prophetik music

lot of sfx and tempo-synced stuff to start, in particular a lot of panning elements. most of the first 45s are heavier in my left ear. i don't think that's intentional. there's a significant build into 0:55, and the first big hit of everything at 0:55 also sounds a bit weird - the bass peaks at like 70hz instead of 30-35hz like i'd expect. is there a filter on this that's cutting out subbass content there? there's also a big notch around 350hz and i can kind of hear the scooped mids there. paging resident primate @Chimpazilla for help with what i'm hearing. apes together strong.
the flourish at 1:08 that's mirrored in a lower instrument is a neat idea. there's a break at 1:23 or so that again has a lot of tempo-synced stuff going on, and especially the swooping effect got a little irritating after the first few times i heard it. the beat comes back after that and quickly goes back to the tempo-synced quieter stuff - some very fast transitions there.
there's an interlude with chips at 2:07 that again sounds hollow with whatever filter's on it, and a half-time section after that that i really dig, and then another half-time section that's different and i dig that a lot. this is a great break section, still featuring some of the tempo-synced stuff but really shifting the vibe a lot. the heavily distorted synth that comes in at 2:55 was >9000x louder than i expected and was probably too much. the following trap-adjacent (pitfall?) section with the funky hats is again a neat change in style. it's very busy and probably could use a bit of trimming down/volumizing down stuff that's less important (just a little, this part is honestly real close).
there's a big build into 3:38 that really subverts expectations with the drop. nice use of the vocal clip to further that subversion. eventually it picks back up at 3:50 and goes through the melodic content from Towering Mountain. the transition out of that section (or lack of one) is pretty jarring. the following perc-less pad section loses a lot of energy fast, and the following detuned bell vibe is pretty minimal and felt like it lost some direction. i did like the shifts to chords that were added to that melodic snippet. i admit that i would have been very fine with a short outro after the section ending at 4:05 - the last section is very different and there's not a ton tying it to the first 80% of the track.
i think that there's a lot of little things here that, if corrected, would result in a really ridiculously great track. i am particularly interested to see if we can figure out why the opening sounds like it's missing part of the freq range. that said, it's a really fun listen and does some super creative stuff with musical elements and especially with synth effects, although the mastering needs work. i think this track has a place on the site, if not now, then eventually.
 
 
YES

intro has a lot of sfx and random-sound sounds that come together to make a rough beat under the ghost arp. we get some melody at 0:30 or so, very chopped up and strange-sounding intentionally so. layering in some plectral instrumentation as well on top obfuscates the melodic material, and the percussion is pretty loud through here.
1:16 is a big stylistic shift, both in terms of time signature and in terms of instrumentation. the heavily filtered strings here are pretty grating and really loud, and it's hard to differentiate between them, the treble content in the very weird bass synth, the ghost arp, the melodic stutter synth, and the plectral instrument that you've had going. it hits more of a groove later on, and around 2:00 has kind of settled down, but it's still confusing to listen to.
2:07 is another shift, bringing back the industrial percussion under a 7/8 groove with more of the very intentionally overtoney bass doing stuff under the stuttery synth. the hard break at 2:40 was confusing to me, as i didn't get why you'd want to just shut off the track in the middle without there being a clear resolution or build section around it. there's some more ghost castle lead played as the melodic content and then it's just done very suddenly.
looking at the freq analysis confirms what i felt was confusing to me from an auditory perspective - the bass instrument (which doesn't really ever venture below about 100hz from what i can hear) is by far the loudest element in the mix, both the fundamental and the first overtone. it's fairly confusing from an auditory perspective to listen to something that features such a high fundamental, especially with the heavy variance in styles throughout the track. the section at 1:16 is a good example - there's nothing to ground the track, and so many elements are in the same aural area that it makes it hard to differentiate and really listen to them. it's very tiring on the ears.
i really want to like this track. the creativity in choices of synths and approach is really neat as expected from eino, the sources are a fun combo, and the arrangement is interwoven nicely. ultimately though it just doesn't sound good - the heavy layering of instruments in the same freq range is intensely tiring. i was only able to get through two listens before my ears felt quite pressured, and the middle section is most of where that came from. the track also is meandering and lacking cohesion, which combined with the lack of real dynamics throughout makes it difficult to follow and stay with what's going on at any given time. there certainly is a ton of source used in creative ways, but the track still manages to feel inchoate.
i think you need to spend some time breaking up the blocks of instruments in the same freq range, and then re-volumize everything so that the instruments that are the loudest at any given time are what you want the listener to be listening to. right now the melodic content is never the main thing, which isn't a great result. also consider adding more to the bass end of the bass instrument while still keeping the weirdness of the upper overtones so as to ground the mix more.
 
 
NO

what a dope original! never heard it and it's awesome.
starts out with some pretty static tones, but the beat comes in at 0:11. initial writing is pretty faithful to the original. the drums aren't quite what i expected given the original sound concept. the bass is pretty active and the lead is very basic initially.
there's a recap at 1:06 and some repeated material (everything from there to 1:24 outside of adding the ascending arp flourishes in a few places). the following section is also very similar to the original outside of a few added flourishes. there's another repeat at 2:00 and then it repeats the opening section and fades out.
i like the concept here! i think there's a bit too much repetition for a piece that's only 2:10. i think the style survives the genre adaptation pretty well, though, so that's fun! i think there just needs to be more arrangement here - less ANARCHY TAKAPON and more Nuac. i'd also like to hear the drum mixing bring the drums out, assuming you're willing to use modern mastering tools and you aren't explicitly going for a GB-realistic sound.
 
 
NO

i love the bitcrushing that eino uses on the drums in several of his tracks. it's just such an iconic sound. it's used to great effect here. combined with the heavy stuttering on the backing parts, there's a great glitchy vibe that comes through here.
the lead has a lot of activity on it, which is nice, and it's also actively personalized with some fun call-and-response harmonic content, so that's nice. i didn't like that the first third or so mirrored the second third quite a bit, and to that extent the repetitive nature of the background that MW called out is noticeable. the break at 2:15 in the general concept is needed and well-timed.
there's some more background breaks via subtractive arrangement that show up around 3:00, and that's a nice change as well. some more noodles in the leads and glitches in the backing parts, and the track is done.
mastering is sound and the track sounds great overall. the arrangement is certainly different from the original if repetitive. i think this is solid. nice work eino.
 
 
YES

neat original! i didn't vote on the first decision.
comments about the soundscape and verb application above apply to me too. percussion across the board doesn't sound like it's in the same world as the synths but the toms are particularly dry. the rest of the verb is like 10x longer than i'd expect too, the tail's super long - i actually think this is more the problem than the percs, since in a vacuum later the percs do have some room tone. the chords that come in at 1:08 are neat, but i wish they'd come in earlier. the lead at 1:22 has such a long tail that it takes a while to fade, and it's moving stepwise in Gm. that wouldn't be too big a deal except the third chord in the short background chorded instrument is a flatted II chord, and so at 1:24 it puts an Ab major chord under an A in the lead line. it's definitely a bit crunchy but wasn't a super big deal to me since the chorded element is so short. the percussion here and the bass writing is actually pretty fun, and i like the call and response through this section. it feels like there isn't quite enough there though - another instrument is needed somewhere where it won't compete with what's happening.
this repeats over a few times and then we get a breakdown at 2:17. this was needed by here so it's well-timed. the same issue that was described above happens at 2:30 except this time it's the bass and the lead, and this is more noticeable since the soundscape is emptier. the same riff in the lead and the same lead riff are used here repeatedly, and it's not until almost 3:15 that we get anything new. this is a perfect section to really change up the vibe or instrumentation, coming out of the break, and staying the same is tiring from an auditory perspective.
the track felt like it was approaching the end after 3:45 and then it goes for another minute doing the same thing, no solo or anything to mix it up. this is too much repetition - we're talking five minutes of bread and only three minutes of butter. trimming this back a lot would help a ton.
so this is a very long rubber stamp. consider changing up the notes that conflict, take some more time to trim back the arrangement to just be the best parts and not also a ton of fat along the edges, flesh out the bass and percs writing for later in the track, and consider how you can continue to iterate what the song's saying throughout so it's not so repetitive. also consider toning back the synth reverb's tail and normalize the soundscape a bit so that it's not so diverse.
 
 
NO

TBH I'd still NO-RESUB anything that was this blatant of a copy-paste. Gotta show some effort for arrangement, can't just make half a song and then double it up!

the chords don't map directly from what i can hear. that makes these blobs of chords inspired by, and not directly taken from, the original track. they may be highly different voicings and that's where i'm losing it. i really don't dig the idea of us trying to parse this ourselves, this should be an artist-provided breakdown to ensure we're not missing stuff in either direction.
edit 2/8: i am teh dumb

I'll still try to do one anyway, but that's my bad, I should have asked in the first place. I'll reach out to Rebecca.
EDIT (2/1/24): Rebecca kindly provided video-based timestamps (added to her submission comments in the first post).

oh, that fat overtony bass and snappy snare are a great vibe right off the bat. really eclectic combination of synths right away. the not-sax and arp leads do a great job of keeping the melodic material front and center without ever really focusing on it, which is a neat trick. there's a lot of blurbs and bloops going on that keep your ear moving.
there's a bit of a reset at 1:37, and then there's some funky beat work at 1:47 under a second reimagining of the melodic material. some more intense drum work and a glitchy fade, and it's done quick.
this is a great one! there's a ton of clever ideas taking the original's unique elements and recreating them in new ways. and it sounds super clean despite the variety of stuff going on. excellent work.
 
 
YES

really neat intro, and the first minute or so before the glossolalia sounds super good. layering sustains against the iconic tritone pattern really emphasizes how strange that pattern is.
the initial presentation of the ?lyrics? is a really interesting concatenation of your intentionally un-classical vocal tone (which to me sounds more folky, that is less rigid/within strictures) against the backing style, which to me presents as more rigid and constrained. the slight glides between the upper and lower pitches on the bigger jumps, the very wide vowel tones, and the ethnic choir sound of your voice harmonizing with itself really is a significant juxtaposition against buzz synths and FM bells. i think it's really neat.
2:15 kind of finishes the first part, and starts a different approach for vocals as well. you use a more closed vowel tone here alongside a more traditionally classical approach to your vibrato. there's a few more obvious pitch issues here (understandably, it's harder to pitch-shift tones that are richer in overtones and have heavier vibrato over a very thin pitch with no vibrato). the slide where you stop your vibrato and try to gliss down is probably my least favorite part of the song actually, it is hard to hear that as anything other than just out of tune.
i understand the intent behind the glitching effects - at that point, the track has been doing the same thing for over three minutes with essentially no break in the backing part whatsoever, and the vocal parts although interesting have been doing the same thing too. as a method of mixing it up, this is certainly effective at shifting the style. i don't mind it as strongly as the other judges. i do think though that it exposes just how little there is behind the arrangement overall - there's essentially two chords, and you're either not singing, singing the invented stuff, or singing ahh tones that do roughly the same thing across the board. sometimes a track just needs a cool idea to get it from point A to point B. i found myself wishing this track had more there from an arrangement standpoint ultimately, rather than just being about the same volume with the same backing parts and roughly the same ideas in the melodic content for >4 minutes.
to be clear, this is definitely over the bar. it's a creative approach to a weird source and has some great ideas. i wouldn't have minded it being a minute shorter, or having more development to stop it feeling so samey across the board.
 
 
YES

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

google says the name means "unwilling transformations", which is kind of ominous ?
the garagey sound is immediately audible. the intro sounds like it's been unwillingly transformed from The Dragon's Trap, with a subsequent dose of Vs. Dragon. the track shifts towards a more standard melodic structure at 0:39, and noodles through a few variations of the sustained melodic stuff from both. organ at 1:26 is a neat synth tone, full of the movement i've come to expect from eino's leads. there's an outro that starts at about 1:54, and then it's done.
i agree with larry that there was an initial impression of this track missing something. most of the sound palette is based around the 75-200hz range, which is why it sounds very dull and dense. most of the track, there's a lead, bass, and drums audible only, because the guitar is both hard right and very quiet (or missing). the intro feels fuller since it's got the guitar going the whole time, but even then it still feels a little weird because that guitar is hard-panned to the right alongside the snare and crash (with the tambourine all the way to the left). 
however, i'll note that on subsequent listens i did start to pick up more density in the writing. while the bass/drums/synth parts are always pretty audible, the other parts that drop in and out are both interesting and more present than i initially noticed. and i find the garagey EQing pleasing, it's certainly nonstandard but it is a funky track and sounds fun.
i think this is a pass actually. it took me a bit to get there, but i can dig it.
 
 
YES

"Phonk?"  "Witch House?"  Even "meme music" is a new term to me. I guess I'm really out of the loop and not up to speed on my subgenres, sub-subgenres, and sub-sub-sub-abyssally-deep-subgenres and straight-up joke-genres. 
That said... I really dig this remix!  Groovy with a creepy vibe.  I like the instruments and sounds, the phat beatz, the full/deep low end, the wide open feel of the soundscape.  I am not a fan of that thing taking the place of a snare either, Larry.  I get that it's the style/genre/meme/joke, it is purposely distorted, and that can work sometimes but it just sounds like a comical sfx more than a drum element, and it's dry so it sticks out of the lush soundscape more than I'd like.  
Mixing works fine.  Mastering is on the loud side but not overblown.
The arrangement and source interpretation are great.  The ending though... where is it?  There's no outro, it just stops.  Gosh, I don't like that.  Why not do a few bars of cooldown and some kind of final sound or chord?  Even so, I think this passes and it's a super cool and fun listen.
YES

never heard Everything Connected before but i love it.
intro is very slow with some sfx and intentional artifacting. the initial riff with the aug 4 from FF8 is in the keys after the first big hit at 0:48, with the subsequent progressions weaving in and out of that pattern. the clock sfx is a nice addition around the time motif. we get a beat at 2:02 after a neat transition that might be a little heavy on highs, but it's still ticking through until it finally hits after some great sidechain action at 2:27. 
around the 2:50 mark, we finally get the first red wings cameo that i've heard. there's a drop at 3:15 or so, and we start getting some more off-time content which is a neat addition. this entire section from like 3:30 onward is really intense, there's a ton going on but it mostly stays audible throughout. there's the breakdown-rebuild section mentioned above, which is pretty neat, and then we're back into the melodic content at 4:16. this is still mostly compression of time, but there's definitely some red wings content in there. 5:04 is the last big hit (with a touch of distortion, not sure it's intentional). there's some significant falling action after this section.
5:30 or so is a significant shift - it's way slower, the beat is much more plodding intentionally, and the vibe is totally different. 6:07 is kind of the beginning of the end - it's a very clear shift away from tempo sync, with a lot more flexibility as the track finishes out. there's some very languid red wings motivic stuff in here but it's pretty stretchy. 
i cannot believe you did this in one week. the breadth of complexity is nuts here. there's certainly a bit of crunch in the mastering occasionally, but the quality of content in this track is incredible. you should probably stop doing this kind of stuff for free.
 
 
YES
edit 11/7: no complaints here. this song is a triumph.

I tried to keep this brief, but as you might know, that's not my forte.
FIRST, the facts...
On October 28th I informed staff that I was stepping down from my role as president/admin/owner/etc. of OverClocked ReMix, and on November 1st I also stepped down from the board of Game Music Initiative, the 501c3 non-profit organization that funds OCR. In short, I no longer feel I have the bandwidth to do these roles justice and to not only maintain, but advance, the missions of both projects. I will be working with Shariq Ansari (DarkeSword) to transition my responsibilities and ensure continuity of operations. The (excellent!) mix posted on Halloween was published without my direct involvement, subsequent posts up to the milestone #OCR04500 have been superbly executed, and I am confident that staff will continue the work necessary to operate - and evolve - OCR in my absence. I will be even less available than I have been, lately, so I apologize in advance for any lack of responsiveness.
THEN, the feels...
Where to even begin?
It's hard to encapsulate over two decades of history; omissions are inevitable. What began as a neat side project I started in my parents' basement in 1999 snowballed into something far beyond my wildest expectations, due to the blood, sweat, tears, and unbridled, rampant creativity that thousands of you have contributed. Much of this happened before social media was even a thing and before the platforms/services we now heavily associate with the modern internet had come into being; it was a frontier, and we were on it, and we took it pretty seriously because we knew how amazing VGM is, how creative arrangements could effectively convey and explore that vast musical landscape, and how a small fandom communicating via email, IRC, & forums could collaborate to build mighty, new things. We took it seriously, often too seriously, but we ALSO played more than a few rounds of Shaq-Fu at conventions, made some truly ridiculous (but always musical!) joke mixes, and developed internal circles of lore with our own memes & jargon.
NOT in strictly chronological order: there was some drama with now-legendary composer Jake Kaufman; VGMix entered the fray; we added a judges panel so it wasn't just me making stuff up; we released our first community album; the unmoderated forum birthed its own sort of... subculture; the site itself evolved to be database-driven and not just two giant dropdowns sorted by game/date; we posted mixes submitted by composers George "The Fat Man" Sanger and Jeremy Soule; we met/interviewed Hiroki Kikuta and Nobuo Uematsu; our album trailers by the incomparable José the Bronx Rican started blowing minds; we started appearing in person at Otakon, PAX, MAG, others - much love to all for having us; we bumped into Leeroy Jenkins at ROFLcon and gave him a hoodie; we started hosting from our own server and managing the technical side of things ourselves; thanks to Mr. Shael Riley (among others!), we got to remix the music for an actual Street Fighter game (!!); we released fifteen more albums...
...and then we turned ten, on December 11th of 2009.
Quite a first decade, and I missed hundreds of things I shouldn't have. Hundreds of firsts, some tragic lasts, and millions of memories that can't quite be conjured by words.
In 2011, we stood up for Fair Use at World’s Fair Use Day, an event organized by the non-profit Public Knowledge.
In 2012, we launched our kickstarter for Final Fantasy VI: Balance and Ruin, it was taken down, we talked with Square lawyers directly for a couple hours and made the non-profit project structure clear & contractual, and we relaunched a successful kickstarter. That's not always how those things go!
We launched Game Music Initiative in 2016, creating an official 501c3 charity to formalize the finances around OCR and potentially support other VGM-related projects, too. On a related note, I’ve absolutely loved seeing OC ReMixes featured by charity speedrunners Games Done Quick (GDQ) - it’s exactly the type of thing I always wanted to see, that synergy.
Things do start getting a little quieter from then on out, and I think there are a ton of reasons for that, but it has been an incredible and improbable journey that I wouldn't have missed for the world. Thank you ALL for making it possible; OCR was always yours, I aspired only to stewardship of something I wanted to exist for everyone.
FINALLY, the future…
It's time - some would say past time - for OverClocked ReMix itself to be ReMixed.
That's the point, right?
Infinite permutation; endless possibility.
You don't always know the day, month, or even year when your influence on something starts holding it back, or when the waning amount of time and energy you can dedicate becomes a liability. That type of certainty is often elusive; it can be a difficult diagnosis to even contemplate, and you need to look for & listen to signs. In addition to just being too much of a single point of failure for OCR (sorry, engineering mindset), the last year I've been asking myself whether it was time to let go, and I think the answer is sometimes in the asking. I have been stretched thin, like butter scraped over too much bread, and that's when you leave the Shire.
Beyond representing what I genuinely believe is best for the future of OCR, I absolutely confess a personal wish to redirect reclaimed time & energy to my family and my own music. Being a husband to my wife Anna and being a father to our daughters Esther and Sarah is my meaning; I have always put them first, but now I can put them even MORE first. Esther just started learning trombone, so in a few years, expect a collab! Sarah is building her confidence learning piano & makes me proud every day. I want to write new music for them, and with them, and that requires more time than I've had.
I believe the principles that have driven us - embracing all games & all styles of music, emphasizing interpretation & creativity, offering both curation and critique, and providing a non-commercial platform for those who seek it - are truly timeless, but there are many ways to honor them.
I look to the new leadership/staff to galvanize, streamline, diversify, and re-imagine, within that immense space.
I'll be leaving them with some ideas of my own; please let them know yours. I ask the community to support them, embrace change, provide guidance, and be patient; I believe it will be worth it!
Thanks,
- djpretzel
 

why are we using the excuse of your otherworldly mouse holding to call you a monster? we all know what you are.

After this reconsideration, we've clearly concluded that we're not accepting this submission. In the thread thus far, prophetik said he agreed with MindWanderer that this didn't meet 4.3 of the Submissions Standards. DarkeSword was saying 4.3 didn't apply here, but DarkeSword & Gario said it failed 4.1.
We then talked extensively in #judges about how to address this and came to a consensus. I'll do my best to summarize the conversation here with key excerpts (edited for clarity).

Regarding section 4.1, we concluded that the format of story narration or audio book isn't accepted as a "genre of music" due to the focus of the experience not being its music:
Regarding Section 4.3, and its purpose, “dominant” refers to the expectation that the arranged VGM is the “most important, powerful, or influential” component of the presentation; this would apply whether it's contrasting 1) the amount of arranged VGM vs. non-VGM composition or, in this case, 2) the arranged VGM vs. the non-musical story narration as the primary focus of the audio. With this piece, djp felt the approach did conflict with both mentioned parts of the existing arrangement standards -- primarily 4.1, and then 4.3 to a lesser extent -- then suggested added clarification to the Standards to address this:
DarkeSword emphasized that the Standards issue here had nothing to do with acceptable source material (Section 3) but rather whether this arrangement format was permitted (Section 4):
DarkeSword proposed an added clarification point excluding narration/voiceover-focused content by name as part of section 4.1, which djp and I edited. As this submission conflicted with two aspects of the current arrangement standards, this added point isn't a new exclusion, but now codifies the reasoning behind not accepting this type of presentation. I also added "rap" into 4.1's examples list of acceptable genres to make very clear that it remains an accepted music style. Usage of lyrics with rhythms and/or musicality (e.g. beat poetry) that integrate with the music is (and has always been) allowed. We then had the panel weigh in on the final wording, which was accepted by the entire group:
The revision of section 4.1 is now live in the Submission Standards:
4. Arrangement
     1. Arrangements in any genre of music (e.g. techno, jazz, rap, rock, classical) are acceptable, so long as the genre itself does not conflict with any other arrangement criteria.
Submissions must have a primary focus on musical elements; this excludes extensive focus on narration/voiceover (e.g. audio drama, audio books).

I like this version a lot more than the first - the elements aren't fighting as much between themselves, so it's less frantic and easier to listen to.
Ultimately though, the trouble is the vocal is so dominant, and isn't reacting to the music in a natural way. Listen to the narration on something like The Snowman audiobook (YT video is desynced slightly from the video so best just listen) to hear how the narrator reacts to the dynamics and energy in the music.
I'm not familiar with too much spoken-word stuff, however my dad introduced me to the eccentric works of Vivian Stanshall as a lad, and though it does contain music (drastically out of time/tune at parts), I would not necessarily say it would sit well with OCR's library, enjoyable as it is. Stanshall also knew that the music would distract from the story, so the majority of that record is just him narrating over silence.
A more popular example might be Fire Coming Out of the Monkey's Head by Gorillaz. Spoken-word verses with a sung chorus. I love this song, and although it contains a lot of prose, it's punctuated by choruses, and it works because there isn't much melodic content behind the narration, and execution is flawless. Also Dennis Hopper.
I might be more open to this if the vocal was re-recorded, removed, or the pacing was more like in the Gorillaz track (less vocal, couple of choruses, no melody under the vocal). It still feels like 2 separate entities playing over the top of each other.
NO

meaty synth keys in the opening with lots of verb. the bass tone is instantly recognizable - love what it's doing right off the bat. the drums kind of noodle around initially, and it feels real loud here with the initial melodic content, but it's clearly from Duel Links. the leads sound great and are stylistically appropriate. i especially liked the layered leads at about 1:05.
there's a break at 1:20 with some neat late-attack synths, and that leads back into some noodling in the bass at 1:50. there's an awkward note at 2:06 in the bass vs. the extended chord in the background. at 2:21, the melody comes back in and there's some ramen around the melodic content as we go through the last big blow. there's another breakdown at 2:53 and an extended outro with some bitcrushed fuzz to end it.
it sounds great, instrument choice and execution is excellent, and the arrangement is clearly solid. this is an easy vote.
 
 
YES

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

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

really interesting sound design at the beginning. sounds like it's in 7/4 or 7/8 for most of the first few minutes, darksim, depending on what you call a quarter. i personally like that it's more 2-2-2-1 than 2-2-3 or the other tired 7-forms we usually get.
there's lots of additive stuff going on in the first few minutes, and it sounds great, grungy in all the right places. i love the build at 1:55 and the subsequent change at 2:02 with the organish pad swelling under it - so good. the bell started to feel a bit old here (maybe using a real bell sample instead of pitching the one you used up and down) but the entire 'chorus' is meaty and sounds good.
there's a long atempo break and then a significant stylistic shift at 3:16 to something that sounds extremely 90s PC. i didn't care for this at all. when it gets more fleshed out, around 4:18, it's still driving the Sound Blaster vibe, but it feels less empty. the keys at 4:50 were a nice touch. there's some more layering at 5:20 or so with the choral pad, which really keeps the vibe in that same late 90s PC world, and that moves into another break at 5:49. 
6:17 brings back the intro style and beat, and features some fun static percussive elements. there's a drop and extended build to the final blow, and then an outro.
this is a really nice job overall. you really stuck with the 90s vibe throughout, and even if it's a bit long in some places and has repetitive ideas in some others, i think as a whole it's a great product. nice work.
 
 
YES

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

what a great genre adaptation for this. the slowdown stutter synth and initial presentation of everything at 0:30 is just great. melody is immediately apparent, saxophone is well-mastered with a lush verb for the style, and the wide synths and vox sound great. i agree with gario about the lack of low-end (and despite there not being any real beef down there, it does sound like occasionally there's some collision between the sweep synth in the lower mid range, like around 1:28ish). the cello sounds great with the big glisses in there. nice rich sound - excellent instrument choice.
the break around 2:41 is a nice break for the ear, and the bass drop into the next section at 3:00 is delicious. the following section features some nice stutter synths that add some extra color to the recap. it was a bit cluttered in the drump fill at 3:41, but the distorted synths (or synth guitars?) right after that were great. i like the false ending at 4:01 - that's a fun idea that i'm going to steal sometime! the sax solo following this is pretty flat but what it's playing is fun, and the ending is fine.
this is a great track. mastering sounds excellent aside from the nits i mentioned, arrangement is great, the personalization in here is great. nice work jorrith and company ?
 
 
YES

SynaMax's "remixes" were essentially re-creations of music from Metroid Prime, going as far as using the same hardware as Kenji Yamamoto. AFAIK, he wasn't doing the same type of interpretive, from-scratch arrangements that we do here. That may have factored into Nintendo's decision to contact him specifically. I haven't seen any instance of Nintendo contacting any other artist, so it's hard to agree with "Nintendo is going after remixes now."
There's always the danger of a company like Nintendo coming down hard on fan communities. If Nintendo issues takedowns to us, then we'll have to figure out what to do when that happens. OCR very specifically doesn't allow submissions that sample the original game audio, but that might not mean much to Nintendo's legal team. There's an argument for Fair Use, but that's a legal defense that you present to a judge or jury, not a response you give to a Cease & Desist.
As far as being concerned about being able to listen: once something is posted to the internet, it never truly leaves the internet. There are remixes that have been removed from this site that you can still download at various places. Nintendo has issued C&Ds against things like AM2R (the incredible Metroid 2 fan-remake) and you can absolutely still find those projects without too much effort. If Nintendo wants to play legal whack-a-mole, that's on them.
When it comes to the music you'd like to remix and arrange: do what you want. Remix the hell out of Mario and Metroid and Zelda and Kirby if those are the soundtracks that inspire you. Even if the worst happens and we can't feature them on OCR anymore, that shouldn't stop you from making something.