prophetik music

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.

usually i really don't like the sfx approach to some things, but this pretty clearly handled in terms of what you were hoping to do. so that's kinda fun.
agree with chimps that there is a ton of overlapping frequencies throughout. the dance piano and pizz are in the same freq space, for example, and it's very confusing. there's some notes that don't work in the piano, as well, and the bass is all over the place (close to half of what it's doing are conflicting with the organ and pad). the concept is also really long without a lot that's measurably different - i don't know that there's really four minutes of music (after the intro) here, it's probably closer to 2.5ish. trimming down the extra would help a lot.
my suggestion would be to take out all of the sfx and vox, make a song that's able to stand on its own and submit that, and then maybe do an edit that has that in it for your personal pages.
 
 
NO

hey, what a fun take! this passes my bar easily. i particularly like the vocal treatment - while a few times there's some strains or odd scoops that needed some post lovin', i think it sounds great within the mix and is well-suited to the singer's vocal range and style. i agree with NutS that the background is little more than a bucket for the vocals and sax parts, but that's ok in this style, i think. it's well-executed and doesn't get in the way of the parts that we showed up to listen to, which is all it needed to do.
some suggestions to subversiveasset, one saxophonist to another: one thing that'd help from a recording perspective is to crank down your gain on your mic and really play a lot louder. there's several times repeatedly where your tone is soft and subtle, which is great for some styles, but this needs a really wailing timbre which only comes from more air behind your stack. the lick at :51 and others is a great example - it sounds like you played it real quiet and controlled, and then it has to really be cranked up to fit volume-wise, but then it feels odd next to the other instruments which have more body. it'll also give those articulations more bite. lastly - don't be afraid to run your parts through pitch correction, just like a singer. the low end of the upper octave (F-D w/ octave key) is really sharp, and it shows on some of your runs through there. it'll let you focus more on tone and fingerings, and less on perfect embouchure adjustments for those runs.
if i'm nitpicking, i'm pointing out that a major seventh up is a huuuuge jump for a singer, especially a male singer going from chest voice to mixed (4:16). combined with a glottal stop (the g in -getting) makes that a pretty hard play, so i'll call that sub-optimal writing. also the entire track has a ton of headroom and can be pushed up easily.
as a whole, though, this is a great fun track that features some excellent guest performances. nice work to all involved.
 
 
YES

there is a surprising amount of sub-20hz bass in this mix for how little there is at 40-80hz. it's a clear scoop down at 30hz and back up but fairly quiet at 40hz so it's intentional and not just a bad 40hz cut.
intro is hip. there's some fun effecting on the vocals initially, but they're pretty quiet vs the backing part. i agree with MW that the bass is nowhere near as loud as i'd expect based on the rest of the background.
there's some more neat effecting on the vox at 1:07 onward. there's a break and the 'chorus' comes in at 1:22, and i realized what's bugging me - the track has no punch. the lack of significant compression to give the background a punchier feel (which you're obviously going for based on that drop at 1:07) is a real miss. having no bass is a big deal too...there's nothing in the range that most headphones are going to put out, although it does sound beefier on a system with a lower freq range like a car system.
the arrangement itself is pretty solid. it's clearly from RRT and doesn't ever really get lost (no pun intended), and the execution is definitely competent. i thought the lyrics were kind of meandering and dumb, but i can't really talk having written the worst lyrics of all time on a remix before. i thought they were spoken/sang well but would have preferred the vocals to be a bit louder.
overall this is pretty darn close for me. i do think the lack of punch and bass is a dealbreaker, and i think it's not a huge change to fix that given the headroom in the mix right now. it just feels quiet rather than low and intense.
 
 
NO

Finally! I can’t tell you how long I’ve been waiting to see this site align with my values as a professional musician. Looking forward to my payouts in that sweet, sweet bitcoin. 

the opening is beautiful, but i agree with rexy that there's a lot of mic pressure noise (ie. you recorded wind contacting your mic instead of what wind sounds like) that needs to get cut out.
the melodic presentation is competent and well-handled. the phrasing and instrumentation reminded me of some of the desert tracks from FFXII, actually, in terms of how they use melodic content and move through instrument groups. the brass that came in near the end of the first melodic presentation was also really nice, great use of contrasting timbres to keep it interesting.
i agree with rexy that the entire rest of the track is original, or far enough removed that it doesn't matter. i'd pass this at 3:45 while complaining about the volume of the last minute, but it's not functional in this state. it wouldn't be difficult to add melodic content to the area between say 3:10 and 3:50, at least enough to make it viable at its full length. i will note that the track is again comically quiet after 2:30, and it's entirely possible to use compression to allow for a quiet tail that isn't utterly incomprehensible at normal headphone or speaker volumes. this is a consistent problem in rebecca's music and it's one that needs to get fixed here if it's to be passed at full length.
 
 
NO

oh, right away i really like the slower pace. that's a really fun way to add some difference to this track. i agree with jive right away that the synths have little to no volumization to them - it's a lot of layering synths in similar ranges on top of each other. the first full hit at 0:48 immediately had me bobbing my head - what a great feel. the drums have zero low end to them, which is unfortunate, because i love what they're doing. jive's right that there's a ton of noise in the lower ranges in the synths that needs to be cut before the drums speak out and feel right. once you've isolated those middle synths, making the kick and bass speak clearer will be quite easy.
the break at 1:38 was well-timed, and gave it a bit of time to breathe. i liked the build as well, although throughout i just felt that the backing synths were simply too loud. i get that - it you write a fun part, you want everyone to hear it! - but it's just too much. turn your volume way down until you can only hear one thing - if that one thing isn't the melody, you're likely doing something wrong from a mixing perspective.
the drop into 2:25 was fun, and i liked the arp that's right in front. there's still not enough bass clarity here, but it sounds real fun. i like the liberties taken with the melodic line here, but the drums underneath dropping and doing more d'n'b stuff was actually kind of disappointing because i just couldn't hear what they were doing. i love the idea but it wasn't really executed well. the ending is fairly sudden but not problematic.
overall i think the arrangement is fine - it's certainly not groundbreaking, and it didn't take into account some of the mid/later parts of the original, but it's recognizable and different enough to make it over the bar. i like the synth work itself, but agree that it needs a mastering pass before it really feels ballsy enough to have the punch that you're going for. filtering out the low end of most of those textural synths is a great place to start.
i'd love to hear a resubmission but this doesn't pass muster just yet.
 
 
NO

classic tune here. also, you went with polygonjohn instead of polyjohn? missed opportunity 
filtered drums and some sfx start this track off, along a very bass-heavy bass and some quiet bells. the melody comes in at 0:35 with some nicely-sequenced gliding synth. this does a nice job sitting back on the beat which fits the background well. there's a silence break at 1:22, and a fade-out for the last 25 seconds of the song featuring a bit of noodling on the A section of the melody. aaaaaaaand...that's it. the melodic content takes up less than a minute by itself. so this isn't going to pass since there's nowhere near enough development here to call it. things that i liked included the general vibe of the drumloop (more creativity and fill use there would help a lot as the track's duration progresses past where it is now), the automation on the melody (i'm a sucker for glides), and the approach overall of a more relaxed version of the original track.
i did not care for how bass-heavy this is. there's a lot of overlap between the bass synth and the chorded bell tones - those need to be squared off with an EQ so there's not so much mud in the low end. adding a bit more highs overall to both instruments would actually help i think - it's very low/low-mid focused, and while that can help it feel relaxed it also makes it harder to tell what's what. i also don't understand not including the B section of the melody on a track that is so short. even just a single run-through of that bit would have helped lengthen the track by 20 or 30 seconds, which is approaching what i'd consider the minimum.
on the topic of arrangement, this definitely feels like a demo. mixing it up in instrumentation, chords, or style with a second run-through of the (entire) melody would add a lot to the track and help wrap it up into less of a demo and more of a finished duration.
overall this is too short to really consider. there's some really nice ideas but it needs more content.
 
 
NO

oh, what a great intro. the scoop on the lead is delicious.
this is a really fun vibe right away. i agree with emu that there's some r'n'b here. it's irritating to me that the dx7 and the piano is ahead of the beat almost the entire time, but that's a nitpick. feels like it got stamped in a touch earlier than it should have been. the variety of backgrounds by the two minute mark help keep it interesting. the pads at 2:15 is a nice transition too.
the guitar is fun when it comes in, albeit pretty out of tune. solo was nice and does a nice job mirroring some of the melody's shape while making its own way through it. the chiptune-esque synth at 4:11 is a really fun idea, and then the exploration it does is neat. it's a little loud though. the fadeout is fine, i didn't think it was too abrupt or too early.
my complaints on this track are primary in the details - the keys being ahead, the guitar being out of tune, some balance. overall though it's over the bar. nice work on a fun style.
 
 
YES

the opening is pretty rough. the snare sample is super electric and sounds pretty weird being machine-gunned like it is. the bass has a fun tone but it's panned and also has a ton of sub-bass, which makes it sound muddy (and it'll sound worse on a big-sub system). the kick is also panned oddly and is mostly beater sound without any bass, which is an odd sound. the pitch-shifting of the snares is an interesting idea, but not shifting the formants as well makes them sound kinda odd when they get farther from their natural pitch.
at 0:41, there's some of the melodic content coming in. the synth work here still features too much bass, but i liked the block chords idea (they're still a little spare and an octave too low IMO). the lead synth is a fun tone and clearly delineates the melodic content, so that's good.
there's an obvious loop point, and we go through the build-up to the melody again, which comes in at 2:20. i did like the glide synth for the arp, and that was a neat change, but other than that it felt pretty much the same as the first time through the same material with no break in between.
at 2:55, there's a synth-only part that noodles around some bits of melody that builds back up into the rest of the groove. it was a nice break from the original idea, but i started to get tired of the lead at this point. the song noodled some more around the initial riff of the melodic content and then sorta ended.
overall this one needs a lot of workshopping from the synth and instrument choice side, i think. the drums sound strange - they feel like they're in an electronic song but you're using them in a classical fashion, and it doesn't do them any favors i don't think. the synths are mostly static throughout - some shifting timbres and new instruments part-way through would help relieve some of the oppressiveness of the repetition. beyond that, i'd think hard about putting a hard EQ on most of your synths so they don't sound so muddy and bleed into sub-bass range.
this one isn't there yet.
 
 
NO

rubber stamping this. the arrangement is pretty minimal (it's there, but i agree there's less personalization than i'd want on a track that's as remixed as this one is), the synths are not terrible but definitely need some work so they're not so "FL preset" sounding, there's some variation of drum patterns but few fills or transition sweeps so it feels very similar, and some of the synths (for example 1:41) sound almost sloppy because their sustain is just a touch too long and it doesn't cut itself.
i want to call out the lack of verb specifically. this style is usually super wet, with tons of reverb filling in the backend of every synth sound. this felt very thin at first and i couldn't understand why until i realized there's essentially no verb here, just synth sustain and sample sustain. some significant attention with reverb will help this a lot.
 
 
NO
 

starts off real peaceful with some pretty piano and strings. from there the flute and strings pick up the main melodic section over some rhythmic strings. this is fairly straightforward writing but it's competent and sounds nice. there's a break for the piano at about 1:04, and this is really well played/sequenced again. we get back into the full group at 1:47, and the arrangement is again in the flute and then strings. this is very similar to the earlier section from 0:25-1:04, nearly copy/paste territory. there's a fun brass chorale at 2:32, and some string ensemble work to follow that up. the solo violin isn't great quality but it's passable. a light flourish in the bells and we're done.
this feels very pokemon, which is pretty nice. the copy/paste section though is pretty egregious. the intro, piano solo section, and ensemble section at the end is really nice, however, and throughout the ensemble writing is pretty solid. this could probably go either way for me, but some more creativity in that second copy/paste section and this is an easy pass in my book.
 
 
NO

some really stellar originals here. also the track clips a bit, a little more than a db, but it's not audible as far as i could see.
there's a ton of great stuff here. there's lots of shifts of style so it doesn't feel the same for six minutes, there's lots of use of acoustic and electric guitar alternately, there's some double time stuff, there's lots of interesting backgrounds in the synths behind the (featured) guitars, and there's no really awkward transitions where something just feels weird. there's scads of arranged melodic content, so nothing to worry about there either.
the drums are a touch loud (which is a stylistic consideration for the DJ set idea, vs a standalone track, so i get that). in the first few minutes i also felt that the lead guitars were a touch loud as well, and the ending's guitar delays sound a bit weird. but the whole thing sounds so clean that i can't really complain - it's all very intentionally handled and it sounds great. easy yes by me.
 
 
YES
 

this is a great original track! i've never even heard of this game. lots of playing with time and downbeats, and a big scalar run which i love in chiptune tracks.
sfx opening into the traditional slammed keys and kit sound of lofi. the melody's obvious right away, and i like the chopping done to it. the full melody comes in at 0:30, and sounds great. i like the addition of strings to the big ascending scalar run. beat and bass are good too and the vocal sample isn't obnoxious (i don't like vocal samples in downtempo and lofi but i get it's part of the style).
there's a break at 1:23, and when the drums come back in they're doing something new, which is nice. at 1:47 we get a new runthrough of the melodic content, and there's some new synths and a countermelody being used, which is great. there's an outro around 2:40.
this sounds great, has a lot of melodic content that's mixed up in different ways, and does a good job adapting the track to the genre. nice work.
 
 
YES