Liontamer Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 The artist has already talked to djp about the dual name request and realizes we don't do it, so disregard that stuff - LT http://www.e-concerto.net/scrapzonegoa.mp3 Contact Information * Your ReMixer name - Goa Vortex (AKA Electric Concerto) * Your real name - Jeffery Blaisdell * Your email address - goavortex@gmail.com * Your website - http://www.myspace.com/goavortex * Your userid - 14517 Submission Information * Name of game(s) arranged - Sonic the Hedgehog (Genesis) * Name of individual song(s) arranged - Scrap Brain Zone * Your own comments about the mix, for example the inspiration behind it, how it was made, etc. Hello, pleasure to submit another ReMix. As you can see, I'm submitting this under Goa Vortex instead of Electric Concerto. The reasoning behind this is so that I can keep my genres separate, Electric Concerto being Euro Trance and Goa Vortex being, well, Goa Trance. That said, I wanted to work on and expand on my Goa skills so I decided to remix a classic, Scrap Brain Zone, in which I could incorporate those skills and hopefully learn from. I hope you enjoy! PS. I have the bandwidth, go ahead and leave the link if you can. -------------------------------------------------------------- http://project2612.org/download.php?id=36 - "Scrap Brain Zone" The way the melody's arranged at :27 isn't earbreak, but it still doesn't sound very melodious and comes off as changing the melody for the sake of not having it be verbatim; it just doesn't work at all. 1:21-2:03 and 2:17-2:44 handled the source's verse, and things were a bit more cohesive there, though much of the benefit was from keeping the melody verbatim. The arrangement of the bridge was cool as a transition section from 2:44-2:58, but IMO overstayed the welcome from 2:58-3:11; I would have changed up the direction of the track at 2:58. Interesting break at 3:27, serving as the first piece of the puzzle for 3:43's fuller section going back to the source verse. 4:06 brought back the groove. The countermelody sounded kind of off to me when paired with the melody from 5:14-5:55, but I'd appreciate another opinion there. Not the notes, but how syrupy it sounded didn't fit the mood. Had to give this one a number of listens so I could get accustomed to the track and give it an even-handed call. There was nothing absurdly wrong here; I'm generally liking what's in place even though the track could stand to be trimmed here and there. The processing and effects employed were a bit on the generic/bland side and could sound more unique. But if anything, I'd say make the parts based on the chorus more melodic, and make the parts based on the verse more interpretive and this would be in much better shape. You don't have to overhaul the structure, but I think it'd be worth it to see what you could do to refine this, Jeffrey. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcos Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 The production on this mix is very good - the issues I have with this mix are to do with the arrangement. At 0.27 the changes to the melody sound wrong, perhaps adding original melodies would have been better. This happens several times in the mix. This would have been a yes had it not been for the changes to the original melody - it just does not sound right. The lead parts need to be re-worked. Everything else was there. NO (Good candidate for resubmission) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anosou Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Is that Juicer II? I think it is :3 I have to agree with the other judges regarding the melodic changes. If you arranged them more to fit your chords and the mood it would probably sound a lot better. Experiment with alterations of the melody until you find that perfect fit. I enjoyed the breakdown at 3:27 a lot. Very cool. I also agree with Larry about the counter-melody at 5:14, it doesn't really fit with the rest of the track and it's most certainly not goa trance if that's what you're after Production-wise I think you're over the bar. I still have some stuff you might want to consider reworking to really make this shine. The leads lack punch and that hurts their ability to carry the track melodically, and that's exactly what this track needs. Also, the automation on some of the synths (bass at 2:43 and onwards for example) is a bit over the top. Maybe tone it down when it's coupled with other instruments and turn it up only for breaks like 2:43. All these crazy synths can easily make it sound cluttered when they're this many and fighting over roughly the same frequencies. Check out the band Total Eclipse, especially the album Violent Relaxation (CD1) for some wicked goa and pointers on how to make the soundscape interesting without making it cluttered. As it is now, the melodic part of the arrangement isn't quite there yet. It would probably have a chance of passing if you improve the arrangement only but I know some production touch-ups can take this to the next level so I urge you to at least try. Remember to save often! NO(resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts