My Doom - The Demon's Dead remix

[Rabid Pickle]

This mix was rejected. Judges said it is a Black Sabbath "cover". I think its ridiculous. Almost all of the Doom songs are ripped off from one metal band or another (Pantera, Metallica, Slayer, Megadeth), and yet there were two Doom albums made on this site.

The Demon's Dead's main melody is almost (ALMOST) identical to the intro of Black Sabbath's After All (the Dead). But after that they are totally different.

Its pretty lame that my mix was rejected even though there are other versions of this song still posted on this site. I put a lot of work into this. I hope some of you can enjoy it.

www.soundcloud.com/woodwardmixing/doom

[Symbiot]

Yeah I came on here just to mention that OC Remix hosts Dark Side of the Phobos which has remixes that could also be said are not the "original source" yet they host the whole cd of them. Why then is this remix denied, but it's ok for those ones to be there (Hangarmageddon anyone?)?

This remix should be reconsidered since they already have songs up from doom that had rip offs of famous riffs (not covers like the rejection says, rip off of particular riffs that don't even have all the same notes)

[Symbiot]

Oh and it looks like OCRemix also put through a remix based on the same song (The Demon's Dead) http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR00987/

[timaeus222]

Perhaps the judge didn't elaborate, or you just got unlucky.

I think it's more than if it was a Black Sabbath cover or not. The intro's acoustic guitar(?) seemed to have a bit too much reverb and was then a bit muddy. The kick drum from 1:30 - 1:46 could be toned down because at that point it wasn't metal just yet. Also, maybe the structure of the song seemed too similar to Black Sabbath and maybe the judge just happened to have little patience or something.

Mazedude's remix had a good feel to it, but it also "barely" made it through; one of the comments said it had a good intro and end, but overall it was "okay".

[Rabid Pickle]

Perhaps the judge didn't elaborate, or you just got unlucky.

I think it's more than if it was a Black Sabbath cover or not. The intro's acoustic guitar(?) seemed to have a bit too much reverb and was then a bit muddy. The kick drum from 1:30 - 1:46 could be toned down because at that point it wasn't metal just yet. Also, maybe the structure of the song seemed too similar to Black Sabbath and maybe the judge just happened to have little patience or something.

Mazedude's remix had a good feel to it, but it also "barely" made it through; one of the comments said it had a good intro and end, but overall it was "okay".

You are wrong. Go look at the Judges Decision forum. One of them posted "No override" which makes me think it DID make it through originally.

And have you heard the Black Sabbath song in question? "Structure" has nothing to do with it. The song starts out with an almost identical riff and after that it isn't heard again.

I won't comment on your uh..."critique" of the song; there is no acoustic guitar in it.

Mazedude's remix is boring.

[Symbiot]

If it wasn't that, then they should've/would've said. It was because

The source isn't original to the game. After the projects were released, Dave decided we shouldn't let remixes of certain doom tracks go through.

Level 10 is a cover of Black Sabbath - After all (the dead):

Perhaps the judge didn't elaborate, or you just got unlucky.

I think it's more than if it was a Black Sabbath cover or not. The intro's acoustic guitar(?) seemed to have a bit too much reverb and was then a bit muddy. The kick drum from 1:30 - 1:46 could be toned down because at that point it wasn't metal just yet. Also, maybe the structure of the song seemed too similar to Black Sabbath and maybe the judge just happened to have little patience or something.

Mazedude's remix had a good feel to it, but it also "barely" made it through; one of the comments said it had a good intro and end, but overall it was "okay".

[Rabid Pickle]

I just don't get the point. A cover covers the whole song...obviously not the case here. This rips off one riff and isn't even identical. It isn't a legal issue otherwise they'd have to take down Mazedude's remix, and everyone still recognizes this as a song from an awesome video game.

Some sort of explanation would be nice.

[Rexy]

I thought the message in the judges' thread was clear about this issue. The Doom tracks were already brought up into question numerous times in the past due to concern about the games' music ripping off other peoples' songs, so you're going to have to understand the decision that's been done.

Let's quote it again to make sure:

After the projects were released, Dave decided we shouldn't let remixes of certain doom tracks go through.

See, the keywords of that statement were "after the projects were released", which meant that after the release of the Doom II project Delta-Q-Delta, djpretzel decided to take the policy into full effect. No songs that remixed some of these certain Doom series tracks have been accepted onto the site since.

As for some of those posted before, I'm surprised there wasn't a lockdown for them, though some added clarification from higher staff would be needed to see if any of these elder tracks would be affected by this rule.

If you want a bit of a guide on which Doom tracks to arrange for the site and which to not, perhaps this and this can serve as guides for you. Don't let the decision discourage you; just learn from your mistakes and move on

[zircon]

Rexy more or less covered this, but I'll elaborate as a staff member and former judge.

Our submissions standards explicitly state that for a source tune to be eligible, it has to be music written for a game. If it gets used or licensed elsewhere after, that's fine. If it wasn't originally written for the game, then it's not eligible. This is our policy and it's very clear. The source tune you submitted was not written for Doom, thus it's not an eligible source. This should all make sense.

Now, what you're frustrated about is that we have two Doom album projects and at least one Doom ReMix on the site which would seem to be in violation of that rule. I have three answers for that, all of which are related and relevant.

1. We do not require that every track of an album project meet our submission standards. That would be an almost impossibly high bar, and we feel that allowing project musicians some flexibility (eg. covering not otherwise eligible source tunes, or arranging in a conservative style that would normally not be accepted) is OK. So, you can't really use mixes on projects as a point of reference.

2. Exceptions to our policy are ultimately up to the discretion of the staff, and specifically djpretzel. The most well-known exception to the eligibility policy is the main Tetris theme. There are no other current exceptions.

3. Our standards and policies have changed over time. That Mazedude mix is over eight years old. I could find quite a few mixes from that time period that wouldn't be accepted today, but we're not in the business of removing old ReMixes unless there is a very good reason. In the past, we've done two "lockdowns" where we removed certain ReMixes that were found to be violations of the standards of their time (eg. correcting mistakes we made when the mixes were first posted.) But this goes back to my second point, which is that it's up to our discretion. As was posted in your mix evaluation thread, djpretzel used the posting of the Doom projects as a good time to set the NEW policy on Doom ReMixes. It would be unfair to retroactively apply that policy, just like it would be unfair to remove ReMixes from 2002 because they don't meet 2011 quality standards.

Hopefully that all makes sense. You're not being treated unfairly here and we don't have a double standard. That posted Doom ReMix is eight years old, when our policies were different. The Doom projects didn't need to adhere 100% to the standards of the time (and even if they did, those standards aren't the same as those today.) In the end, we would treat ANY other *current* submission of that source tune the same way that we treated yours. It's not a ruling that your ReMix is at all bad, just that it's outside the scope of what we do.

[Liontamer]

zircon's right on how the standards have evolved. That said, Rabid is saying that the Doom source only uses one riff from a mainstream song, then goes to all-original material, meaning the majority of the source is stuff originally written for a game, according to him.

I'll take a look into this, compare the source and mainstream stuff in question, and get back to you. It's rare we pull back decisions, but obviously if we made a mistake, there's no issue doing a full vote. But if the Doom source is basically a Black Sabbath arrangement, then what zircon said is correct. After our Doom albums, we got a lot more information on what in-game tracks were in fact mainstream music covers/arrangement and thus ineligible to be source tunes for OC ReMixes.

[Symbiot]

If you want a bit of a guide on which Doom tracks to arrange for the site and which to not, perhaps this and this can serve as guides for you. Don't let the decision discourage you; just learn from your mistakes and move on

Most of what you said explains what's going on... except for this. How was that his mistake? He wasn't told during submission, and there was no clear guide or warning about the song before submission. If it's not going to be allowed, that's one thing, but don't blame him for it.

[Liontamer]

Most of what you said explains what's going on... except for this. How was that his mistake? He wasn't told during submission, and there was no clear guide or warning about the song before submission. If it's not going to be allowed, that's one thing, but don't blame him for it.

It doesn't really matter whether an artist knows or doesn't know if a source tune was originally written for a game. Just because the artist doesn't know doesn't mean we just toss out our rules. Otherwise, we'd post every mix of that Mortal Kombat techno theme.

That said, a community project to make a list of VGM tunes that aren't commonly known as not being originally written for a game would be a handy reference tool.

[Symbiot]

It doesn't really matter whether an artist knows or doesn't know if a source tune was originally written for a game. Just because the artist doesn't know doesn't mean we just toss out our rules. Otherwise, we'd post every mix of that Mortal Kombat techno theme.

That said, a community project to make a list of VGM tunes that aren't commonly known as not being originally written for a game would be a handy reference tool.

Yeah I understand, and I appreciate what you posted.

I was just saying it's not really the submitter's fault for not knowing, and to say it was a mistake he should learn from is pretty odd.

[DragonAvenger]

Just to clarify on one extra point, a vote of 'No Override' doesn't necessarily mean that it was on track to a YES vote. N.O. is when a track is in violation of one of our standards that was missed in the initial overview of the song from the inbox to either the panel, a direct rejection, or a direct post. There have been songs given a N.O. vote that have initially passed the panel, and tracks that would have been voted NO anyways.

[Rabid Pickle]

zircon's right on how the standards have evolved. That said, Rabid is saying that the Doom source only uses one riff from a mainstream song, then goes to all-original material, meaning the majority of the source is stuff originally written for a game, according to him.

I'll take a look into this, compare the source and mainstream stuff in question, and get back to you. It's rare we pull back decisions, but obviously if we made a mistake, there's no issue doing a full vote. But if the Doom source is basically a Black Sabbath arrangement, then what zircon said is correct. After our Doom albums, we got a lot more information on what in-game tracks were in fact mainstream music covers/arrangement and thus ineligible to be source tunes for OC ReMixes.

I appreciate this a lot.

[Rabid Pickle]

Just to clarify on one extra point, a vote of 'No Override' doesn't necessarily mean that it was on track to a YES vote. N.O. is when a track is in violation of one of our standards that was missed in the initial overview of the song from the inbox to either the panel, a direct rejection, or a direct post. There have been songs given a N.O. vote that have initially passed the panel, and tracks that would have been voted NO anyways.

Fair enough

[Rabid Pickle]

Any word yet?

[Rabid Pickle]

Liontamer, have you looked into this?

[Gollgagh]

I'd leave a message on his profile to remind him; it'd more likely get looked at sooner than this thread.

[Mak Eightman]

Man, I never heard Black Sabbath and even I say NO to this remix.

Sorry. Production is the main problem you have here.

I love that pizzicato string in intro. But rest of your mix sounds obviously cheap. And BTW! It is boring to)

[Rabid Pickle]

Man, I never heard Black Sabbath and even I say NO to this remix.

Sorry. Production is the main problem you have here.

I love that pizzicato string in intro. But rest of your mix sounds obviously cheap. And BTW! It is boring to)

Obviously cheap huh? Give me some specifics.

[Mak Eightman]

Obviously cheap huh? Give me some specifics.

Bass guitar sounds kinda out of tune, perhaps that detune effect cause it. Not a big deal if you pan your main guitar track to left and right or maybe even to right. But then you'll need something in left channel. Also all over the mix main rhythm guitar don't moving anywhere, it kinda bothering listener's ears. Just imo.

Drums.. I do like your programming style, it could be interesting, if you make some reverb or maybe even delay to Toms(at the very beginning of the mix). Then, your kick sounds mechanical(as and snare). It could work if you used deep electronic Kick with hard attack. Use some velocity to drums to give em more charm.

Then I remember some interesting effect to rhythm guitar somewhere near the end. Nice. But in combination with main rhythm your mix becomes too muddy. Some balancing, EQ'ing and compression and your mix will be nice.

I can say more specifically, but i don't have your mix in a hand, cause my browser hates soundcloud(so as I). This what I remember.

Overall, KEEP WORKING MAN! You'll improve your skills in a few months staying here. Don't accuse professionals in your own weakness. And don't think you are the best musician ever! Cause you NOT! Sorry. Best of good man!!

If you want someone to help you, don't be shy. This is the main goal of this community!

[Phonetic Hero]

Don't accuse professionals in your own weakness. And don't think you are the best musician ever! Cause you NOT! Sorry. Best of good man!!

If you want someone to help you, don't be shy. This is the main goal of this community!

This echoes my thoughts pretty much exactly (except maybe "best of good"... not quite sure what that means haha). You got No'd. So what? I've been No'd too. Not a big deal. Learn from it and move on. The most important part of the statement is not being shy or afraid to ask for help, and perhaps even more important is remaining humble in the process. Getting mad at other people isn't going to help the situation, it's only going to make people return the favor. I hope to hear more from you and track some progress, because I'm quickly finding out that there's a LOT to learn. And everyone really is willing to help, as long as you have the right attitude.

Best of good

pH

[Rabid Pickle]

This echoes my thoughts pretty much exactly (except maybe "best of good"... not quite sure what that means haha). You got No'd. So what? I've been No'd too. Not a big deal. Learn from it and move on. The most important part of the statement is not being shy or afraid to ask for help, and perhaps even more important is remaining humble in the process. Getting mad at other people isn't going to help the situation, it's only going to make people return the favor. I hope to hear more from you and track some progress, because I'm quickly finding out that there's a LOT to learn. And everyone really is willing to help, as long as you have the right attitude.

Best of good

pH

The track was "no'd" because some Judge says its a cover of a Black Sabbath song, which it isn't at all. I just think its shitty that they don't have a "Don't Bother With These Songs" list or something.

And the only people I'm pissed at are judges who spout some shit to get me off their back and don't mean a word of it. Oh, and morons who are only attacking my mix just because I'm arguing with the almighty judges.

[Symbiot]

I had to post here again in light of seeing how rude you guys are being with your criticism. Saying not to accuse professionals in your own weakness? Saying it's cheap and boring? I'm sorry but that is not helpful, and that is not the issue at hand. He was having them look into the technicality of why it was NO'd, which was because of the source material.

I would hope that the veterans here would be more constructive and helpful rather than trying to run people off. Help the community grow rather than looking down your nose.

This echoes my thoughts pretty much exactly (except maybe "best of good"... not quite sure what that means haha). You got No'd. So what? I've been No'd too. Not a big deal. Learn from it and move on. The most important part of the statement is not being shy or afraid to ask for help, and perhaps even more important is remaining humble in the process. Getting mad at other people isn't going to help the situation, it's only going to make people return the favor. I hope to hear more from you and track some progress, because I'm quickly finding out that there's a LOT to learn. And everyone really is willing to help, as long as you have the right attitude.

Best of good

pH