury" got changed into a more somber mood at 1:34 and 3:26 respectively, and the double-time approach for "Devil's Ambition" at 2:47 also contributed well to the pacing. It gives me the idea that Kuja is the star of his unique love story opera, based on how the sections linked together. The production also sounds clean and well-balanced, but it's not without its minor irks. Articulation isn't even my biggest beef this time, as the instruments are mostly beautifully realized - with only the brass parts sounding not quite as human. I want to shout out to that synth female voice in particular - the volume shaping and vibrato sound lovely! If there's one thing I can change personally, it's adding a touch of reverb onto the overall soundscape for that concert hall experience. I can see this working well without, though. Unfortunately, this track has a set of crackling pops that would require another render to get them addressed. I heard some at 0:36 1:35, 1:38. 1:49, 2:06 and 3:56, as well as an audio skip at 3:55. I also heard what I assumed was bow sounds at 0:03 and 3:15, to save another judge from any misunderstanding. As it stands, it's a more thorough and advanced arrangement with some well-articulated and clean instrumentation. I can firmly get behind this, but that's provided the crackles get fixed. I'm confident that Rebecca will co-operate with us. YES (conditional on fixing pops)

You got the source undoubtedly present, and with subtle subtractive arranging between each variation. The piano run set the stage, the orchestral metal variant added some new wind/string flourishes and harmonies from 0:55, and eventually added brass stabs near the climax. The Indian folk-based section at 1:42 went loose with lovely accented percussion, and an expressive sarangi (?) lead with some subtle pitch-shifting. Add that with a sweet guitar solo at 2:38, and I can see the fun ideas all laid out. It does stick very close to the source's notation throughout, but it's not afraid to explore different textures, and I can respect this decision. Production-wise, the mix does feel unbalanced, though. When the lead guitars appear among the orchestra backdrop, the rest of the instruments bury them entirely. They're supposed to be dominant among the orchestral backing, and it's especially jarring with the strings and brass swallowing the lead guitar solo's energy. Your guitar tones are fantastic as always, so I feel they can be brought further into the mix without altering another instrument's EQ settings. Talking of EQ, there's a peculiar emphasis on low-mids. The piano intro covered a limited set of notes, mainly spanning the low end and sounds muddy. One straight-forward fix other than changing the piano tone is to bring the right hand an octave higher. The orchestra itself also has an emphasis on lower tones, with the stringed backing providing it at first and the brass getting more aggressive later on. EQ cuts among the lower-end can give them a more defined place within the mix and let other parts stand out alongside it. Looking over your symphonic orchestra particularly, the articulation here feels minimal at best. You've got the brass stabs in nicely, but the other parts sound robotic in the mix. They are center stage for a full minute, but the constant attacks and releases make them fall flat. The slow attack on the strings also makes the melody too hard to hear. They alone can easily benefit with both key-switch experimentation and a less sluggish attack value at least. Nevertheless, key-switches and envelope manipulations are two handy tools that can give more human life to your classical backing. It's an okay arrangement - safe, but I see it as borderline acceptable. But I would like to see you go through another mixdown pass, with more emphasis on the guitars and more clarity/realism among the symphonic orchestration. Never stop experimenting with different sounds though, Jean-Marc - that's a strong asset that I'd like to see carried over to future work! NO (resubmit)

Oh boy, I remember this! Sir Nuts linked me to the decision thread not long after I got added to the Judges and asked which way I'd vote on it. Here's what I thought: once the melody started at 0:21, the source clicked for me there and then. The harmonies and effects contributed actively towards subtractive arranging, which is heard as the main arrangement attraction. The horn performances and manipulations were spot on, added to that textural thickness and are all cleanly placed out in the mix. And do you know what else this track brought to mind? It reminds me of the Tortoise section of Camille Saint-Saens's Carnival of the Animals suite. Saint-Saens used the main melodic riff of Offenbach's "Galop Infernal" (otherwise known as the Can-Can) and slowed it down by 2.5x, while here the source is brought down to 4x its speed. This arrangement is a more extreme case, but at the end of the day, the BGM is dominant and has an interpretation approach seldom seen around the VGM scene, period. If I were on the panel at the time, I would've been in the Yes camp. Nevertheless, you did boldly, and I hold mad respect to the result that popped out. The original Super Mario Bros has tunes covered a vast number of times, but this is a sign that proves there's still room to make something unique out of it. Nice work!

Ooh, I love the expression on your lead guitar! I understand the Satriani-esque vibe you were going for with that. The arrangement itself is a straightforward rock cover complete with solos, and even they felt sweet and dense like a virtuoso work should be. It's an interesting minimalist setup with just a single rhythm guitar, two leads, bass and percussion. And yet, most of the time it doesn't feel too empty all things considered. I do have issues with the drums like my fellow judges. First, I'm going to have to disagree with MindWanderer regarding the tom groove (not machine gun drums) at 0:19. It's the most engaging part of the entire drum track, with the writing and occasional 16th note flourishes. I do agree on it sounding mechanical, and that also is a problem with the rest of the track's notation. You've made a start with adding accented notes when necessary, so some further velocity tweaks around the quieter notes can add some human life to these patterns. Talking of patterns, I sensed a lot of cut-and-paste among the drum writing as well. You have the ride groove at 0:58, the 16-beat at 1:17 and the 8-beat at 1:36, but these parts repeat in sequence from 1:55 onward with no alterations from the previous section. It's fine to have an established groove for a specific part of the track, but you can spice them up with different fills, flourishes out of nowhere or even changing up the kick pattern. Take the time to experiment and see where it takes you. I also feel the balance can be improved as well. I'm in a completely different direction to MW yet again here - I can hear the bass, but the rhythm guitar feels buried whenever the leads are in play. With a minimalist setup and the rhythm guitar being the only instrument in the low-mid section, it does become a problem. If EQ tweaks can't work out, it's an instrument I would like to hear a touch louder. Support with a keyboard pad can also help fill out that area if further assistance is required, but this will depend on exactly which Satriani track(s) inspired you. It's a satisfactory arrangement with an ear-catching lead tone and a more intriguing soundscape for rock arrangements, so it'll be neat to hear on the front page down the line. But to get it up there, I'd like to see you spice up those drums and get your rhythm guitar to stand out more. I too thought it almost went over the bar, so I do hope you keep working on it. NO (resubmit)

Power drills and wine glasses? Sign me the heck up - that automatically makes the soundscape unique! The arrangement is easily more organic than the original, again due in part to the choice of instruments with only the electric guitar and the power drill providing a subtle synthetic layer. The framework is also tight, with an intro, two full sections based on the source, and a mellow breakdown at 3:14 complete with a sweet guitar solo and tom groove. I like how in the second source block (starting at 1:59), Sean saved the track from repetition with playing around with the melody and contributing to the backing instrumentation. Natalya's role is minimal in comparison, but her harp added a sweet response to both Reuben's acoustic guitar and Sean's lower strings. Top that with a tight and bouncy banjo lead, and by concept alone, I see it as one of Reuben's best. The instruments and SFX all feel clear as well and appropriately placed in the stereo field. I have no problems with the higher strings at 1:05 as I thought they were intended to have the main melody line. I would've liked more EQ separation between Sean's strings and Reuben's acoustic guitar/banjo, but it's more of a nitpick here. The track is also quiet with the volume hardly peaking above -6dB, but I can also make a case for organic parts needing room for expression and can function as-is. It's one of the most standout Fear Factory arrangements I've heard, for sure. Combined with tight performances, a one-of-a-kind sound palette and one of Reuben's better productions, I'm more than happy to see this on the front page. Excellent job! YES

I received a mixing update from Garpocalypse this morning. The new version (linked in the OP) has addressed my mixing criticisms, and I'm a lot more confident with what he's got. Here's the changelog: For the bass, I wanted to hear more of its tone anyway and not the harmonics, and that's exactly what he set out to revise. The kick has more of a presence now, the guitars are cleaner, and I had no idea you can use saturation as a mixing tool in this kind of situation - it's paid off and added a much more defined sound. The only issue I had with this particular version is a couple of weird off-the-beat woodblock sounds at 0:39. I don't know if they were there before, but they stick out and don't belong in the soundscape. I've contacted Ryan to get him to look at that, and since it is a 2-minute fix, I believe this track is almost ready for primetime now. I've got my fingers crossed! [EDIT: Less than 6 hours later, Ryan got in touch with a render that fixed the issue - which turned out to be a punched-in metronome. The sound is gone, the track sounds great, and I am confident in giving it full approval for the front page now. So glad he was able to chip in!] YES

First of all, it took me a long evening to take notes on the source tunes, so I'll provide a breakdown for my fellow judges. 0:31-1:13 - B section of Spear Pillar / Arceus motif. 1:41-2:05 - Bells from Sinjoh Ruins / Mt Coronet. 2:28-3:12 - Rhodes piano from Sinjoh Ruins / Mt Coronet; strings come in and provide the melody for the former. 3:14-3:45 - Mt. Coronet's B section. 3:55-4:17 - Rhodes piano stabs from Mt. Coronet's C section, with strings following. 4:17-4:47 - Pokéthlon Finals A section. 5:02-5:43 - Final part of C section in Mt. Coronet 5:58-6:04 - Brief reference of Sinjoh Ruins' C section. 6:08-6:40 - Distortion World's A section on muted trumpets, moving to the B section on sustained brass. (Sorry, but I didn't hear anything from the Arceus source here.) 6:48-6:58 - Last section of Sinjoh Ruins, which also references the A section of Spear Pillar and the brief Giratina melody motif. 7:02-7:17 - Distortion World's A section. 7:17-7:39 - Sinjoh Ruins bells. 7:57-8:03 - Last reference for Sinjoh Ruins / Mt. Coronet before ending. The sources are dominant, so I'm pleased to see you understood that part. I also heard how you treated the meat of the arrangement as an extension of Sinjoh Ruins, while also adding in other components to weave the mood. The Spear Pillar intro sounded neat with the tempo shift before getting into the arrangement proper. The bass writing sounds fun and added a driving force to the backing instrumentation. The ominous instrumentation and glitching in the Distortion World section was a fun way to add in a temporary feeling of chaos. And most importantly, the integration of other sources into Sinjoh's structure was a neat touch and reduced the prospect of medley-itis in the track. So you aren't wrong here - you can't have too many outside sources when arranging that kind of BGM. There are two issues I have with the arrangement, though. Firstly, the Pokéthlon Finals section feels so out of place and random, so this is a rare case that the track would sound more cohesive without a section dedicated to BGM. Secondly, the source melodies have all been brought in verbatim, with only the rhythmic changeups in the Distorted World return at 7:03 having any hint of playing around with motifs. You have an 8-minute run-time and plenty of opportunities to explore these tunes, so consider going back over the BGM integration so far and experiment with them. The production left me mixed feelings, though. Firstly, I respect your choice to mix dated and modern sounds - it's a neat aesthetic that I didn't think would work in theory, but it works here. The rest of the production, on the other hand, feels rough and I need to bring a few irks to the table. The brass and symphonic string section has no articulation. When present in the track, these instruments all sound robotic and don't smoothly transition well from one note to another. Modern production samples like these usually have key switches to trigger for different forms of expression, so consider looking at those and seeing what you can do. Velocities can also get shaped up to better shape the dynamic field. There is an excessive amount of piercing frequencies here. Your decision here makes sense as you use a lot of high-pitched synths and bells in your instrumentation. But audio beyond at least 8k Hz is only intended to add a hint of sparkle into the track and shouldn't be used to carry a tone. One idea I have is to transpose your offending synths down an octave. Another is to put a low pass at around 10k on the harshest sounding ones. Fixing this step is vital, as it made the track too fatiguing to listen to otherwise. While I'm on the subject, the mix itself feels cluttered and muddy. It happens most often when the Sinjoh/Coronet Rhodes piano overlaps the lead(s), a lead overlaps another or the rare occasion where the bass overlaps either. Even the percussion feels muffled and buried as a result of not enough separation between the parts. With so many instruments and a hefty track length, the idea of going into each part's EQ settings feels daunting. But it's worth figuring out which samples to make cuts to get others to poke through. As a concept, it's a neat idea, and it added a sense of drama to the source material not present before. But the track itself is too painful to listen to thanks to the unhealthy high frequencies, with parts blending into each other and the real-sounding brass and strings sounding too robotic. If you decide to revise this, cutting the highs is essential. On the other end of the spectrum, I see further experimentation with the source melodies as desirable. Whatever happens, Adrian, don't give up - I see potential in you. NO (resubmit)

I'm not too sure why you linked a fan arranger's 40-minute medley to show your basis. But I do see that the first track in sequence - "Echt of Sorrow" - has an evident inspiration based on structure and instrumentation. It also fits for Edgar and Sabin's bond in the game, so good thinking referencing that particular source from Re:Zero. I love how you adapted the central Figaro theme to a slow waltz - it feels sweet and sentimental. The strings throughout and the vocal sample at 0:56 are also beautifully articulated and grabbed my attention. And the decision to give the "Coin Song" section at 2:17 one of the thickest backing setups alongside the change to 4/4 has some liveliness that wasn't present in the source material. And to give some respite for Larry, there's straight source use from 0:15-3:05, 3:32-3:50 and 4:04-5:10 - so it's dominant as well. In all seriousness, the arrangement is fantastic. However, that solo piano section at 3:05 doesn't feel natural. The velocities and timings feel way too robotic, and Gario also pointed out the uncanny volume envelope that shaped it. I understand that you want the piano to sound bolder as time goes on, and that's acceptable in concept. But the only effect I heard is a tech crew member realizing they placed their microphone too far from the piano and needed to edge closer carefully. If your other samples have an alternate soft sound when played gently, surely the piano VST has something similar to let it stand tall as well. I'm also unsure about how much of a non-VGM source should be in a submission. Based on this, it's also a safe bet to change the harp's notation to something that's more "inspired" by the animé, not directly fitting it in. Nevertheless, it's a lovely concept, and I enjoyed every second of it - but that robotic piano section sunk it under the production bar. The woodwinds were okay at best - not as lovely as the string and vocal articulation - but the piano needs work to make it sound as beautifully realized as the rest of the instruments. Consider looking into your harp and changing the notation, so you don't run into a standards violation either. I don't know how much non-BGM you can use in a track at the maximum, but it's better safe than sorry. Regardless, please revise the mix and send it back to us! NO (resubmit)

The arrangement structure is by-the-numbers, but my gosh did the source get used well. You've changed the key, no section sounds samey, and each variation has its way of being played differently. It's a safe structure though with two run-throughs, subtle original writing, and some careful building down with the C section at the end. I also thought the use of the Capcom logo jingle at the start was charming, as well as tastefully using lower-quality percussion/harpsichord soundfonts at 3:38 to add more of a game feel. It's nice stuff. Alas, the balance feels off to me. First of all, the drums feel wet and distant, with an equally rough tradeoff of the kick's attack being inaudible. It's fine to place that meaty reverb onto your snare for that big rock sound, but the kick didn't need as much with all the fast movements it had throughout. Secondly, the rhythm guitar has muffled the bass. I get the trope for mixing metal tracks - no one's going to hear the bass player - but it's still an essential part of the beat's foundation. I feel it's best to add a slight high-pass onto the rhythm guitars just so the bass can pass through in the mix, but if that affects the tone too much, boosting its volume can be another alternative solution. And this is more of minor note, but your lead-supporting synth pads (0:49, 1:37, 2:25) should be quieter. The lead guitar is meant to take center stage with the support only adding to its presence, not swallowing it whole. It's an enjoyable yet safe arrangement, and I appreciate the opportunity to get the judgment fast-tracked. But all in all, I feel the mixdown needs a revision before bringing it onto the front page. Take a look at the reverb surrounding your drum set (especially the kick pedal), find a way to give the bass more presence, and go through your instruments' volume levels. This track is one I'd like to hear on the front page in some shape or form, even if it takes an extra attempt to do so. NO (resubmit)

