djpretzel Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 My Artist Name: Deft Flux Game Remixed: Descent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harmony Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 Ah, memories of saving up $5 to buy the shareware version of Descent on two 3.5” diskettes. Good times, good times. This has got a pulsing vibe that I’m really digging. Although the main beat is a chill oom-tss deal, there’s some subtle and at times rather intricate percussion going on behind it which really drives the track. The synth that carries the main theme at 1:26 is refreshingly smooth, although a bit quiet for my tastes, and in general the choice of synths and their processing fits well with the ambient feel. Too much is happening in the lower registers. Through 1:25 we have a very low bass, low strings, reverbed toms and a pounding kick. The creamy synth at 1:26 is low and many of the sound FX are low as well. While I won’t say that it’s muddy, I will say that the combination feels indistinct and heavier than it should. Props on handling so many lows without the mud but a more prominent lead and more high frequencies from something other than the percussion would make for a more polished sound. My biggest issue is the limited arrangement. For a 5 minute mix not much happens compositionally beyond the source. There are extended groove sections like 1:55-2:15 and 2:33–3:11 but more interesting synth processing, additional FX or something along those lines is needed to keep them from sounding as repetitive and bare as they do. Additionally, there aren’t any significant modifications to source instrumentation so at times I feel that this is something of a simple upgrade with a tempo change. Great sounds, great mastering, cool groove but a little repetitive and not expansive enough for me to pass outright. I’m close on this one but I think the source can be used much more creatively. Work on it and please resubmit. The first Descent soundtrack deserves all of the attention it can get. Borderline NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The wingless Posted June 8, 2005 Share Posted June 8, 2005 This song perplexes me ideologically. Consider, for but a moment, how stark the source material is. Descent 1's intro theme doesn't have a lot going for it in and of itself. Ideologically, we as judges want you to go above and beyond the source material; to make it your own. The question, then, is how much can you add, given such stark source material? It's the musical equivalent of divide by zero. In any event, I'm wrestling with the idea of what is enough addition. Is it an absolute? Is it a relative? Since these are difficult questions I pose, I'm going to skip the philosophical bombast in the closet and just focus on what I *do* know. I like it for what it is: quasi-trance. I don't think it's supposed to be a Wham! Make it Big! developmental piece. I think it's supposed to undulate and slowly rise and fall like the movements of a serpent. And, in this regard, I think it really works. YES now, to be discredited by my peers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 Short and sweet. I liked what's been done with the mix so far, in terms of giving it some basic but decent beatwork, as well as an ambient feel, though I felt the track was too trebly. Too much high-end and not enough midrange. I liked the sound of the lead introing in at 1:26. 2:14-2:33 had some average stuff going on with another brief section of the material, and was repeated at 3:12-3:31. By about 2:30 the beatwork was getting too repetitive, and should have offered a bit of variation so the approach didn't sound a bit lazy. The rest of the song after 3:31 progressed ok, and had some little touches added here and there that picked things up at the end. But at the same time, this could be a more. A bit more balance EQing, less repetition of the beats, and a bit more meat on the arrangement. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrayLightning Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Total imbalance here for me. There's a lot of heavy bass and a lot of really cutting frequencies with the hats, with not much inbetween those. Honestly, by the end they were getting really, really redundant, and the strong nature of the high frequencies it wore really thin by me by the end. I think you need to mix and spice up the beatwork more. It's really repetitive. For almost 5 minutes, it felt like it was repeating the same thing over and over. Would be one thing if it was strong material, but I think it's too problematic for me. I would go back to the drawing board and focus on the best elements of the mix. Trim lots of fat out and repackage it with more compositional, instrumental elements. Also fix the major production problems. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djpretzel Posted June 18, 2005 Author Share Posted June 18, 2005 Like John says, the source material IS minimal... and production here is actually pretty decent - I *like* the blend of a very phat, electric sounding bass with semi-trance elements. There's a lot that's working, but at five minutes I think the biggest problem is developmental - there's no climax and it feels like there should be one, and the melodic elements are background to the trancier riffs. I think some additions and dynamic variations - perhaps a breakdown section, countermelody of some sort, etc. - could help this out a bit. It's potentially worth resubmitting if such changes are made, as pieces are definitely clicking. As is, however, I'm closing out with the 4th and final no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts