Liontamer Posted August 3, 2008 Share Posted August 3, 2008 Contact Information * OA and Scaredsim * Andrew and Simon * Andrewluers@gmail.com * oceansend.com * 14963 and 20011 Submission Information * Gradius 3 * Cosmo Plant * Konami Kukeiha Club is the composer listed, it was arcade and SNES (probably more recognizable as SNES) * Link to the original soundtrack: http://snesmusic.org/v2/profile.php?profile=set&selected=14355 It is track 13. comments: OA: This was a DoD collab; I did the arrangement, drum programming, synth, and the second guitar solo, Simon did the rhythm guitars, the guitar leads and break near the beginning, and the piano intro. This is a "Simon mix" version, where he did the production; I had done the production from the actual competition. Simon: Simon did everything, OA only does the submitting work since I am too busy for such trivial things. ) --------------------------------------------------------------- I'm pretty familiar with the source. Protricity had a cover-ish WIP of this theme years ago that was pretty good. http://snesmusic.org/v2/download.php?spcNow=gd3 - "Cosmo Plant" (gd3-13.spc) Heard some light pops at :01, :03 & :08 during the piano intro. Felt like you lost a fraction of a second at 1:31 & 3:06, as the tempo seemingly messed up for a second; not sure what happened, as the DoD version didn't have those issues. What the hell was up with the guitar in the back from 2:53-2:55; resolved decently, but it just seemed like a huge sour spot there. Cover-ish, but aight. The first iteration of the source felt too straightforward melodically and should have displayed more interpretation. Even one of the backing guitars during the verses mimicks voice 3 of the SPC, albeit at a slower tempo. I liked everything else behind the melody though. The second iteration played with the theme with some slight alterations and embellishments, but that wasn't enough, IMO to make the whole thing feel interpretive enough. I don't mind if this passes as a strong cover. This was certainly a good genre adaptation, and I enjoyed it. The soloing was good too. But my gut's not feeling this all the way. To me, it could use more melodic interpretation. Good luck with the rest of the vote. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palpable Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 Very cool set of instruments. I liked the organ and piano giving subtle touches, the synth lead, and of course, Simon's guitars. It all worked together. I did think it was a pretty cover-ish arrangement like Larry but felt it had enough to differentiate it from the original. Piano flourishes in the intro, lots of fun messing with the synth after the first iteration. 0:26-1:30 is dangerously close to being verbatim, with the bass also mimicking the original, but the new backing instruments and drums give these sections some flair. However, if it had all been like this, it would have been a NO, easily. 3:07-3:29 felt a tad empty but that's a pretty small problem. Ending cuts off pretty bad and I think that should be fixed. Production is solid, wouldn't expect any less from you guys. The crunchy background guitars might be a tad muted - I think that's why 3:07-3:29 sounds so empty. Giving them a little more high-end could have given this some more bite. Whatever. Nice job here, guys. YES (conditional on ending) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anosou Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 Some audible pops in the beginning as Larry said, I mainly heard the one at :01. Also the strange glitch at 3:06 has got to go, what's up with that? Might be a miss in the bassdrum (a 32nd note the wrong way) but it sounds very off. Didn't think 1:31 was an issue though. Production is good enough even though I think the guitars could've been given a volume push/EQ fix and the hi-hats some additional high frequencies. Especially the guitars since they're such a vital part of the mix. Ending cut-off ain't that bad but it could fade better. Arrangement is a tricky one. It IS close to the original. I think I have to agree with Vinnie though, the arrangement is borderline cover but I think it's safe enough to pass. The drums and sections after 1:30 is enough to keep it from being a straight cover. Didn't have a big problem with 2:55. However 3:10-3:14 had some awkward stuttering in the solo that could've been handled better, especially since it's sequenced. Legato man, legato. That's minor though However, I would like you to fix the pops, 3:06, ending and perhaps fiddle a BIT with the guitars to make the soundscape a bit fuller. I'd feel that would give it the push the mix needs to really outweigh the slightly coverish arrangement and it's easier than changing the arrangement. So. YES(conditional) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zykO Posted August 24, 2008 Share Posted August 24, 2008 hey congratulations on the 3rd place tie! this is awfully close to being a cover but it's just barely different enough to be alright.there is clearly stuff done here that changes it up but since it isn't a problem for many of us, then it isn't a problem. the production needs a little help on the guitars which are played beautifully but need a little more push on the rythm volumes. the ending is a bit abrupt but i'm not gonna ask you to change it, just know that it is YEScond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big giant circles Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 can we get this one J-hosted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted September 17, 2008 Author Share Posted September 17, 2008 can we get this one J-hosted? Updated the first post. Whether or not I post an FTPed link in the actual thread, the sub will always be on the FTP, so check the folder to make sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big giant circles Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 There's no *glitch* in the tempo at 3:06, if you tap the tempo alongside it, you'll hear that it's fine. However, after slowing the tempo down a ton, I think there's a particular snare hit that's about 1/32nd of a beat too late, and it's causing that anomaly that we're all hearing. Not a big deal to me, personally. The production on this one is spot on. It'd be great to get a version without those pops at the very beginning, they're pretty exposed with just the piano. The arrangement is going to be the tricky spot here. I guess I'll need to do a play-by-play here. 0:00 - 1:31 is entirely a cover. It's in a different key, and there's a couple extra measures thrown in for good, well, measure. But otherwise, The melody is practically verbatim. 1:31 - 1:51 brings in some original work. 1:51-2:01 references the intro of the source. 2:01-2:43 continue with the source, but but with a bit more improvisation in the melody. The progression is still identical, though. 2:43-3:06 is very verbatim again, however there is some counter-melodic stuff going on behind the lead synth with the backing lead guitar. 3:06-3:29 is original stuff. 3:29-3:50 tempo slows down, and minus the one reference to the source intro riff again, is all original stuff. All in all, without breaking out the stop watch, I'd say that at least half of the track is just about verbatim melodically. I really think if the progression had been varied up a bit more then the issue probably wouldn't have been brought up. However, despite the melody and the general song progression being as close as they are, there's obviously been some additional compositions done by Andrew and Simon. The drum programming is really solid, and the guitar performances are strong too. I think there was a bit of portamento/mono-lead abuse here, and I'm personally not big on leaving mono on for an entire song, but that's just personal preference. Also, the ending didn't bother me at all. I've passed songs that seem coverish before (and even have one such posted on the site myself) and as long as the supporting instrumentation and partwriting justifies the closeness to the melody, then I'm ok with it. This has some solid backing guitar work, some great drums, and the organ, synth, and guitar playing off each other are IMO the (barely) redeeming qualities as far as OCR guidelines go. Great sounding track, guys! YES (borderline) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big giant circles Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 However, I would like you to fix the pops, 3:06, ending and perhaps fiddle a BIT with the guitars to make the soundscape a bit fuller. I'd feel that would give it the push the mix needs to really outweigh the slightly coverish arrangement and it's easier than changing the arrangement. Also, I think this is honestly a bit much to ask for in a "conditional" vote. Rewriting/recording additional guitar work is more of a "NO, resubmit" kind of thing, IMHO. Plus, regarding that section, I'm pretty sure the dropout of instrumentation was intentional to give the track a bit of dynamic contrast. The rest of the soundscape was pretty full, I'd say. I personally don't see the need to require them to have a full soundscape there as well. Just my opinion anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted October 5, 2008 Author Share Posted October 5, 2008 Also, I think this is honestly a bit much to ask for in a "conditional" vote. Rewriting/recording additional guitar work is more of a "NO, resubmit" kind of thing, IMHO. Plus, regarding that section, I'm pretty sure the dropout of instrumentation was intentional to give the track a bit of dynamic contrast. The rest of the soundscape was pretty full, I'd say. I personally don't see the need to require them to have a full soundscape there as well. Just my opinion anyway. No opinion either way on the guitar issue AnSo had, but based on his vote, he just sounded like he wanted volume tweaked, not re-recording anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anosou Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 Also, I think this is honestly a bit much to ask for in a "conditional" vote. Rewriting/recording additional guitar work is more of a "NO, resubmit" kind of thing, IMHO. Plus, regarding that section, I'm pretty sure the dropout of instrumentation was intentional to give the track a bit of dynamic contrast. The rest of the soundscape was pretty full, I'd say. I personally don't see the need to require them to have a full soundscape there as well. Just my opinion anyway. Never said anything about the guitar playing or arrangement of the guitar, I was only critizing how buried/muddy it was compared to everything else (especially the lead synth). Didn't mention a specific section either, I think the guitar is buried pretty much all the way through. zyko said the same thing about the rhythm guitars needing that extra push.. Are we talking about the same thing Jimmy? So yeah, conditional on the additional EQ/volume push and if possible, some of the audible pops (during the intro for example). I was wrong about 3:06 being a glitch, still bugs me but I guess I can jive with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big giant circles Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 My bad, I must have misinterpreted the part about fiddling with the guitars to fill out the soundscape. It's coo. Or wait a second, are you trying to find a cheap way to say that this remix needs "another soundscape"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anosou Posted October 5, 2008 Share Posted October 5, 2008 My bad, I must have misinterpreted the part about fiddling with the guitars to fill out the soundscape. It's coo. Or wait a second, are you trying to find a cheap way to say that this remix needs "another soundscape"? aah, it's cool. btw this remix totally needs another soundscape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcos Posted October 10, 2008 Share Posted October 10, 2008 The guitar sounds a bit muddy in itself, apart from that everything else sounds great. Having listened to the source and the mix several times, this just seems too much like a cover for me to pass it, and that is my main issue here. Needs more original elements. NO (Resub) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkeSword Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 I think the part-writing is pretty great here. You guys are saying it's coverish, but I feel like it's got a different feel due to the backing rhythms and stuff. I like it. It's got a nice sound and great construction. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zircon Posted November 2, 2008 Share Posted November 2, 2008 Lemme start with production... drums sound nice, as do guitars and synths. My only issues were the fairly quiet rhythm guitars, synth lead being a tad loud, cymbals being slightly too loud, and slightly weak compression on the master track. I wouldn't mind those issues being touched up. However, production IS fairly solid overall. On the arrangement end, I have to say this does feel a bit too close to the original. In some ways the energy level almost feels a little lower, maybe because of the sounds or mixing, I'm not sure. However, it really doesn't change the style nor does it take any major risks with any of the other aspects of the songs, instead sticking pretty close to the same chords, voicings, rhythms, etc. With more interpretation this would definitely be stronger. The verbatim melody usage wouldn't have been a big deal if more elements were changed, but it's already very similar to the original in terms of the mood and feel too. NO, resub Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vig Posted November 26, 2008 Share Posted November 26, 2008 forgive my procrastination on this one. June was an asslong time ago. The piano intro didn't impress me...somewhat mechanical sequencing. Once the energy cranks up, the track becomes a lot more fun. I have to say it's in no way groundbreaking, but at the same time I can't really find any serious fault in the production. I'm going to go along with andy and malcos in saying that the arrangement is a bit too straightforward. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted December 6, 2008 Author Share Posted December 6, 2008 Yo, has that resub I sent you several months back hit the panel? Simon was wondering why the song says *resub* but no resolution. No huge rush; I talked to Cain and he wasn't sure what was up with it. Hahaha! Of course Cain wouldn't know what was up with it. Neither would 'Ili. You guys are the last two, so get your votes in, beyotches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishy Posted December 27, 2008 Share Posted December 27, 2008 Apologies for the late vote. I suck. Had a read through yonder thread, and whilst it is coverish at times, I think the small scale modifications are enough to carry it. The ending is a bit strange, but there's enough conditional votes on that already. Lovely synth solos, and a bit o' shred near the end for good measure. Production is pretty solid, though I feel like I've heard this drum kit somewhere before . Bottom line, if you were to fix up all the little things for those conditional votes, all my issues would be gone, so; YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHz Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 Yup, Fishy definitely sucks, no question (sorry) Anyway letting this go two months without a closing vote is inordinately embarrassing for myself so let's get this over with. (sorry) Pretty coverish, though the interpretation in the intro and 2:01 section and the additional and original writing are enough arrangement. Production is alright, pops in the intro but I didn't think they were that bad, louder rhythm guitar would give the track a bit more punch but the energy level is good as is. No major issues, here is a vastly overdue final SORRY (yes) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts