Sign in to follow this  
djpretzel

*NO - NEW POLICY* Streets of Rage 2 'Infectious Oldskool'

Recommended Posts

Note that we don't have a set-policy on people remaking their own stuff. Evaluate as a separate mix, in comparison to the existing mix, etc.?? - djp

It's been a while since my last submission, about half a year actually.

This is essentially a remake of SID of Rage. That one was made 2 years ago and I feel it could have been a lot better, so this is what what I wanted it to sound like from the beginning. It takes a lot more inspiration from early 90s House, sounds like The Shamen - Move Any Mountain, with an added C64 of course.

Also, this is the third time I'm reminding you, my Remixer Profile needs to have the e-mail updated to this address.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree that it's much better than SID of rage. objectively it's good clean fun, as djp put it two years ago, but it sticks perhaps a bit close to the original. thusly i'm gonna reccommend that

YES, i think it's an improvement upon SID of rage, but perhaps it ought to replace the latter. The main difference is cleaned-up instruments, and if he wanted to, protricity could submit eleven different versions of neighburgers each with different leads and each would be good enough to get on. so i say replace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had and enjoyed this for weeks. Awesome shit. I would have rather it functioned more like a rearrangement in the manner of SID of Rage, but this is an excellent mix even if it sticks much closer to the original ("Under Logic"). This is certainly intense, energetic work.

YES

Thinking of Hornpipe2 doing the same thing way back, I was also gonna say, yeah, should this replace "SID of Rage?" Vig has a good point above, but no one would ever actually submit mix revisions to the site that way, so I'd prefer not to reason over the situation along those lines. Dan (GY) seems like he wouldn't mind SID of Rage being replaced, but if he wants it to stay, I'd have no problem with it. The tracks are different enough so that they both deserve a spot. Make that decision his call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, I wouldn't call it much better than the first version. They're both ok remixes. This one sounds a bit better. The old one has aspects that seem to be missing in this one.

So.. I thought we had a policy regarding not touching anything between OCR0000 and OCR1000...

Whatever, YES for replacement. no for addition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eh, I wouldn't call it much better than the first version. They're both ok remixes. This one sounds a bit better. The old one has aspects that seem to be missing in this one.

So.. I thought we had a policy regarding not touching anything between OCR0000 and OCR1000...

Whatever, YES for replacement. no for addition.

What exactly IS the policy regarding mixes in 'lockdown'? Won't this potentially mess up the bittorrent download?

I think it's a great mix; I vote YES for replacement, but because SID of Rage is so similar, I vote NO for new mix, on the grounds that it would violate some kind of policy. I mean, it's just two versions of the same, mix, right?

Tricky. :?

EDIT: I just want to clarify that I'm only voting YES if DJP allows for replacements. So don't consider this passed yet, unless we get the final word on the policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it would seem the consensus is to replace SID of rage with this mix. unless djp has objections, lets do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lockdown is a lockdown. Don't set precedent and allow everyone to replace their old pre-1000 mixes unless you're ready to deal with the headache.

I agree with this. Locked down mixes should not be replaced.

However, what if we treat this as a removal of an old mix, and a posting of a new mix?

In effect, OCR00664 would be removed as any other track is removed (because mixers always have the right to have their tracks removed from the site), but Infectious Oldskool would be posted as OCR011xx (whatever we're upto).

Or we could just not post this and recommend to people in this decision to check it out anyway, so that we don't set a bad precedent that could eventually lead to a lot of replacement headaches.

Just a few thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Gecko contacted me and he wanted to know WHATS UP since this has been in the panel for like...6 years. He said that he intended this to be a 'NEW MIX' submission; not a replacement, but that the end decision was ours.

PERSONALLY I think replacement is the better option; I just listened to both mixes, and the similarities are just too strong to warrant a new post.

EDIT FOR ANYONE READING THIS DECISION

While this mix is not different enough to be posted, its still really good. So I recommend tracking it down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since Gecko says it's up to us, and lockdown #2 can allow us to replace as an option at the moment, we need to get this issue decided. If you haven't already voted above, compare both mixes and briefly give your reason for your choice.

Replacement: Vigilante, Protricity, DarkeSword, Daniel Baranowsky, GrayLightning

Addition: Liontamer, Malcos, The wingless

Meh: analoq, Digital Coma

Also wanted to briefly add that if replacement wins out, I'd prefer that this specifically take SID of Rage's place as OCR00664, as was similarly done with Greg Kennedy's situation. As it looks like we're ending up with a fairly split vote, djp can make the final call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know much about the intricacies of mix addition/replacement, so I don't think i'm qualified to make a steadfast vote on what should happen.

The new mix is definately a better track overall, and I don't think anyone will miss the old one with this one taking over, so I would think replacement would be the best option.

However, if it's easier to just add it without screwing the bittorrent thing and violating lockdown procedure, go for it.

Whatever's easiest on Dave.

-D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really have strong opinions either way on this. However, I completely agree with what danny b just said.

If I'm forced to pick one, like vig, prot, darke and db I'm slanting for Replacement as well.

Whatever Dave wants to do or is easier for him. It's his call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'd be willing to go with a replacement if this ReMix addressed a major issue with the original, but there was really nothing 'wrong' with the original and this mix doesn't really 'fix' anything.

and by the same token, it's not significantly different enough to warrant an addition. so this leaves me with:

no on replacement.

no on addition.

yup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I really don't see why we should entertain this request anyway. It's not that different from the original mix already on the site, so who cares. GeckoYamori can work on new stuff and leave this alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...hmm..in trying to decide where to draw the line on this replacement/addition crud, i really dont think this is different or better enough to be added.

so like analoq said

NO/NO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[12:37] * Digital_Coma is playing Gecko Yamori - Streets of Rage 2 Infectious Oldskool OC ReMix (0:00/3:24)

[12:37] <@Vigilante> i dont see anything wrong with having a policy

[12:37] <@djp_semiaway> my problem is all the work that's involved with my write-up EVERYONE ELSE'S reviews, the judging, etc. - all to repeat for something that's had relatively few changes. I think we should only entertain as additions, not replacements, and it would fix the problem.

[12:37] <@Vigilante> that's reasonable

[12:38] <@djp_semiaway> i.e. you can remake your own shit, but it better be different enough to constitute posting as an ADDITIONAL mix, not a replacement, and it should be judged in that light.

[12:38] <Digital_Coma> for some reason the panel majority thought this was different and good enough

[12:38] <@djp_semiaway> in that light, I don't think this is different enough to add.

[12:38] <Digital_Coma> i dont think this is a good example to set forth

[12:38] <Digital_Coma> for such a policy

NO

Sorry this took so long to be decided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[12:36] <djp_semiaway> okay

[12:36] <djp_semiaway> at least this small group seems to be in agreement

[12:37] <djp_semiaway> no doubt Ari will be livid at not being consulted

[12:37] <djp_semiaway> but I see the formation of a policy we can at least be CLEAR about:

[12:37] <Digital_Coma> i'm sure he doesnt like the mix either

[12:38] <djp_semiaway> rearrangements of your own mixes will only be entertained as additions, not replacements, and they must be substantively different AND improved in terms of both sound quality AND arrangement.

I think we have a policy. Not everyone will agree with it, but we can at least be clear about it. People need to move on. We need to accept that there will be older mixes on the site that are not up to current standards; it's natural, it makes sense, and - unless the piece is a clear rip or standards violation - replacing them with updated versions is sortof like rewriting history.

If people want to go back and cover the same song again, that's fine. If they want to use pieces or ideas from a mix they've already gotten posted, that's fine. But the new submission will only be entertained as an addition, not a replacement, and it has to be different enough to qualify under these heightened judging criteria.

I know there are counterarguments, and fairly good ones. But there are counter-counter arguments as well. In general, I think we need to look forward and not backward.

I believe that, evaluated as an addition and not a replacement, this mix should not be posted, under this policy.

Share this post


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