djpretzel Posted May 26, 2005 Share Posted May 26, 2005 Hiya! I know it's been awhile since I've released anything, and this one isn't exactly landmark or anything (although I am cooking up some serious sweetness), but it's fun. Silly. Wacky. Zany. Very trackery. Game: Earthbound Remixer: Mazedude Title: "Battling Organs" System: SNES Original Composer: Keiichi Suzuki Original Game Theme: Battle 1 I took a weird, dissonant, short and funky original... and made this. Enjoy. Mazedude http://www.mazedude.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted May 26, 2005 Share Posted May 26, 2005 http://www.snesmusic.org/spcsets/mo2.rsn - "Battle Against a Weird Opponent" (mo2-029.spc) This one played it pretty close to the tempo and composition of the original. It certainly made the source material more energetic and eccentric, but that was on account of the synth and production choices, not any melodic rearrangement. The style was too similar to the original, but most of the ideas were additive, attempting the expansive arrangement route. I liked all of the additions in there though, and as much as I was inititially inclined to flatly go NO. There were several creative support additions, and other parts were absolutely gold, like the wholly original melody from 1:20-1:41 on top of the chorus. Most of the additions felt true to the Earthbound style, though some stuff came across as too random and not working in tandem with the source tune melody, for example 1:02-1:19 and 2:06-2:25. On the plus side none of the additions were repetitive except for the additions on the chorus at 2:26, which was fine. Loads of variation in the additions, but none in the foundation of the track. If this was back in the day, this wouldn't be a problem for me, but I feel like there's gotta be more to it. Does it compare favorably to relatively recent past material where the source tune style and tempo has been kept verbatim yet the composition has been substantially expanded, like Mark Vera's Laser Squad "Mission Recalled" or Makke's Lost Patrol "In the Air Mix"? To me all of the additive elements clicked there, and they don't all click here. That's definitely not because the source tune you chose was "too strange". The track abruptly cut off at 2:51 as well. Anything that could be done to make some of the most prominent additive ideas work more closely (and I suppose I should say logically) with the source would push this over the bar as an additive-approach arrangement. Even "Treehouse of the Ancients" had a great original breakdown that pieced together thematically with the source material; maybe bring in an idea on that level? Damn, really don't wanna do this again. Chris is a hero in the community, no lie. Sorry, man. :'-( NO (borderline/resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harmony Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 Some of the percussion work sounds like early 90s throwback R&B and I’m really digging its deceptively simple style accented by tons of FX and subtle variety (such as the introduction of the ride at 1:30). Whereas the source is completely repetitive, the theme driven sections of this mix morph and evolve allowing a lot of really cool creative stuff to be packed into 2:51. I agree that some of the additive elements, especially near the beginning, didn’t work as well as they could have, even given the “weird” groove that the mix is after. The pitch bends on the organs and synths were interesting but there were points when I felt that the dissonance didn’t work to the tracks credit (0:11, 0:22, 0:25). After 0:30 though I thought everything was spot on. The lead elements all occupied very clear places on the soundstage which made for enjoyable and intentional harmony clashes. In addition we have seamless transitions to much more traditional melodic sections with some slick cross-panned synths that still manage to hold remnants of the source’s off-the-beaten-melodic-path vibe (1:20, 2:26). IMO, the lead at 2:06-2:26 is amazingly groovetastic and works wonders with the feel of the source. Fade-out on a 2:51 track was a letdown I must say. I was looking for a dissonant auditory assault for the end so my expectations may be getting the best of me. I feel that the additions to the source in the form of creative expansion of the rather sparse original elements, coupled with superb execution and plenty of original melodies justifies the close adherence to the source structure. Great work Mazedude. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
analoq Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 i complain more about dissonance, chromaticism and 'wrong notes' than a number of the judges. and i do it because most people don't know how to use 'em, or they use 'em in contexts which are ineffective. mazedude knows how to use dissonance and in this case he uses it in a context that is completely unexpected -- but still entirely effective. i understand larry's concern and i wish this had more rearrangment qualities at it's base rather than at it's peak-- but this one's just too much fun. yes though if this passes, does someone wanna contact mazedude and try to get a version of this with a better fade-out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkeSword Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 This reminds me of that sythesis you'd usually hear on a Sega Genesis. Analoq is right; the dissonance is used brilliantly here. Even though it's dissonant, it still manages to lock together in a coherent way. Nice. Problem is it's too short, and the track cuts off in a bad way at 2:51. Needs to be longer; more material + better ending. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The wingless Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 J-j-judge Mazedude? I can't. It's like judging Jordan on his dunk, Tiger on his stroke, and Peter North on his range. I... I CAN"T! And yet, here we are. So, from what I'm hearing, the biggest problem is the wonky ending? I *agree* to a certain degree. With so much delightfully irreverant music theory in the majority of the piece, a fade-out ending is a bit perplexing, if not inexcusable. But I think even the great Gods of our OCR Pantheon need to adhere to the same rules as the damn dirty noobs. Fix the ending, a proper English ending, and you'll get posted, same as everyone else 'round here Resubmit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zykO Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 hahah too whacky for most? try the zyko i dig. the organ work is phenomenally distracting (which, from where i'm sitting, is a good thing) but the groove beneath it is stellar with fantastic percussion. when i'm listening to this, i feel uneasy and happy to be so and that is odd. very dissonant, very smart and very fun. the accompaniment to the lead is fantastic and REALLY is trackery. i acknowledge the concern about its length and amount of arrangement... but in its defense, being a 3 minute track does not mean its short (perhaps too short because we want more mazedude) and the arrangement achieves what its set out to the ending. umm. no, i don't think it works. fades are awesome when used for the right reasons and this just isn't how i'd end it. but this is his track and is ended precisely as it ought to be. right. its good. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zircon Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 Man, Earthbound has some WEIRD music. It's hard enough to listen to, much less arrange in an interesting and enjoyable way. Even considering that, I think Mazedude has done a good job in his work on this mix. The original is ridiculously sparse and dissonant; the ReMix, less so, with some more.. pleasant additions and variations. It's tough to listen to at times, and I don't think I'd object if changes were made to some of the chords to make 'em sound just a little more natural, somehow. Production values were great all around - I don't feel the need to speak about those. This is very difficult to judge because the source is so random and unstructured, and thus, the rearrangement will have some degree of that. However.. there's solid sound quality and a quality interpretation, despite it's highly unorthodox execution. Shnabubula will have some company now. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 I heard back from Chris in case the cut-out during the fade was unintentional, but he said it was a purposeful choice. If it's the fadeout that concerns you, well... it's supposed to do that. There you go y'all, no more mystery! Looking for more votes, bros. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny B Posted June 11, 2005 Share Posted June 11, 2005 Every once in a while we'll get submissions where i'm not sure if the strange sound quality is intentional. The most blatant "offender" with this kind of presentation I can think of is Shnabubula. I don't think it's any secret that I'm a huge fan of Shna's work. Why do I bring up such a wacky allusion? Because this track reminds me of that vein of the bizarre, the avant-garde. I believe that Mazedude's wackiness is completely intentional here. I mean - he's Mazedude. Fanboism aside, I don't profess to be an expert in the obscure, but what is here is just about the best interpretation I can render in my own mind about what the source could inspire. It's not a brilliant onslaught of harmonic progression and melodic transcendence - No, this is a pseuso-atonal journey into the nether realms of Crazy, Anyone who disagrees with this OCRemix's legitimacy can explain to me a better way of interpreting such an insane original. The fadeout/cutoff is fine. The original does it as well, and it serves the same purpose. This ReMix, in my book, is a prime example of a solid reinterpretation of the original that places creativity first and sound quality second - as it always should be. This is another submission that I feel doesn't need the little details pointed out to qualify it. Mazedude knows what he is doing, and he does what he does better than anyone else out there. Go, boi. YES -D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Israfel Posted June 11, 2005 Share Posted June 11, 2005 Ok, this is friggin' cool. It seems the only true objection is that some feel that it doesn't expand on the original track enough, and I just can't agree with that criticism at all. A tad on the short side, but it's an adequately developed, well executed, and creative mix; it gets an easy yes from me. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts