Sam Ascher-Weiss

I am in agreement with harmony's suggestions of adding 32nd note [maybe 16th note depeding on your BPM] or triplet fills, and avoiding constant velocities on your closed hats. As gray suggested, the drums have the potential to be the source of foward motion in this piece, so you might as well give them some more magic to invigorate them. Try new emphasis patterns like having a snare/stick on the "and of 3" every bar for a section or two. Go for more off-beats instead of the constant 1 and 3 bit you have at the moment. While you're at it, how bout more movement in the bass sometimes. Just like the drums, the bass has the option of emphasising those off-beats. Right now it's locking in with all the other folks on 1 and 3. At 1:11 the piaannoo first plays the repeated note end of bar tag. This is good! There is a game of catch being played by the piano and guitar. You could try reversing these roles at times having the piano begin a bar and the guitar swoop in with a repeated note or some other non-distracting melodic action to segue into the next bar. Finally, alter the chord progression every once in a while to get some more of that interpretation going on here. This piece runs out of steam quickly and is lacking a driving force. The bass and drums have MONSTER potential to make this happen as do the other instruments by hightening their already strong interplay. Throw in a less conservative arrangement for the kill and you'll be ALL SET! n0

I agree with bubbleman here. WOW SHOCK! The melody is being used very infrequently, and when it is used, it begins on the root instead of the fifth which gives it an entirely different quality. It's very easy to detect the original when ever it occurs because the chord progression has to get "interesting" in order to accomidate the extreme chromaticism. When the melody is gone we mainly just hover around Bb Minor. For this reason, not only would including more of the melody make this mix passeable in terms of interpretation, but it would also make it much more intruiging harmonically judging from the sections where the melody was actually used. So so so so so, you only used the melody a couple of times, and when you did you changed it's location from the fifth to the root and kept it in one place [bb - though same notes as Eb version for source] while in the original it travels [Eb, Ab, Db, Bb]. On it's compositional merits alone, this is MOST passeable, but more source = necessary. Cool stuff regardless! n0

OCR Hosted NSF - Track 4 2:00 was a solid change of pace with the melodic instruments taking up more of the rhythmic weight than the drums for a bit when before they were just sitting on top letting the percussion do all of the momentum generating. The layering here is well thought out and things GELL on a regular basis! Not much more to say about this piece. Cute little ReMix! YeS

I'd call that a bassline rather than a melody, and it is has been perfectly preserved by the "hopscotch" route/7th pattern in the ReMix. The phrasing has been altered but the notes are there consistently from beginning to end while the rhythms have been taken up by other instruments playing different notes. Still doesn't seem too liberal to me.

I don't think this was too liberal. The original was basically just an F sharp blues and you preserved that aspect of the form. I hear no melody [other than the very soft instruments playing minor and major thirds] in the original, so I don't see how you could have overly obscured something that doesn't exist. Anyway, interpretation was not an issue for me. The bass-less section from 2:02 till 2:17 had the type of moderation that a lot of this piece is lacking. Sometimes the choir holds a low F sharp for a long time and at a high volume to the point where it starts to PULL the rest of the layers down. Similarly the high pitched portamento sound draws attention away from some of the lovely textures you've spawned. This is superbly evidenced at 3:38 when it goes on subatical. All of the real movement in this remix happens in the high register and drums. The bass is moving as well, but more than "moving" it's really just playing hopscoth between E and F sharp most of the time. There is a slightly audible left-panned instrument that's getting some action in the middle register, but it doesn't have much presence. If the bass were to do some more staccato work, that would help, as would having more prominent patterns in the middle register instead of so many sustained instruments like the choir and strings. More 2:02-ish sections wouldn't hurt either. One thing you totally NAILED was the atmosphere. Work on that layering and you'll be in the clear. A lot of this is very fun to listen to! n0 (Resubmit)

Good choice to switch the meter to 3/4. Those sorts of things always make for interesting arrangements. This is a highly liberal take on the source material as Liontamer said. When the piano first plays the melody, it sounds nice, but when the oboe joins in it becomes overbearing and shrill. The actual notes the oboe plays are fine, but the tone is painful at times. The guitar work at 1:36 is beautiful. The gradual fade in of the bass leading up to the climactic chord at 1:56 is an ideal opening for the next section. Here the strings are blanketing everything else in an attempt to bring some more fullness, but they end up making things sound muddy instead. Less repitition in the guitar part would help deal with the robotic feel. Lots more panning, taking more care with the volume of the oboe, and not relying on sustained string chords to fill in aural holes would do wonders for this song. Those technical issues aside, this also needs more direct coverage of the source. This is extra-important when you alter the meter since by default this makes the source less recognizeable. There are plenty of enjoyable moments in this piece, but right now there are too many things holding it back! n0

This is hillarious! The way you put the beat over the original, it makes the piano part sound like it's playing triplets rather than eighth-notes. Everything else is splashed on top without much regard for the way in which it interacts with the original. The guitar doubling the melody is funny... but I wouldn't say it works. Also, based on what you said in your submission e-mail, and judging with my own ear, I'd say you sampled the original DIRECTLY and then wrote on top... that is a submission violation if it is the case... but you weren't 100% clear in your sub-email. The piano part is note-for-note [sure it's been transposed up half a step, but my guess is that was doen in audio to help bring up the tempo without having to do too much time-stretching]. Uematsu + Slightly relevant yet crowded and akwardly layered material = this mix. If I hadn't only been here for 2 months, I'd EASILY give this a NO OVERRIDE! I think this is because you don't completely understand the rules of the site, so it's not your fault but.... now you know. n0 PS: Can someone please NO OVERRIDE this?

Doom Midi Soundtrack - "13 Toxin Refinery" TRUE TRUE! Intro is nice, and the fuzzy wuzzy + drums for a while is also bags of fun. IT IS as has been stated, the repetition that slaughters this song. Wingless' breaks idea was a good one, and you ALMOST do this at 2:24, BUT the front man playing those E flats stays loud loud loud. If you had either silenced him or made him quieter [i'd go for silence] then you'd have quite the refreshing break going on there and by 3:12 we'd be ready for some more aural ballistics. This would be especially fitting CAUSE it's when the drums step back through the door. Here the back up synth line is very powerful---ly written [with the wah-wah], but being covered-up by the frontman again. TURN HIM DOWN! By 3:50 you're safe. Doubling the pattern down in the lower register at 4:20 was great for that fullness effect! Finally at 4:29 one more part where the front man needs to shut his mouth or speak in a softer voice.... and then WE'RE DONE! So, this is VERY close. If you simply add some breaks [or just take the breaks you have and make them more break-ish by quieting the lead] and clean things up at 3:14 with better mixing/panning [to bring out the back up pattern and keep the lead singer from overly dominating the scene] then you will be SOOOO ready to go. n0 (Borderline)

It was funny how you broke the melody down into 3 bar phrases instead of 4 bar phrases. Simple dimple orchestration [Vanilla like Larry said] and very little expansion upon the source, other than the 3 bar phrasing thing. Fade out also was a weak choice! n0

OCR Hosted Nsf - Track 4 Wow.... I'm speechless! There are legions of great ideas in this song, and not one of them poorly executed as far as I can tell. You used the bass line from the original and converted it into a melody with a full blown chord progression to back it up. And a fascinating chord progression at that. I was completely floored by the all of a sudden acceleration guided helpfully by the upward pitch bending chords which indicate increased excitement on there own so they fit in perfectly with the change in tempo. After the DnB action, a beautiful piano brass and choir gathering takes place growing slowly into some borderline corny yet perfectly suited herioc chords. This happy feeling is not meant to last and quickly segues into a not so optimistic sounding final note cluster. There is never a dull moment in this remix yet the excitement is not constant or tiring. There is a tradeoff between interesting melodic ideas and then sections that are more rhythmic in nature with an extra spicy overlap every now and again like at 2:14. So much fun to listen to! YeS

Other than some of the rhythmic emphasises and melody, there is very little that is taken directly from the original. The orchestration is remarkably imaginative. Take the clarinet at 0:30 with the second clarinet playing a gentle counter melody while the pizzicato strings pluck the off beats. There you have a wonderful intrumental line up that sounds nothing like the original. The piano, clarinet, harp and pizz bridge is also 100% fresh. The laid back almost behind the beat phrasing in the piano gives the section an added touch of realism. The piano is sooned joined by several more instruments that float along being carried by the meditative piano rhythms. All of this builds superbly into the following climactic section. Here once again, the rhythmic emphasis patterns are taken directly from the original, but nothing else was. Some of the chords have been altered as well. At this point I glanced at the time and realized that the song was almost over. It occured to me that there was no way this ReMix could ever feel complete with only a few seconds left to finish things off, but you proved me wrong. By changing the dotted pattern from the original into triplets, you gave the piece that stroke of finality it needed in order to lay down a firm and complete ending. My only concerns about this piece come not from it being necessarily too close to the original, but from the fact that it only makes the journey through the entire theme. There are buckets and buckets of expansion during this single trip, but as a result it's just about the same length as the source. Ultimately I do not believe that is enough reason to say NO to this otherwise top notch material. YeS (Borderline)

BEAUTIFUL!

Theme from Pac-Man Fun stuff, especially with the meter. Starts off with a pretty standard 7/8 feel featuring the occasional switch-up [at 0:09 1 bar of 6/8 and at 0:18 two bars of 4/4] At 0:57 we're given 4 straight beats to set up the next section where there's a whole lot of playing around until finally settling into a hybrid 6 + 4 at 1:36. That lasts for quite a long time, allowing the groove to relax for a while. Finally at 3:16 we're treated to a very simple 6/8 that almost sounds like 4/4 triplet time but it only lasts until 3:27 when another hybrid meter enters, this time 7 + 8 instead of 6 + 4 changing into a more exciting 5/4 at 3:58. All good things must come to an end, and at 4:18 the intense 5/4 vanishes leaving in its wake a playful set of 3 beat patterns with a few 4 beat phrases thrown into the mix [at 4:33, 4:45 and 4:49] growing closer together each time until the final one which ends the piece. These time signature games are the most significant compositional element in the song. The sounds are pleasent enough [i particularly liked the faux-choral instrument], as are the note choices, but it's the rhythmic tension caused by the constant change of meter that makes this piece work so well. It is a most enjoyable listen! YeS

The bass drum sounds like it's been tuned upwards which gives it more of a hands on feel. Rather than having it dwell down below, it's right there in the thick of things. When you add the hand drums to that, the percussive texture becomes all the more unique. The thick string-like warping sound that fades chords in and out brings worlds of depth to the soundfield whenever it enters. When it makes its first departure at 1:37, rather than leaving things seeming empty, the hand percussion jumps in right in time, replacing the depth with clarity and stronger foward motion. The moment of silence at 1:58 was a neat little bit of messing with the listener's a head and it rolls out the red carpet for the next portion of the melody. Temporarily reintroducing the mighty morphin' string sound at 2:39 leaves me well prepared for what's to come. The melody is then accompanied very gently by an up and down 4 note marimba pattern which is eventually joined by the warped strings leading into a brief statement by the bass. The drums take their cue from the bass player and proceed to give everyone else a four-count before returning to the main section. Marvelous ending with the deceleration followed by some funky panning, stuttering and detuning effects on the warped strings. Somehow, while using a non-traditional combination of instruments and even some strange audio effects, you've still managed to write something that almost sounds like a live performance. This comes from the excellent instrumental teamwork, the use of panning, and the fact that all of the parts are given crucial roles at every moment of the mix, so that nobody feels left out. At the same time, each section flows wonderfully into the next with a gradual rise and fall in dynamics while preserving an overall sense of build. When its finally over, I don't want it to be, but I still end up feeling like I got my money's worth. YeS

I don't know how much thought went into the layering in certain sections but they could use some more. WANT SOME EXAMPLES?? At 1:53 the solo string parts are playing standing harmonies that dampen the intensity of the moving strings/piano/snare drum combination without adding anything significant by playing notes that are already being handled by the other instruments. The piano at 2:15 is struggling for audibility amidst the waves of string action and the attack on the cello that enters at 1:04 makes it sound as though it's not playing in tempo. Also, the cello is located in the same register as the harp while frequently producing notes that are disagreement with it. Though the way in which the instruments work together, or against each other rather, isn't spectacular, the textures provided by the choice of instrumental combinations can be pleasing at times like the "style change" that Liontamer mentioned at 1:01. One particularly strong portion of the mix comes at 2:30 with the multiple solo string parts. Here the sonic texture works well, but actually so do the notes themselves as each part fits in without any needless crowding. Soon after, the piano jumps in just on time to bring us home. The biggest weakness here comes from the sloppy interaction between the instruments. A smaller issue is the start-and-stop flow of the arrangement. Each section ends only moments after it begins, never allowing for any continued development or significant build up. On the bright side, there are some lovely textures and a rather slick ending to top things off. Untangle some of that instrumental gridlock and maybe think about throwing in more transitions between sections so that they can grow or morph into one another. If you do all that then you'll definitely have a winner! n0 (Resubmit)

SWEET!

I probably shouldn't comment on this, but I think it's so AWESOME that you're only sixteen years old! Okay, on to the mix: The 5/4 bonanza from 1:28 to 1:43 was the perfect transition into Frog's Theme. The tremolo strings under the beginning of windscene and subsequent string work at 2:09 showed real expertise in synthetic string writing. The individual notes moved in different directions and intervals giving the section a wonderfully natural feel. The version of the End of Time Theme using the solo fiddle, rapidly bowed strings in the background, counter melodies in the oboe and bassoon with an ocassional piano strike was playful yet profound. Sure there were a couple of clashing notes, like when the back-up strings play an Eb at 3:49, but it's nothing substantial enough to take away from the terrificly frenzied, almost maniachal jig you've got going in that section. Afterwards you appropriately allow some calm to follow which lasts just long enough to properly prepare us for your heroic version of End of Time leading into the harp pattern from the source which is given a completely different feel thanks to the G in the bass. The G eventually fades as the harp arpeggiates its final chord. Beautiful! This ReMix is a series of vignettes, no two of which are alike. They all have their own unique charms and compliment one another splendidly keeping five minutes and thirty seconds from feeling like too long. YeS

Fun portamento octave hopping at 0:41. The three note repeating upward moving support pattern at 0:45 and 1:52 adds some much needed momentum considering the relatively plain drumwork, though I was dissapointed when both times after the transposition it became an all too typical up and then down again 6 note arch. The bass plays by itself it its lower register sandbox though it occasionally emerges for some cohabitation with the other instruments like at 1:29 when it answers the call of the guitar. That little bit was most satisfying. At 2:15 you chose the perfect note to go out on since it could have continued to fade after the strings came in which would have made a much smoother transition, but for some reason you felt obligated to make sure it was gone by the time the strings arrived. Despite mixing issues and akward attack on the strings during the drumless portion of the mix, the guitar part floated gently over the standing chords bringing out the beauty of the source melody. When the 3 note pattern I so adore returns at 2:52, it only strengthens the effect by creating a stronger foward drive without taking away from the openness caused by the absence of drums. Luckily this time it doesn't trasnmogrify into a boring rise and fall figure like it did in the first two instances. This accomplished what is in my opinion one of the most important things in ReMixing which is to truly honor the source by highlighting it's strengths. At first you showcase the action-packed potential of the original and then you display how it could also stand up on the strength of its melody alone. KUDOS! YeS

So the obvious reason to NO this is that it's way too short. Fine... that's all well and good, but i'd like to address this issue of "harmonic tension". It's a tough call but certain things make me feel that this "tension" was more like sloppiness. Most of the tension comes from every time one part [and by part I mean groups of instruments moving in unison] spells out Bb major another outlines D major. When this happens the first time in the piano and strings there is a D in the bass so it sounds like a mistake, but the second time there is a Bb in the bass so it sounds like a Bb Augmented Major 7th... but there's an F in the strings... and it's not a PRONOUNCED F, it's a quiet F that sounds like it's trying to hide. That F is the most controversial note in the chord and if it was intentional I would assume it would be at the fore-front. Also, the piano NEVER plays a Bb in this section... if it did I could be 100% certain that the harmony was intentional because one instrument would outline it in it's entirety, however each time this part returns, some instrumental groups go to D major while other go to Bb major with NO OVERLAPPING and the F always sounds like it's trying to hide. [it would be more convincing if one group played Bb, F#, A and another an octave above played D, F, C#.... the C sharp would add tension in the same veign as adding the F did but it would also lend added coherence by turning the harmony into a stack of major 7ths {Bb and A, F# and F, D and C#} and creating some harmonic overlap] If there were no problem with the length and developement, I'd give you the benefit of the doubt with this stuff, but since my name was mentioned I figured I should weigh in about the so called "harmonic tension". I'd actually like to hear your reasoning behind the notes you chose. Anyway, as everyone else already stated, the song at the moment is incomplete. n0 (Resubmit)

Duke Nukem Midi Soundtrack - 02 "Episode 1 - Stalker" & 25 "Episode 3 - Gotham" The melodic material gets buried a lot of the time. Your treatment of Gotham at 1:05 is beautiful but it doesn't last for very long. It's also pretty cool how you combine the two themes at 2:09 though it's done in such a subtle way that it's hard to notice. While both source tunes are identifiable, you only use a small portion of each of them and there was a lot of other material that you could have exploited. The only clearly noticeable difference between the first and last sections is the gentle layering of Gotham on top of the stalker theme, but unfortunately that's not enough to keep the mix from feeling like it doesn't go anywhere. The section from 1:36 to 2:09 showed a lot of promise for developement but it got cut off before it had time to fully "blossom" so to speak. To go along with the generally flat arrangement is the crowdedness caused by many similarly distorted synths all acting in the same register. You've got to clean that up. Add the incredibly repetitive drums to the list and it becomes clear that this is not yet passable. There are several gems in here like the first treatment of Gotham with the slow moving harmonies and the subsequent section featuring more variation than any other part of the mix. Adding these elements to the rest of the track while clearing up the clutter with extreme panning, fading some instruments in and out and more frequently varying the timbres would do wonders for your ReMix. Right now it's not quite there yet. n0

The ONLY problem I have with this mix is the emptiness that lasts for too long. At first when your delayed lead is playing the intro from the original and then the melody, having it at the forefront accompanied solely by quiet ambient chords and a bass line that's right in the pocket with the drums gives the mix a unique sort of clarity. On occasion another synth will play a backup singer echoing role like at 1:00. That plus the effects and subtle variation in the percussive instruments allow the mix to retain it's clarity without feeling too minimal. This all stays charming until 1:29 when you bring in the second part of the source. Luckily you swoop in by 1:45 and change things. No complaints about that section. Each time after the guitar plays it's motif everything almost freezes so you get a start and stop sensation like compositional pop-and-lock. 2:03 - 2:18 again felt too empty. The mellow guitar action after that is just fine as is. When you bring your original lead back at 2:37, you had the right idea when you took out the high hats and snares. Fading them back in was an interesting choice that I think payed off. At 3:10 we're back to the section from 1:29. The ending is cool with me. This is tremendously easy to fix. There are only three sections that are in serious need of attention. 1:29 Here you can add a harmony part to join your lead which might take a bit of fancy foot work thanks to the delay. Instead of a harmony part you could have some ambient upper octave arpegiations [up or down, that's your choice] that spell out the chords. 2:03 This one's easy. You can have a slow moving melody in a gentle pad [think string-esque] that can be carried along by the figure that you've already got going. I say this because it sounds like an accompinament part.... only it isn't accompaniying anything. 3:10 This section is almost identical to 1:29 so you have the same options, however in a piece this sparse you want to try and avoid unnecessary redundancy so your best bet would be to either add another layer on top of whatever you choose to do at 1:29 or just do something different. I still think either arpeggiations or harmonizing with the melody are your best bets [hey look those two words are anagrams of eachother]. Yeah... I say this a lot but I want to make it clear that these suggestions are just A FEW possiblities and I'm sure there are millions of others ways to go about making these sections fuller. All I did was choose the ones that I think would be the easiest to pull off while not straying from the overall atmosphere of the mix. This one is VERY close, so please just throw on those finishing touches and send it on back. n0 (Borderline/Resubmit)

This is VERY weak as a "Jazz" arrangement. Half the time the piano is playing chords on the same beats each measure and other times it's playing chords in exact synchronicity with the melody with voice-leading doubling the saxophone. I like the little turn around at 0:48 that happens several other times during the piece. The reason the sax sounds "flat and dry" is that the piano is totally monopolizing a lot of the notes in the melody and slamming chords on strong beats, something you just would NEVER see in a professional or even semi-professional Jazz setting. On top of that, the left hand of the piano literally without fail doubles EVERYTHING the bass plays to the point that it seems as though Liontamer didn't even notice the presence of the bass. If he didn't though, I don't blame him because the bass was being completely obliterated by the piano's left hand part. The arrangement gets bigger toward the end simply by having the piano's comping become all the more intrusive and pounding a bunch of octaves in the left hand [once again making the bass player obsolete] while the sax plays the melody note for note... just LOUDER. The result of all this is an arrangement that sounds like it's TRYING VERY HARD to sound like jazz, not an actual jazz arrangement. n0

I commend you on your efforts here, but the sounds are all low quality, the arrangement goes nowhere and there are two serious harmonic blunders [2:04 and 4:14]. Otherwise I absolutely adore the mood created by this piece with the combination of wildlife-sounds and warm flowing melodies. I find it has an overall calming effect on me. Unfortunately based on the standards of this site I have to say n0

2:11 was the highlight of the track for me. The bass drums pound each beat into my head almost knocking me over but the tight-as-hell synth catches me leaving me bouncing back and forth to the groove. Later at 2:39 when the additional distorted synth joins in by emphasising the off beats, the entire dance apparatus has finally been constructed and it does what it's supposed to. After all the HARD-core sounds the sweet talkin' synth that shows up at 3:25 hit's the spot. It's like "I only hurt you cause I love you baby!" Right right, so we got tight rhythm work [not just drumwork since all of the instruments get in on forming the backbone of the beat] some nice occasional contrasts and a not-all-that heavily interpreted source with a good amount of original material mixed in. YeS

There's a lot to love here. All of the tempo changes are super-neato! Despite the quality of the some of the sounds [like the organ and the choir] the choice of instruments and their application is unique and maybe even..... fascinating... to me. Things are jumbled a lot of the times with the melody getting lost while it's tossed back and forth between instruments, which is actually something that personally I love. From the outset of any song, I'm ready for anything usually but you can't make that assumption about your listener. With something like this, you need a minute or two to pull people in.... make it clear that the crowdedness and peculiar sound combinations are intentional by starting the track with a minute and a half or so of VERY FOCUSED material and every once and a while returning to that feel. That way I can rest assured that the wacked out action is a CHOICE and not a WEAKNESS. Basically you have to be a real salesman when working in this style. This track is mostly medicine and it needs more sugar to help it go down. How could you do this maybe? LET'S SEE: At 0:26 when the melody first enters, keep it in one instrument and limit the accompaniment parts to simple chords to back it up along with a bassline that acts in tandem with the drums. [i know that seems incredibly boring but don't worry]. Once you've done that, you can then do your version of the melody with the instruments playing hot potato as they are now, HOWEVER, first remove the drums temporarily and have the layers introduce themselves one by one instead of all together. You can have that business build until you feel like going into the part of the source that you first use at 1:00, at that point BACK TO FOCUS! That part of the melody has it's own built in focus because of it's seperated nature [note note note note note MOVING CHORDS note note note note note MOVING CHORDS] so just highlight that. Hopefully you get the jist of what I'm saying. You need to hold people's hands a little more, that's all. You've chosen my favorite style to work in and it's a very difficult balancing act though you're damn close to making it work. Just remember, you have to seduce your audience before you try to bring them into your world. For myself, I like the track just the way it is now and so I'll be listening to it quite a bit. n0 (Very Borderline/Resubmit)