Liontamer Posted April 18, 2009 Share Posted April 18, 2009 Link to mix: Note: This mix is part of the Final Fantasy 4 Arrange Project - Echoes of Betrayal, Light of Redemption. Please to not post until after the project is release if the submission is approved by the Judges. Thanks! Contact Information: * Remixer Name - Level 99 * Real Name - Stevo Bortz * Email Address - Level99RemixTeam@gmail.com * Website - none existing right now * User ID - 13318 Submission Information: * Games Arranged - Final Fantasy 4 (Final Fantasy 4 JAP SNES) * Individual Song Arranged - Dancing Calcobrena * Composer information and original soundtrack already available on OCRemix.org * Notes about the mix: This is my remix of Dancing Calcobrena from FF4 for the FF4 arrange project. It took me about 10 months of ongoing (and not-so-ongoing) work to get nailed down, thanks in large part to OA and Avaris constantly getting on my back to push the writing as far as I could possibly take it. I honestly don't know what was going through my head in terms of inspiration when I worked on the musical theme and ambience for this mix, so I'll say in large part that I wanted a more epic-love-making-meets-almost-phil-collins-style song. And so, after making that terrible phrase, I'll let the song speak for itself. ----------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.zophar.net/download_file/9797 - (36) "Dancing Calobrena" Well, the source tune is only 26 seconds, but at a brisk pace, so there's a lot of room for expansion. Opened up with some original writing with some cameos of the source quietly in the background. Still, quite a lot of noodling until finally getting to the heart of the arrangement. Source kicked in at 1:34. I know it was going for a dour vibe, but melodically, it felt flat. I'd appreciate some more opinions on that. The mixing during the chorus at 2:00 felt odd. Everything was very distant. During the soloing at 2:56, the leads seemed further away than the percussion. 3:24-3:38 did some liberal stuff that wasn't quite the source, but I saw what you were generally going for. You did use the source tune in a lot of unconventional ways. Going for the breakdown, you needed 148 seconds' worth to be over 50% and I had 146 seconds of overt usage: :13-:17, :34.5-:38, 1:16-1:25, 1:34-1:38, 1:42-1:46, 1:49-1:53, 1:56-2:26.75, 2:28-2:56 (18 secs worth), 2:59.5-3:00.5, 3:24.25-3:31.5, 3:35-3:36.5, 3:52-4:13, 4:17-4:19, 4:20-4:56 Even though I'd sign off on the arrangement being kosher with a few more seconds of source (I'm not as is), I thought the overall arrangement, while creative, was generally too liberal and could use some additional source elements to ground it. The extended, 90%-original intro could use some more references to the source, for example. The arrangement concerns could be addressed fairly easily; the production may be a little tougher. I'd like to hear some more opinions on the mixing/sound balance, but after refining those issues, this could be good to go. NO (resubmit) EDIT (6/9): Having heard a more recent mixing by audio fidelity, the production definitely sounds better and thus passable. I still can't YES it based on the arrangement, and agreed with AnSo regarding the guitar tone, even though I could easily live with that. The only issue I'd need addressed is something to bump the source usage over the top. Rather than teeter over the line with 2 seconds, I'd recommend some sort of backing part or decent sized reference that could easily be inserted into the intro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palpable Posted April 19, 2009 Share Posted April 19, 2009 Definitely an unexpected way to take this material. I misread the title and thought it was "Calcobrena AND a Night of Dinner of Dancing", then expected something like a flamenco, which the material would lend itself well to IMO. But that's neither here nor there. This is yeah, dour. Guitar noodling was pretty cool, and I liked the general vibe, but there were issues. 1:31 was a point where I thought it would build more than it did, and then again at 2:00, the drums were distant and soft, didn't build enough. Was strange to hear the same light drum pattern at 2:56, where there was more energy. I think the mix could use more elements that stand out, including the elements you've already got in the song. Fixing the mixing will help but I'd like to see more elements added too. The intro is pretty but a little samey after 2:30 of pretty much the same thing. That's half the song. With respect to the source material, you're probably close enough to the line that I'd call it in your favor. Would certainly help to have more of a connection in the intro. I do like what you've got so far, but I think it needs more love. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anosou Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 I'll be short because most issues have been pointed out. You could definitely afford to use the source some more, especially in the intro. Mixing is unbalanced and lacks energy. The guitar tone was a bit flat and lacked presence. Some additional elements in the mix, perhaps using parts of the source, would help. This needs some more TLC to pass, sorry man. EDIT: Heard the re-mastered version. The production is good now. Guitar tone was still a bit flat and you could afford to make it a bit more dynamic volume-wise but everything sounds clear and full. Arrangement still needs polish. NO(resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts