Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Israfel

  1. Pleasant- but like the others mentioned it doesn't add much to the original- the overall feel and composition is pretty much the same. But still, a nice listen. NO
  2. I'm with the yea's here. My only complaint is that the one bar drumloop does at times become noticeably repetitive. But otherwise I really dig this, fun stuff. YES
  3. --a bit on the quiet side/ muffled and distant quality to the sound --samples do have a sort of "general midi" sound, but they're serviceable --within the genre of symphonic music, this is perhaps a bit too straightforward and the arranging tends to be on the sparse side --form seems lack a certain sort of logic- what I mean is that arrangement comes off as a bit sectionalistic. Rather than a logical sequence of ideas designed to build tension and maintain interest, the piece seems to be made up of fairly independent sections, and as such there's a lack of focus and forward momentum to the work --I do appreciate the significant change in style and overall feel between the original and your arrangement A nice mix that tilts to the better side of average YES
  4. --no attention paid towards dynamics + overly quantized sequencing leads to a quite mechanical sound to the mix --rather haphazard form, a seemingly random flood of ideas --an unfortunate lack of phrasing, expression ect. --muffled, unconvincing piano sound Good effort, but the sequencing is far too robotic for this to pass. NO
  5. I don't know if I'd call it a midi rip, but it is a bit too similar to pass. The recording also has a sort of muffled, distant quality to it. Fans looking for a "sound upgrade" type of arrangement should enjoy this one though. NO
  6. Gee- it sounds like you applied a delay effect to every single track- percussion, melody, everything. As the others mentioned, this creates a sort of undefined, amorphous quality- perhaps some may find this atmospheric, or "dreamish", but it just seems a little sloppy here. Most of the mix stays pretty close to the original although things do pick up during the last two minutes or so. It's not a bad track or anything, but nothing standout. The overall mediocrity combined with an excessive use of delay warrants a "no" unfortunately. NO
  7. Really darn sparse arrangement. The nifty little counter-melody at 1:35 is really the only standout part- otherwise the mix is just far too simple. NO
  8. Some of the voice leading was changed, the instruments are different...and that's about it. I know that the arrangement was intentionally similar to the original, but we really discourage that sort of thing here- this comes off more as a orchestration rather than a "rearrangement" anyway. Far too close to the original for me to pass. NO
  9. A straightforward take on an already simple original. What bugs me about this is there's basically only one musical idea- a harmonic pattern that repeats over and over (and over) again. Then near the end you transpose the whole thing up a step and keep going with the pattern. This thing could have really used some more harmonic variety. There is the "B" section at 1:20 or so- but it doesn't last very long and it sticks pretty close to the original anyway. Accompaniment is a bit too simple as well- consisting almost entirely of block chords or arpeggios. Strive for greater interest in your supporting voices. It's a pleasant listen, but too straightforward. Other than a few counter-melodies very little has been added to the original. NO
  10. Interesting work. Couple points. --your voice leading is too muddy. Aside from the melody, most everything is in lower octaves. It would be better to have some variety of register --the rhythms are a bit jerky and uneven at times. You rush (:35 for example) and drag (like at :51) the tempo throughout the piece. --the mix comes off as too straightforward. For example, 1:05, with the simple two-part texture. --the recording lacks clarity- and has a general muffled quality. Although part of this is likely due to the bottom-heavy arrangement. --too little rhythmic contrast. The driving bass line seems to go on forever and quickly becomes tiresome. BUT...I'm still going to pass this- there's no reason that a posted work must be a compositional masterpiece. The way I see it is that this work will undoubtedly be well received by listeners as it is a competently performed work with an arrangement which, while simple at times, does have a few strong points- for instance the far too short change-up at 1:51. I have no mind to pass a work simply because the listeners will like it, but in this case I feel that the piece has enough going for it to not overshadow its flaws, but make it enjoyable nonetheless. YES
  11. Fun stuff- decent amount of variety and everything sounds pretty polished. Might have been able to shave a little bit off the length but otherwise this sounds pretty good. YES
  12. Completely ridiculous. I like it. It's sort of like the goofy music you hear in places like the Pharmacy in Persona- it's happy, silly, yet strangely comfortable. Mix doesn't really do anything wrong, and it's pretty cool, so YES
  13. Yeah...nice try. This just isn't a remix. NO
  14. Couple problems here: ---first of all the sample has a sort of toy-ish quality ---The excessive amount of sustain creates a dissonant and muddy quality- particularly in the lower register ---the loud, accented notes in the bass don't make a whole lot of musical sense NO
  15. Aside from what the others have said, I also think that the drums are too loud and mixed too far up front- something which highlights the repetitiveness of them. Not bad or anything, but the arrangement is a little too sparse at times and there seems to be some mixing/eq problems. NO
  16. Not much else to say, the others have it covered. I agree with their reviews. NO
  17. Gah- this is tricky, certain sections work really well, but... First of all, this particularly jazz band seems to be a bit down its luck and forced to take cave gigs. There's a ton of reverb here and it's inappropriate for the style. The samples are well...not good. But then, it's not so bad since they sound like the FF7 instrument samples which is fitting I suppose. The drums are nicely sequenced (or played) although they don't seem to be quite in sync with the other instruments- maybe that's just me. The arrangement is pretty cool at times. Although, since you're emulating a live ensemble, I wish that more attention had been paid to sequencing- the brass chords in particular just sound too harsh and mechanical. Not bad...doesn't wow me and there are some problems here I think...but...a tentative yes for now. I may come back to this one though. EDIT: Yeah, unfortunately the sound quality/ sequencing really does bring this one down. Nice arrangement though. NO
  18. Terranigma and Chrono Chrono...together at last? As the others have said, this is a really darn repetitve mix that follows a fairly predictable additive form. I can only assume you were going for a sort of minimalist or new age type sound- ala Tubular Bells or Piano Phase- with the repeating piano pattern - but in those cases the repeating patterns are constantly evolving, there's always a sense of change. With this mix however everything feels so static, I hear a few variations here and there, but it's not enough to change the overwhelming sense of repetitiveness. Not bad or anything, but I don't think I can pass this NO
  19. This one just didn't work for me- certain sections were far too empty sounding (like 1:13), there was a general lack of form or development, and the arrangement was a bit on the simple side. Not horrible by any means, but a somewhat unsatisfying listen. NO
  20. I think I figured out one of the reasons I like this so much- it reminds me of some of Sopor Aeternus' instrumental work. The subdued, somewhat minimalist and sectional arrangement just really appeals to me. The subtle harmonic and melodic variations masterfully reimagine the original themes in a way that puts most mixes to shame. *This* is rearrangement done right.
  21. Nice stuff- doesn't blow my mind or anything, but fairly enjoyable. Horribly underdeveloped though. You have several ideas which are briefly used and then never expanded on again- if you want the piece to be this short you either need to cut the number of musical ideas that you have in play (you would definitely need to cut the cool section at 2:13 in order to justify the length- the addition of new material that late in the mix just makes the piece feel too short and incomplete) or further develop the music that you have. Form is not a minor issue though, and when done poorly it gives the piece a very unsatisfying feel. This is a good start, but I don't think you should call this one complete yet. NO
  22. Ahh...OMF, man I loved that game. There's no getting around it, this is some solid stuff. Upbeat, fun and has enough variety and changeups to keep things interesting. Definitely a keeper, good work. YES
  23. Yeah, I'm pretty much in agreement with analoq. I actually really wanted to like this one because of the source material, and there were a few sections that I thought were fairly enjoyable. But for the most part the arrangement is too sparse and repetitive- and as was mentioned some of the higher pitched sounds were quite distracting. NO
  24. I remember this from the wip forum a few months ago- it really impressed me then and I still think this is top-notch work. Very authentic genre work and the sound is lush and quite beautiful. Cool stuff. I do think it ends a little abruptly and that the flowing nature of this mix lends itself to longer playtimes, but otherwise I really enjoyed this one. YES
  25. I do rather like the bassline and it's nice that you changed up the harmony some. Although as has already been mentioned, the lead is much too quiet and the harmony lacks rhythmic interest. Fix the volume issues and maybe try to do more with the accompaniment and I think this could be pretty cool. NO
  • Create New...