Rexy

This arrangement is meaty and jumped around the mix doing three different ideas. It explored the source as it is (like with the chiptune intro), played around with the foundations and adding new melodies over the top (like at 1:00), or added something brand new (like the piano intro at the end). Even the piano-into-ensemble-into-chiptune breakdown at 1:48 explores all three ideas at once. I also felt the lower chip harmony at 2:51 didn't sound harmonically pleasing with the backing, but it's a minor gripe in an elegant set of writing otherwise. The sound palette's mixture of chiptune and modern synths also felt intriguing and fit the arrangement's goal. They're all mixed in well, the synths' manipulation is engaging, and even the piano sounded realistic and adapted to the stereo space. The only thing that sticks out for me though is the clarinet at 2:12. I understand it acting as the bridge between the piano and chiptune melodies, but to me, it sounded like it was performing all of these legato notes without any room to inhale. You can remedy it in future works by merely adding a moment for it to rest. Putting these little nitpicks aside, it's a varied arrangement that jumped between handling the source and doing its own thing. And it's all with a lovely presentation that crosses the line between retro and present day. Ben, I wouldn't have guessed that you took two years off before working on this - because there's no sign of rusted chops here. Nice work! YES

I can identify that summer feel, going for 909-sounding drums and some engaging low pass filter sweep at the start. Source presence is there, though not entirely note for note thanks to two beats of additional writing at both 1:16 and 1:24. The section at 1:41 sounded fun, bringing the countermelody in for some rhythmic changeups and added harmonies. Despite this, the interpretation of the source tune itself is minimal at best. In all three parts that the source is present, there's just the bass, melody and countermelody. While the bass has a summer dance vibe rather than the source's gallops, there needed to be more subtractive arrangement if sections like that are to stick around. Talking of which, if you're going to copy-paste the 0:46 variant at 3:24, the duplicate would need more new layers and/or further interpretation so that it could stand out. The instruments themselves all sound clear and well presented, but despite all the subtle effects in play, the synth timbres themselves outstay their welcome too soon. There are no new textures after that first main theme variant, and when matched up with the minimal arrangement and sparse soundscape, it all contributes to a stale sounding track. Consider going over your synth patches (or generate new ones) and layering some on top of one another. It'll be nice to hear something more unique. Glenn, it's a promising and enjoyable tune, so thank you for sharing it with us. As of right now, the bland soundscape and barebones arrangement are holding it back, and it'll be nice to hear another version with these problems addressed. NO (resubmit)

I undoubtedly see it as a more unusual Timaeus arrangement. There's more of a focus on subtractive arranging with additional instrument layers under the primary source, which even goes as far as keeping the 6/8 time signature and general atmospheric feel. I also like the impressive tricks with the integration of other Tangledeep BGM (and the occasional riff from Dungonmans), as well as adjusting the source to a Persian scale on a couple of occasions. It matched the goal of a more calming mix that evolves as time goes on. The production is also very charming. All the instruments are well mixed, the percussion sounds gorgeous, and the pitched percussion (harp, bells, piano, etc.) had proper attention paid to dynamics. And as an added bonus, the synth leads combining with the soundfonts generate a unique timbre that respects the pseudo-SNES nature of the source material. The stated extra time spent mixing the track to this meticulous detail paid off, that's for sure. It's an easy decision here - it's a lovely crafted arrangement and an equally thorough presentation. That means a spot on the front page - great work as usual! YES

Yeah, Youtube links aren't a great place to host submissions for us. I'll give the benefit of the doubt, but please host it in a cloud drive or attach to your email in the future. Anyway, the source treatment is mostly safe and conservative, but there's plenty of subtractive interpretation that makes it stand out. And there's so many I'll need to dish out the bullet points again! * The intro and first run-through use the source's elements straight with the drum and bass grooves controlling the pace, varying slightly as the rack goes on. * The pitch-bending harmonies during the second run-through (2:52) are expressive and caught me off guard. *The slow chugging guitars at 4:18 added a more ominous tone to lead out of the track's first half. * The section at 4:35 had a cool use of time signatures alternating 2 bars of 4/4 and a single bar of 7/4. * 5:40 added a dramatic rising choir that gets revisited at 7:49. * 6:07 has the stereo-shifting guitars on the upbeats forming an effective countermelody against the piano. * The 7:09 section revisited ideas from the first and second iterations of the source along with the latter's harmonies. * And 7:49 also had moments where the rhythm guitars would go into triplets and occasionally have an engaging gate effect at the same pace. As heard, these ideas all come and go with one or two getting revisited. With the source's familiar framework, it all ties in with enough ideas to fit this track's prog-rock feel. Even the production doesn't pull any punches. The instruments are easy to pick out, the guitars had so many tones they didn't outstay their welcome, and the performances are all clean and tight. I do agree with Larry regarding the lead guitar's sloppy introduction at 0:57, but it corrected itself quickly, so I don't see it as a dealbreaker. And I do sense inconsistent writing - notably in the first half - with the drums going back and forth between working with the other instruments and working independently. But at the same time, it doesn't grow stale and adds to the arrangement's engaging nature. Overall, this track pleasantly surprised me despite its insane length. The performances are on point, there's plenty of interpretation to justify the framework, and the presentation is both clean and matches this vision of loneliness. Impressive stuff, Andy! YES

This arrangement is fantastic! I had fun listening along with the timestamps and hearing the different elements in place, so thank you for that. It's especially amazing to hear points where one source worked alongside another. They contributed to an arrangement that never tires out and retains familiarity almost all the way through - almost as if it's rhapsodic. I felt especially floored at 1:55, where the Zelda theme got adapted to fit the more ominous minor key shifts and set the scene leading up to the groove's introduction. It's a visible sign that the sources were used, played with, and retained a consistent vision. The production values are also potent as well. This sound design feels like a fitting homage to the Metroid Prime trilogy's overall score and the early work of Jean-Michael Jarre. Everything's well balanced, clear to pick out, used reverb effectively to create ambiance, and even experiments with different timbres to pull the listener into the immersion of deep space. All in all, I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be on the front page. There's excellent playing around with themes to simulate the vision of an epic duel, the presentation is meticulously crafted, and a result like that can also mean great teamwork. Amazing job! YES

Right off the bat, I saw that you've gone for a louder production than what I have previously heard from you. Have you been practicing, or did Gabriel help out with the render again? Still, it's a pleasant surprise. The instruments are not only mixed well, but there are subtle articulations on the early woodwinds, and the rest of the instrumentation has some lovely dynamic variance. I didn't mind the quiet robotic drone as much, though. It only jumped out rarely outside the beginning and ending, and even then it added to the rest of the percussive feel. The arrangement is also in a more unexpected direction than what I usually associate with you as well - way less conservative, with an engaging framework. It uses the B section's piano arpeggio as a rhythm part and treats the source's C section as a chorus at 1:45 and 3:36, but these halves also stood out from each other. The first half played around with the A section's second half through the strings, and the second half had the first half's A section on the panpipes before further interpretation. It's a lovely hint of attention to detail and shows an understanding of how to interpret the source while still making it recognizable. It's a more unusual Rebecca production that I've heard, and for me, it ticks all the right boxes. The only bit of homework I have for the future is to experiment with articulating the strings as well to match the attention on the woodwinds - because quite frankly, the production as a whole stands out as well. I'm in favor of hearing this on the front page! YES UPDATE 8/14/2018: I listened to the track again after seeing Larry's vote below. Using a visualizer as a guide, I sensed the piano overlapping some of the instrumentation at 1:02-2:02, 2:38-2:53 and 3:36-end. I also must admit the low drone's tone slightly de-emphasized some of the other lower-range instrumentation. However, the minimalist setup prevents these flubs from over-exposure and therefore reduces any negative impact to the soundscape. My Yes vote will still stand.

This semi-baroque feel sounds like an exciting direction to take a minimal source. With the moments where the harpsichord would take more center-stage and where the strings would become a lot more forward, the characterization feels refreshing and well interpreted. However, there is some robotic sequencing going on here. I appreciate the change in velocities, but you also need to think about what a performer would do in a live setting. If you look at your strings and woodwinds, they have this constant use of sustain and identical attack. You can remedy it by experimenting with attack/release envelopes or looking at the VST's key switches to more realistically articulate them. Another issue I had was the dominance of low-mid instrumentation and their contributions to a muddy mix. There's nothing wrong with having cellos in most of your string section in the loud parts (1:04, 3:53), but their notation made the bassoon and harpsichord troublesome to pick out. If I were in this situation, I'd transpose the strings up an octave to let the bassoon and harpsichord breathe and fill in a void in the mids, just like you did at 2:58. But let's say you do want to keep the pitches as they are. If so, you'll need a considerable amount of EQ separation between those three instruments alone to give them their own space. It's lovely to hear an arrangement that's more classically inspired and will be great to hear on the front page. As of right now, it needs more care with string/woodwind humanization and making louder areas cleaner whether by shifting pitches or doing another mixing pass. Please keep at it - arrangement-wise it's a pleasant listen, and I hope a second version will push the production values up there as well. NO (resubmit)

I can't deny the quality of those orchestral sounds. They all fit well in this soundscape, sound gorgeously realistic, and even the brass has a lovely and expressive release to it. I get that the entire section from 0:43 onwards is majestic, but I would've preferred the master volume to get brought down, not letting the instruments touch the ceiling. It's still just a desirable thing rather than a significant flaw. And of course, there's the arrangement. Yes, it's barely 2 minutes long, and it covers just one loop of the source material. But the new instrumentation added onto the source's bones makes up for it. The slowly building strings at 0:14, the brass playing the melody at 0:43 and adding its own little flourishes, a fuller orchestra at that same section, the complete change of chords at 1:07, and that gentle plucked string backing at 1:26 are all potent examples of expanding the source's foundation. It's short, it's sweet, and the treatment is sublime. Excellent work, Jason - with the arrangement and production working well, your challenge paid off! YES

This track sounds amazing! The live musicians are all clean and mixed well, Cyril's raw vocal power is perfect for this setup, and a lot of the writing is very energetic. Taking this fight theme into power metal is an idea I didn't think we deserve, but it's a near-seamless production. However, I too wasn't thrilled about the organ tone either. Thanks to its flat sound, it just couldn't keep up energy-wise with the rest of the instrumentation. With everything else going on, I can let this issue slide. The arrangement wasn't a straightforward assessment, though. As powerful as the track was, I found it challenging to timestamp it - to the point that I asked Chernabogue directly. Here is what I got back. Before asking, I was able to pick out the intro, bridges and choruses. But right off the bat, the verses don't sound like their equivalent section in the source in melody, and I even tried double-checking the lower harmony but with no luck. Likewise, the transitions at 0:18 and 1:12 have no melodic content to identify with immediately. There is good news! I can accept HeavenWraith's guitar solo at 2:06 based on this factor - Furilas's bass adapting the D section's melody and rhythms straight. That part is already a bright idea itself - a 5/8 sequence for the bass and the drums, working as a polyrhythm alongside the rest of the instruments performing in 6/8. When I realized what was going on here, that just added a significant amount of time to my previous estimate. By understanding Chernabogue's notes, I feel more enlightened by his intentions - and with the spotty verses and transitions aside, I detected 60% source use. Combined with the framework and solo sequence, I felt surprised with the treatment given, and it's got a surprisingly intelligent undertone despite the balls-to-the-wall power metal approach. So yeah, that's my reasoning for accepting - great arrangement, high production values, and fantastic performances. Alex and the team did themselves proud! YES

In a vacuum, the instruments here do sound lovely and cohesive. Considering the source material is percussion-heavy, those sounds needed attention out of the gate, and you got the ambient space and atmospheric feeling all worked out. Again, quietness is a recurring irk, but based on how much the dynamics built up after the 2-minute mark, it's not a big deal in this case. But here's the problem with interpreting a percussion-heavy source - making sure the source is dominant. Melodies are already minimal in the source, but there's more emphasis on rhythm. You got the right idea early on with the hand drum groove getting expanded right from the get-go. But the main issue with the arrangement is the interpretive BGM side of it stopped too soon. There's some lovely additional percussion working well alongside the source's core elements - but at 1:12, the emphasis swung in favor of cinematic string, harp and flute writing. It's not usually a problem, but it did push the core source elements way too far into the background. That's not even at 30% of its duration, and it stays that way until the end. It's a tricky source to arrange as it is, but there are a couple of ways to go around it and still make it feel like a Wind Waker remix: As Larry said, you can incorporate the minimal melodies in the source onto pre-existing timbres - or even focus on arranging more of the percussion. But again, you may be limited if you don't feel confident enough. Another method is to incorporate some different Wind Waker BGM into the track, or just Zelda BGM in general. It's a less risky move to pull off, and it can fill out the melodic space that the original writing is currently occupying. It's always a good idea to send music over and see where it goes, definitely - but in its current form, the arrangement cuts it short. If you ever get a chance to revise it, go over the track and see what you can do to make the source material more dominant. It's a pleasant listen, but it's just not there for OCR yet. NO (resubmit)

This idea sounds neat - a digitized orchestra makes me think this is what Wendy Carlos would do if born 50 years too late! It follows the structure of the source up until 2:38, where it decides to do one last build based around the central three-note motif. Surrounding all this, the choice of synth textures and percussive sounds are so distinct and compliment the track's vision. However, the production isn't quite there yet. Firstly yes, that white noise layer either needs to go or be significantly quieter in the mix. I can argue it provides percussive energy in the high-end when there aren't many other high-end sounds present. As of right now, it's distracting to the point of borderline piercing. Another way to remedy the soundscape not having enough high-end is to transpose some of your sequenced synths up one or two octaves, then EQ so that its higher frequencies have more of an emphasis. A lot of your synths also occupy the same tonal space and some can benefit from a technique like this, while others can have cuts in one area so another sound can get a boost in the same place. Techniques like these can cut back the muddiness harming this mixdown. Trust me - this is a cool idea, and I suggest you leave the arrangement as it is. All it needs is a cleaner mixdown, and I would consider it golden. Please stay on this track - it'll be amazing to hear something like this on the front page! NO (resubmit)

Right off the bat, I'm going to have to disagree with MindWander for a different reason than Larry. Why? The structure of the track is identical to the source material, right down to the number of beats per segment. Luckily there are some subtractive change-ups with a guitar lead rather than vocals, an added rhythm guitar part and a solo at 0:57 where rapping was present. Ideally, I'd like to hear more interpretation-wise, but there are changes, and they get the job done. After hearing the rhythm guitar in the Fly Octo Fly choruses (0:32-0:46, 1:09-1:34), the run of G notes on the bass makes it sound too bland. I feel it'll benefit from the bass playing the original's root notes, or a pattern that'll fit the lead and rhythm's writing. It's not as weak as the minimal interpretation, but it helps to focus on the source material's chords. If you can't identify them, try writing sequences that feel harmonically pleasing with each other. Production-wise, I have different feelings regarding this mixdown. * Yes, I do agree that more can be done to separate the EQ of the lead from the rhythm guitar, but rather than the lead getting muffled I thought it was the other way round. * Regarding the exposed string sample at 2:00, a track like this can benefit more from a synth lead rather than any realistic instrument, so consider that as an idea. * The backing bass and rhythm guitars do play at a consistent texture. However, the drums did a good start via its variations with subtle 16th hat runs and visible identification of each section based on the number of open hi-hats and occasional tom rolls. It's a good start, but experimenting with different rhythms and writing more unique drum fills can break this wall of monotony. It's not a groundbreaking idea, but I do see promise based on the source's treatment and strong performance values. Unfortunately, the smaller production issues added up too much overall. Consider doing another pass on the mixdown at least - and whether you'd want to add more source interpretation is up to you. Keep at it. NO (resubmit)

I too sense a lack of realism on those instruments. The parts sound too static, the limiter squashing dynamics down in the Dark World Dungeon section is unnatural, and a lot of your leads feel dry. If you're going to be writing for a full orchestra, it's a good idea to: Make it feel as if the performance is in a concert hall, with attention to the placement of parts in the stereo field and the amount of ambient space they have. Abandon the limiters and let your parts have room to breathe. And most importantly, go over each instrument and make them feel more humanized. Loosen up the timings, vary the velocities and emphasize which ones you think are the most dynamic notes. You can even consider using the volume envelope to shape the dynamics for sustained notes. The arrangement has the source present, but there's a four-section medley going through straight interpretations of your source material. I liked hearing Ganon's theme adapted near the end of the Dark World theme at 1:19, and similarly, Dark World reprised near the end and accommodated at Lorule Castle. But I would've liked to have heard more of that kind of idea in other areas around the track. That idea above is one of a few things that can be done to personalize the arrangement in a subtractive way. Other possible suggestions include adding original parts in the background, or even some original writing to make the transitions between sources feel smoother. It's not bad, but issues on both arrangement and production fronts have weighed this down too much. It'll be a good idea to take it into the Workshop and experiment with new ideas, then try again. NO (resubmit)

Honestly, I feel the melody got excellent treatment. It starts simple enough with a straight run at 0:43 with a dynamic break between renditions of the A section. But then there's playing around when adding the B section during the double-time segment at 3:31, and one more interpretation at 4:08 that adds a guitar solo and a key change in the middle. Add all the original guitar solos, orchestral breakdowns and crazy tempo changes throughout and it just geared itself to such an epic arrangement. Even the production values sound tight. The orchestra sounds clean, the big rock sound is well defined, and the guitar performance is exceptionally expressive. The only issue I had with it was the guitar tone sounding like it's got too much sharpness to the point of providing a hint of a buzz in its tone. It doesn't dampen the mix though, but it's more like something to watch out for in the future - especially after seeing how your gear has grown over the past two years. Enough waffling around from me - it's golden, so let's get it on the front page. \m/ YES

I have to agree with you - this boss theme is incredible. But yeah, I too noted the messy mixdown right away. The frequencies of the rhythm guitar are clashing heavily with those of the bass and lead guitar, the cymbals are way too over-compressed, and the instruments as a whole has no sibilance at all. Let's assume your master recordings aren't as lossy as the MP3 you sent; if so, the next main focus is learning how to EQ your instrumentation at an improved level. There are all sorts of reference charts available to learn from, so see if they can help you. The arrangement itself felt interesting enough with taking the source material in a much darker direction, and despite all the noodling past 1:42, there's still a sturdy 54% source coverage here. The more ominous chords and melody has a liberal feel - which isn't bad - but the original material post-1:42 has no throwbacks to either the source or other Headdy BGM. In that situation, it would be ideal to hear more references to the BGM even after hearing the main variation. Your performance skills are hot, though, and I hope to see them on the front page someday. As of right now, the production and lack thereof broke the deal with the second half's treatment being more of a smaller irk. I hope my note of reference can help you out with your mixdowns - it'll be incredible to go over something with a much cleaner presentation than this. NO (resubmit)

Working with a melodically minimalist source is no small feat, that's for sure. It also felt like the right kind of track to play with it as a product of the big beat genre - and that groove pushed through my speakers with no seam exposed. It felt like the intention was to refine the source material for a modern age - and by sound palette and balancing alone, it got nailed on the head. As for the arrangement itself, I have to admit the bass pattern didn't initially sell itself well - all from sounding different from the source material. But when the groove kicked in at 0:48 and remained close to that of the source, it felt like an unusual but worthwhile exchange so I can let that slide. This track also maintained the sequenced blip and choir parts from the source which first appear at 1:21 here and made up a good chunk of ground from them alone. When not present, there are entire subtractive segments like 2:10 with some new patterns, an entirely original breakdown at 2:42, and that melodic climax at 4:37 that adds a different melodic progression to the synth choir from before. It's clever stuff - and much like prophetik said, it can fit well in a theoretical XG sequel in the future. (Throwback Entertainment should get in on that!) All in all, it's a well-polished track with not only a killer arrangement, but it also adds a lift to the source material's intended aesthetic. I can easily see this on the front page. And as a side-note, if OC Remix still exists in the 23rd century, I do hope it works well with racing of that era regardless of its evolution. YES

That source is crazy - not up to the melodic standards that I usually associate with Kirby, but it's evident in your arrangement. It's incredible to see how you noted out this complex composition and maintained that familiarity - even going as far as keeping the same breakbeat feel as the original. With this similar genre, I'm surprised that you decided to use a more realistic choir at 0:47 rather than a synth-like one to match the rest of the sound palette. To me, it's desirable to hear it with other more synthetic layers over the top to mask its stiffness. Otherwise, the rest of the instrumentation sounds cohesively balanced, and I can get behind that. But my big problem lies more with the arrangement itself. As of right now, it consists of a single run-through of each source with no other modifications or personalization. There are ways to lift this, though, including: Reference different sections of the source within parts of the arrangement Expand by roughly a minute and add more playing around with the components Or even leave the framework as it is and add some original parts underneath. It's a solid direction so far, and you're a beast to cover something so structurally complex. But the arrangement needs more interpretation, and I'd like to hear a version that adds more to what's there so far. Please address this and try again. NO (resubmit)

I may raise some eyebrows, but I don't think the ocarina sounds that shrill after running an EQ analyzer on the track. This instrument did pop out distinctly, but that was solely the tone and not any ambient noise that would interfere with the sound quality. It's still more on the loud side, and I would've ideally wanted to hear it brought down a couple of decibels. Nevertheless, David did an expressive performance, and I can let it slide. The arrangement itself is more on the conservative side with some little detailed tweaks to background elements like the harp and some subtle bells in the background. The swifter ocarina playing at 2:13 is a nice touch, and changing up the lead to bowed or plucked strings on occasion also adds a pleasant break in the textures. Talking of textures, while a lot of the pitched percussion sounded nice and well balanced, I do have some nitpicks about two particular VSTs used. Firstly, the plucked strings at 1:35 are more blatantly shrill, barely having any tone to them and feeling more robotic in their delivery. Going over the velocities and EQ would let it have more of a body to match the violin in the background. But having had a few piano mixposts myself, I felt my inner alarm bells go off regarding your decision to harshly sustain said instrument. With all of these mid to mid-high parts surrounding it, there was no need to mess with the soundscape by holding the piano's sustain pedal down and made it too susceptible to unintentional dissonance. It's surprisingly not a dealbreaker, but there is a helpful tip for the future. By bringing the foot off the pedal for just a small fraction of a second before each chord change, you can reduce the chance of dissonance by a lot. With everything weighed in, the arrangement is not too ground-breaking, and the production values feel underwhelming. Still, they both went over the bar - and David's ocarina performance gave this track a significant lift as well. Roll on winter - it'll be comforting to hear this on the front page, getting cozy in front of a warm fire. YES

It took me a few listens to detect the source, but it got played around in this bizarre soundscape. You utilized its chords well, the singular run of the melody was adapted to fit the soundscape, and you nailed that lo-fi production aesthetic. My issues with this track are that the percussion feels empty, and the framework ended up going into a sparser direction as time went on. If you're going to make a vaporwave track, it's best to keep a consistent 80s pop style beat, rather than randomly hit parts of the kit on occasion. Similarly, the bass dropping out from 1:07 onward ended up doing more harm to the second half of the track, taking it in some unintended ambient direction with no backbone. I respect the unexpected direction taken, but as of right now it only really sounds like a tech demo. It'll be desirable to hear a version that adds a more consistent driving beat with potentially more writing going on in the bass. It's a genre that's surprisingly unexplored at OCR, but you've got the nerve to make it happen if you decide to revise the track. NO (resubmit)

I felt that repetition too. While technically the theme was handled in four different ways with varying degrees of lead instruments and countermelodies, the textures involved felt samey otherwise. Even the combination of the cello, harpsichord and hand percussion making the same patterns underneath the other layers weren't doing any favors. As they were least able of carrying the theme, I would've preferred to have heard them getting played around just as much as the rest of the instrumentation. The choice of instrumentation and balancing is as lovely and pleasant as ever. For the most part, the choir sounded okay as there weren't many other instruments in the low-mids otherwise. But I don't get why there is this stiff sounding solo at 3:09. This choir's harmonies were all fighting for lead melody, and those timings felt so painfully robotic there. You've previously demonstrated your capabilities to humanize orchestrated parts and fit live vocals into a mix, so it made no sense for this orchestra part to be like this. Despite all this, it placed me in a problematic dilemma. On the one hand, the production isn't up there with your best and the arrangement quite frankly almost put me to sleep with how long it dragged on. But on the other hand, it is an interpreted arrangement with passable production values despite the choir mishap. I can see this on the front page, but please be careful with the arrangement framework for similarly longer tracks in the future. YES (borderline)

Ooh, I sense that Enigma inspiration! I hear "Sadeness (Part 1)" on the radio occasionally, and that similar groove made me latch onto the idea immediately. It does feel interesting to see the fast-paced nature of this source applied to a more downtempo and electronic feel. The opening pattern of 8 notes also works as an effective arpeggio - whether solo, running alongside the melody, or even as part of the brief F minor breakdown starting at 2:10. The source material has a lot of ideas going on, but this mix needed just the arpeggio and melody A - using them in a modest framework adding more layers with each repetition. These layers are something as simple as changing the hi-hats to a 16-beat pattern (1:20) to adding more pads over time and introducing a countermelody near the end (3:05). It's a mellow adaptation that works well, so sweet going there. However, this is also one of those tracks where I feel needs more work regarding its mixing. As more layers get added in each repetition, the smashed dynamics got worse, and it becomes much harder to hear the main melody. It's most problematic under the additional pads and the countermelody as mentioned earlier past the 3-minute mark. There are many ways to fix this within another mixdown, however. Examples are EQ separation, transposing the lead or some of your pads, and weakening the limiter by just a touch. All of these are possible solutions that I can suggest to achieve a less cluttered mix. On its own, it's one of the most unorthodox Jenova arrangements I have heard in a long time. But I'd love for you to clear up the mixing and send it back. It's a close call, but I'm all for hearing this on the front page soon. NO (resubmit)

Shiver me timbers - this shanty gave no quarter! Dustin, ye seadog, ye ran a fine jig and battened down the hatches on this swash-buckling deck! Alright, here's my thoughts without the pirate speak. The arrangement is conservative for the most part, but in addition to performing the theme, there are also fresh twists and turns like: The playing around with the first part of melody A at 0:22 The original part at 1:42 that still kept to that buccaneer feeling The violin solo at 2:19 that added a little bit of tension before going to the melody C repeat That chugging rhythm guitar at 2:48 interpreting the opening notes, building a grand climax towards the ending segment And dare I say, the ending itself at 3:34 is adorable - a fade-out to a whistling local? That's not only a cool way to handle the theme, but it's out of the blue and caught my attention. The production itself also feels clean, the guitars are still as heavy as I remember from you, and when the orchestra is in full force, there's an intense amount of work to make them ride over the top. The only nitpick I have, however, is that violin sample. The reverb makes it fit well among the other instruments, so good going there. But if this sound has any key switches, it's a good idea to experiment with them and give out a more realistic tone than this constant perfect medium stab. Nevertheless, in its current form, I can see this on the front page. The arrangement is fantastic, production values are clearly over the bar, and the performance work is top-notch. I'm glad to hear from you again, arrr! YES

I should make that five. I'll box mine up and send it to you later tonight x)

First of all, thank you very much for the source breakdown! Going over the sections, I can verify its treatment with plenty of subtractive writing - and the saxophone/guitar solos and synthwave style placed the icing on the cake. I honestly have no significant problems with the production, either. The sounds are all appropriate to the genre, the live musicians all sound crisp and clean, and everything feels well balanced. I honestly think the vocals are at a good position in the mix and are clear enough for me to make out the lyrics. The only thing that sticks out is that the mixdown doesn't go beyond -3dB and can sound better with some normalization, but it's no dealbreaker in this case. It's still a fantastic Jorito production / collaborative project as always. Not only can I see this on the front page, but also as part of a playlist for use at the gym. YES

Arrangement-wise, the framework plays it safe with one run-through of the source. And through this limited structure, it was left open for some new ideas like the creepy ambient opening, the pitch-bending expression on the lead synths and some building chords in the background. It's not a groundbreaking interpretation, but the genre change and sound palette gave it enough to make it sound like your unique take. But here's the big problem that I have - your mastering. The ambient intro was pleasant, but starting at 0:54, the dynamic level reached its peak and never eased off until the ending - and the drums were yet to appear by then. You got the right idea with side-chaining your pads, but they're still hard to hear later in the mix when the drums, bass and leads all fought for the forefront. Here are some ideas to fix this dynamic smash - if there's a limiter evolved in the mix, consider weakening its settings and re-adjust any instrumentation manually. But let's say they're all compressed without a limiter for some reason. In that case, it'll be a good idea to go over the compressor settings on each separate part or do some EQ separation to cement their position within the soundscape. I'm in favor of the genre adaptation for sure, but I'd like to see this return to the inbox with the dynamics issue addressed. It'll be lovely to see you submit again. NO (resubmit)