Jump to content

*NO* Rayman 'The Power to Heal'


Liontamer
 Share

Recommended Posts

Greetings to all who happen to read this text. I go under the name of Flexstyle, and I'm proud to submit my very first serious Game Remix to OCRemix! For this remix, I chose one of my favorite games--the original Rayman--and chose the theme of Betilla the Fairy, who gives Rayman his powers. I've created, with the guidance of the WIP-crew on the forums, a thumping-yet-dreamy Trance-ish mix of Betilla's theme. I called it "The Power to Heal" because that's basically what Betilla does. Gives powers and healing. Y'know?

Anyways, enough about all that. Here's the important stuff:

SOURCE MP3:

REMIX MP3:

REMIXER NAME: Flexstyle

REAL NAME (sorta): Mike Hudson (Not my real last name, but it's the one I use on the internet--I'm a very cautious person)

EMAIL: djflexstyle@hotmail.com, or djflexstyle@yahoo.com

WEBSITE: www.acidplanet.com/flexstyle/songs, or www.myspace.com/flexstylemusic

USERID#: 22246

GAME NAME: Rayman (since this was the first one, it had no subtitle or anything)

SONG NAME: Betilla the Fairy

GAME INFO: Listed under "Sound Effects and Music" in the credits are the following names: Stephane Bellanger, Didier Lord with Sylvain Brunet, Nathalie Drouet, Dominique Dumont, Kamel Feunas, Remy Gazel, Didier Leglise, Jean-Marc Lichtmann, Frederic Louvre, Oliver Mortier, Frederic Prados, Stephane Ronse, Rene De Wael, and Olaf Zalcman. The game publisher was UbiSoft, and the game systems released on included the PlayStation 1, PC, and Nintendo Gameboy Advance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Thought it was solid as a trance tune. Not very out there, but some interesting beat details and a good drive. This is definitely skirting the line of what is too liberal though.

Break it down, y'all:

0:00-0:29 - original

0:30-0:58 - uses melody and countermelody

0:59-1:40 - original

1:41-1:55 - uses simplified melody

1:56-2:11 - original

2:12-3:50 - uses melody and countermelody

3:51-4:56 - original

I think I can round the numbers in your favor, but I thought the treatment of the source was fairly uncreative given how only one line of the melody and countermelody are used. In your favor though, the simplification of the melody was not bad for a change-up, and the harmonies in the second-to-last section were an excellent addition. I also noticed there's a short arpeggiated riff that comes up a couple times that's pulled from the original - a decent touch. I'm willing to call this just over the line.

Production was very skewed towards the highs and it got pretty loud up there. There's also not much clarity when the song reaches its peak, and EQ would help this out a lot, especially in making that piano clearer. That's gonna be what stops this for me, and I'd like to see those two things fixed before this goes up. I don't think anything necessarily needs to change on the arrangement side, but I think more could have been done.

This is very close to a pass for me, so I hope you spend just a little more time on it, Mike. Keep hitting those WIP forums and try to enlist some of the production gurus' help for the finishing touchs.

NO (resubmit)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Rayman (Game Rip) - 10 "Betilla the Fairy"

Based on Palpable's breakdown (0:30-0:58, 1:41-1:55 & 2:12-3:50), that's about 140 out of 296 seconds of the track or about 47.3% of the track. Get it above 50% overt source tune usage and we'll be good. If there's something we're missing, please let me know.

Overall though, I wasn't quite feeling the production for the first :45 seconds. The mixing actually feels pretty dry, mostly on account of the layered claps having no body to 'em, and thus not filling out the space well. Definitely agreed with Palp's comments on the EQ being skewed to the highs, leaving things sounding a bit too hot as well as not well separated once things picked up.

The actual source interpretation is OK, but I agreed with Palpable that aside from some pretty standard building techniques for the genre (that were pulled off well, so no hate), the interpretation didn't really tread any new ground after 2:12. Though unrelated to the source, 3:51's material was good, clicked well with the preceding writing and made for a solid finish.

Maybe I'll be alone in this, but I felt like only a few source tune ideas were used here and not sufficiently developed due to too much retreading. Aside from the production suggestions, I'd actually like to hear the source tune taken given additional treatment and further interpretation. What in place already has some good interpretation, and the overall dynamics were good. But the actual melodic interpretation could use more substance on to really get this mix on solid ground. Cool stuff so far, Mike, definitely keep working on it.

NO (resubmit)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...