OCR01976 - *YES* Unreal Tournament 'Forgone Rejuvenation'

[Liontamer]

Contact Information

ReMixer name: Phr4kture

Real name: Nafeu Nasir

Email address: mythic47@hotmail.com

Website: www.soundclick.com/djfrakture

Userid: 23228

Name of game arranged: Unreal Tournament

Name of individual song arranged: Foregone Destruction

Additional information: Forgone Destruction was composed by

Michiel Van Den Bos for levels in the original

Unreal Tournament such as CTF - Facing Worlds.

Link to the original soundtrack: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EDw9oIeiF8

Comments: Forgone Destruction is a track that makes me very nostalgic.

Its very influencal to my musical taste and style aswell.

This remix is a show of appreciation I have for the track

ENJOY!

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

Unreal Tournament OSV - "Foregone Destruction"

Awesome track, and I remember Phr4kture's name from zircon's Antigravity remixing contest.

However...

This sounds like you made an actual remix sampling the original track (and thus not a ReMix), since this was clearly using the original MOD as the basis of the track.

Taking the original game audio and simply adding drum loops or using an existing MIDI file and assigning new instruments does not qualify as substantial or original arrangement.

Obviously that oversimplifies the effort put into this one. The jist though is that we don't accept remixes done using the original game audio, expertly manipulated or not, as the core of the track. 5:03-5:16 had the right idea in that you have to rebuild the source tune from the ground up with your own sounds and then work from there with the interpretation. Killer remix--and one you should send to Michiel Van Den Bos right away if you can track him down--but it's outside the scope of what we accept.

NO Override

[big giant circles]

I'm looking into this. I'm not entirely certain it's a N.O. Stand by.

[Palpable]

Argh. Double argh. I adore this track and I am definitely keeping this. One of the best songs I've ever said NO to. But yes, it samples the original track for the three-note riff. The eighth-note riff that plays constantly also sounds exactly like the original, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was just recreated, since the notes change later. It's a pretty simple instrument.

Can we discuss this on IRC before canning it though? I want to get a better understanding of what we allow in terms of sampling the original song. I don't see sampling vs. recreating a sound as being that different, but I get the sense that sampling is a big flag for us while recreating an instrument isn't. If there was a song that had a guitar part and someone played the guitar part nearly identical to the original (and changed everything else about the song) would we NO OVERRIDE it? (I think the song is still a NO because it's not very interpretative until the breakdown. I just want to NO it for the right reasons. )

[Liontamer]

Argh. Double argh. I adore this track and I am definitely keeping this. One of the best songs I've ever said NO to. But yes, it samples the original track for the three-note riff. The eighth-note riff that plays constantly also sounds exactly like the original, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was just recreated, since the notes change later. It's a pretty simple instrument.

Can we discuss this on IRC before canning it though? I want to get a better understanding of what we allow in terms of sampling the original song. I don't see sampling vs. recreating a sound as being that different, but I get the sense that sampling is a big flag for us while recreating an instrument isn't. If there was a song that had a guitar part and someone played the guitar part nearly identical to the original (and changed everything else about the song) would we NO OVERRIDE it? (I think the song is still a NO because it's not very interpretative until the breakdown. I just want to NO it for the right reasons. )

You have to create your own sounds and those sounds need to sound distinct enough/unique enough from the original to stand on their own. Even if everything using the source tune was recreated from the ground up here, he might as well have used the MOD, since the sounds and even some of the effects would have been copied to ape the original. The same way if someone wrote their own NSF and made the Mario "Overworld BGM" as close to the original as possible, they might as well have not made it. I'm not trying to sound absolutist about it, but the opening of this track seemingly gives away that it's sampled. Definitely open to more POVs or I wouldn't have paneled this and asked for confirmation.

[big giant circles]

Alright, so I'm not positive that it qualifies as a N.O. The original source tune is ~168 BMP, and the remix is 135. So I timestretched the source down to the same tempo and meticulously compared the two. Here's some samples:

LINK

I noticed that if he is using a straight (timestretched) sampled loop from the source that the pad is not audible. I ran a LP filter and did my best to remove it from the source--here's what I came up with

LINK

If you compare the "very original loop" to the "foregone source 135 loop", you'll notice that the pad is still audible, albeit much less noticeable. If you compare the filtered source loop to Nafeu's remix, you'll notice that the pad had been entirely removed.

Yet another comparison is the timbre of the main synth riff. It sounds like a simple sinewave, but I actually programmed the riff into the FL 3OSC using only a sinewave, and it's not a perfect fit, so he may be using another synth there. However, that's not the main point. If you compare the two riffs together side by side, you will notice an OBVIOUS difference in the sound of the two. Yes, they are very similar, but they're definitely not exact.

LINK

Also, you'll notice the attack on Nafeu's synth has a subtle "clicking" sound, but the source lacks this, that also suggests he's not using a ripped loop.

Finally, the delay on the chimes/piano playing the three chords. In the source, there is a one-beat delay where the feedback lands on the right side. I compared this to the remix, and there is entirely different delay, even timed differently.

LINK

I do realize just how close they sound, but it's not always impossible to recreate a synth sound or use the same preset that even a game might use.

All that being said now, this mix is freaking cool. The original tune has a very distinct DnB main drum loop, and high hat loop. I didn't hear either in the remix. As far as I can tell, he did everything in the mix manually. Considering the repetitive and minimalistic nature of the source tune, this is a phenomenal remix. It's progressive, production is tight, and it's got a lot of energy.

For the sake of things, I do think it would be a good idea to simply contact Nafeu and ask him if he sampled the source, but honestly, even if he did, I've pointed out that it's been altered enough that despite sounding similar, it's obviously not exact because

-pads have been completely removed

-delay is altogether different

-timbre of main synth is different

-tempo has been substantially altered

Let's ask him. If he says yes, he did in fact sample the source, just get him to recreate the loop by hand, it should not be hard at all. On the condition that he's not sampled the source,

a solid YES

[Liontamer]

We'll definitely contact the mixer to find out more, but if he had the original MOD file (and that is out there because I used to have it), he probably wouldn't need to timestretch stuff. He could deconstruct it however he wanted and do new effects, same as sampling an NSF or SPC.

[Palpable]

Alright, thought about this one a little bit more after what was said in IRC. The part of the standards that references sampling is sort of confusing. As Jimmy points out, the instruments may not be directly sampled, they may just sound very similar. And we've passed songs that sample before. This isn't just the original audio with drums, so I don't think NO OVERRIDE applies. In this case, the instruments sounding similar simply makes the arrangement more conservative.

Now then. The first half of this song absolutely relies on the two main riffs, kept intact with some slight processing on them. There are a lot of subtle background instruments that are added, new tempo, new beat, but by and large, I felt it was very conservative. None of the new parts take the lead or offer much interpretation. They just back up the intact parts of the original.

At the breakdown and after, it gets more interesting. There you get some chord and structural variation, and the eighth-note synth riff changes. I think this is pretty solid, interpretation-wise. But it's about half the song.

I'm sticking with NO, but I think it's a closer call than I originally assumed. Wouldn't fault anyone for going YES.

NO

Edit (11/26): Vote changed, see next page.

[big giant circles]

I emailed Nafeu. Hopefully he'll get back quickly.

I reiterate that if there was in fact no direct sampling, that this is a solid YES from me. I mentioned that if he did direct sample that it would be in his best interest to take a few minutes and rework/replace those samples with original sounds, so we may have to put this one on HOLD if that's the case.

[big giant circles]

Hey BGC, thx for informing be about this,

I do have access to the original mod file but the only thing i sampled from the original song are the chimes at the very beginning (the first 3 notes you hear played are the samples I used throughout the rest of the song) . The sine wave lead I created from scratch after hearing the original track itself, and every other element of the song was self produced. If this still is some sort of violation I'd have to wait until the weekend or maybe even later because I have been busy with many things.

Thank you for your complements and I hope we can come to some solution about my remix.

Unfortunately, yes, we'd need you to redo the chimes. Don't worry about it if you can't get to it immediately, but if you can get it back to us by the end of the month or so, that would be great. I'll go ahead and put a HOLD on your remix, and we'll resume judging when you get me the updated version. Also, make sure that the file size is absolutely no larger than 6 MB.

Let's go ahead and pause this one until he can get us the updated version, which shouldn't take too long since he's only replacing one sample.

[big giant circles]

Aight, so after chatting with Dave, he pointed out that it's not explicitly against policy to have a song that has direct samples in it, as long as it is kept to a tight minimum. Since the amount of sampling is limited to just the three chimes in the source, I'm going to go ahead and confirm that my vote is a

YES

Why? The production is excellent. Vinnie's concern is that the arrangement is too conservative, but seeing as the source is more of a groove-oriented track than a melody/riff oriented track, I'd say the amount of expansion was perfect. The pads have been adapted, but maintain an identifiable connection to the original. He's added arpeggios and altered the bass line which IMO reflect expansion from the original. And what's more, is he's done a great job of pulling off a nearly 7-minute track without it losing energy or focus.

Solid piece.

[Liontamer]

Even The Final Summoning came up for Lockdown 1250, and was a direct post, so that's not really cut and dry. Not sure it would have made it through the panel back in '03, and while I voted to keep it for Lockdown, I wouldn't approve it as a submission on the panel, because the direct sampling was too integral to connecting the mix to the original.

That being said, haven't heard anything in the mix that shakes me off of a NO. The lead being that identical to the source and the overall instrumentation having such similarities wasn't offset by the new material. That's not to say I didn't think this was a great track.

NO

[anosou]

First and foremost I didn't think direct sampling was an issue here since it was both altered at times and such a small part of the track.

Production is obviously excellent! Everything sounds even in levels and creative effects have been put to good use. The bitcrushing on the drums from time to time is great for example.

Regarding the arrangement, I think Jimmy has a good point here. There is a sufficient ammount of expansion from the original, especially considering how the original is very groove-based. There is clever drum sequencing all over the track and not just a rip from the originals DnB drums. The original synth part at 0:56-> is great and reminds me of Andy's Mindbender. More counter-melodies at 1:52 and onwards. At around 2:36 the three-note chime pattern is arranged together with some additional counter-melodies from a square synth at 2:50. The main riff is arranged heavily with the new chords at 4:18.

I mean, all that doesn't qualify as enough arrangement? Even if it's not the boldest arrangment because of the track's length and similarity in style to the original it's outweighed, in my opinion, by the stellar production, dynamic and never repetitive arrangement (break at 3:18 sent chills down my spine) and overall clever treatment of the source. A tough call for sure though.. In my opinion, this might be borderline but it's a borderline yes.

Great work Nafeu, I'm looking forward to hearing more (perhaps a little more interpretive) remixes from you!

YES(borderline)

[Palpable]

OK, I've done a LOT of thinking on this song, quite likely more than on any other song I've judged. After hearing the points of view in this thread and seeing Dave's decision that the sampling was not strictly against guidelines, I'm switching my vote. To come to this decision made me really rethink what OCR should be about, not necessarily what it is. Looking at precedent, there isn't a single song that uses sampling as prominently as this song does. It was on this basis that I said NO very quickly, but once I thought about it, there shouldn't be an inherent problem with sampling. It just makes the remix closer to the original.

The song seemed very conservative to me for a while because I got stuck on the fact that the melodies had not changed. It seemed more like a remix in the DJ sense rather than an arrangement. But a remix CAN be an arrangement - it just depends how much has changed. In this song, a lot has changed. The remixer took the two main melodies, put effects on them, and crafted a completely new soundscape behind them, also changing the song's structure. The second half has even more changes than that.

I think passing this definitely sets a new precedent, and anyone who says YES should be aware of that. But I also think it opens up avenues we should open.

YES

[Vig]

I'd like to point out that this remix is even cooler when you play the original in the background.

In general, I'm very liberal with regard to what types of material usage I think should be allowed on the site. Even so, this remix makes me a bit uneasy.

1. It samples directly the most recognizable element of the original, and maintains it as the most central element to the tune.

2. The feel of the tune is similar, even though the tempo is not.

3. Arrangement-wise, this tune can come across as an update of the original.

However, I feel like the third concern is one I can look past, because the nature of the tune is very atmospheric, and within those bounds, there is an ample amount of new material, and there are plenty of original ideas.

Obviously the quality of this remix is fantastic. I'm inclined to votes YES because even though there's direct sampling and a similar vibe, there is plenty of creativity here, and the execution is fantastic. The main reason we have been so nervous about direct sampling in the past is that it has often been a crutch for weak remixes. I think we can all agree that is not the case here.

The use of samples from the original does not inherently make a remix unoriginal; there has simply been a strong correlation between the two. To disqualify this tune because of its direct sampling would be to miss the forest for the trees.

Passing this tune is the right decision, but you would all be wise to make note that doing so will set new precedent, and we should not allow this to open the flood gates for lesser remixes.

YES

[Fishy]

I think there's a beautiful irony in this remix. djp coined the term ReMix to mean arrangement, and yet this is probably the most perfect example of a typical remix that you would normally get, and it almost go a no override .

Production is flawless. Moving on.

This is certainly a total groove mauling on behalf of Nafeu. Beats are relentless, with some nice sample reversing, and even a bit of bit crushing :3. The chords are there, but with their own brand new soundscape. The 3:34 section was particularly nice. I agree with my fellow J's that all the small riff/beat/pad changes should constitute as at least minimal passable interpretation, especially when the production is as amazing as it is, and I think that this is a precedent that could and should be set. Note well that there must be a lot of small scale interpretation, imo.

This is the kind of remix that UT players dream of for their noob-raping playlists.

YES

[Palpable]

Moving to Accepted since djp gave it the ok a while back.