djpretzel Posted May 26, 2005 Share Posted May 26, 2005 Email sub file Doom 2 Into Sandy's City ( Shotgun Rmx) OC Remix.mp3 **Contact Info** Remixer Name: Infyuthsion Remixer Real Name: Mike H Email Adress: lostdragon_411@hotmail.com **Remix Info** Game Remixed: Doom 2 Song Remixed: Into Sandy's City Link to Original Song: http://scragadelic.slipgate.org/master_of_plagiarism/DOOM2-MIDIs/Bobby_Prince_-_Into_Sandy's_City.mid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted May 26, 2005 Share Posted May 26, 2005 http://www.dongrays.com/midi/archive/game/d2/d2map09.mid - "Into Sandy's City" Aight, so we have a trance thing going on with some stock sounds. Not particularly groundbreaking, but let's see where it goes. :46 had a decent original rhythm preparing the listener for what I assume is gonna be the intro of the source tune soon. Really not liking the choice for the lead from :46-1:38, as it was in my face 'n shit, but that's generi-trance for ya. 1:13 had some claps enter the background along with some subtle strings. The buildup was quite long for this 4-minute piece but finally the melody arrived at 1:39. Unfortunately, some muddy vox managed to crowd up the soundfield and actually muffle the melody. Those hats gradually getting louder starting at 2:06 were really annoying. Very generic sounds still by 2:35. Nothing very interesting. Sounds like something a beginner Commodore scene arranger could think of, in that this was just a straightforward trance adaptation of the original. Adapted capably, sure, but not very innovative or even interpretive. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harmony Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 Good work Mike. The build up through 1:39 was very dynamic and the drop in momentum to the intro of the source at 1:40 worked to the song’s credit. In the context of a remix however, a 1:40 intro with a classic paint-by-numbers trance intro that has little to do with the source is not going to cut it. Considering that the source itself is repetitive and not very melodic, every available second of this mix needs to be used for expansion and reinterpretation. After 1:40 I simply hear the theme repeated at the same tempo, in the same key, from a few various synths. We’d love to hear more of your own style here Mike so more original melody or something to break the standard monotony would be great. Man that 909 snare fill starting at 2:05 is really plain. Why not layer it with something or EQ it so we can’t tell it’s just the default 909? In general though, I don’t have a problem with many of the synths. They’re generic but most of them fit the style. Unfortunately even if you’re the best chef in the world, if you use generic ingredients to bake a cake, you end up with a generic cake. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
analoq Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 i've said in the past that i will applaud relying on genre cliches if they are executed with skill. and while the skill here isn't great or even notable, it's there. the mix builds up, it builds up a trance chord pattern the main theme enters. we break into the main theme over the trance chord pattern and all elements get thrown in it's a simple formula that works in a radio-edit length trance tune. the production values are nothing compared to a professional trance track, but there's nothing unforgivable given that this is an amateur community. in the end, this mix will not pass and it shouldn't. it's an overly underwhelming and unimaginitive remix, but since you avoided most of the common pitfalls of the trance remixes we get, you deserve 1 yes. yes way to not screw up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny B Posted June 12, 2005 Share Posted June 12, 2005 I wholeheartedly agree with analoq here. It's a very enjoyable tune, but that's probably because i'm a sucker for generic, cheesy pop/trance. It reminds me of the music that plays while waiting in line for the Riddler's Revenge at Magic Mountain. I'm fairly certain the presentation here is intentional, as it's cheesy and simplistic, but not annoying or grating on the ears. My main beef, however, is that while it is indeed a successful adaptation, it doesn't really take the original anywhere with regards to interpretation. It's like the original was put in some type of trance machine and a lever or switch of some type was pulled. I don't think total reinvention was the intent here, but there's not really enough originality here to qualify it for OCR. I really want to pass this, so a lot of people can hear it. I'm sure a lot of listeners would really enjoy it. But given the guidelines I am sworn to obey, I can't classify this as the passing variety. I'm not going to delve into technical critique, as I don't think it's required. It's well produced, just not conceptually inline with our regulations. It kills me to say it, but NO -D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djpretzel Posted June 16, 2005 Author Share Posted June 16, 2005 Certainly not bad or hard on the ears, and certainly not a rip, and thus difficult for the judges, but I agree with the call that something *more* is needed and that things feel a little cookie-cutter at times. Closing with 4th no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts