Jump to content

Donkey Kong 64 'Frantic Factory' untitled mix (UPDATED!)


Recommended Posts

Hi everyone, here's my first VG mix (still as-yet untitled and in need of much finalising)...

LATEST VERSION: http://cbnow.co.uk/theradicalsifu/DK64_Remix_WIP_2.mp3 (4.79MB)

OLD VERSION: http://cbnow.co.uk/theradicalsifu/DK64_Remix_WIP.mp3 (4.81MB)

The levels and mixing are still very much preliminary, and it's possible that the bass/kick might be mixed wrong on some sound systems, I haven't finalised all that yet... also the mix does contain one or two samples and instruments from the original track :)

PLEASE critique, be honest, brutally if necessary...

Thank you!! :<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not familiar with the source material, but musically I think this is pretty good, very nice for a first mix (I suppose you've done other things before though). There are some pretty nice things going on here, and mixing isn't bad at all.

The bass pad coming in at 0:20 is a bit too thick and loud. It dominates too much. Overall (and especially in the end), it's a bit too much low-frequency dominant instrumentally.

Btw, how did you make (or where did you get) that distorted sort of dragged out snare (I really need a similar for a remix of my own) xD.

Also, the instruments are a bit too panned out imo. Try to keep dominating melodies fairly close to the middle, otherwise attention will be too much dragged to one end which makes you kind of lost over there so to speak.

I'm not an expert, but those are my two cents.

EDIT: It also ended kind of abruptly, some fading out stuff would be cool.

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quick thoughts from somebody who knows nothing about mixing or anything:

Cool hollow sound at the beginning. Makes me wonder what's going to fill all that space! :razz:

Drum beats that come in at :11-ish are ok. Seem a bit uninspired. Honestly it doesn't seem like the right beat for this atmosphere...

:38 section doesn't quite work for me. I think it's the stringsy samples.

:58 I like. Seems like it's going somewhere now.

1:33 slowdown and crank up I LOVE. So fitting. What's after that is good too, but after the crankup, I kind of expect something far more intense from here on out.

Overall, lots of promise I think, and it's nowhere near bad at this point. Won't pass judges though. I'd change those samples I mentioned. Also, I don't think it reaches the crescendo that it leads the listener to believe that it will. After that crankup, I'd go crazy. Add some high-range bits (is that even a thing?) and try to make it more... hard-hitting, you know? It's clear I don't know what I'm talking about, but I know what I like, don't like, and want more of, and I hope this was helpful in some way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really promising mix - great source tune and it has a lot of potential. I'm new to the forums but wanna get involved so I'll give you some feedback, for what it's worth!

Soon as I put this on the chord progression reminded me of Eminem's "Kill You" track, so I sort of had Eminem rapping along in my head until the bass and vox pad came in at 0:20... I love that blip at 0:12 as well.

The track builds nicely from here, the vox pads are reminiscent of Perfect Dark, and then when the strings come in at 0:38 I could be playing Jet Force Gemini, walking around a huge spaceship. I seriously love this section, and am a little disappointed at 0:55 when it drops back down again - I was expecting it to grow into something even bigger. Maybe some elaboration would work well here?

1:33 is brilliant, but I also agree with previous posters in that it needs more urgency from this point. Maybe add another layer of industrial drums to give it more force? A tempo change? I reckon a bit more expansion before the cranking up and then go nuts after that part would make this track stand out.

1:52 - not sure the flute is the right choice of instrument here. It's a very industrial sounding tune and the flute's almost too "smooth", and a little quiet. Try beefing up the lead at 2:20 too, again it seems a little too quiet. That said, the lead at 3:04 is worth waiting for and I'd like to hear a bit more of it.

Hope I don't sound too critical, keep working on this track as you've got a great foundation here. Looking forward to hearing more :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the comments, everyone! Wow, looks like I've got lots of work to do. I'm going to give my ears a few more days' rest (because they're sick of hearing it :-P) and then I'm gonna set about making some major changes.

Some specific replies:

Btw, how did you make (or where did you get) that distorted sort of dragged out snare (I really need a similar for a remix of my own) xD.

Oh, it's two or three individual snare sounds layered up with some claps. I think the claps were panned slightly left and right too. I'd need to check.

It also ended kind of abruptly, some fading out stuff would be cool.

Yeah, I forgot to mention that I needed to put a proper ending on it. ;)

1:33 slowdown and crank up I LOVE. So fitting. What's after that is good too, but after the crankup, I kind of expect something far more intense from here on out.

I've thought about this and you're absolutely right (in fact just about everything said by everyone seems pretty sound and logical to me). I think I've got an idea for what to do with that middle section, so I guess I'll be back soon with the latest version. :<

I enjoyed it... but no, not good enough to pass the judges at all... And it is much too tame; sounds like an alternate version of the theme, a scrapped or beta version if you will. It definitely needs a lot more than what's there.

I agree that the arrangement is conservative, I will see if I can re-write some of the parts. I kind of wish you'd written a bit more though, you've just kind of gone 'no it's no good' and not said a whole lot about what I can do.

Thank you very much again for the feedback everybody, I will try to address all of the comments and concerns and be back with an updated version sometime soon :D much love!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had this on loop for the past 30 minutes without noticing... That's a good thing.

Unfortunately, I can also assure you that this won't make it on OCR, as is, for a couple of significant reasons...

1.) Far too consevative - this is almost identical to the source, melodically, harmonically and structurally. The only thing that's been changed are the instruments, which while nice, isn't enough to be considered viable for OCR.

2.) The instrumentation is limited to some basic instruments (saw, square and some pads & drums). It could work with just those instruments, but the track uses the same instruments for the same things throughout the track, which gets tiring on the ears quickly.

3.) The drums have no variation, at all. They could be removed entirely and not even be noticed, really - add some flavor to the drums, different beats, fills and whatnot; that could really add the spice to the track that it needs.

Production is tight, so good job on that.

It's not a bad track by any stretch of the imagination (I wouldn't have looped it for a half hour if it was), but at the same time I can assure you that this won't make it if you submit it, and the primary reasons aren't something that you can simply 'tweak' and call it done, either (well, other than the drum comment). It would pretty much take a rewrite to get it to OCR's requirements.

If you're up to that I can't wait to hear it - this IS one of the best sources out there :-o.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I generally don't see the point in 'defending' one's own work from constructive criticism, I am surprised and confused by your comments Gario, as I don't personally consider them to actually be true.

1) The arrangement is a little bit conservative, but it is in no way a carbon copy of the original. For a start there is almost 35 seconds (of a three-minute track) in the middle that is completely original, borrowing only an eight-bar chord progression. There is other original material elsewhere in the song and I have rearranged and added new parts. I disagree that instrumentation is the only difference. I suggest you relisten to the source?

2) Okay, I can kind of see where you're coming from with this, but... the track is three minutes long, and some of the parts do undergo instrument changes. Is it a big problem? I honestly don't think it's that big a deal.

3) Come on, this isn't in the least bit true. The drums change ALL the time. Kick and snare come in at 0:11, hats are added at 0:20, 0:37 sees a new drum pattern with different snare layering and hat patterns, there are little fills here and there (such as a mini hat run at 0:50), drops down to a kick and snare at 0:55, drums return with a different, more deep and punchy snare sound at 0:57... this is the first MINUTE of the track. How did you arrive at this conclusion?

Um, can I get a second opinion on these criticisms?? 8O

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really O_o? Now while I may not have been constructive before I will this time but looking at both sides:

Conservative? Granted that he didn't really play on the melody that's there, but he does have quite a bit of original material that fits nicely with the mood of the song. Sifu play on the original melodies, even if it's just a tiny bit I really don't feel like this mix is that conservative.

They sounds may sound simplistic but I feel the techniques used were executed to give the mix a nice coherent sound without feeling like the song needs to be clogged with a lot of stuff or crazy sounding instruments. I even feel the drums were pretty damn good. I like the way they sound, nice programming, and the fills I felt like were enough to keep the drums interesting. I really don't see how he could beef up anything without ruining what he's goin for when I hear this but then again I could be or probrably am wrong.

Just my two cents granted I'm a nub myself but I'm just goin from the top of my head listenin to your mix and the source then defending your mix while trying to help lol. You should probably switch to mod review sifu, and see what emunator and halc think about this.

Edit: Lol beat me to the punch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, my drum comment was made with a lazy ear, lol. Sorry about that - it's the beat that's throwing my ear and getting repetitive, not the drums themselves. You could probably get away with it, but I would personally change the beat up, periodically. Laaaazy ears in the mornin', for me, and I'm terrible at wording things, from time to time. Sorry 'bout the misunderstanding.

I'll stick to my guns about the conservative nature of the track, though. Listening to the track, you stick far too closely to the harmonic/structural elements of the source, there, and when the source is playing note-for-note it really is playing 'note-for-note', if you catch my drift.

1/6th of the track playing an original melody over the source's structure & harmonies isn't enough, there.

The instrumentation is a fairly decent problem, enough alone to hold back the track, imho. It exhausts the ears to the point where it all sounds the same by the time you get to the end (even when it indeed is not). That's just the way the human mind works, when it comes to listening to music, unfortunately, so you really do need some more variation in the instrumentation, there.

Hopefully that's a little clearer - it's understandable to get defensive about criticism that's completely wrong, like my drum comment :-P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still not sold, to be honest. The submission guidelines state that an acceptably different remix will involve "modifying the genre, chord progression, instrumentation, rhythms, dynamics, tempo, or overall composition of the source materia". I have tweaked the genre and turned it into a breakbeat/electro piece, changed the instrumentation, added new rhythms, dynamics, and original parts and solos. Furthermore I could easily point to a dozen (fairly recent) accepted OCRemixes which follow their source as least as closely as my WIP does.

And I still can't comprehend your comment about the instruments getting tiring on the ears quickly, if you say you had it on loop for 30 minutes?

Please, has anybody else got any comments? I've got people saying that it's great, and other people saying that it will never make it. I don't really know whether to sub it or not. I'm going to fix the ending and make some minor tweaks first in any case, but some people here are saying it needs a total rewrite, and I don't know who to listen to...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weird intro, but kind'a cool once you know it's there. Apparently, source has something similar. Track sounds compressed when the snare hits, probably what's making it sounds tiring to Gario. That snare also sounds like it's on a quick autopan or something, snare seems to start on the right and move left, which I find annoying. The second snare is also a bit loud, and tehre's a loud hihat sound just before every other note that's too loud. Overall really dry and empty sound.

Two thirds through the repetition is getting to me. Can't say if it's too conservative, but it _is_ conservative.

NO, RESUB is my guess. My main concern would be the dryness and compression, but arrangement might also be a problem. Might be.

It's a great first remix, but I wouldn't expect it to get posted. I wouldn't YES it in this condition. It's definitely worth fixing up and submitting tho, nice work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have been listening to V1 of this quite a bit, so glad to see you're still working on it :)

Really like the changes - the more industrial and 8-bit style synths are a great addition and after the crank-up it's a bolder sound. I still feel like you could turn up the bass at that point though.

As for the conservativism, I don't mind the arrangement at all, but if you WERE to add some more of your own flair, I'd do it from 0:55, maybe try a short bridge section just to mix up the chord progression a bit.

Great mix so far, enjoying it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...