prophetik music

i didn't vote on the original. looks like it's complaints about a static and over-long song structure, and some note issues. this is much shorter! so that's a positive based on initial glance. the initial delayed chords and electro strings pair well with the hats and claps (i wrote haps and clats at first). the kick hits at 0:28 alongside some fun synth work that features a lot of delays and sustained chords. this is a neat texture in this entire section. the melody first starts 0:53 and is instantly recognizable. there's some fun chords in the original, and it works pretty good getting them into this style which surprised me. there's some crunchiness around every vii chord (sounds like a G# fully diminished to me) that i think is coming from putting the 7th of the G#o chord (F natural) in a lower instrument next to an E elsewhere in the chord. since it sounds perfectly fine when it resolves, i think it's an easy fix, but it sounds weird every time it happens, and that's every time we get to that chord. you could either replace the G#o chord with an E7 in first inversion (G# B D E) - essentially removing the F natural from the background entirely and changing it to an E - and just let the F in the melody function as a passing tone. that'd fix any following instances of it without being too complicated. the melody continues at 1:23 in an arpeggio-style lead which isn't particularly trap but sounds fun. it's pretty loud though and so it is crushing out the fun synth brass stuff that's around it. there's another weird note at 1:46 especially (and it's a little weird at 1:39) - almost certainly another F natural next to an E. you need to either commit to the vii or else an Am with extensions each time this comes up. 1:49 is a lighter backing texture, and gives us a bit of a break. there's some build with the claps here into a drop and hit at 2:19. 2:22 has more bad notes, as well as 2:29, 2:36, and 2:43. this is the opposite as before - instead of having an F in the moving part and an E in the background, this time you've got a fully diminshed G# in the background (G#, B, D, F) with an E in the melody. even worse, you move to an A in the melody - next to the G# in the background! so you've got half-step dissonance twice. it just doesn't sound good =( there's a dropoff into an outro in the ep that's pretty quiet, and then it's done. i think there might be one repeat through the pattern you're using here at 2:48-3:00 - you could probably cut that chord progression from an earlier section at least once, and put this in and be done at 2:48 or so. from a technical standpoint, there's not quite as much bass as i'd expect, and i think the lead synth is a bit too loud since it covers up a lot of fun movement in the background. this is especially clear when the lead's doing a lot of sustains and arpeggiated jumps. other than that, though, i didn't have a real issue with it and thought it sounded pretty good. if there wasn't the consistent issue with notes crunching, i'd probably pass this. it sounds good and is a fun take on the theme! clean up the chord issues and you'll be in a good place. NO

i didn't vote on the original. looks like most of the comments were around mastering. interesting intro. some tuvan throat singing/samples, some neat orchestral-adjacent samples, and then a big, groggy wall of sound hits at 0:35. there's organ, orchestral stuff, multiple guitar leads, some drums that i can barely hear...and then it kicks in at 0:49. the drums at 0:49 lack punch entirely, and the bass is hard to hear if it's audible at all. the guitar leads have some really fun stuff they're doing - i love the nasty unison tone they have - but it's hard to really hear anything clearly. it feels quiet (at least it's not loud like the original version complained about!). the snare has a lot of head tone to it - that's the hollow aspect of it - and the kick is hard to distinguish under all of the other things in the same freq range (there doesn't appear to be a ton of bass presence there, and the beater tone sounds like the snare). the hats exist but sound mega fake next to everything else - maybe it's because they're essentially just static? there's a little too much shaping on them IMO. there's a violin break which is neat and then the band comes back in at 1:40. this tbh is really great - there's a ton of really interesting stuff going on, like the synth bass riffs, and the bigger arena-style drum kit sounds a lot better here. the violin lead cuts through pretty clearly, which is great. there's a countermelody that's harder to hear. another break and then we're into some keys and bass at 2:14, with some more sfx. isolating the vin like this makes it a little easier to hear that it's not real - some more attention to humanization would help. the band comes back in at 2:37 and most of my earlier criticisms apply here. i still think the guitar lead/synth bass doubling is neat, it just sounds quiet and nowhere near as intense as i'd expect. the guitar chugs that happen after that are also cool but still sound blah. there's an outro that comes across as disjointed as the bass instrument and lead guitar are doing different things rhythmically that don't quite line up, and then it's over. from a mastering side, this swung the other way. it's quiet overall and lacks intensity. i like the arrangement, but i think it just doesn't sound good yet. someone like emu or kris would be a better person to call out specifically what's needed, but a significant EQ pass will certainly help. NO

i voted on the original submission. my original vote mentioned issues with blown-out mastering and generic synths, and some funky notes that didn't quite settle. there's still a fun electro feel to this. there's a quick go-through of the melody, with more attention given to mixing up the lead instruments and backing parts. the bass in the third chord of the first presentation of the melody (0:18.5) doesn't sound right, likely due to something else in the arpeggio above it - i'd suggest ensuring you're using the chord you're intending there (sounds like a G7 with a B in the bass - make sure you don't have an F natural too low in your pads competing with that B in the bass). there's a big shift at about 1:03 to bring in some fun 303 arp, and a developmental section that kind noodles a bit and has some melodic call-outs. after that is a very random but neat organ exploration thing with some really unexpected chord shifts that aren't wrong in their usage but do sound both surprising and unprepared (like at 2:00), and then a key change at 2:04. make sure you don't extend the previous resolution into this new key - it sounds really weird as-is. 2:28 brings another short break and more of the b theme, and there's a short but well-handled ending. there's some silence to trim but that's no big deal. from a mastering perspective, there's still a significant focus on low-mid. there's a lot of stuff going on in the 300mhz range and it felt pretty cluttered as a result. also, i felt like the kick's attack was quiet (although the bass presence was a lot, almost too much), and the snare's higher end was very bright and obtrusive. i think that reining back in the kick's bass content and adding a bit of beater tone to it will help that, so that it's not so boomy, and then cutting the snare's 1k+ content a bit so it didn't cut so hard through the mix will help a ton. this is honestly a cool concept. it keeps the upbeat, open feel that the original has, and it explores a variety of timbres to do that. i think the mastering is still not there - there just is too much clutter in the low mids, and the kick really started to bother me after a bit - and there are still some weird notes that required several listens to understand what they were doing. some attention to note cutoffs and preparing transitional chords would be a big help. NO

what absolute BANGERS of originals! i am gonna check out a ton of that music now. the initial presentation of stella is immediately recognizable, and well performed on the whistle. presentation is typical ivan, balls to the wall but everything's clear and nothing's really overwhelming. when the paired guitars come in at 1:25, i loved the continued focus on orchestral instruments in the background (lead guitars could have been slightly quieter but this section is still real fun). the solo break at 2:15ish i would have probably attributed to just similar chords, but i can hear some of stella's chord patterns in there now that i know what to look for. solos are great. there's a funky chord change at 3:13 that i didn't expect, but End of Hibernation has some real weird extended chords in there so i didn't think it was a real issue. it is probably the only really crunchy transition out of the whole song, though. entrance of the guitar at 3:52 was nice. this section of the arrangement wasn't quite as originally handled as stella 2 and 1 were, but there's obviously a lot that went into the transcription. the accordian lead at 5:41 sounds great, really - it's a very different vibe from earlier, and changing up the backing instrumentation at that point was a great choice to keep a long track moving forward. there's some ramen and then a final recap of everything starting at 6:34 with the expected last solo and outro. this is a great track. the mastering is solid (if loud) and clear throughout despite a variety of different instruments and band groupings. the transitions are overall real solid. the arranged aspects are present throughout and the solos especially are great. can't believe you didn't win with such a complete package. nice work ivan! YES

that is a small amount of source! interested to see where this goes. right off the bat i was impressed with the variety of ways you used such a short clip of melodic content. there's tons of fun processing, like at 0:46, 0:54, and 1:02, going on in the drums. the bassline doesn't ever real fail to keep you locked into the original material and especially the references to Success are great. there's a big build section that does a great job bringing down and back up again, and then we're in a big blow at 1:56. i found myself wishing for more bass in the mastering here - there's a ton going on, but i wanted a mega kick in my face! in fact i'd say that's my main critique throughout, that the kick is nowhere near the punchy driving kick i'd expect for something that has so much energy elsewhere. after 2:33, there's a big lower-energy section which continues to move and show more fun ideas, and then we get another big blow at 3:34. there's a transition to new stuff for a bit at 4:04 and an outro that comes and goes with a bit of goofiness, and we're done. this is a super fun arrangement! there's a ton going on and i don't feel it ever leaves orbit in terms of what melodic material there is to use. i wish there was a punchier kick throughout, but that's my one real criticism. if it goes back again, that's the only thing i'd really want to be changed. but as is, i think it's great and fun. nice work. YES

i love that your remixer name is that you're a pirate, and you remixed the 'sea port' track. agree with MW about the mix, but to be more clear - you've got a huge amount of bass presence in this track that's going to waste and isn't actually making anything feel bassy. your peak around 65hz is fine (although a peak of 9db is very loud, i almost think bringing it down a bit will make everything punchier) but there's so much subbass content below 40hz. a hard cut at 35 or 40hz will dramatically improve the clarity down there. some sidechaining to lift the bass instrument around the kick will help a ton as well with preventing your compression from slamming on kick hits. i do also agree there's more room in the mid than you're using, and adding some click to your kick attack and adding some snap while removing some head tone from your snare (claps are fine) will do wonders with helping those sound bigger without having to crank them louder. i thought the hats were fine, tbh, but wouldn't mind hearing a better/more audible crash analog for transitions. the arrangement itself is really fun overall. i like the expansion throughout and actually liked some of the things MW called out as being negatives (the aggressive synth work at 1:13, the blurbles at 1:50), i just think it sounds boomy and weird throughout and overall the lead synths can be pulled down a bit. i do think it needs an ending since there isn't one right now. this needs some workshopping but is a fun idea. NO edit: chimps is way better at this than i am, listen to her first. what i thought was missing click is probably more me misidentifying the stacked mids. i still don't hear the bass sidechain but i trust her ears more than mine for mastering stuff.

haha, super weird opening. not bad, just immediately made me smile because it's weird. the big beat and swirly keys right away were a fun sound. drums are probably a bit loud over the piano lead, but it's a fun beat and i love the bass blats. there's some more rhythmic synths added at about 1:00 and then it opens up more at 1:15 to a more traditional electro/rock feel. i agree with MW that you'd never guess this is a mashup. there's a piano break at 1:42ish, with some fun panned verby synths and a recap of the super scooper lead from the beginning, and we're back to a bigger beat at 2:19 or so. this felt similar to the opening, but there's some new stuff added in around 2:35 that mix it up, especially in the keys. 3:06 opens up again and i really dig the descending countermelodic synth work there. there's a swell to a keys-driven outro, and it ends comfortably. this is a fun track. it sounds good, does a great job with a preponderance of source, and doesn't overstay its welcome. nice work. YES

uh, not the style i was expecting in the slightest from the original it's a little heavy in the left ear off the bat. it's also mastered quite dully early on, although it helps with the vibe. it honestly has a nice feel as the dulcimer and guitar are alternating. there's some more active bass parts at 1:30 that sound uber fake, but the light distortion on the guitar or ep there is super fun. the saw MW mentions is a little sudden but i do like what it's saying, just needs a bit of a different timbre i think. there's another vibe check at 2:43, emphasizing some fun distorted, echoed chords and a tom groove. there's a few weird fills in here that are not quite in the pocket nor are they triplets, but overall this section is neat and a good break. at 3:51 we get a shift back to lower energy (still with some fakey-sounding bass), but the EPs in here are a nice compliment to the earlier distorted chords you were using. at 4:29 it's pretty clear our 119 minutes are almost up, but it continues to noodle and explore new stuff here, which i think fits with the track as a whole. there's some really fun juno-esque pads and then it's done. the mastering sounds pretty dank and it kinda wanders, but i like it as much because of those aspects as in spite of it. there's some real fun exploration here that never leaves behind the original, and somehow both stays in the same vibe while shifting around a lot. this is a neat track. it felt a lot like something off the b-side of one of those copycat albums that came out after herbie did Headhunters. it's got Vein Melter energy to it. YES

one of my favorite originals in gaming. the fifth bar is just so achingly beautiful. i'm curious behind the decision to use this version of this theme as the primary track, though, as i think this matches up better with a few other versions on the soundtrack better than the more emotive title screen version. lot of verb in that opening, with some fun housey pianos leading the charge. there's a quick transition into (i was about to write toe-tapping but MW already wrote it, great descriptor) upbeat house complete with noisy hornet leads and a great driving 12/8 beat. it's almost too buzzy around 1:20, but it's just on the good side of the line and feels like a great track for an arena or pump-up video. the break at 1:46 is well-timed, although there's almost too much going on to hear the melodic content. this quickly gets back to the melody, with some soaring faux-brass synths and a nice take on the theme. this repeats a few times and then goes to a quick recap that finishes out. nice choice not to do another recap, don't want to overstay your welcome. from a mastering perspective, this is not as bright as i'd expect it, nor does it have the heavy, powerful kick i associate with the style. that said, the melody's always there, the kick is present, backing pads aren't too loud or soft, and i can hear countermelodies when i'm supposed to. let's do this. YES

i just love this original. it's so simple. louder than normal for RET pieces, but still ~3db of headroom. the initial tremelo in the violins does not sound very strong. there's some odd registration in the flute at 0:30 as well. in fact, most of the non-percussion samples between 0:30 and 1:20 sound just not very good. even the EP under all of it lacks attack so it's hard to pin the pitch down. the introduction of actual sustain strings vs. that not-good tremelo violin ensemble helps some, but the bassoon sounds both out of place and in another time zone, and the choir is fake but admittedly applied with a deft and light touch. i found the section starting at 1:23 to be more realistic in application, although i still don't care for the EP (nor do i care for it playing essentially the original as written). there's a nice ritard that is elegantly done, and then we're back on a recap of the earlier section that i didn't like. there's some new content at 2:18, but it again features awkward samples (why does the violin only sound real on the second half of sustains?) and those tremelos that just don't sound good. there's some more stilted winds and then a shift to a new texture at about 3:20 that almost seems like it's missing a part. the EP comes back in at 3:29 and plays out the descending chord pattern again, and that's that, with no resolution and a sustain on a non-root pitch. i don't care for this at all. there's poor sample choice and/or usage throughout and the arrangement is anchored by a similar instrument to the most important thing in the original playing essentially the same stuff. the best parts in this arrangement are things that rebecca didn't write =( so, i don't think this is passable here. if the samples and/or usage were improved significantly, i'd consider this borderline, but it needs more RET and less lena to go beyond that in my opinion. NO

some real weird sfx off the bat that coalesce into something resembling a beat and some funky stuff, settling into something more recognizable at 0:34. the synth usage, filter usage, and consistent attention to variety of effects and a moving/shifting lead instrument is great. there is just a ton of variety going on throughout the track, although a few parts do get mostly reused (1:05 and 1:49 for example). the track also sounds good - there's a ton going on all the time and i never feel like something's being buried. i wouldn't have minded a bit more bass presence but don't mind the agile feel that less bass focus provides to the track. quick breakdown below. 0:35-0:50 - descending bass line in bass synth 0:50-1:19 - i think this is supposed to be 0:22 or 1:10 in the source, but the chords aren't 1:1 although they sound adjacent. 1:19-1:34 - descending bass line again 1:34-2:03 - the adjacent section to 1:10 again, similar layout but with some variations 2:03-2:18 - similar to above, drastically different voicings 2:18-2:48 - sounds like 1:27 in the original, or at least inspired by it 2:48-3:18 - stutters in original around 2:10ish are influencing this i think 3:18-3:46 - more of the same chord progression and similar burbles from like 2:00 of original 3:46-4:17 - chords and vibe from 2:46 of original 4:17 - the rising and falling synth is from a few places in the original, and then it ends there appears to be a preponderance of source so no issues there, although many of the correlations are tenuous or based on one instrument. this is a lot of fun to listen to. nice work. YES

intro needs some velocitization on the piano. balance is also all over the place, with the backing parts being much louder than the synth lead and electric guitar. i heard nothing wrong with the strings at 0:24, just a V7/V being used properly. all that said, it's some nice writing that's just executed weird. i like what it's doing, and the concept is neat. there's a transition to a faster tempo, and we've got a significant difference in instrumentation as it adds a (very loud) punchy set and some more complexity in the guitar leads. the bass sounds about an octave or two too high, just doesn't carry the low end at all. there's some great technical riffs which are fun, and what the drums are playing is fun, but i can't really hear anything else. then it just suddenly switches to a much slower tempo without any setup. i like what the guitar's doing here, but it's both too quiet and wasn't prepared or foreshadowed at all. there's some verb-only drums brought in a la the end of At Wit's End by Dream Theater and then it's done. this could have been neat if it was set up at all, but it just lends to the piece feeling disjointed. this has some fun arrangement ideas and just doesn't feel complete. there's a real workshop feel to the middle, where there's nothing but the strange bass, guitar lead, and drums, whereas the intro isn't volumized for the instruments (strings volume doesn't change between the quiet opening and the bigger middle) and the end is disconnected. give this one some more attention and i think you'll have something special. NO

i emailed jean marc asking for an updated version without audio clips and a better title.

thanks for the writeup. i like the history of why you chose different instrumentation. the intro is a little surprising because of the combination of obviously digital and obviously acoustic instrumentation, but it fits together and isn't too jarring once you get used to it. i enjoy how evocative the low flutes sound, and the erhu is a great choice for the melodic content. 1:18 introduces percussion and a bass instrument, and feels more like a pop ballad than the intro. there's some timing fuzziness in here but it's clear what you're going for. i do think that it's a bit mid-heavy through here (mostly due to the guzheng's quality of recording). there's a bit of a break and then it's back going forward at 2:11. i like the addition of the mandolin here to give it more rhythmic structure. additionally, the melody being carried by the vocals is really nice - i like the leans and accents she puts into it. it's a bit loud and drowns the backing parts a bit but is very stylistic. there's a significant break before 3:15, and then we get the last part of the melodic content again. this is much lower energy and does a nice job of setting the end of the track. the little electronic flourish is fun since so much of the track was live. this is a neat idea. there's not a ton of significant shifts in energy, and it's a bit mid-heavy so it's denser than i'd expect, but it has some fun ideas and the singer especially helps take it over the top. nice work. YES

classic original. intro is pretty in-line with the original, with some vocal washes over the top. i didn't catch any real differences from the original's arrangement outside the layered verby vox for at least the first minute. if anything, switching the supporting harmonic content from a plucked instrument to pads at ~0:38 was a downgrade. there's some nice scoring at the transition point to the B part of the theme at 0:56, but no changes to melody or chords, just nice layering. all bell and percussive instruments in this section are too loud. the flute realization of the melody is pretty boring and doesn't feel as alive as the original does. there's finally some more original atmospheric material at 1:38, with the addition of the orchestral percussion. the switch to an english horn for melody is nice, but it's overwhelmed by the rest of the background. there's some real neat added tension around 2:15, but then it's right back to the original material. there's a nice countermelody for this play-through of the B section, but the melodic content is getting lost still unfortunately. 3:15 is a significant shift in style. i think what it's doing is cool in a vacuum, but there's little if anything to tie it back to the first three minutes. and then it ends with 30s of silence. i believe that the tension-filled section at 2:15 was intended to be a precursor to this, but that's tenuous at best. there is some really great scoring and beautiful soundscapes in this. the attention on the whistle leads is great (although it then calls out how bog-standard the flute is in comparison), and the variety of percussion used and especially the transition at 1:38 sound awesome and really felt like the piece was about to break out. but the track is essentially twice through the original with nearly no changes (most of the orchestration is even in line with what's in the original, and is primarily a sound upgrade), and then a sound demo tacked on the end for another minute. there's nowhere near enough transformative arrangement to say that this can pass. what you've made sounds nice, and i get wanting to submit something because you can't go back to it, but i don't think this passes our bar. NO

great original. the audible action on the piano at the beginning and mirroring the voice with crotales/glock gives it such an intimate quality despite the lush orchestral sounds. ori's soundtrack is very good. the concept here is very interesting. the heavy manipulation of the melodic content via slicing and use of negative space is much more evocative than i expected. i generally don't like the clipping artifact that you get from slicing without regard to the end of the waveform but it acts as a percussive element to keep track of what's going on. regular changing of the soundscape between heavily verbed and very in-front also helps to differentiate and focus the melodic recollections. i particularly like the progression you get around 1:03. there's a very legato, drawn-out set of chords that slowly gets more warped as the (now-familiar) stutter pattern above it shifts more and more towards slices so short that they have no tone. that progresses in the opposite direction after about 1:29, and rather than focusing on the syncopation and stutters from the beginning, forms more of a ballad/chorus section until it gets washed out by the amp feedback. the following section is pleasingly regular and forms a good coda for the work. there's some silence there to trim but it's no biggie. this is, as most of michael's works are, simultaneously engaging and challenging to listen to. there's a clear arc and journey to the song's structure (as ori is mostly about the journey, this is a great example of the game influencing the music's arrangement), there's a clear technique used throughout in a variety of ways, the original track is visible throughout, and it's mastered intentionally and with a deft touch. this is a great remix. YES

oh, what a great idea. this fits so well together. the rhythm guitar is super aggressive and widely panned which i like in this style. the drums are pretty standard outside a few big fills but sound great and do a great job keeping it driving too. there's some well-timed breaks and the pick-ups like at 2:04 are definite head-bangers. the half-time feel around 2:28 was unexpected but helped to keep it feeling now. it kinda just ends, but that's stylistically appropriate IMO so that is fine. it definitely feels like there's no bass, which is weird because there's buckets of sub-bass content if you look at the freq plot. i think DS's idea of going through and doing more mastering work makes a lot of sense. this track's reliance on the guitars to do big rhythmic elements in conjunction with the bass requires a super-clean, super-punchy mix (can't help but think Disturbed or Breaking Benjamin with the guitars tuned so low), and right now it is very muddy in the low mids while simultaneously not having much bass presence. i do think that the EQ is enough to sink this, although it honestly sounds decent right now. i might be making perfect the enemy of good, but i think this needs an EQ pass to at least filter out the sub-40hz content. beyond that, i like the arrangement and i love the vibe. NO edit: i was making perfect the enemy of good. this isn't pro mastering and it doesn't have to be. this is over the bar, although i'd really like another mastering pass. YES

the opening features a lot of subtle synths and a really great adaptation to the vibe from the original. the style adaptation is really great. the lead saw that's imitating the guitar, however, despite a bunch of detail put into the attach, glide, and release, just sounds 10x too loud and really doesn't fit what's going on behind it. all of the backgrounds are more interesting unfortunately. it picks up a lot from a dynamics perspective at about 1:07, and this sounds great. the saw lead clearly was volumized for this section and left alone too much in the opening. there's a break for about 30s that is similar but not the same as the opening, and then we get a more intense section driven by bass and drums. the saw is back from a melodic standpoint, but the piece lacks some sense of verve through this section until maybe 2:50. there's enough ancillary countermelodic content there to finally really flesh it out enough to feel full. there's an outro that's essentially the beginning, and then it ends. i agree with MW in that it feels less than the sum of its parts. there's some neat ideas in the opening that are rehashed twice more in similar fashions, the lead saw is just too aggressive and in the fore for the opening, and it doesn't feel like it progresses despite moving through some pretty different adaptations of the melody. i think more attention to the soundscape after the opening section and subsequent work on mastering would help a ton. NO

what a creative, weird take on these two. i really like the vibe you've crafted with the glitchy drums, the long-tail sustains, and the different arpeggios in each ear. there's a ton of stereo separation going on and i'm here for it, i think it really allows the two sources to show up in a way that i wouldn't have expected. i also really appreciate that you don't really care about sticking with the tonality as much and get into the glissandos and detuning a bit. i love it when concepts in the originals inform the remix and this does that. the source usage is consistent but definitely tenuous. i would have missed a lot if i hadn't had the breakdown. tbh though that's a fun thing since it's rewarding future listens. there's more than enough here though. what a great track. i love how out there it can be. such a unique take on two great originals. YES

the intro is really, really dense. it's hard to find much to grab onto, although i like the LFO'd vibrato on the synth at 0:20 a lot. the intro does a nice job building up the muffled soundscape up to the piano coming in. there's a pulsing synth that comes in at 1:24 that does a great job of giving the track some more feel of time to it. there's a kind of surprising shift at 1:57 where the bass just disappears. it gets pretty thin and loses the great feel of the earlier section as a result of that. i like the detuned leads and continued motion, but it sounds tinny here. the bass comes back in at 2:44 and it feels a lot better from then on out. around the time the melody comes back at 2:44, i'm starting to get tired of the ambience despite it feeling more fleshed out. there are some changes that are going on, but the overall feel could easily be mistaken for the earlier instance of the melodic content. i'd want something big here to differentiate it. and then it ends? what is that? it didn't even feel like you were done and there's a fadeout. that's a lazy ending. at least go to the root chord first. i actually was pretty OK with this until the ending, but that put me over the edge. i think the middle section needs some bass to root it. i think the recapitulation needs something to differentiate it from the beginning. the ending needs to exist. but i love the muffled, closed-mouth-humming feel of the track overall, and i think there's some really great synth work in there dressing it up. i don't mind how mid-heavy it is (although i'd love to hear some sparkles of higher stuff occasionally like what chimpa mentions). this is neat! it needs some more dressing, i think. NO

as a note, i am evaluating this in comparison to the original, with ben prunty's version as a corollary but not directly involved other than to insure that it's not a rip. compared to the original, this is highly evolved and has a lot of new stuff and new concepts. compared to ben's, it's different enough. i don't know if i'd call it derivative, but this felt similar to me to the alternate versions of tracks from Crypt of the Necrodancer that OCR folks worked on. there's a lot of similarities in the approach and instrumentation, but within that framework, there's a lot of variation. sometimes fences result in a more creative approach since you're working around stuff you wouldn't have thought about before. i found the synth lead that is prevalent at 1:47 to be grating and lacking in movement, and would have preferred some envelope to mix it up. other than that, i didn't really have quibbles with any of the instrumentation options, and i think it sounds pretty good from a mastering perspective. i like how different several sections feel - the opening, 0:57, and 1:47 all have dramatically different vibes while remaining cohesive. nice work =D YES

ddrkirby is one of my favorite remixers on OCR, and this is a great example of why. breadth in his approach, heavily rhythmic and focused as much on the spaces as the notes, overall high level of quality, and a consistent ability to find ways to cram even more detail into the little corners of each track. this track is slammin and i love it. the pacing of the track really stands out to me. there's a clear refrain that's higher energy than the rest that you want to come back to, and several distinct spaces that are created within the track (the different solo sections, the break at 2:28, the building action into the break at 3:27) that all feel perfectly timed and intentionally placed. the ending doesn't feel out of place or sudden, and it does a good job referencing the beginning of the track without it feeling cliched. the source material is present throughout and the mastering is big without feeling too loud or crushing specific instruments. this is a very good remix. excellent work. YES

the initial presentation is great - this sounds straight off a post-grunge album, right down to the cleaner hats, wall of sound guitars with bass mirroring the melodic material, and low-mid-heavy EQing. the drums are super compressed but it's def a stylistic sound. you'll want to probably put your overhead cymbals on a different bus to avoid them compressing each other too much when you get more complicated with them. lastly, it's tough to hear the rhythmic aspects of the bass guitar, but it seems like they're there - adding some high end to the bass's tone so the picking is clearer would help, as would adding some space in what it's playing like what the guitar's doing. from an arrangement perspective, the first few minutes are pretty straightforward. i would have wanted to see some of the stuff that happens after two minutes used earlier to mix it up, and then have a recap. it's a fun track though! i like the original material you created, i just think it needs to be more cohesive in its usage. this is fun, but it isn't there yet. NO

interesting crossover idea. definitely works. mastering-wise, i definitely hear where my fellow judges are coming from. the clipping/distortion at the beginning is distracting and doesn't sound good. the bass and kick have a ton of extra bass boosted in there that sounds very unnatural - a huge peak in the ~90hz range, with a bunch of sub-bass content around 30-33hz that is likely adding to it feeling distorted. the guitar lead is overwhelmed by the backing pads and drums to the point where it is hard to hear. i believe MW is talking about the 12-13khz range for there being something high pitched - i can't hear it, but my wife can, and i get a bit of a turned stomach from listening to it as well. that'll need to be cribbed out (a tight notch filter could do it, as could a general low pass to fluff up that freq range more). the arrangement and concept is fun. it's pretty straightforward melodic work, but the vocals add a ton to the drifting feeling, and the open maj7 chords also lend themselves to that too. i like this a lot, honestly. i think it needs some mastering fixes that would be simple. either a notch or a low pass to fix the high freq, and a high pass to filter out the sub content, and this is there. the EQ boost you've given your bass/kick could be turned down a bit too so it's not so boomy. this is probably OK to pass right now, but i'd like to see those changes take place before i am unconditional with my vote. YES CONDITIONAL

i love the genesis's bass synths, they're all so fat. great original track. the first thing that jumps out to me is how thin this sounds. you've got a huge focus on the bass right off the bat (since that's the big thing in the original, too!), and it just sounds like FL default sounds with no EQ. there's no punch to the tone and it feels pretty loose. some real solid workshopping will take that from a time filler to being a highlight for the track. i think darksim's comments around vanilla synth design and that it's far longer than it needs to be are 100% on the nose. there is a lot of source-similar material here, and IMO not enough arrangement to justify multiple restatements of the same (excellent) original melodic content. furthermore, the synths aren't stuff i want to listen to for seven minutes - they alternate between generic and not particularly satisfying, although you've got some fun wide-LFO stuff that is neat and used as sfx in a few places. i think i am less high on this track than the rest of my peers. i think this has some bones, but it needs some significant workshopping. if this was a four-minute track that focused on the best bits (the slick bass riffs, the great melodic content, the driving beat), cut out the cruft and filler, figured out the ending better, and really worked on crafting synths vs. choosing presets and dropping them in, i think you could have something that was really fantastic. as it is, it's both twice as long and half as interesting as it could be. NO