Ouch - I see Larry asking for "rock musician" judges to help out and we don't have any. How do we rectify that? Anyway, Larry also nailed the track progression. I do also find it interesting that you took motifs from all four movements of the source and turned them into a compact rock sound in the space of 7 minutes. By that merit alone, it's one of the more interesting "Dancing Mad" arrangements I've heard in a long while. What I like about the arrangement is that it doesn't go from point A to point D straight away. The first minute alone has lush choirs citing the first movement, leading into a heavy metal rendition of the third. Only then does it decide to explore the sequence in order before calming down with a choir-driven reference to the source's finale. You thought wisely using the third form for bookends - it's a balls-to-the-wall opener that sets the mood, and it offers familiarity for the finish. I don't mind the transitions as it's an expected component of the source material. But if there's any way to make them segue further, transposing the first movement sections up a semitone can mask it. It's not something that'll keep me up at night, though. Alas, with so many rock flavors, the mixing needs a lot more care. On the broader picture alone: The cymbals have too much sibilance/sizzle overall so consider cutting out some of those higher frequencies. Whenever the choir and rhythm guitars appear at the same time, the former gets brutally drowned out. If you're unable to cut EQ from the guitar without sacrificing the texture quality, think about carefully bringing the choir's volume up. And even more jarring, there were several points in the track with unintentional distortion. A revision on the master chain is a suggested idea to remove them if a revised mixdown doesn't solve it. Additionally, the blast beats at 3:24 is an excellent idea for the second form in theory, but the mixing here feels careless. On top of the previous cymbal and choir issues, you'd also have to accommodate for the snare drum barrage as well, and I can barely hear that either. Again, this can be a case of trying to make cuts in the guitar to get the snare to pop through, or bringing the snare volume up if it screws over the guitar texture. Or another idea is to change the snare's tone so that it doesn't fit the track's key, giving it more of a chance to push through the soundscape with less effort. In a vacuum, this track is enjoyable, and I'd love to hear it on the front page in some shape or form. Unfortunately, the mixdown is so cluttered I can't see it as this incarnation. You got plenty of production crits from all 3 of us, so keep them in mind if you decide to give the presentation another pass. Hearing a cleaner version of this track will be amazing. NO (resubmit)

Geez, Rebecca - you picked a problematic source to remix! It's got three parts (hence "Triple Laser") - a bass at 4/4, a mellow synth that loops every 21 beats, and a brighter synth that starts over after 20. That's not a lot to work with, all things considered - and consider me shocked to hear not a lot of it used at all. I hope you can read sheet music because that's the best way for me to explain. Circled in red is the motif that gets used for most of the track. The mellow synth does appear later via your echoed strings, but the bass isn't touched upon at all. Here is the source breakdown I picked out: 0:04-0:08, 0:14-0:18, 0:22-0:25 - All with strings referencing the two-tone motif. 0:33-0:46 - Interpretation of the two-note motif via the strings, then moved to the flutes. 0:56-1:10 - Echoing strings referencing the mellow synth loop. 1:10-1:14 - Flute doing the 2-note motif. 1:28-1:34 - Echoed strings referencing the mellow synth loop. 1:57-2:04 - Bassoon referencing the two-tone motif, going as far as pushing on to the pitch next in sequence. That's 55 seconds of identifiable source, bringing it at 39%. I might get proven wrong later, but if I can only sense that much coverage for an abstract source, it sticks out as a significant problem. You have an untouched bass - by far the most recognizable part of the source - that is worth considering fitting in. And referencing other more conventional Portal BGM can also assist with more definite identification. The production, however, is considerably harder to give feedback for one good reason. Except for the heavy bass swell at 1:40, the track doesn't go any higher than -12dB. Even if you boost the volume, it'll bring the instruments' articulation up to the front and allow you to adjust any that don't sound unnatural. Thankfully the tremolo strings sound well layered, the pitch-bending on the solo violins feels ominous, and the harp-glockenspiel combo has some pleasant-sounding realism. Decay on the woodwinds still needs work, but the modulation otherwise sounds serviceable. As it stands, it's a creepy tech demo that has robbed me of a good night's sleep. But there's still more to work on if intended to get onto the front page. Most importantly, it needs to not only be a louder mix but also have more identifiable source material. Improved articulation on the woodwinds is desirable, as is another pass through the mixing once the levels are adjusted. At the very least, it's more unusual than other submissions of yours sent into the inbox and I hope to see you do more exploration in that direction. NO [EDIT 17/09/2019: I stand corrected regarding source use - thanks MindWanderer for adding more to the timestamps. I can respect a more transformative arrangement, but I still feel the mechanical wind instruments stuck out like a sore thumb and I'm still not sold on seeing it on the front page. My vote still stands.]