Jump to content

Zelda: Link's Awakening 'Tal Tal Mountain Range'


Recommended Posts

Ok, this is my second attempt at the tal tal mountain range, this isn't finished yet, I am unsure whether to shorten the intro, as it is very long, and may stop it from getting past the judges panel due to there not being enough of the source.

Anyway, I hope you enjoy this, my tribute to my favorite Gameboy Game :)

rkhf

Also here is a video of the source tune off youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6PCFHzZ_Jg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your change to the Tal-Tal chord progression is a pretty nice idea. However, the intro definitely could be tightened a bit. Splitting up the melody like you did initially doesn't really sound that good. Your original additions and variations are pretty solid though, I have to say, including the solo material. You're on the right track though. My only suggestion would be to try to use more of the source that isn't the full, fast-paced melody... try doing it half-time for example, or just quoting parts of it.

Production stuff: I would reduce the portamento/legato on your first lead, slim down on the bass frequencies, and remove a good amount of reverb. The mix sounds kinda compressed and muddy in the lows right now. When everything picks up and the main melody comes in with the faster drums, the cymbals are too loud. In general the drumkit kinda seems weak, but it might just be overly processed (too much reverb.) The synth-guitar style lead later probably isn't bright enough, and has too much delay as well, though the tone is good.

Overall, production is your weakest area here. Focus on that, and you've got a good shot at a posted remix.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole instrumentation has sort of a 16-bit flavor (DKC on slow parts, Megaman on the fast). I love that, myself, but I'm afraid others might disrespect it.

Also, the repeat & fade is one of the weakest of all song ending types, you should write a proper ending to it.

Anyways, it's a great source material and you give it a style which both is different and fitting of the melody, which is the biggest compliment you can give an already good song.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I have done some changes -

Brought down bass frequencies

Added parts of the tal tal heights theme to the intro

Changed the breakdown section in the middle

Added an ending to the track

Removed some of the reverb on instruments

Changed the compession amounts.

rkhf

Link to post
Share on other sites
I liked it a lot. The most annoying thing is that almost everything is panned to the right. Seriously, why is so much panned to the right? My right ear is killing me now...

Are you sure? I listened to it on headphones before i posted it and it sounded fine panning-wise, and I have just double-checked the panning, I haven''t gone to extremes on either side :?.

I will change panning a little however, My first lead is panned right (only slightly), it could be that, I'll center it.

I'll also carry on work with bringing down the bass frequencies as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like your style.

The lead synth sounds monotonous, as if it was miked in the basement with bad gear. (Sorry, I don't know all the musical jargon.) Perhaps slightly detuning it or stereo separating it.

Other than that, the entire song sounds a bit muddy and in the low end, which has kind of a mushy sloppy sound. It's just production type things like Zircon said, keep working on those.

But yes, please keep working on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got bored. Listened. Got bored. And then it suddenly got great.

Some rhythms got a little repetitive, you could change them up, subtly.

Hats are a bit loud. Harmonic backing is a little low at times, you could raise it to provide actual backing and not just atmosphere. The 80's chords you've got in the bg at times might even work in the foreground as a "lead". Snare could punch through a little more, you could EQ a peak to it to get through some of the heavier backing. Kick gets lost easily, compress it a little harder, maybe give it a peak.

Overall, it's a little on the light side of balanced. Didn't hear the earlier version that according to zircon was muddy and had too much bass... well, this one ha stoo little. Fix that. You need more bass frequencies, boost 'em or drop some mids and high. I heard a bass in there, but it's kind'a high. You might want to add one, low volume, an octave down, only providing low-range frequencies.

Source is there.

Great stuff, but I'm not really surprised.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm honestly very impressed. I wasn't expecting a lot because the Gameboy track is... basically already a re-mix of the NES theme. So I was thinking "Huh, a remix of a remix, eh?" But really, great energy, great melodies. I'm digging it. I hope you pass the judges!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy damn this is awesome <3 I've never heard a Tal Tal Heights remix I didn't like, and this remix definitely continues the trend.

The beginning really feels like it drags on a bit too long, though. I can exactly pinpoint the moment the remix goes from 'decent' to 'flipping amazing' - 1:33. I feel like it would the remix good if you were to shorten that intro some and kick things into high gear much sooner. Other than that, I've got no complaints: this remix is pure badass.

I await your next update, yo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I must say that it's been a while since I've heard a recent Tal Tal Hights mix. As a casual listener, I'm impressed with your mix so far. Just to be fair, my first listenings (x6) were with my winamp graphic equalizer turned off, since I have a decent pair of ear-buds that sound great either way.

Like what those who've commented so far have said, the intro could do with a little compression of 10 to 30 seconds to get into the meat of the song a bit quicker, and it would be great if it could be done without losing or cutting the elements that are established there already. I particularly liked the section from 1:33 leading into the main melody, I nearly welled up into tears of excitement when hearing that. Kinda reminded me of some early 90s anime music, a good thing mind you.

My only other beef would be the drum set.... kinda sounds a little weak to me, maybe because the kick/bass drum doesn't have enough "Oomph" in my opinion. But then I kinda favor drums that literally kick the crap out of the lower frequencies anyway, but it may be different for everybody else.

Otherwise, great job, and keep it up.

EDIT: Something I'd like to suggest about the ending, you may want to consider having your lead (instrument) drop out a little earlier than the rest as the song fades out. Those mid-high frequency notes tend to persist a bit longer than needed compared to other elements.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys another update, its almost there now!

I have edited the intro. Shortened it and kept all the sections with a melody. I also added a snippet of the main theme in the intro.

I also faded out the final note of the melody end at the end quicker - that was a great idea

:)

rkhf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done. I'm happy you took my suggestions to heart. The ending sounds so much better. But that intro still needs a bit more work, but this may also be that I've been listening to your previous version like some 40 times up until this morning, so the new version's intro sounds like it flows a bit awkwardly now with the new snippet. I did come to fancy that small pause in the previous version just before the melody starts in. It does get one's heart going on that little bit of anticipation of what's to come. But that's at your option.

A smooth flow of notes is desirable for a slow intro, try not to let the sound (notes) "cut" too much, a sudden cut of a note is pretty noticeable, unless it's in the style of the song. Of course, a shorter intro doesn't leave much room for extra notes, so be careful on your use of space there, don't rush it, it's meant to be slow.

EDIT: Also an optional suggestion: that section I mentioned in the previous version (now located at 1:11- 1:17, and again at 3:19-3:25 and sprinkled throughout), the melody you used there, could you bring it out just a little more in the song? It just sounds SOOO good to my ears, it deserves better than staying in the background. Again, this is but an optional suggestion.

I wish you luck that these also appeal to the judging panel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Piano is a bit thin, it could use some more lows or mids. Even when it plays on top of the early rock stuff, I can hear how thin it is.

Lead drowns a bit in the rest of the stuff, give it a little volume... or add distortion/overdrive/something to it. Also, it faded out a bit too soon at 2:22, should have lasted/faded a little longer.

Before 3:33, the lead there could use some vibrato or something to make the sustained note interesting.

That's really all the crits I have. great stuff man.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I have sorted previous problems (piano EQ, vibrato etc)

Another thing I have remedied is the bass, Its was too high in the lows in my opinion, and was destracting me from the rest of the track.

I think people were happy with the bass as it was before, but I hope the bass is even better in other peoples views now, as it is in mine :)

rkhf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Too fast fade at 2:22, and the lead is a little too loud at times, but that's about it. No more help from me. For this track anyway.

Awesome work, man. Looking forward to seeing this on the front page. I advise you to check with a J before submitting tho, they might have some more crits.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't notice the differences at first, until I compared it to the previous version. I noticed you increased the treble to allow for a clearer sound, and the piano sounds a little brighter and fuller now. The backup harmonics and melodies are more noticeable, hats off for that, thanks.

I did my comparison by rapidly switching between the 2 versions while manually selecting sections to listen to, and this new version has lifted the haze that the previous versions suffered from, good job.

Now all you need to do is find a panel judge or two and have them look it over. I would also recommend that you include links to your previous versions from the beginning for comparisons to see if you have been evolving this song in the right direction. (That's also for my own curiosity too, since I've only seen the last 3 versions.) But I'm confident you've done well enough to be successful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoa! That IS a big difference. My ears certainly heard those low frequencies in your original version, certainly not for those who put heavy emphasis on the bass on their equalizers. I'm glad I caught this when I did, I'd have never heard all this goodness of the 4 versions I collected.

A word of advice on your next WIP song: allow the multiple versions to be heard along with whatever current version you are working on, so people can critique on all the steps taken up to your final version, for like a "Which version most appeals to you?" vote. You'll never know if the judges like a previous version better than the last. According to my count of links in this thread, this final version would be labeled as "version 6" in count.

So I thank you for posting the first version, and I'm glad I had a hand in helping you get this far. Good luck, and I look forward to listening to your future works.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I gotta disagree with Grr on the multiple candidates idea. I know I'm too lazy to listen for specific differences in tracks, even when I'm comparing source to conservative remixes. I know I think it's easier to listen to _one_ version, and providing specific feedback for that one instead of spending far more time on comparing different versions and noting the pros and cons with each. Granted, that kind of feedback could be very useful, but I think there'd be far less feedback that way.

I mean, it's easier to say (and to read) "it needs more bass" than "the bass in version A was too muddy and in B it was okay when tehre wasn't many other instruments around but it needs more punch when the whole thing gets started".

Also, multiple versions make the post longer, which makes it a bit daunting. As I see it, this can be daunting for listeners just looking for a track to comment on. A long post with a lot of links to different sources, different remixes, different version... they make the post look bad. Complicated.

This is how I tend to write my wip posts, tho I haven't made any in a while. I think the simplicity helps listeners. *ahem* My way:

What I think about it.

Link to remix

Link to source

Would be interesting to get a discussion started on this (and perhaps other wip forum-related things), but perhaps that should be its own thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...