Sir_NutS

Yeah I've been using Bitwig since release and I don't think I will need to switch anytime soon.  The strong points of bitwig are the modular possibilities, the sandboxing of VSTs which is the absolute best of all the DAWs I've tried (and I've tried almost all of them except Logic) and the quick workflow it offers.  Also, I'm not sure if this is a thing nowadays but you can use 32 and 64 bit VST2 and VST3 devices on the same project without any issue.  I know I had issues with this in a couple of DAWs a few years ago (Sonar comes to mind).
However, it's also a relatively young DAW, compared to the mainstream ones that have been around for more than a decade, so you might find here and there some stuff that's considered "basic" in other DAWs is not yet available in BW.  So if you want to switch I recommend trying to at least make a couple songs on it to see if you're going to miss anything pivotal from your previous DAW.
Overall, I've always said the best DAW is the one you know.  Don't switch for the sake of switching.  But if you're curious about having a modular DAW with the best VST support then check BW out. 

A note on Reaper: it's cheap, and also has a vast feature list.  However in my experience it was very clunky and the workflow never quite clicked for me.  Even after doing some deep customization on it (which is one of its strong points, as it's highly customizable) I just couldn't feel at home.  I did produce a few songs on it but left it after BW came out, whose workflow clicked for me quicker than any other DAW before it.  So be warned that Reaper is famous for having a steep learning curve, but also packing tons of features.
edit:  Also, I have a Nektar LX48.  The nektar controllers are basically made for BW's workflow, specially if you're into live performances.

Yeah I've been using Bitwig since release and I don't think I will need to switch anytime soon.  The strong points of bitwig are the modular possibilities, the sandboxing of VSTs which is the absolute best of all the DAWs I've tried (and I've tried almost all of them except Logic) and the quick workflow it offers.  Also, I'm not sure if this is a thing nowadays but you can use 32 and 64 bit VST2 and VST3 devices on the same project without any issue.  I know I had issues with this in a couple of DAWs a few years ago (Sonar comes to mind).
However, it's also a relatively young DAW, compared to the mainstream ones that have been around for more than a decade, so you might find here and there some stuff that's considered "basic" in other DAWs is not yet available in BW.  So if you want to switch I recommend trying to at least make a couple songs on it to see if you're going to miss anything pivotal from your previous DAW.
Overall, I've always said the best DAW is the one you know.  Don't switch for the sake of switching.  But if you're curious about having a modular DAW with the best VST support then check BW out. 

A note on Reaper: it's cheap, and also has a vast feature list.  However in my experience it was very clunky and the workflow never quite clicked for me.  Even after doing some deep customization on it (which is one of its strong points, as it's highly customizable) I just couldn't feel at home.  I did produce a few songs on it but left it after BW came out, whose workflow clicked for me quicker than any other DAW before it.  So be warned that Reaper is famous for having a steep learning curve, but also packing tons of features.
edit:  Also, I have a Nektar LX48.  The nektar controllers are basically made for BW's workflow, specially if you're into live performances.

Didgeridoo
YES
oh the rest of the song? it's pretty good, albeit sticking to the original concepts quite a bit.  The more exotic instrumentation does add a bit of identity to it, though the original wasn't short on the exotic instruments department either.  Production is solid as expected, and the fusion of both songs works, helped in no small part from the sources being similar thematically.

Ah, I remember listening to this one.  Very smooth groove, and clean production.  Stephen's clips, pondering as Shovel Knight add a lot of personality to the track (I should know that!).  The sax performances were well realized and the track just flows really well, never gets boring.  I think the synth lead could've been a little less stiff and had more flair and funk in the performance, but that's a minor complain from me.  The arrangement is great as we've come to expect from Jorito, mixing the sources pretty seamlessly.
YES

Ah I remember this one.  Jorito catched up pretty quickly on the basics of synthwave, and the authenticity is very much here and throughout the duration of the song.  A couple things: the voicing change near 2:55 could've been handled better, I feel the mood changed too much and breaks apart from the rest of the song, second I feel like the overall mix could've been tighter.  It's clean, and shows a ton of progress from Jorito's first subs, but for this genre I think a bit of grit from those old tape recordings and analog hardware that made the original sound famous would've been great here.  Tons of ways to get that effect nowadays, so you should look into that, but the production is otherwise solid and I'm just nitpicking at this because it's something I'm very familiar with.  Very good stuff.

Reading the other Js comments now, the track is a bit static at some points but there are plenty of variations in the drum sequencing and arrangement.  There's enough detailing for me throughout and I don't think this is below the bar by any means.  
YES

I wanted to quote-vote Gario but Kris beat me to it.
Nothing much else to say, I remember this from the competition, and I thought it was pretty good back then.  Solid production, but I have to agree with the others on the tenuous relation to the source, I'm familiar with most mmx songs and even I have difficulties making the connection.  I'm very sure that this song will have some people scratching their heads in confusion, but we can't argue the source is there however disguised.
YES

The mix feels super busy right off the start. Not the cleanest production here, but it doesn't completely break down.  Loved the arrangement and those short time signature change breaks. Also any vocoding is a plus for me.
I think this song could've used a break somewhere, it's too busy ALL the time, and it gets very tiresome towards the end.  Even a 15 second section where things calmed down would've improved the listening experience tremendously.  I need to mull over this, as I'm borderline right now.  I'll finish my vote later.

Jorito will provide a version with fixed mixing, eq and balance in the next couple of days.  I'll update this post with the new version but for now I ask to hold on till the new version is provided.

EDIT: Jorito provided an update: 

The mix is much better balanced now, and everything sounds cleaner.  Since my qualms were production-only and they've been solved, I'm happy to change my vote to a YES.

I really liked this arrangement, it is very expansive on the original, plenty of customization and different elements, it never stays on one phrase for too long but it doesn't feel like it's jumping around randomly either.  The guitar soloing was crazy.  I think the initial section, with the orchestral elements playing along the drums and synth elements was odd, and didn't blend well, but this wasn't a big gripe for me as the rest of the arrangement made up for it.
My main issues with this track lay in the production side of things.  The mix feels muddy and distant, and needs better EQing.  The mids are too dominant and make the song sound as if played through a tube, and the highs lack a bit of brightness.  I loaded the song and did some hacked up EQing and I think your problems lie around 500-1.5k hz, carving those freqs nicely, or eqing the individual instruments that occupy this space may clear things up a bit.  I also felt the mix's compression could be brought down a notch.  Even though the mix feels distant I can hear the compression acting up on the guitars and orchestral elements pretty badly.

This is a really creative remix and I want the production issues fixed before I can pass it.  They aren't hard to fix so please take this into consideration and resubmit asap!
 
Edit 07/05/2016 Issues have been addressed, the mix is cleaner and better balanced now.
YES

The mix feels super busy right off the start. Not the cleanest production here, but it doesn't completely break down.  Loved the arrangement and those short time signature change breaks. Also any vocoding is a plus for me.
I think this song could've used a break somewhere, it's too busy ALL the time, and it gets very tiresome towards the end.  Even a 15 second section where things calmed down would've improved the listening experience tremendously.  I need to mull over this, as I'm borderline right now.  I'll finish my vote later.

Just to follow up on this, I'll also be mailing the mixer to see his reaction to the MIDI similarity, and offer him the chance to co-credit the MIDI author if it's true. I would then have to contact the MIDI author, Monster Iestyn, to get their approval as well. djp agreed with both Gario and I that -- while the arrangement is close to the original and is more borderline, there was enough going on that removing it on arrangement grounds compared to the original song itself isn't the issue. This is strictly about the closeness to the MIDI version on VGMusic.

Can we talk about how how happy I am right now?! I thought it would get rejected to be honest (almost did actually)...but here it is on OCR, and I'm screaming in happiness! Definitely gonna try to make a new remix. And hopefully I do a lot better. Thank you everyone! And djpretzel' s comments had me rolling lol.

Yeah... the ending isn't a super improvement, but it is an improvement.  The vocals are a bit too dry now, but my main beef was with the ending.  This feels less like a WIP now, but to be honest I would've preferred just a longer fadeout instead of just a cymbal crash (Can't believe I'm saying I'd prefer a fadeout).
I think I can let it pass like this, I still think the arrangement is awesome and just needed tweaking in the ending and vocals, which we got, just not to the degree I would've preferred.
YES

This is fantastic! such energy and feeling of fun and speed, just what a sonic track needs.  The vocals could've used less processing so they fit better with the rest of the track, but it's not bringing the track down for me.  The swing-y feel of the vocals are a great fit for the track though.
Now, about that ending.  What happened there? it's like the track wasn't finished, specially with such a short fade-out time.  I wouldn't have a big issue with this if it was a longer fade-out but man this is way too short.  
This is a very hard decision for me.  I think I would be willing to give this a pass if the ending was changed. It seems the ending didn't stop the other Js for passing it but I'm not completely on that camp.  I would really like if we could reach out to the artist and ask to double the fadeout time, at least.  
This may seem nitpicky and I may be alone on this one but I don't think this leaves me with a feeling of a finished song and I don't think it can be on the front page as it is.
NO (Conditional on ending fix)

Seems like we're pretty much in unison about the ending and vocals being an issue, even if whether it's passable or not is in debate, so I sent the artist a request to fix that ending specifically while mentioning the issue with the vocals. Here's hoping for a fix.

This is a good method that works for me a lot of times.  In fact I think most of my most transformative mixes come from "shower humming".

Were you actually looking for a mod review? (If not, just pretend this is regular critique.)
ARRANGEMENT
I'm not very familiar with these sources, but after listening to this back and forth, it seems to be a fairly conservative arrangement. Not necessarily an issue in and of itself, but in terms of OCR guidelines, a ReMix that sounds too close to the original generally doesn't demonstrate as much interpretation as it could. What I would suggest is deviation in the (i) structure, (ii) rhythm, (iii) harmonies, and so on.
I have this feeling that you maybe listened to the original and tried to be faithful to it, and ended up having very similar note sequences on each instrument; from what I can tell, this ended up being not too far from an instrument switch on a nearly exact transcription.
A nice analogy is plagiarism (sans the connotation); if you look at someone else's work and just try to reword it, chances are you might not really reword it that much if you really like their wording. But if you don't have that person's work in front of you, and you just try to come up with the same ideas in your own words, you have a much better chance of making a more original work that satisfies the assignment.
OVERALL
I like the result personally, and I can appreciate the melodic variation you tried later on in the track. The pacing is alright, and I didn't find it all that repetitive. [In terms of "would this be accepted on OCR?" though, probably not.]
-----
ADVICE?
If I were to have remixed these two sources, my approach would be to listen to each source and try to internalize the melodies over a few days or weeks. From the melody, I would imagine my own harmonies, or perhaps try to hum one melody on top while the other source is playing. When I come up with something neat, then I start writing from scratch with no pre-loaded MIDI.
As an easy example, try humming the "chorus" from the Super Mario 64 credits theme on top of the Pokemon GSC Goldenrod City theme. That's one I found recently!

Mwahahah, I picked the right time to take a vacation from evals.
Man, I thought I made long tracks. That's probably why you haven't been getting much feedback. People are scared of it. I've yet to listen to it myself, I'm just dropping by to laugh at Gario. Looking forward to listening, though, when I think I have the time.
Also, I suggest you sub the full-length thing to ocr. Maybe a regular remix release isn't the best way to release it, but I want to see what the judges have to say about it.

To be honest future bass has a wide range of styles within itself that's really impossible to tell you "go do X for future bass".  It depends on the artist and the sound you're going for. One thing I've noticed is somewhat common is the 85-90 bpm range, and the gated 1/8 chords.  As for synths, if you want it to be aggressive, stack your saws, big chords, underlying bass doesn't matter much since texture will be lost.  For stuff that's a bit more calm you'll have to be subtler with the synth choice for your chords.  Drum structure usually follows the chord rhythm usiing the kick and snare.
My recommendation would be to just listen to the type of future bass you want to make and extract the elements by yourself.  That's how different styles within a genre are sometimes born.

Pretty much my thoughts on this one.  The piano velocities can be an issue at times, and I think more could've been done to add subtlety to the performance, but the transformation and changes on the melody lines carried by it is what mostly makes this remix unique.  I was fine with the arrangement's dynamics, I think the energy levels drop/rise enough throughout the track, which is very chill in nature and doesn't really need huge peaks and cliffs in mood.  On the production side things are clear, while the mix has a bit of a cold and dry feel to it sometimes, it's not something that brings the whole thing down for me.  The sax section was... not very good.  The tremolo was a bit excessive IMO, but the sax has a very short stay here.
Overall I think this is close but over the bar for me.
YES (borderline)

Despite practically disappearing, I do care about what happens to OCR. I'd rather the community has a little more financial stability (God, I wonder what that's like) than the aforementioned single point of failure. I consent to monetization on my OCR music. Of course, my consent will be revoked if unskippable ads are enabled (which I know you will keep turned off anyway).

I also continue to give consent.  
In the spirit of the season feel free to Ho' out my remix for the benefit of the site. 

Mike's early remixes were a huge inspiration for me to get into music and remixing.
Glad to see him back.

On another news the Judge Process thread has been updated thanks to @Nutritious.  I'll try to keep it updated again.
 

When I joined the panel, the wait time for a sub to appear on the queue was about a year and a half.  Yes, If you submitted your song today, the ETA for it to arrive at the queue would be around spring 2019.  This year around july / august, if you submitted your song there was a good chance it would get on the queue (and possibly out of it) that very same week.  So yeah, it's a bit faster now.
I took this process over from Larry because the thread has been a personal grudge for me for years, since it usually went without updates for months when the queue was ridiculously long.  I used to update it weekly or more often but since we had reached parity with the inbox (and I have too many responsibilities this year) I stopped updating it, since things are a bit slower now (the most recent mix on the queue is from around mid october) I'll try to update it again.  This thread is a pain in the ass to update though, takes a considerable amount of time, so yeah.
This has been a topic of discussion internally and is brought up a lot.  To make this process visible it requires a better submission process and integration with the site.  This is a major project which requires, you guessed it, a lot of time to implement, free time from the staff.  I know you're perfectly aware of all of this but a lot of people, perhaps understandably don't see the amount of time that is put on the site behind the scenes to keep it running, release projects, work on evaluations, implement forum features, organize panels, etc.  I personally would love to see this whole process to be updated, but it's not happening overnight with the current resources we have.
I was very surprised by this as well, I thought we were rejecting far more than we were passing.  But after thinking about it, it makes perfect sense.  The bar has been around the same place for about a decade now, and it has become increasingly easier to make good music.  I remember the FL compo mentioned by Larry, and at the time this compo was made, FL and most DAWs used to come with very poor quality samples and the tools they came with were pretty vanilla and basic (3xosc, i.e.).  Compare that to the current FL studio which comes with many more powerful tools out of the box, plus a more comprehensive sample library of better quality.  Same with other DAWs like Reason, Ableton etc.  You can get Reaper nowadays for free/cheap, grab a bunch of high quality free synths/effects/samples and get going without spending a dollar.