Palpable Posted May 3, 2010 Share Posted May 3, 2010 ReMixer name: Xenocidebot Real name: Richard Wolff Email address: xenocidebot@hotmail.com Website: http://xenocidebot.wordpress.com/ Userid: 19860 Name of game arranged: Cybernator Name of individual song(s) arranged: Track 3 (alternatively listed as 1-5)- "We've Gotta Do it" Additional info pertaining to the game: -Sys: SNES, Title: Cybernator, Year: 1993, Composer(s): Masanao Akahori. Orignal soundtrack: http://snesmusic.org/v2/profile.php?profile=set&selected=624 Comments: Righto, fixed up based on what the rejection email said and some input from other musicians. To quote myself quoting the rejection email in your workshop forums: "...it apparently needed 'a stronger, more varied beat', 'some fuller instruments' and for me to 'fix up the production some' before resubmitting it. There was also the big bold 'sound quality (e.g. sample quality, sequencing, mixing, processing, recording) is poor.'" I tried to make the percussion a bit more punchy and a wee bit more varied. For "fuller instruments", I EQ'ed most of the instruments differently, with the most drastic changes being the pads and bass. They are also now layered affairs (I had previously done them all in Omniphere, now there's an Alien 303 and Sylenth backup, respectively.) I also put a bit more treble into several of the instruments (most of my fellow producers seemed to feel it needed more after the re-equalization) and played with the drums a bit more before I wrapped it up and got ready to resub. So...that's that, really. --------------------------------------------------------------- We've Gotta Do It Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OceansAndrew Posted May 10, 2010 Share Posted May 10, 2010 Arrangement was pretty static for a lot of the track, but I was feeling the different layers and the direction the source went it. It may just be the unfamiliarity I have with the source itself, but everything seemed pretty fresh to me. I liked the glissando synths, and the varied epiano and other synth leads, combined to keep things interesting. Production wasn't pristine, but I feel that it's clean enough to warrent a pass. Your luck with the other judges may vary, but I am down with this one. yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vig Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 I'm largely hearing a sonic update of the original. Same tempo, same feel, same key. You've got some personalization in the parts, but then you go and repeat everything a million times without changing anything, and you didn't bother to have an ending. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palpable Posted May 22, 2010 Author Share Posted May 22, 2010 The arrangement stuck close to the original melody, but the personalization was not bad. The main thing killing this was the lack of energy. The drums felt flat and held the same almost the whole song, while the e-piano lead blended into the background a lot, given how low it was. This should have been a lot more dynamic and engaging, and I'd attribute half to the writing, half to the production. The ending was also weak, could have used a more defined way to end it. Sorry, but I think this needs another take. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonAvenger Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 I'm going to have to agree with Vinnie here. Right now the track has some nice personalization. Overall it's a lot more chill than the original, which is nice. The issue I'm having is that overall it's lacking he energy to grab and keep my focus. There's a few factors in this. First is that the lead is somewhat hidden in the lower range and because of how well it blends with the background instruments. You've got to pull it out a little more, maybe a bit of a volume boost or having sit in a different range so it contrasts a little more. The other half of this is that things get static overall. There isn't much variation in the melody each time it comes in, so things start to sound repetitive, and the drums are similar, if not the same, throughout. Overall I'd like to hear more variation; drums, lead, instruments, dynamics, even structure. Also, take a look at the ending to strengthen it and have more of a conclusion. You've got a good base track, see how you can experiment with it to add that energy in. Keep working at it. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkeSword Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 I think this sounds great. Nice, chill background music, with some subtly groovy beats and a great synthy texture. Sounds aren't the best, but it's got a kind of old school feel that really works for me. Only thing I don't like is the ending. A bit abrupt. Otherwise, YES! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 The overall levels were too low (except for the bass). The claps felt really tame, but didn't sound as weak once other parts joined in. In the intro, the synths should have been more upfront, as well as the lead at :31. As is, the Rhodes lead just sounded weak and out of place, but you had better instrumentation for the lead from 1:01-1:17 to change things up. Not a fan of the way the Rhodes interacted with everything else here from 1:20-1:48; the brighter tone of it never clicked with what else was in place. Some more stuff at 2:04, repeating earlier sections with a bit more instrumental sauce on top for some contrast. There could have been more going on there to spice it up and make the core of the arrangement feel like it had evolved, but this wasn't bad. The grace notes added onto the melody by the e-piano (2:07-2:11) didn't sound good at all, because the tone/sound didn't fit, and the volume just made it get lost in the rest of the soundscape. It's a good base, but this still needs more spit polishing via EQing work, and IMO, some tweaks to the instrumentation to make the textures sound more cohesive, and further interpretive ideas in the second half to keep it fresh. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts