*NO* Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 'Winds of Hyrule'

[Liontamer]

ReMixer name - Strike911

Real name - Jason Koohi

Email address - jason@sanctuslegacy.com

Website - http://strike911.sanctuslegacy.com

Userid - 1293

Name of game(s) arranged - Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time

Name of individual song(s) arranged - Windmill Hut, Song of Storms

Your own comments about the mix - Definitely a trance mix, but when I make stuff, I want people to be able to groove to it, so I tried to give it an oldschool club/dance flavor too. My aim was to make something that would give people that feeling to just get on a dance floor and get down. I get emails about the remix almost daily as it somehow showed up on YouTube (I think in a couple of fanmade World of Warcraft tutorial videos). The next natural step was to submit it to OCR. I'm crossing my fingers. Thanks.

----------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.zophar.net/usf/lozusf.rar - 57 "Windmill Hut" (56 "Ocarina ~Song of Storms~")

Good fade-in intro to start things off. Transitioned into some trance buildup at :34. The synth design felt lackluster to be honest, but the overall energy was OK.

Good dropoff at 1:47 before changing up the beat pattern at 1:59. The bassline writing at 1:59 would have been drove the track nicely if the sound was more focused. Instead it sounded very faint in the back. And at 2:12 the countermelodic synth writing was also REALLY quiet and understated. You have to give kind of stuff more presence; those ideas would create unique textures with the source melody if you just punched them up more and provided that interplay.

2:25 was more of the same stuff with some slight changes/escalation in the support, before a more substantive changeup at 2:52. 3:19 went back to the core arrangement one more time with the saw lead. Even with some additional rhythmic changes, the melody just felt like more of the same. You don't need to do anything drastic, but you really could have used more variation on the lead when it came to the sound choice.

Pretty much all of your countermelodic writing is way too subtle, IMO, and it just makes the core of the arrangement seem to repetitive. Vary up the Song of Storms lead a bit more just to keep that part fresh, and punch up & focus some of the countermelodic writing so that it actually interacts with the melody.

Right now, Jason, you have a fairly solid arrangement here with some good dynamics in place, but you have a lot a minor weaker points to the mix that combined to drag things down and make the arrangement seem less substantive than it was. You don't need to change any of the writing or structure of the arrangement, IMO. You just need to refine these smaller issue to really get this clicking. Good luck with the rest of the vote. I'd definitely like to see this get posted in some form.

NO (refine/resubmit)

[DarkeSword]

Personally I think this is fine the way it is. You never linger too long on an idea but still give ample time to allow them to develop. The synth design isn't ground breaking or anything, but it creates a nice texture that gets the job done. I also really love the bits where you start gating the melody. Great job.

YES

[zircon]

I know it's nice to have dynamic contrast in any electronic piece, particularly trance, but the volume before :37 is incredibly quiet. I could barely hear anything up until that point, and when I checked my mixer I noticed I was listening at practically twice my normal volume level. Please turn that stuff up big time so it's actually audible! Once 1:05 kicks in, things are up to a pretty good volume level. I do feel like you could make things louder if you grabbed a plugin like TLS Maximizer or George Yohng's W1 Limiter to squeeze a couple extra decibels out of the master track.

In terms of synth and sound design, I have to be honest; things are pretty bland. This reminds me of blind's "Temple Trance", which was cool, but six years old at this point. Each sound choice is a trance staple, and there is a huge reliance on detuned saw sounds for all the different parts. Gating and arpeggiation are heavily relied on, both of which are also big cliches. I would have liked to hear some smooth, simple leads soaring above the mix, or perhaps acoustic instruments here and there. The lack of variation in the percussion was also disappointing. There were no special fills, no changes in rhythm or meter, no breakbeat loops or anything to really switch up from the textbook 4/4. The bass is also a pretty lo-fi sample playing a simple rhythm. I'd switch that up for something more interesting, in both sequencing and tone. Even a filtered square or 303 type sound would probably be more engaging.

The arrangement is OK, but not too adventurous - I think you could do much more interesting stuff with the melody than the repeated rhythmic variation you're doing now. If you don't want to change that, consider adding in a significant breakdown section to give yourself some melodic freedom. You might also replace the source melody at some point with a new melody, solo OVER the source melody, or perhaps change up the chord progression.

This most likely would have passed several years ago, but at the moment I feel like the production & arrangement are just not quite at our bar.

NO

[big giant circles]

Well, I have personally always felt kind of "meh" about this source tune. The thing is, it's really catchy initially, but pretty soon you realize that for all the song's worth, it may as well be 7 seconds long, because it just repeats over and over and over and over and over and...

Anyway, there's been lots of folks take a stab at trying to turn this diddy into an epic masterpiece, and I'm just skeptical that it'll ever happen.

That being said, I think this mix is executed well enough. I'm not going to rant about this being the sort of mix that throws the whole dang planet out of orbit (because it's not) and I do tend to agree with Andy that after hearing so much generic qualities in certain styles (in this case trance), you become a little unimpressed even if the song is executed just fine.

I think that's the case here. The song personally doesn't really excite me because it certainly does take the generic approach. It's not breaking new ground and, and it doesn't possesses some amazing element that captivates me and motivates me to play this song over and over and over and sit in awe. But the simple of it is, the song is enjoyable--nothing more, nothing less. The arrangement is probably about as much as we could expect when this source meets this style, and while it may not be record breaking, I guess it'll suffice as far as our bar goes.

I'm sure this'll be a long, drawn-out vote that boils down to personal interpretations by the various judges on what our standards are, and how predictable, cookie-cutter stuff stands with the bar, but I personally feel that it's not our place to require all songs or styles to break new ground at all times. I'd say the only time we might be totally justified in such a way would be if there were already a remix of the exact source, and it were in the exact same style, and otherwise going to be easily mistaken for the previous submission. Perhaps at that point, it would be fair to say "Well, this is aight and all, but it sounds dang near identical Hillbilly Rodeo complete with goats and all, and we've already got 4 remixes of that theme".

I think it's all we can do to ask:

"Is the song arranged well enough?" YES.

"Are there any fatal production flaws?" NO

"Will the song be generally enjoyed by the VGM fanbase?" YES

[Palpable]

The arrangement has been summed up pretty well already. Very generic sounds and structure, but good energy and a decent interpretation of the theme. I thought the intro didn't really add that much, and that it was too quiet, like zircon mentioned. The rhythmic changes in the melody were nice, but I would have liked to see some of the original writing take more of a lead role. What you have added is all background.

Production was fine too, though I think things could have been a little clearer. No big problem areas anywhere though.

In the end, my take on it is the same as BGC's. A couple problems here and there, but to me, no real reason why this shouldn't get passed. I'm not that excited about it but it's a good song, and I think it will have its fans.

YES

[Vig]

beginning is really cheap sounding, and too quiet. Too much reverb hiding the crappy accordion and tuba sounds; mechanical and boring sequencing.

The trance section is okay, in that it's polished, but the arrangement is...independent of the source material. It's a melody slapped on a generic trance vamp. This is well below the bar.

NO

[anosou]

I agree with previous judges about the quiet intro, it feels a bit drawn out and unnecessary. When it gets going it's pretty cool though. Nice build-up and energy right from the start. I like the 4/4 adaption, it didn't feel too forced, and I enjoyed the polysynth chords during the build-up.

Larry and Andy brought up some very valid points about the arrangement though. The same elements are always in the front playing mostly the same things which makes the song seem very repetitive. I hear you have some counter melodies and other ideas but you have to give these ideas more space. Try some changes in the bass too, keeping the same notes during the entire song just adds to how repetitive this sounds. Any kind of harmonic change would really help this track as it's using almost the same chordal structure throughout.

This mix also suffers from generic sounds like Andy said. These are the kind of presets that come with every subtractive synth known to man, they've passed their expiration date. Most modern trance have moved past these and instead found other interesting elements, maybe even real instruments, they add to the mix. Try some free samples of weird old synths, make your own patches or process some real instruments in a creative way. Some additional percussion and variations in the drumwriting wouldn't hurt either.

While the energy and general arrangement idea of this song is good, it gets old quickly. With just a couple of fixes, maybe some changes in sounds and additional harmony, this would be an easy pass. I'm also certain you would gain quite a few fans with this one In my opinion, it's just not above the bar yet because of how repetitive it sounds. I do believe this is a quite easy fix and I really would prefer a slightly improved version on OCR. You will thank me later. Good luck!

NO (resubmit)

[big giant circles]

This mix also suffers from generic sounds like Andy said. These are the kind of presets that come with every subtractive synth known to man, they've passed their expiration date. Most modern trance have moved past these and instead found other interesting elements, maybe even real instruments, they add to the mix. Try some free samples of weird old synths, make your own patches or process some real instruments in a creative way. This could help keep the remix from getting old quickly. Some additional percussion and variations in the drumwriting wouldn't hurt either.

Don't mean to sound like I'm picking on you, Anso, because I'm really just reiterating my feelings on the subject in general, but again, I don't feel like this is a totally fair/legitimate issue. If someone does a remix in the style of a song from the 80's or 60's, or heck, even classical, wouldn't it be like saying "uh, this style is old. try new stuff, dude."? feels like it would be the same thing in this case.

Not to sidetrack the vote, and I'm not adamant about getting it passed--those of you who feel it's a NO are fine to feel that way, but I do feel compelled to address this perspective, because it will certainly come up again in the future.

[Liontamer]

Don't mean to sound like I'm picking on you, Anso, because I'm really just reiterating my feelings on the subject in general, but again, I don't feel like this is a totally fair/legitimate issue. If someone does a remix in the style of a song from the 80's or 60's, or heck, even classical, wouldn't it be like saying "uh, this style is old. try new stuff, dude."? feels like it would be the same thing in this case.

Not to sidetrack the vote, and I'm not adamant about getting it passed--those of you who feel it's a NO are fine to feel that way, but I do feel compelled to address this perspective, because it will certainly come up again in the future.

I'm in the camp where I felt the production & balance choices and lack of variation in the sounds negatively affected the dynamics and execution of the arrangement enough to NO it. That's the only aspect where I'd hope more people would agree.

I don't think these sounds are below the bar, but I didn't feel they were produced in a particularly sophisticated way. It does sound vanilla, and I feel that's a valid criticism, even though I didn't cite it or agree with the others on that issue for this specific mix. But I think stronger execution with all of the sounds the same would be a much easier pass.

[anosou]

Don't mean to sound like I'm picking on you, Anso, because I'm really just reiterating my feelings on the subject in general, but again, I don't feel like this is a totally fair/legitimate issue. If someone does a remix in the style of a song from the 80's or 60's, or heck, even classical, wouldn't it be like saying "uh, this style is old. try new stuff, dude."? feels like it would be the same thing in this case.

Not to sidetrack the vote, and I'm not adamant about getting it passed--those of you who feel it's a NO are fine to feel that way, but I do feel compelled to address this perspective, because it will certainly come up again in the future.

I definitely don't feel like you're picking on me and I do understand your concern and I share it to some extent.. but then again I went with my gut here. Though the sounds were generic they were good, but as Larry said, they weren't produced in a sophisticated way. This remix sounds very repetitive and that's my main concern, the generic sounds and lack of changes in the harmony and general sound (try just clicking through the song) just adds to this sounding repetitive. Also, I tried to adapt to the standards, the part about common presets is valid here, even though it's not an extreme case it keeps the song from achieving it's fullest potential

• Overusing common presets, relying heavily on prerecorded loops, or employing nothing but basic tones or "chiptunes" is discouraged.

I'm still very borderline on this.. but generic sounds did help push this to the NO side. If you feel I'm way outta line on this one, please say so and I'm going to take some more time to maybe reconsider my vote. I did think it was a cool track.

[Palpable]

Don't mean to sound like I'm picking on you, Anso, because I'm really just reiterating my feelings on the subject in general, but again, I don't feel like this is a totally fair/legitimate issue. If someone does a remix in the style of a song from the 80's or 60's, or heck, even classical, wouldn't it be like saying "uh, this style is old. try new stuff, dude."? feels like it would be the same thing in this case.

Not to sidetrack the vote, and I'm not adamant about getting it passed--those of you who feel it's a NO are fine to feel that way, but I do feel compelled to address this perspective, because it will certainly come up again in the future.

There are certain styles that are difficult to make remixes in, not necessarily because we are against those styles, but more that our standards have some conflict with the style. Obviously something chiptune-sounding is going to have to really good to pass, and probably incorporate effects that were impossible to do on the original VG systems. Avant-garde can be tough because it has to incorporate the source recognizably. Anything very repetitive would probably get NOed, even though there is plenty of popular music that is very repetitive.

I can see using preset-y trance synths as a valid criticism on those terms. Sure, there's tons of trance out there that uses synths like that, but our standards have a small conflict. I like to leave it as a judgment call.

[zykO]

hmm

the trance parts of this are engaging but i am a little bias as to the source (i noticed BGC feels its a bit overrated... which it might actually be but still) so maybe that is why i enjoyed it.

however, what's with the lame intro? it's silent to the point of abuse. almost a minute of nothing before it finally starts to do anything. and all of a sudden there's TRANCE.

more importantly, i think vig said it best: the "arrangement" is basically the source melody lead slapped on top of a trance track. and then it goes round and round like the windmill hut itself. granted, that's neat and i like listening to it... but we have a bard to uphold and that is simply not enough.

as for the controversy on style and genre. i don't think we can knock this for being a straightup trance track... sure it's going to be static and undynamic in parts... not many trance tracks strike me as "dynamic" durin long stretches of em... however, this could have certainly been more creative in terms of arrangement and orchestration and that is where it ultimately fails. making something retro isn't enough to sink as that is an entirely subjective circumstnace.

NO

[big giant circles]

I definitely don't feel like you're picking on me and I do understand your concern and I share it to some extent.. but then again I went with my gut here. Though the sounds were generic they were good, but as Larry said, they weren't produced in a sophisticated way. This remix sounds very repetitive and that's my main concern, the generic sounds and lack of changes in the harmony and general sound (try just clicking through the song) just adds to this sounding repetitive. Also, I tried to adapt to the standards, the part about common presets is valid here, even though it's not an extreme case it keeps the song from achieving it's fullest potential

I'm still very borderline on this.. but generic sounds did help push this to the NO side. If you feel I'm way outta line on this one, please say so and I'm going to take some more time to maybe reconsider my vote. I did think it was a cool track.

Certainly not, bro. You're not out of line in any way. Again, I'm fine with the NO votes - as long as the point is valid. Sometimes though it's just good to elaborate further or better explain a particular criticism, which you totally did just now. I was just making sure the vote was based on something more in depth and legitimate than "this is an old style."

Definitely not singling you out. I think all the NO votes are valid. This is just one of those issues that comes up from time to time--often when dealing with trance.

Also, I h8 joo 4 n0t v0teing liek m3!!!!!1!!!11 <3

[CHz]

Windmill Hut's melody is one of my favorites of the entire Zelda series, and I like seeing what other people can do with it because chances are pretty good it'll turn out better than Windmill Hut did.

Okay, yeah, first the intro. I get the slow, soft buildup into the phatness and so forth, but this is both too slow and too soft. The arrangement is, well, it's a couple of licks from the melody repeated ad nauseam on top of the boom tiss, which isn't particularly special, to begin with as others have pointed out. It seems like this is what you were going for, and I'm not knocking you at all for doing it, but as far as OCR goes, I would like to see more done on the arrangement side. Better counterpoint (including beefing up what you've already got), varying the riffs more, bigger breaks that play more with the source, anything.

Production is a'ight. Generic sounds, sure, but you're not using them poorly or anything. I'd love things to be more distinctive in that area, but that's not really my problem here.

NO (resubmit)