Sign in to follow this  
Palpable

OCR01971 - *YES* Langrisser 2 'The Prophecy of Alhazard'

Recommended Posts

Remixer: Dr. Manhattan (userID : 23236) & Scaredsim (userID : 20011)

Submission information:

Game arranged: Langrisser II

Songs arranged: Knight’s Errand, One’s Side

Source material: http://www.project2612.org/details.php?id=72

Thanks!

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

,

I was going to let this one marinate because it's absolutely badass, but I think I already know which way I'm going on this. With the melody, structure, and even sometimes backing guitars and drums following the original closely, this feels like a cover to me. There's one section in the middle that bridges the two songs where you guys solo over the opening on One's Side, but otherwise, it's pretty conservative. I can hear that you've added some background bells here and there, a guitar harmony at one point, but it all feels like sauce. The meat of this is straight from the original. Sorry guys. I may change my mind based on what others say, but I think we routinely say NO to rock arrangements with this level of interpretation and I want to be fair.

NO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Super close call on this one. Production is definitely above the bar, and though the arrangement follows things really closely, I think arrangement-wise it just scrapes over the bar as well. Nice playing as well doesn't hurt at all either.

Here's the break down!

From the OCR standards:

* Modifying the genre, chord progression, instrumentation, rhythms, dynamics, tempo, or overall composition of the source material

* Adding original solos, transitions, harmonies, counter-melodies, lyrics, or vocals to the source material

of those listed, this mix changes Rhythms, though in the first 3/4 it is mostly backing rhythm parts; it's more personalized and expanded later on when the song is closing out. A lot of the drum rhythms are original throughout, however. Instrumentation is changed ever so slightly in the slightly playful bell section near the end, but is otherwise negligible. If the genesis could do guitars, I think the original would have sounded similar to this. Tempo is changed slightly on both tracks to smooth out the overall curve- most noticeably, One's Side is slowed down a bit as to not completely clash with the slower tempo of Knight's Errand.

For the additions line, original solos, transitions (along with a smooth keychange), harmonies, and counter melodies were all added. They certainly could have been more prevalent, but they were undoubtedly there.

So overall, though none of the requirements for a remix were delved into super deeply, a lot of them were touched on, some more than others, but I believe this is more than just a cover.

yes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes

I'm cool with your vote, but I'm curious, does there not seem to be a pretty intolerable amount of clipping going on there?

tooloud.png

So anyway, so far, the performance, and drumwork are rocking my socks. But my ears do not appreciate being attacked with such ruthless malice and disregard to my long-term hearing. :P

So at the very least, I'm going to be 100% adamant that in the event of a PASS, that we get a version where the master volume is fixed.

That being said, screw both of you guys for making this vote difficult ;-)

I can understand where both my comrades are coming from here. It also seems like we like to throw around the word "cover" a lot lately, and we've never really attempted to distinguish what that actually means. And I hate to say it, but our history shows that we don't always give consistent treatment to a song that seems "cover-ish". I myself have arranged mixes where the melody seems generally fairly under-interpreted, maybe even the general vibe. I don't think I've ever really come so close as this mix simply because OA's right. If the Genesis could pull off guitars like this, then it'd probably just be an out-right NO.

That being said, take that "Icy Peaks" from a while back. It was pretty much verbatim melody, and though I LOVED it, I think I was the only person who voted NO because it was pretty much a cover on (very beautifully recorded) violin. Apparently we came to the conclusion that the emotion from a human performance is acceptable interpretation because it adds power and emotion to the mood.

I think that's going to be the saving principle behind this vote. It's dangerously conservative, which is generally something we like to avoid getting TOO close to around here, obviously, but as Andrew mentioned, there's sections where it is actually expansive upon the original.

YES (was conditional, but changed to plain. see below.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i talked with Simon on this-

[some private convo stuff, edited by djp]

I guess that about says it all. I'm pretty disappointed in him. Doesn't change my vote, but it makes me pretty sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My two cents: I actually didn't notice the clipping when I first heard this, so I guess that means I wasn't bothered by it. Let's keep this one open. Maybe enough judges will feel the same that also think the arrangement is liberal enough. Though if they really don't want to change it, I guess Jimmy has to decide whether that makes his vote a NO.

I don't think it's sarcasm, I haven't known Simon to get sarcastic ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we all got together in J-chat and talked about it today, and it seems I'm the only one who has a real issue with the volume. I'm pretty convinced that it does clip a bit, but I think the more appropriate term would have been "over-compression" which while technically not clipping, still affects the quality. This track is limited to the far end of extreme, and IMO it makes the kick and certain high frequencies sound not good.

The mix has a good chance of being passed anyway though, so I'm sure it's not a big deal. I suppose after discussing it with 4 other judges, I'm apparently being nit-picky with the volume, so I suppose I'll just change my vote to a plain YES.

Aside from that, how does anyone have the gall to cuss out OA of all people? Way to be a chump and throw a nice fit over nothing, Simon. Nice. Work. Brah. :?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Production is certainly passable. I think the percussion does suffer a little bit, but this sounds pretty good despite that. I like that phrasing "dangerously conservative," as though the world were in danger of exploding if this were any closer to the originals. Obviously extremely coverish on the melodies, but there's original drums and guitar harmony even in the first half, some really subtle piano in there, soloing obviously, countermelodies, and all that good stuff.

This is really scraping it for me and I could go either way, but I'm going to go with a yes. There is more than a minimal amount of original material in this, and both source melodies are tackled twice in different ways.

YES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Production is certainly passable. I think the percussion does suffer a little bit, but this sounds pretty good despite that. I like that phrasing "dangerously conservative,"

Shaddupz, you know what I meant. :tomatoface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The gross overcompression is pretty standard for the music industry these days. Dynamics are out. see: Metallica: Death Magnetic debacle.

Way to go, your mix is practically radio-ready!

Solid all around.

YES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this