Rexy

You made a fun dance-pop arrangement, with some appropriate blippy synths and the usual quality guitar recording I've expected from you through your Pixel Mixers contributions. The synths also had some careful attention to subtle tone shaping and volume, which helped them feel less vanilla overall. However, I'm co-signing with Joel regarding the narrow panning and the muddy mixing. For the panning, the bells at the beginning had some fun stereo effects, but hardly anything else felt like it was getting pushed to another side. Consider putting your written parts over at least two layers and panning them on opposite sides of the stereo field for more of a textured effect. EQ-wise, there's not much action going on in the mid-highs to highs and too much the other way. It's worth revising the panning on some of your higher-pitched instruments to favor those frequencies, as well as your snare and hi-hats to give them some more impact. It doesn't hurt to make the mix louder overall, too - there's 4dB of headroom, which is something a quick normalization can fix. The arrangement, while sturdy, also has a big problem worth addressing. On the plus side first, you did well with breaking the source down and finding ways to develop sets of motifs individually, with the first two bars of the melody getting used as your leading hook and the countermelody in that same area working well for transitions. The rest of the source got used for the bridge sections in the second half, both of them surrounding your fun guitar solo. The big problem that I had with all of this is that the source didn't sound dominant. Here's what I detected: 0:01-0:08 - First two bars, used on the bells in the intro. 0:35-0:39 / 1:06-1:10 / 3:00-3:04 - First two bars used as your hook throughout. 0:44-0:49 / 1:22-1:27 - Countermelody usage for transitions. 1:29-1:51 / 2:30-2:51 /3:07-3:13 - The rest of the BGM got used for the bridges around your guitar solo. At 42% source coverage, I feel the track either hasn't applied the source enough or went too liberal depending on the section. This source is an interesting one where the amount of countermelodies present doesn't mold well for chords to be part of the quota. Within the gaps where BGM is absent, consider finding ways to fit some in - whether it be a melodic passage you already used or something left abandoned - for example, like the original's bass. Heck, even other FF2 BGM can work if you feel you're still too short. I felt like I dumped so much critique all at once, Julien, but that's because I know you've got the potential to be a posted OCR artist. You said you still have your project file, so that gives you room to revise the mixdown/panning and find ways to make the source material more apparent. I'd say keep at it, but I know you'll do just that anyway - I believe in you. NO (resubmit)

Cecil uploaded his original take on his YouTube page, but he didn’t send it here as a submission. Thought I’d make that a little clearer

Hello, Here is my submission for a guitar cover for Tifa's Theme in Final Fantasy 7 Remake. Your ReMixer name: kennyslik Your real name: Christian Morte Your website: https://www.youtube.com/user/gtdolorz Name of game(s) arranged: Final Fantasy 7 Remake Name of arrangement: Tifa's Theme Name of individual song(s) arranged: Tifa's Theme This guitar cover was inspired by guitarsvd's original cover of the song! Thanks, Christian

In proper Rebecca fashion, the track went through three different source variations that all sound texturally different from each other - no surprises there. The slow tempo buildup is neat to take in, as well as a little padded segway at 1:53 in the middle of your third loop. Many of the changeups are from mere instrument swaps, though you added some textural variation with the percussion variation and strings along with a new tuba harmony at 1:07. This kind of subtractive interpretation isn't as elaborate as what I heard from your Golvellius mixpost last year, as I wanted to see more of those pads and side melodies present. But what you did here is barely enough to get it over the bar. On the presentation side, I can identify your parts thanks to some thorough EQ work, but my right speaker had earned one heck of a workout, as Joel hinted. Why are the strings and other bass instruments not only loud in the mix but also pushing through on that side in particular? There's at least a 3dB difference between both speakers for much of the way; hence re-balancing would help things considerably. The sequencing for your non-percussion instruments feels stiffer than what I usually hear with not a lot of attention to articulations this time around, plus the usual legato note shaping problems persist on top of that. Yet, with the segway at 1:53, you improved on that with some volume automation, so that's a start. Unfortunately, I don't think this track is ready for the front page just yet. I like your usual textural ideas, but I feel the balance and robotic orchestration had let things down. I hope you have your project file because I'd like to hear another version that revises the panning so that it doesn't push too hard on either speaker, plus a closer look at the articulations on your instruments. Additional countermelodies would work well on the arrangement but are just nice to have in comparison. Good luck with the rest of the vote. NO (resubmit)

Contact Information Remixer Username: Audio Mocha Real Name: Daniel Florez User ID: 33297 Name of games arranged:Final Fantasy 3 Name of arrangement: Surfing Fantasy 2 Name of individual songs: Opening Theme Source material: Comments: Back in 2014 before Theatrhythm Final Fantasy Curtain Call came out, Square Enix was holding a contest called the Legacy of Music campaign. Me being a huge fan of the original Theatrhythm and having been curious about creating game covers, I instantly started working on a submission for the contest. The rules were to make a remix of the Final Fantasy theme that plays in every single game and the winners of the contest would receive prizes but more importantly, the highest ranking entries would be judged by Nobuo Uematsu himself so that alone made me get into the contest. I had recently gotten into surf rock so I had the idea of making a surf rock remix; I knew that since the judges would receive a ton of metal entries so maybe the novelty factor might help me. Since that was one of my very first times ever recording guitar and filling in for the rest of a rock band, I was very much just winging it. I recorded the thing using Audacity and the drums were some loops I made in a Adobe Flash drum sequencer with a pitch dropped guitar filling in as bass. It was definitely a rookie effort but I've always had a soft spot for what I did then and had been wanting to go back and make a better produced remix of the Final Fantasy theme. Fast forward to hearing about the Dod x OCR FF3 event. The moment I saw that the event was asking for an Opening Theme remix, I knew that my time had come.

What a quirky match-up of sources! They both have their distinct moods, but believe it or not, they both relate to each other thanks to the Burmecian species in the game - so I can imagine an honorary showdown here just like you. It's a lovely stretch of story-telling while also enhancing the sources with how you see fit. Bowlerhat's flute worked beautifully well for the introduction, with the buildup in layers and mood while going through "Cleyra" straight for a loop and a half. Then, when you added "One Danger Put Behind Us" at 1:25, instead of going into the direct minor key, you shifted into a completely different one and adapted the melodies into 5/8, only going back into 6/8 near the end of each set of 8 bars. And you kept going with that experimentation with an 11/8 section that blends the two sources at 1:56 - just in time to let "Cleyra" take center stage for a defined finisher from 2:40. There's a lot to love with how you treated the source material and created your own thing, for sure - but if there's anything I'd change, the transition to the 2:40 section feels abrupt. Hence, I would've wanted a chord modulation that better bridges the two segments together. But it's a small part in the grand scheme of things, and I'm sure you have your reasoning for that. As expected, Bowlerhat and Chris's contributions are beautifully recorded and synched, and your programming on the rest of the instruments work well with your vision. Yet, I also don't think the orchestra's production values are as polished but for entirely different reasons to Joel - I feel the volume levels for the leads, while quiet, are still identifiable in the mix. I'm more concerned about the master volume being louder than what I usually expect from you. The RMS average is at -11.5dB in the left speaker and -13.5 in the right, making this louder than Youtube's music upload standards, and the master compression hammered down on your percussion hits in the louder parts. So while I would like to hear a slightly quieter master and some instruments re-panned to the right for steadier balance, the track otherwise feels listenable as it is and got more done well with the articulations to make up for it. So while I'm not too thrilled over the presentation this time around, the quirky arrangement idea and execution shines well among the rest of your equally fun marches. The three of you did some nice stuff - best of luck to the rest of the vote. YES (borderline)

Jazz fusion Wily? Hell yeah, sign me up! You've changed up the A section's chord section entirely, left room for a sweet solo at 0:54, and allowed for more swagger across your backing to carry the style forward. I'm afraid I have to disagree with Joel regarding the pacing transitions, though - which use the B section of the source. Even though they got their time signature changed from 4/4 to 12/8, the lead in and out of it flows naturally, making them a feature that works and draws attention at the same time. Despite the excitement of the genre switch-up, I did, however, feel concerned about copy-pasted segments. You have two uses of the A section (0:41, 1:42) that all got duplicated from the initial one at 0:06. These duplications account for nearly 20% of the running time. Thankfully, your B sections all have different drum patterns - and in the case of the one at 2:07, the piano also took more of a backseat to the toms. So while the A sections aren't all that distinct, you've demonstrated that you've got a grasp for variety elsewhere, so I can let them slide. The mixdown is a slick one, with all instruments getting their defined space in the mix. The guitar parts sound tight, expressive, and free of artifacts, and the tone is sublime for this kind of genre adaptation. Though, my only complaint is the snare feeling stuffy with not a lot of punch getting through. It sounds exposed when it's on its own for the intro and a brief drum fill near the end, but less than 10 seconds of that isn't going to break the deal. It sounds a lot better when the rest of the backing is in play, so no harm got done. I understand that everyone and their dog had covered this source at one point, but the style you went for here shows that there's still room to do something refreshing with it. Complete with a slick presentation, I'm all for seeing this on the front page as your debut! YES

This track has a fun progression for being this Basshunter-inspired waltz dance thing. You've got the opening build, the breaks, and the theme making an entrance at the climax, which is pretty much what I expect for the genre. However, it fell in a crucial pitfall in source use not being dominant - so much so that it doesn't make its first appearance until 1:37, and that's only the chords for the second half of the A section. Here's what I found in terms of source: 1:37-1:51 - Chords for the second half of the A section at half-speed. 2:12-2:32 - Starts with the second half of the A section, then went through the whole thing straight. 2:40-3:08 - A section in full, twice. 3:21-4:17 - Resumes with the A section melody, getting played around and brought into half time. At 3:50, the speed returns to normal for the high-pass filter ending. That placed your source quota at barely 45%, making it very clutch. Within that interpretation, the chords hardly got changed up, the melody got played with only once, and 20 seconds of that run-time got based on chords alone. I understand you - there's not a lot in this source material to work with, but it's still possible to enhance it in a dance setting. You could cut off the melody's first four notes and use it as a repeating rhythm pattern during the intro, find ways to fit in other FF2 sources if inspired to do so, or even change up the chords while letting the melody remain unaltered on top. Experiment and see what works. The mixdown is clear enough to identify parts, and the noise and EQ sweeps you've added on occasion do enough to shape the track. Though, aside from the climax at 2:04, the overall EQ shaping lacked mid and high frequencies. Something like that can get rectified by either tweaking the EQ of the instruments you already have or a more advised idea of adding more instrument layers to beef it up. And as Joel also brought up, envelope shaping across your instruments is extremely minimal otherwise, letting your parts sound more bare-bones than they had any right to be. Your synths all have parameters that can get manipulated with careful tracking, just like what you did with the EQ at the end. See if you can check them out and find ways to integrate them. It's not often that I hear dance tracks with this kind of time signature, and I'm all for seeing something like this on OCR down the line. But it's still got a way to go before it can head up there. It'll be nice to hear a revision that does more with source integration, adds a thicker palette, and adds more envelope based engagement. Whatever you do, please keep going! NO (resubmit)

Faseeh, I love you. This source is my favorite track in the game, and I'm so happy to see someone arrange it! Arrangement-wise, it's one loop (minus the crazy piano solo, thank goodness) with some neat tricks thrown in. You established a modified chord structure straight away, and this choice fits so well with the first melody lines and those from the break at 1:24 onwards. Joshua's guitar part at 1:00 also added in some harmonies not present in the source, and the plucked synth at 1:12 changed up the pitches of the original's piano descent to better fit the established chords. You also kept the B section's reprise at 2:12 refreshed with the throbbing bass and the gate effects on Joshua's guitar - a minimal way to vary things up, but it works well enough. The guitar kept its momentum to the end with a rad solo and returned to the A section for one big finish. All in all, enough happened with the writing outside of the brisker genre adaptation to match it on par with previous works. Now, I felt unsure about the production values. On the one hand, the mixdown is firm without needing to be too loud, Joshua's guitar part is tight and cleanly recorded, and there's some fun effect work on the transitions as well. I'm okay with the guitar's volume - it's more than enough for me to hear it along the rest of the instruments. On the other hand, there is a light fuzz to the render that gets more noticeable when the distorted bass is in play, plus the EQ shaping on the entire track feels bass-heavy (as expected for DnB). Therefore, it doesn't have a lot going on in the higher frequencies for a good chunk of the duration. Transposing some of your backing parts up an octave could've helped with breathing room here, but the separation of components is still serviceable as it is. Ultimately, this is one of those tracks that has a good presentation and a more stellar interpretation. And in classic Faseeh fashion, it feels both fast-paced and chilled out at the same time, and no doubt something to start winding down a DJ set. Great teamwork between the pair of you! YES

My Contact Information ReMixer name: theconsoloist real name: Chris userid: 34798 Submission Information Name of game(s) arranged: Shovel Knight Name of arrangement: Grand Shovel March Name of individual song(s) arranged: Main Theme Link to the original soundtrack (if it is not one of the sound archives already available on the site): Your own comments about the mix, for example the inspiration behind it, how it was made, etc: This is an orchestral arrangement for a full symphonic orchestra, which could actually really be played. I really love Shovel Knight's Soundtrack and always thought 'damn this would really fit an orchestral arrangement'. Anyway here it is I alway tried to have the main melody playing. Sometimes straigtforward, sometimes a variation of it (especially in the middle sections). But I think the prominent part of the melody (e - A - f#) sticks out pretty well.I hope you enjoy it! It was always a little dream of me to submit my own remix to ocr but never really got to it. So I'm really glad now that I finally submitted one.

Your arrangement skills have been shaping up nicely since the last time I assessed any of your works! In all fairness, the source is only 80 seconds long, leaving room for interpretation aplenty. Indeed, it starts with a conservative take. Then at 1:01, you suddenly threw in an aggressive variation on the source's more somber E section, letting the loop then resume 15 seconds later. Following its conclusion at 1:39, it returned to an exploration of the C section along with a rad solo that trails between improvized writing and melody exploration. The E section's aggressive take returned at 2:04, with that same melody getting used for the big finisher and layered vocal finish. Indeed, the complexity is getting up there with your guitar skills - so I consider it a fun ride. Yet, the arrangement isn't without its faults. Firstly, the 2:04 section is identical to that at 1:01, so at least some subtle variation in rhythm guitar performance or drum writing could've helped. Thankfully, you did just that at 2:18 with the faster strums and the double kick pedal use, so that makes the blip feel minor in comparison. However, for all E section applications in the key of A minor, the first note at the fourth bar's start doesn't mesh with your modified chord structure well. Said pitch is an F#, just like in the section's scale in the source material, but it badly clashes with your chosen chord of F major. Reworking either your lead or backing can fix this, and I'm afraid you may need to ask Psamathes again to re-record the appropriate harmony for the ending as well. The recording quality of the guitars and vocals are top-notch, and the guitar tone itself is as brutal as I'd like to see in an arrangement like this - good stuff. The mixdown is okay, but it does feel very bass-heavy - as if there are too many sub frequencies going on. It's fair to roll a pinch of that off the bass guitar so the rest of the mix can breathe more. I had to think about the drum kit, though - I'm able to hear the parts, but the snare, in particular, isn't cutting through very well, with only snaps being audible. See if you can find where the fundamental tone is for your snare in terms of EQ and make some instrument cuts to let it pack more of a punch. I like the track for the most part, but those sour notes need to get addressed first and foremost before posting. While not as problematic in comparison, the stuffy mixing is also worth checking out, especially when getting the best out of your snare and taming your bass. Jean-Marc, I hope you still have your project file because this is an idea I'd like to get behind if you can refine it. NO (resubmit)

Contact Information Your ReMixer name: Almighty_Arceus Your real name: Jordan Wynne Your email address: Your website: www.youtube.com/c/AlmightyArceus Your userid: 33542 Submission Information Name of game(s) arranged: Pokemon Diamond/Pearl/Platinum Name of arrangement: "EEVEE used Swift!" Name of individual song(s) arranged: Route 209 Theme Link to the original soundtrack: Hey OCRemix, it's been a while! I'm coming at you with what i call a lo-fi "complexhop" remix of the classic Route 209 theme from Pokémon Diamond, Pearl, and Platinum. This ReMix borrows a lot of its EQing from lo-fi techniques, giving it a worn and vintage feel, which leans into the classic/nostalgic feeling this theme evokes. However, by tempo and feel, it is much more rapid and active than a typical lo-fi piece, and contributing to that in no small part is the fact that I arranged this piece in 5/8 time. This is how I arrive at the word "complexhop," but call it what you like, I'm not too keen to genres and I'm not so picky, so long as you enjoy what you're hearing This piece should impart a sense of majesty and nostalgia, but also energy and joy. Like a breeze in a way. I find the worn wash effect on some of the instruments, particularly the sampled chimes around 1:13 in, adds to this idea of a breeze, guiding you along on your excited journey as a Sinnoh Pokémon trainer. The chimes sway in this 7/8 breeze, and the drums keep you moving along (and with a little bit of punch!) Since I last submitted a piece to OCRemix, I feel like I have developed a lot as an artist. I feel like I have been developing a style of my own, and it's all thanks to the growth that the remixing community has brought to me. I'm hoping that this piece shows how far I've come as a ReMixer, incorporating some of my signature passions (odd time signatures) with my experience I have gained over the years. Hope you enjoy!

I've been going back and forth on this one for the past few weeks - and that's because when the track works, it really shows. The arrangement opens with Dark Star's A section melody on top of Prophecy's A section chord section, then goes through Prophecy straight following that, time signature swap and all. It then follows on with going back to the intermingling idea, back to Prophecy's A section at 2:06, an original tin whistle/melodica solo section at 2:32 that eventually adds that neat "Angel's Fear" cameo, the return to Prophecy's B section and a close-out with the intro's intermingling idea. So on paper, you've got a satisfying structure to go through from start to finish. Yet, the more I listened to it, the more unsure I felt over some of these repeated ideas. The first sign of it pops up with the 0:20 section appearing again at 1:26, but luckily the drum writing between the two variations is entirely different, and we can't go wrong with blast beats. However, 2:06 completely re-treaded the same section at 1:01, as did 3:10 repeating 0:39 but with a modified fill at the end, plus 3:31 also repeating 1:01 but with a modified blast beat finisher. That's over a minute of straight-up recycling, and a second-half like this one could've benefitted more from any different kind of backing changes to make them stand out from what happened before. The drum fills are a start, but even just changing the bass and rhythm guitars' rhythms can make a huge difference, and what you did before with the drum variance for 0:20 and 1:26 can also apply there. Now, the mixdown is an interesting case. It's on the bright side, but nothing's competing with another part, which is impressive considering your folk-based additions here. It's also clear you wanted to push for an audio direction similar to Eluveitie as Wes brought up - but the tin whistle is going for dominance above all the other instruments. I can understand why this is the case as a lead instrument, but the signal is too high, and it shows both on listening and on visualizers as well. Kris did a great job with the screengrab and showing how it pokes out of the mix, so any way to tame it and keep it in line - whether it be a re-EQ or a doubling up with another part - could help out here. I'm also not a fan of the melodica's tone, but it's one of those instruments you can't express naturally anyway, and it's got a modest amount of flange to make it sound the best it can in the mix. Ultimately, the tin whistle's peaks are problematic on the presentation side, while minimal variation is an issue for the arrangement. I don't think this is ready for the front page yet, but it is a cool idea that I hope you still have the project file around. If you do, it'll be great to hear a version that sits the whistle better in the mix and distinguishes the repeat sections in the second half. Good luck with the rest of the vote! NO (resubmit)

As usual, Rebecca, you've picked some lovely sounding instrumentation with more of an emphasis on percussion than anything else - something that brings out your raw strength when humanizing those parts. I'm not a fan of the sound of your violin VST, but on the plus side, you've given it some volume shaping, so it feels a lot better programmed than what I usually hear from you. There's no part bleeding into another one, which makes a lot of sense with the minimalist audio setup - but I'm with Joel regarding the quiet master. It peaks at -3.5dB during the intro and then doesn't even go above -6dB since. The delicate instrumentation does justify the volume levels here, but it's also one I'd prefer some normalization for at least. The writing has a pleasant framework to it - a steady intro into some motif development with variations. Yet, this source doesn't have a lot to work with - the slow fade intro, the four notes of bass, four bars of the same harp pattern, and some string harmonies. So it made sense to cover the source straight for the first 35 seconds, complete with graceful slowdown throughout to prepare for any transformation happening. However, what I heard after that wasn't so much transformation, but more like entirely original content. I went through the track so many times, trying to find any instrument phrase that sounded anything like any of the source components that I mentioned - but ultimately, I found nothing at worst and too many liberties taken at best. Rebecca, you've handled short sources before, so I'm sure you can find spots throughout your arrangement to make BGM use much clearer. It's a pretty track in a vacuum, shaped and produced well to capture that idea of floating petals in the wind. But I can't pass it if I don't hear enough overt source material. Maybe my fellow judges could prove me wrong with their breakdowns, but for now, I can't see this on the site unless the BGM quota gets addressed. You've got this. NO (resubmit)

What a chill groove you put together - with genre authenticity worth relaxing by. It gave a favorable first impression with some modified notation on the A section and most of the track having textural variations shaping around that same part. The B section doesn't arrive until 2:18, and even then, it looped twice in building textures to go back into the main beat. So while I appreciate the ideas you've got going, this track has a couple of substantial autopilot issues. Firstly, the A section's melody notation got repeated throughout the track, outside of the B section break. See if you can go through the other uses of the source and find ways to vary it - whether it can be with new harmonies, revised note rhythms, or even changing up the chord modulations every once in a while. Secondly, the groove you established at 0:28 got repeated straight twice more (1:50, 2:45) - and while it's possible to go in that direction, just tweaking the textures or drum beat between them can be more than enough to make them feel more distinct from each other. The mixdown is decent - nothing clashing with another part, save the leads needing to be a pinch louder as they're carrying most of the source use. The sound palette feels quirky to me - you've got a mixture of dry organic tones with some wetter leads and backing parts. Unfortunately, those dry instruments stick out like a sore thumb, and even more so when panned heavily in one direction like your Tamborine on the right and the B section's string patch to the left. A touch of reverb across your pitched percussion, in particular, could de-expose them. And as Joel brought up, either that opening harpsichord at 0:25 isn't on the beat, or you've got a delay ping louder than the primary signal. See if you can get that fixed as well. Considering this is your first sub, George, you've got some sweet ideas with the RnB direction and initial source presentation. But with autopilot issues and exposure of your more organic parts, it's a tough sell, unfortunately. I'd like to hear another version with added melody and textural variations, as well as a remedy for the fakeness flaws on your sound palette. Whatever you do next, keep at it. NO

This track gave me a fantastic first impression! You turned the source into a waltz, the sound design is unique, and the altered chord modulations allowed the melody to sit comfortably over the top. All this stayed true on repeated listens, with various leads and articulations keeping the motif iterations refreshing despite sharing identical notation, plus that dramatic choir and brass interchange from 1:08 being a great segue between run-throughs. I'm also with Kris regarding the tame finisher compared to all the drama the rest of the mix had, but I can't let that influence my feelings elsewhere. Indeed, I still like your ethnic approach to the sound design with your choice of percussion and wind instrumentation. The humanization on those parts feels organic, as does your variety of articulations across all instruments at any one time. Yet, the strings' attacks feel stagnant and not realized as much as other parts, and some volume shaping on your legato notation on those same strings and woodwinds can also help give them more of an edge. This mix does feel muddy when the full ensemble kicks in, but in quieter sections, everything feels so much clearer to take in. And as touched upon, the mixdown hardly ever goes above -3dB, which is strange on a track written for dynamic emphasis. While a general cleanup would be okay, I am also aware that the sheer ambition behind the arrangement outweighs all the cons put together. Kris may think that there'd be a handful of NO votes based on the track's production, and she isn't wrong about the weaknesses on board. But when the interpretation and part-writing are this good, along with a coherent effort on articulations, I feel the track can get posted as it is. Whatever you learn from this process, Adam, see if you can apply it to future projects - because this is still one impressive debut! YES

Frankly, I wasn't too impressed with the first minute - it sounded more like a sound upgrade of the source itself. But as the pads and drum writing kicked up during the B section, that got me more than set to see everything else in play. You got the high-passed Azalea Town cameo at 1:00, the second variation with the smooth vocals and rad guitar solo, the build at 2:04 leading into the Pokémon theme shoutout, and the segue into Azalea going on top of the B section at 2:52 to close things out. I admit I didn't hear the National Park BGM, as you mentioned in your email, but that doesn't matter when all your run-throughs of the theme sections are so distinct it kept me engaged throughout. Fun stuff! The choice of sound palette is also very charming - starts with dry percussion and synths, then evolves with richer textures, significant guitar/keyboard articulations, and attention to fun effects when necessary. The live vocals have a pristine recording quality, as do the guitars, and no part is interfering with another in the mixdown. Nevertheless, having the maximum peaks at -1.2dB with this pumping intensity is a considerable risk when aiming for loudness, especially when artificially sustaining the crash cymbals and giving them an unnatural swell. If loudness is indeed what you're aiming for, then it'll be nice if you can weaken any compressors in your master chain for the next set of projects you export, as well as bringing the peaks much closer to the ceiling. As a result, you provided a cheerful and lively arrangement that never outstays its welcome, along with such bouncy production values with some swagger despite the sausage presentation. Remember to keep a close eye on your master chain for whatever you do next, but otherwise, consider this a powerful debut! YES

There's something about this particular source and short arrangements. It's somehow a working formula, and this track is no different. The interpretation of the theme is incredible - you've kept the bell backing as it is but brought everything else into half-time, and that just made it evolve into a more cinematic character. The build into the soprano at 1:21 served as a great climax, keeping the familiar arpeggio and B section's chord structure while letting the articulations move the pace along. Like Kris and Joel, I would've wanted another minute with particularly an exploration of the C section, which went unused otherwise - but the handling of the source here is still more than enough. Regarding the mixdown, barely anything sticks out and blends into anything else, and your articulations, reverb and delay have been used to significant effect in bringing out the instruments' strengths. Said parts are some lovely sounding samples for the most part, with a generous layering of ensemble patches for your backing textures. Though, just like Kris, the trumpet patch at 0:26 doesn't sound as convincing as the rest of the ensemble and could've had some extra layers itself - yet, it got used briefly enough not to impact the full scope. Ultimately, the track does its job in bringing a brief yet well-polished arrangement that would fit right at home on the silver screen. If this is your first sub, Ly, then I'm more than curious to know how you'd follow it up - excellent job! YES

Hello, I would like to submit my remix of the "Theme of Love" from Final Fantasy IV. Contact Information Remixer Name: George Shepherd Real Name: George Shepherd Email Address: Website: www.youtube.com/user/SuperBuckleMan Submission Information Game: Final Fantasy IV Arrangement Name: "Can't Get Over You" Song Being Arranged: "Theme of Love" Original Composer: Nobuo Uematsu

Remixer name: Bluelighter (arranger) (ID 21840) ; Bowlerhat (ID 30366); Chris | Amaterasu (ID 23512) Real Name: Guillaume SAUMANDE; Jorik BERGMAN; Chris WOO Mail: Game & Songs: Final Fantasy 9 – Cleyra and One Danger Put Behind Us Composer: Nobuo UEMATSU Interpreter: Bowlerhat: Flute Chris | Amaterasu: Violin Hi OCR, Here is an orchestra arrangement of "Cleyra's Theme" from ff9 (and a little of "One Danger Put Behind Us"). I've started this some years ago, but I let it in stand-by to work on my Treno remix. Two instrument players have collaborated with me: Bowerhat for the flute and Chris | Amaterasu for the violin. I'm really grateful for that! Their recordings give to my arrangement a new dimension. At the beginning, this arrangement was thought only for Cleyra's Theme (without the middle parts of this mix). But I founded interesting to introduce also "One Danger Put Behind Us" into the arrangement. I had several influences for this one: Celtic, movie, march band… I came where I wanted, following my inspiration and my mood of the moment. With the title, I tried to summarize all this. I liked the idea of a tournament, like there was in Middle-Ages. I imagine the princess in the soft parts of the beginning, the knight's arrival (at pt5), the heroic fight (at pt6), the celebration of the winner who marry the princess at the end Nothing to do with the original story. It's another vision of Cleyra! In the whole, original sources are easily recognizable. Maybe the part 6 sounds strange. Two melodic lines and tonalities of the two original tracks overlap. Even if "One Danger Put Behind Us" is brought out in this part, notes of Cleyra reminds the place of the scene and allow me to return to the center melody at the next part. Enjoy! BREAKDOWN Originals Cleyra : 0'00 Melodic Line 1 0'36 ML2 0'56… repeated One Danger Put Behind Us 0'20 ML3 0'42 ML4 1'03 unused 1'35… repeated Arrangement 1- 0'00 intro (Celtic Style) 2- 0'10 ML1 (Celtic) 3- 0'43 ML2 (Celtic/Funny -> March Band) 4- 1'04 ML1 (March Band) 5- 1'25 ML3 (March Band) 6- 1'56 ML4 and ML1 together (Heroic) 7- 2'40 ML1 (A little March Band, soft instrumentation) 8- 2'58 ML2 (March Band) 9- 3'37 Outro (Celtic)

Many of my thoughts got touched upon already - so kudos to Kris, Wes and Deia for checking it out overnight! When I started listening to this track in the inbox, I was concerned about where the source would kick in after that extended cinematic intro. Luckily, once it made its arrival at 1:29, it stayed there for the rest of the track - so source use is ultimately not a problem. All variations that followed on are all distinct from each other, too. The first one doubled up on the A section and kept with the bass-ambient feel previously established, and then the second one supported it with acoustic drums, juicy pads, and more developed chords underneath. And the dramatic zig-zagged movement from root to diminished chords at 4:03 was the icing on the cake and a powerful way to set up the closure. Even though the melody stayed the same, the textural shifts and especially your chord modulations in the second run had done more than enough to let it stand out. Great stuff! As much as I love most of the arrangement, there is an irk that caught my ear. The transition into the source properly at 1:29 could've been smoother than relying on a bar of 11/16, which will sound odd in any context. But it's a little part of a much broader picture, and I feel okay to keep that aspect in as it is. And wow, that sound palette is mind-blowing - lovely attention to reverb, delay, cinematic swells with articulations, and overall thickness of your sounds. The lead, as Wes pointed out, isn't too exciting in comparison to your backing textures - but it does offer up a down-to-earth counter for just being what it is. The balance and mixing are mostly well polished, as all parts have their own defined space in the mix, and there's no severe collision between sounds. I felt the high-frequency lead at 1:57 was just a hair too loud, and unlike Joel, I felt the melody at 3:09 could've had some further whack to it, so it doesn't blend too close to the pads. Neither of them is a dealbreaker, as both aspects are too brief to damage the bigger picture. What I heard overall is a very, very solid debut from you, Peter. While it does take longer than it needed to get to the source, it explored it via the backing and complimented it with some impressive cinematic sound design. If this is what you're like for your first post, I'm excited to see what your next few can be. Welcome aboard! YES

Hey, this a fun performance! Performances are mostly on point, every instrument has its own defined space in the mix, and the balance is precise. Your lead guitar's flanger effect is very subtle and helps contribute to expression, so I didn't feel it needed more presence than what it got. I do have two little concerns for the presentation. Firstly, the countermelodies at 1:20-1:30 are looser than the rest of the mix, so a re-take can refine it if editing the raw audio can't. And secondly, the tail end of the track got cut before it can fully fade out - so watch out for those with future renders. Neither of the production issues feels that troublesome in comparison to the arrangement, though. To your credit, you presented the run-throughs for each source in a different way. You distinguished the first two of the fight theme with a lead in different octaves and the third relying on harmonies. Meanwhile, Little Mac Down had similar-sounding first and third run-throughs separated with different rhythm guitar rhythms and the second having the accompaniment stab in the background while the melody did its thing. But neither the core melody itself nor the chord structure get changed up in all variants, as did the drums outside of fills - and when there's not enough done to the sources, that's a critical flaw. Finding ways to modify the chord structure or melody further in individual variations could make them stand out, add an original solo on top of the existing chord structure, or even a temporary sub-genre change during one of the loops. Those are just a few ideas of many, though I also encourage you to jam together and look out for new performance ideas as well. You all did great together with a well-produced rock cover, but that's pretty much what it is right now - a cover. Right now, it needs more interpretation before getting shown on OCR, so it'll be nice if you can all get together and start experimenting. Keep going! NO

I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with Joel regarding the arrangement's introduction. You opened with the intro's chords, then went straight into adapting the middle flute section. It's such an unexpected way to start the interpretation off - and while this rendition technically isn't a sonata in form, the first 40 seconds certainly has the draw of one. Otherwise, the structure goes through the whole source straight with "Orgel of Water" attached to the end. It's not too cerebral on paper, but the mood variations across all verse and chorus appearances are worthy compromises. The first one at 0:42 opens things appropriately with middle-oriented keys. The second verse at 1:29 varied the melody line while shifting a whole octave higher before going more dramatic with the chorus. I felt it was smart to overlap the last two bars of the hook with the first two of the bridge - good catch. The altered chord modulations and rhythm emphasis for the final verse at 3:12 changed things up on a tonal level as well - though, there was also a very sudden jump from the rubato focus in the previous section. A way to smoothen out the transition would be nice to have but is still okay to take in as it is. The performance is as wild as I usually expect from you - very natural and raw. I would've liked the pacing at 2:32 to be less jumpy and tighter in tempo, but it only accounts for 15 seconds of the track, so it's not a significant concern. Mentioning your choice of piano tone and presentation would be like a broken record at this point - on par with previous works, and gotten the best out of the performance alone. Again, when the track gets loud, the accents get muffled from your compression - and based on what I already said on your FF5 mixpost, I'm sure you've got an idea on how to tame it. It's postable as it is, thanks in part to the strength behind the quieter sections and the staccato emphasis at 2:32. As a collective whole, the pros outweigh the cons. It's a lovely piano adaptation with plenty of expression variations, human performance, and a stable presentation. Let's get this posted! YES

You almost threw me into a loop with that minor scale modulation at the beginning - that is very clever coming from you. Following that, though, the track went straight into a more textbook arrangement territory with four different textural variations - and thankfully, they all vary in instrumentation and dynamics. The first one was the closest to the source with all the piano and bell runs, then the second one at 1:05 stripped out every second note from the arp and placed them onto the staccato strings, with prior established parts all providing backing. The third and loudest variation at 1:39 set the arpeggio further into the background, with the legato strings taking center stage with original padded harmonies. Finally, the closing run at 2:21 cut out more of the arp's notes from the first half, with every second downbeat this time - appropriate to pace slower towards the calming finish. Again, this approach isn't revolutionary, but it takes a simple source in different directions and gets the job done. It's a clean mix - though I expected that, considering the lesser amount of instrumentation involved and the dynamic spread. It's a wide one, too - peaks at -6dB during the third iteration, save for the pizzicato string in the right speaker going further to the ceiling. I said it in one submission of yours, and I'll repeat it here - some light master compression could help tone these sudden peaks down, so they're more in line with the others from that same instrument. The pitched percussion again sounds lovely with their velocity variations, as does many of your keyswitches across other parts. But once again, the legato notation across your strings and woodwinds can benefit from volume shaping to get their expression in line with everything else. Neither aspect is a dealbreaker, as the delicate direction you've aimed for works well otherwise - but they're still some food for thought. As a complete whole, I sense a simple arrangement with enough attention paid to delicate dynamics and textural shaping to get it onto the front page. Nevertheless, the site hasn't had any FFA coverage for ten years, and what you did is enough to give it some time back in the spotlight again. Nice work. YES

RebeccaETripp Rebecca Tripp http://www.crystalechosound.com/ ID: 48262 Game(s): Seiken Densetsu aka Final Fantasy Adventure Song Title: Sacred Horizons Songs Remixed: Overworld 2/Search for the Sacred Sword