DragonAvenger Posted June 27, 2011 Share Posted June 27, 2011 Mixer Name: TheGuitahHeroe Song ReMixed: "World Calamity" (source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9EtAPA4KEE) Game: Pokemon Mystery Dungeon: Red Rescue Team ReMix Name: "The Sky Will Be Your Limit" Judges: "OMG MORR POKEEMONZ MZTRY DUNGNZZZ?????? Well.....yeah. And it's progressive house at that. Honestly, my process for this mix involved so much copy-and-paste it wasn't even funny; dragging the paint tool across FL's pattern screen got pretty tiring after a while It's six and a half minutes long, inspired by deadmau5, and lo-fi (the most so I've submitted to the panel thus far, hope you guys dig it!). With DRY drums. Yes, very dry. I played with filters a lot in this one, but hey, what else is new. Also sidechaining, same old, same old A little excessive, sure. But you know what? I LIKE excessive sidechaning. DEAL WITH IT. Hahahaha! (seriously it's a personal preference ) Except the end result is totally different from anything else I've made. Nonetheless, please enjoy my take on this gut-wrenching theme (you gotta play the game ) It might be a little repetitive for some people's tastes, but I figured "who knows, it might hit the guidelines." XD _______ Source breakdown?????????? Man I'm going all-out here... *:14 - 3:05 and 4:15 to 6:30 = main bass structure of all of the source *chords from :37 - 3:22 and 4:15 - 6:30 are slight variations of chords in the source *Lead from 1:20 - 1:47, 2:00 - 2:32, and 4:30 - 5:03 (with the exception of the last 5 or so seconds of lead) are straight from the source *ostinado from 2:44 - 3:14 and 4:14 - 6:00 are straight from the source *high bells from :49 - 3:30 and 3:45 - 6:15 are straight from the source *3:23 - 4:14 = break from all source usage with the exception of the high bells. Total 365 seconds of source out of 396 seconds of song. So yeah, kinda conservative, but it's my belief that there are enough variations for it to qualify as a passable arrangment???? Haha what do I know, you guys are the judges Again, hope you guys enjoy, see you in three weeks --------------------- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9EtAPA4KEE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halc Posted July 18, 2011 Share Posted July 18, 2011 mixing is pretty solid. the beat is a little repetitive, but I think you pulled off the style well. a lot of stuff is kinda washed out in auto-panning and reverb, not in a bad way, but I wish your melodic lines would cut through the arrangement more. there's not really a strong melodic presence until 2:10 (and again at 4:34), and they only last for about thirty seconds. regardless, I'm definitely groovin' to this. however, arrangement-wise, this seems more or less like a genre-adaptation. most of the elements were relatively unaltered, save for a bit of expansion on the melody at 2:10. curious to see what others think, but I think this needs a little more in terms of original writing/interpretation. NO(resub) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonAvenger Posted August 12, 2011 Author Share Posted August 12, 2011 Listened to this one quite a bit. I'm on the fence about a few things. Right now the track uses a lot of generic sounds, and generally sticks close to the source plus the style adaption. The beat definitely is basic, and is one of the bigger gripes I have overall. On the other hand, the structure is spread out quite a bit, and the different elements of the source are used well in the genre. I think this one doesn't take many risks, but it's an intelligent mix that is natural for the source. Overall I enjoyed listening to it, and I think for me it's enough to get past the bar, albeit it is close. YES (borderline) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OceansAndrew Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 decent soundscape, but I think it did feel a bit generic, and definitely repetitive. I think overall this is really close, because there is some good interpretation, but it is lacking that little extra push to get it over the top. No, please resubmit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkeSword Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 however, arrangement-wise, this seems more or less like a genre-adaptation Don't really see "genre-adaptation" as a bad thing. I think it's great. A great example of some more long-form electronic dance stuff. It's not about the melodies going measure to measure, it's more about the texture of the track and how it shifts and changes. Great soundscape, perfect take on the source. Really solid. I like it! The only problem is that at the end during the subdued outro there's some clipping or clicking or distortion. Starts at around 6 minutes. YES (conditional), need a fix on those clicks at the end (I contacted him about a fix, waiting for PM) Fixed version is fixed. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutritious Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Cool source man. I can see how this would have nostalga points for people who played the game. Definitely a long, slow build here. There's no question what's being remixed here, though, as you phase in and out with elements from the OST. As far as arrangement level - I have no problem with this as the structure is quite divergent from the original. Connecting parts from the original were used creatively thoughout, but never to the point where it just felt like a trance cover (sorry- PROGRESSIVE HOUSE). Nice evolution over time too. Despite it clocking at 6:38, the track never felt like it overstayed its welcome. Overall, production was very clear. I honestly didn't have any problems with the sound design - some of the synths may come off as being on the generic side, but I felt like they all fit very nicely into the context of the track as a whole. If I was going to mention something, I'd say the sidechain is a little grating on headphones - it might just be a little to sharp of a contrast in the high end eq. But yeah, besides that, I'm groovin here. Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emunator Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 I'm almost entirely in the same boat as Drew here - there's some really cool textural stuff going on here, but it's a bit washed out and cramped, not much is cutting through. None of the samples are bad, but nothing's jumping out and really wowing me either. I think you've got all the pieces in place for this to be a really nice remix, you wouldn't have to change up the arrangement much at all, but just do what you can to work a bit more personalized, interesting sounds/writing in there to make this song your own, and clean up your soudnscape. It's a close call and there's a lot of great stuff going on here, but I'm not quite sold on it yet. NO (resubmit!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vig Posted November 19, 2011 Share Posted November 19, 2011 Not hating on the repetitiveness nor the beat. This is chill house. anything too busy or complicated would be inappropriate. As is necessary in a song of this genre, there are lots of changes and ideas that are introduced subtly and over long periods of time. There is a great dynamic progression over the course of the track. Perhaps there's a bit too much downtime in the middle, and while this makes it less danceable, the breaks are still interesting. I'd say this is pretty well-executed remix. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palpable Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 I was fine with how he source was used in this, there was a lot added in terms of flow and textural elements. The original was a pretty static song, while this has a clear direction. I agree with Justin that it got grating at times, but I can comfortably pass this. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 I'm almost entirely in the same boat as Drew here - there's some really cool textural stuff going on here, but it's a bit washed out and cramped, not much is cutting through. None of the samples are bad, but nothing's jumping out and really wowing me either. I think you've got all the pieces in place for this to be a really nice remix, you wouldn't have to change up the arrangement much at all, but just do what you can to work a bit more personalized, interesting sounds/writing in there to make this song your own, and clean up your soudnscape. It's a close call and there's a lot of great stuff going on here, but I'm not quite sold on it yet.NO I'm listening to the revised version, FYI, yet all of this (emphasis added on the dealbreaker) is still right. I'm OK with the source usage, and the arrangement has potential. Small detail, but that little snap added to the core beat from :45-1:42 ends up too downplayed after more elements comes in, which is one reason why the beat ended up sounding too vanilla and flimsy. Vig is right that the dynamics work fine for the genre. The volume and the energy is implied by the composition, but the sound design was too bland and the soundscape was still too messy. For example, at 4:14, the EQ is screwed up so the source melody sounds like it's being swallowed by the padding instead of just being in the background. Clearly, it's meant to be a background player, since that melody purposefully fades in and out. But when it's loud, it's not supposed to be cluttered with the pads. You just have frequencies running into each other and it's muddying up the soundscape and making the parts difficult to distinguish. I don't have any big gripe if it passes, but this deserves (yet) another pass on the production to tweak some things, so everything properly sounds full and separated. NO (borderline) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts