Jump to content

*NO* Final Fantasy 'Requiem for a Dying World' *RESUB*


DragonAvenger
 Share

Recommended Posts

Thanks for pausing this judgment, in light of the recent evaluation, and stuff like that.

Original judgment: http://ocremix.org/forums/showthread.php?t=33556

Requiem for a Dying World (Final Fantasy 1 album)

New write-up:

Chernabogue says: "Brandon started the FFIX project, but it was then directed by Fishy (that's what I read). He decided to make a heavy metal album to cover FF1 and I joined it, though I was not as good as other metalheads involved in the project. I first wanted to do 'Victory Fanfare', but it was already claimed by NintenJoe, so I decided to do 'Dead Music'. The source is simple but very effective. An organ/guitar duet was pretty obvious to do. I did the arrangement and Brandon recorded the guitars and bass for the track."

Brandon says: "I had originally made a mellotron-heavy version of this and the mellotron sounds in general seemed to be pretty unpopular with the panel for their mechanicalness, so now this version has lush LA Scoring Strings in it, some EWQL Choir and Alicia's Keys. All of the guitars and bass were re-recorded, and I loaded up my more modernly customized drum preset. I had to re-record some of the key parts to make them sound more natural as a violin. Tweaked the EQ on everything so it slides together like pb&j on bread. It was both an honor and a privilege to work with Chernabogue, would do it again in a heartbeat."

--------------------

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 months later...

If the strings are sequenced, how do you have massive "performance flubs" at :24 and :29? It doesn't sound dissonant in a way that works, it's just sloppy.

The piano sample sounds OK, but the sequencing was too mechanical and dragged this down. The drums were improved and don't sound as hollow as the first version, but the snare tone still had no bite, and the writing was still plain and metronome-ish.

This really started falling apart at 2:41 - the bowed strings sounded needlessly out of tune in spots and the timing wasn't tight enough. The guitar chugs were serviceable but lacked energy, and the drums were anemic & empty. There was 0 synergy with the instrumentation, and it ended up tanking the piece.

The arrangement concept was still fine as far as being creative, interpretive, and expansive. But the polish still isn't there. This was an improvement from the last version with the production, with better instrument choices, but it still needs its screws tightened even more, especially for the final section.

NO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm on Larry's side here, this doesn't feel like it's there, either. The performance flubs on the lead strings... I can see what you were going for but it totally doesn't work :-( I can barely tell when things are out of tune, let alone out of key, but the lead strings really bothered me here.

Aside from that, I feel like the transition to more traditional metal/orchestral hybrid made this arrangement lose a lot of its personality. I really liked the texture that the mellotrons, organs, and harpsichord brought to the table with your previous iteration of this song, and this version really lost that adventurous feeling as a result of changing the instruments up. Don't get me wrong, I don't feel like what you've got here is bad, per se, but if you do end up going back to touch this one up again, I would personally like to see some of those old instruments come back, albeit in a better-mixed form with higher quality samples :???:

The piano sample is really not cutting it here. The sample is fine for a lot of genres, but in this case it's way too dull and not nearly strong enough to carry a melody line in this context.

I do still like the arrangement, and the production here is getting better but I'd like to see you guys strike a balance between this version and your previous sub. At the very least though, if you're gonna stick with this new style, you need to fix the lead string flubs and replace the piano sound with something more appropriate and dramatic before I can be okay with this.

NO (resub!)

(11/22/11 - vote changed, see below)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I'm siding with the NO votes here. Larry really hit every problem area well. How the strings can be dissonant AND mechanical is a new one on me - I guess maybe you were trying to humanize it, but going that far out of tune is the last thing you want to do. The drums really don't carry the power that is needed, and sound too dry and a little too thin. Arrangement is sweet, but the execution is still not on the level it needs to be.

NO (resubmit)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely an improvement, and I'm not trying to make the perfect the enemy of the good, but the textures & balance still don't click enough with this one yet. I think Brandon can get it going with one more pass.

The texture of the harder drums & electric guitar with perky mallet percussion as the lead just didn't make any sense (:44-1:03). However, when the mallet perc wasn't the lead from 1:46-1:58 and worked in the background to support the dual guitar layers, the texture (while still strange) wasn't off-putting because the instruments were at more complementary levels. Keep it more like that, and it works.

The slow machine gun drums were too loud and obscured the electric guitar & bowed strings (1:26-1:47). In particular, the bowed strings on melody were so crowded out that the details of the arranged melody, while creative & well-written, might as well have not been there due to being too difficult to hear.

REALLY awkward guitar timing from 2:41-3:02, with noticeable timing flubs at 2:52 and 2:55 that were behind the beat.

The drums are beefier, though I felt like there were some sections where the background still felt a bit sparse (e.g. 3:15-3:37). Not a huge issue though, unlike the previous version.

From 3:37-3:47, a lot of parts seemed to bleed/mud together (backing guitar, vox and bowed string), and that also seemed to make the drums sound louder than everything else, which didn't make sense. Brief, but take another look at that.

Very cool finish at 3:48 with just the bowed strings. Very sweet execution.

Good stuff, just give it another pass for the win. Hopefully another J with a good ear can either co-sign or further isolate on what I touched on. I'm still a NO, but I'd love to hear the balance & EQ further tightened up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

ARRANGEMENT / INTERPRETATION

[X] Too conservative - sticks too close to the source in many places

PRODUCTION

[X] Low-quality samples

[X] Unrealistic sequencing (particularly acoustic instrumentation, e.g. notes use the same velocities, mechanical timing) - orch elements and drums

[X] Drums have no energy

[X] Mixing issues - orch elements too bright/thin, piano too soft

STRUCTURE

[X] Pace too plodding

WHAT I LIKE ABOUT THE TRACK

[X] Good live performances

[X] Instrument choices

[X] Source tune choice(s) - Arthur's theme by Christopher Cross

NO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...