Palpable Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 Original decision: http://ocremix.org/forums/showthread.php?t=24340 Gawd u ppl n ur demands!!1 attache'd cheers. ----------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.zophar.net/download_file/14690 - Track 2 ("Underground BGM") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big giant circles Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 I felt compelled to check out the original votes on the prior version. Gonna quote 'em for mainly my own reference. Short and sweet, I'm feeling a lot of what's there, but the arrangement got boring after 1:43 when I realized that you were only using the first 6 notes of the source melody, and then it never went anywhere else.This had really cool beats, good dropoffs, great effects, etc. But the usage of the source melody and all of the ideas, for that matter, became too repetitive. Once you get past :56, you've basically heard the entire thing. Needs more substance, guys, but this is off to a great start. Use more of the source tune and employ more variation. Hmm, toughie. I'm actually ok with the source usage, being a fan of remixes that drive one melody line into the ground. The production is really nifty, with a spacious, quirky sound and a fantastic beat. Every measure sounds a little different from the last, but the problem is there's not that much variety dynamically. Aside from the short dropouts at 0:50 and 1:29, this stays in one gear the whole time, and doesn't really have much contrast from moment to moment. It would have cool to see a section playing with the chords, or using the second part of the melody somewhere.It's definitely close, don't get me wrong. If you decide to resub, I'd want to see most of this intact. In fact, I was tempted to go YES but there's a lot of cool directions you could take this in, and I want to see some of them taken. Larry basically nailed it. Really cool track with some hot processing (although I'd ease up on the filtering a bit, gets a bit grating). The beat is solid and it makes my head bob. However you're using a very small part of the source and the arrangement and dynamics ultimately become repetitive.I say go for some more variation both in source tune usage and dynamics and you've got a solid winner here. Having not heard the prior version, as I read these comments, I really feel like they still apply 100% to this version. Dang shame, this is a great track, really fun, bobbing my head/tapping my toe and all that. Highly enjoyable. I just think this mix totally falls outside of what our guidelines are aiming for, though. Basing an entire song (even a short-ish one) on 6 notes (3 really, just repeated and octaved) is kind of--not really what I would call a "ReMix". Not sure what else to tell you guys, really. I had no problem with the track otherwise, I didn't think there was any excessive repetition, there's lots and lots of awesome ear-candy, and the production is clean. But honestly, this may as well just be an original piece as far as OCR is concerned, really. Hope that doesn't sound insulting. I can hear that the melody is derived from the SMB Underground theme, but again, taking 3-6 notes and creating a song based solely on that loop is an uphill battle to the max. Honestly, if you want this thing passable, I honestly don't really see much of a way beyond incorporating some additional SMB melody in there prominently. If you feel inclined, by all means, send this one on back. Otherwise, keep making music regardless. Hate to throw down the dissenting vote, but I don't think it'd be fair to YES this based on our current ReMix criteria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 Stream of consciousness: [19:38] * Liontamer is listening to GSlicer, The Scarborough Joker - Super Mario Bros. - Minus World Remix [] (03:18)[19:39] <Liontamer> only a minute in, but it's using the source a lot; whole track is still messy so far [19:39] <BigGiantVotes> using 6 notes of the source [19:39] <Liontamer> sounds so unfocused; basically just a groove [19:39] <BigGiantVotes> yeah [19:39] <BigGiantVotes> I wouldn't call it unfocused, personally, I'd just say it sounds more original than ReMix-y [19:39] <Liontamer> I mean, I'm cool with just a groove, like it's BGM; don't mind; but not really much direction or flow to this [19:40] <Liontamer> sounds remixed, just stays in one gear most of the time with the treatment of the theme [19:40] * BigGiantVotes agrees [19:40] <Liontamer> some dynamic range and direction would have hooked this up Basically the same issues, sorry homies. I like the instrumentation and the production was solid overall, so it's not a matter of being able to put together a polished sounding piece of music. There's some dynamics, but I still think it sounded unfocused like the changes are there for the sake of being there. There's just no real flow or evolution to the arrangement. Yeah, perhaps consider incorporating another SMB theme or, again, develop more dynamic contrast with rhythmic or tempo variations of the six-note source. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palpable Posted December 6, 2009 Author Share Posted December 6, 2009 There's some dynamics, but I still think it sounded unfocused like the changes are there for the sake of being there. Bingo. There's a whole lot of variation going on in this, even more than the last version, but it's within one very very narrow band and the changes come off as contrived to me. I think this needs to develop beyond that. Even including the second six notes of the source would add a lot more variety. This just doesn't do it for me, sorry guys. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts