DragonAvenger Posted May 20, 2012 Share Posted May 20, 2012 Remixer Name: TheGuitahHeroe Song/Game Remixed: Kanto Gym Leader Battle from Pokemon Gold/Silver/Crystal ( )Remix Name: "The Gym Leader is Royally Pissed" I actually did this for a Pokemon G/S/C project being done on the forum I'm a moderator of, which can be found here [shamlesspromotion] http://www.fanmadepokemon.proboards.com [/shamlesspromotion]. Shoutout to EmuZSNES for coming up with the title! But yeah. More dubstep crap here. I suppose I should provide a breakdown for this one: Source: Intro -- Part 1 -- Part 2 -- Part 3 -- Major Bridge -- Loop to Part 2 and repeat I've provided the number of seconds in (parentheses) next to the times to make it easier to count them to calculate total source usage. :12 - :15 (4) and :21 - :24 (4) -- Bells play lead from part 2 of source :24 - :35 (12) -- Almost straight source usage from part 3 of source :37 - :43 (7) -- Lead plays major bridge :48 - :51 (4) -- DIRECT AUDIO SOURCE USAGE LOL __________________________________________________________________________________________________ (from :51, the source is used mainly for backing harmonies, I'm putting these into a side pool in case this doesn't actually count as source, although I think it does) :51 - :55 (5), :57 - 1:00 (4), 1:15 - 1:18 (4), 1:22 - 1:25 (4), 1:31 - 1:33 (3), and times all that times two for the repeat of the chorus in the second half (so make that (10), (, (, ( and we'll say (7))-- high bells play lead from part 2 (all of these are like one second long:) 1:03, 1:06, 1:09, 1:21, 1:24, 1:27 (6 altogether), and against times it by two for the repeat in the second half -- bass plays riff from part 1 of source 2:29 - 3:17 (all throughout the second chorus): DIRECT AUDIO SOURCE USAGE LOL plays in the background throughout (I actually have no idea how many seconds to count this as since it plays during a lot of other source parts as well, so I'll settle for (20) seconds or something... __________________________________________________________________________________________________ Alright, that was the side pool. I'm sure you guys have had more fcked-up breakdowns than this. Right?.... ... 1:05 - 1:10 (6) -- lead from part 3 of source escapes from the wrath of the dubz for a short while 1:34 - 1:40 (7) -- same, except from the latter half of part 3. 1:40 - 1:50 (11) -- hardcore noodling of lead from part 3. 1:58 to 2:01 (4) -- riff from part 1. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Oh yeah, and DIRECT AUDIO SOURCE USAGE LOL plays throughout the break from 1:40 to 2:04 (2ND SIDE POOL FCK YEAH) (I'm counting this towards the (7) seconds during the break which did not include other source material...in the side pool of course) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2:04 - 2:16 and 2:16 - 2:26 (24) -- straight source usage from part 3, with the latter section being half-tempo or whatever you call it 3:17 - 3:29 (13)-- Almost straight source usage from part 3 of source again 3:30 - 3:35 (6)-- Lead plays major bridge again And I think that's about it. ADDING TIME (ambiguity ftw): Regular Pool: 102 of 228 seconds total source = 44.7% (well that's not that good is it) Side Pool: 80 of 228 seconds total source = 35.1% (I guess this makes it better??? LOL) Total: 182 of 228 seconds of total source (regular and side pool included) = 79.8% source So yeah. Whether or not this meets arrangement requirements depends on whether the 'side pool' source usage actually counts as source usage.................. I hope you guys enjoy regardless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonAvenger Posted July 1, 2012 Author Share Posted July 1, 2012 Thought about this one for a while. I think the arrangement is there, although it's not my favorite to listen to. The dubstep elements are mostly well-done, but I don't know how well it really fits into the arrangement. Regardless of that, I thought the arrangement does have some pretty good moments where the original gets a fresh light. Overall I think the song is strong enough to pass, although I'm curious what the other judges will have to say. Oh, except the ending cuts off suddenly. Gotta fix that. YES (conditional) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halc Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 I feel as if there are small production things I want to critique, but I'm not sure exactly how to spit them out. for what it's worth I enjoyed this, that bassline was really slick and the mixing was solid overall despite me wanting to twiddle with it .. dug the slowed-down take on the theme too, definitely didn't have any trouble hearing the source throughout this. nice work once again, my friend. edit: not noticing the cutoff ending, seems to taper off that last note just fine, to me anyway. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emunator Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 I can't say I'm personally a fan of the actual bassline here. I find it kind of repetitive and detached from the rest of the song, and it personally distracts me as a listener from all the other cool stuff going on in the arrangement. I probably won't be keeping this one on any of my playlists because of that, but honestly I can recognize that it's a matter of personal taste more than anything. Your handling of the rest of the theme was exquisite (I would honestly love to hear a wub-less version of this arrangement) and the modifications you made to the theme itself are great. I think people will probably dig this on the whole. Sorry for spending most of this vote ragging on your track, it's still objectively a pass, as far as I'm concerned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OceansAndrew Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 This is really nice, but the timing of the bass is off and late. Either nudge the data so it peaks sooner, or adjust the oscillator to peak sooner. I thought the rest of the track was excellent, but the bass was so overpowering and didn't feel like part of the song. Volume on it needs to come down and the timing needs to be fixed. No, please resubmit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishy Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 I've remixed this source in the past and I would have had trouble identifying it. The source plays total side-fiddle to the bass which may be genre-typical but doesn't indemnify it from the rules. Standards say 'identifiable and dominant'. With that in mind I can't pass this on arrangement. Your breakdown isn't wrong per se but I disagree with some of the less direct usage you've counted. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WillRock Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 First off, i'm going to say that this mix is pretty awesome. I am also going to agree with my fellow judges about the dubstep bass Its a cool idea in theory but its very dominant for something that clearly lacks source usage. I don't believe the issue is just with the bass however, I believe the lack of a lead presence is also to blame. For example, I counted 1:35 as source because I heard the lead clearly. I do hear the lead with the bells, just, but it feels like there is too much release and it lacks presence so i'm more hesitant to count it. I will give you more credit than fishy, since I haven't remixed this source and heard it clearly in the remix quite frequently. However, I do think this suffers from poor levelling, which is not only hurting your production, but its hurting your arrangement because its undermining the work you've put in the details which could have helped to pass this. Basically, I feel like this needs fixing. The source usage doesn't add up to enough for me. I understand that the bass is suppose to be a central part of dubstep, but don't put it above everything else to the point that you start losing all the instruementation around it, especially if it lacks source usage. NO (resub) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emunator Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 Honestly, after reading some of the other votes, I've decided to actually change my vote around. I guess the bass wasn't as much of a subjective personal-taste issue as I thought, and re-listening I definitely feel like there could be some objective improvements made to get this up to the bar and more listenable for everybody. Sorry to hold this up. NO (resub!) (oh wait, I just realized I never actually wrote in a vote the last time. Whoops.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palpable Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 A surprisingly tough call. It's a good song but there's two sticking points. One: the source is very marginalized in the wubby parts of the song and that leaves the arrangement a little light on source without counting those sections. Personally I would say the source is still dominant, but I can see why others would not. Two: the bass actually gets kind of annoying. Yes, dubstep is supposed to have over-the-top basses, but this gets into the realm of irritating and overused and on that basis, I'm gonna reject it. I realize this borders on making the vote personal, but there is a point at which "troublesome to me" becomes "universally troublesome" and I think I can say this falls a little too far into the latter. I've listened to my fair share of the genre and usually the sounds are not this grating and static. However, I didn't find the same problem OA had regarding the timing though - the delay felt very intentional and tastefully used, like the way rappers sometimes rap behind the beat. It looks like this arrangement is getting rejected for a variety of reasons, which can be discouraging in terms of knowing what to fix, but I don't think this is super far from passing. If you can smooth out the production a little more, I think you can address my concerns, along with the source usage one potentially. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 A surprisingly tough call. It's a good song but there's two sticking points. One: the source is very marginalized in the wubby parts of the song and that leaves the arrangement a little light on source without counting those sections. Personally I would say the source is still dominant, but I can see why others would not. Two: the bass actually gets kind of annoying. Yes, dubstep is supposed to have over-the-top basses, but this gets into the realm of irritating and overused and on that basis, I'm gonna reject it. I realize this borders on making the vote personal, but there is a point at which "troublesome to me" becomes "universally troublesome" and I think I can say this falls a little too far into the latter. I'm co-signing on this. The arrangement is sweet, but the dub-wub parts are too loud/grating AND the source usage, while there, is getting marginalized in volume when that dub-wub stuff's in play. Literally, those are the only 2 production issues for me in the big picture, but they hurt it. I'd go conditional YES, but we're collectively trying to refrain from that going forward, so I'll throw on another NO, but heavily encourage you to tweak the levels of the loud dubstep-style stuff and make sure the airy source usage during those sections isn't getting steamrolled. Smooth out those levels and you're golden, IMO. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts