Emunator Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 Original Decision: http://ocremix.org/forums/showthread.php?t=32478 ....yeah. Your ReMixer name: Brandon Strader Your real name: Brandon E. Strader Your website: http://www.bstrader.net/ Your userid 3123 Name of game(s) arranged: Donkey Kong Country 3 Name of individual song(s) arranged: Brothers Bear (SNES) Dave Wise http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JibGNrKohU Made this in a couple days for DKC3 project.. It was very fun to make due to how generic bluesy rock the source is.. I kinda stayed in that same general area with it.. I was inspired by Uprising by Muse for the drums and bassline.. but for the most part I think it is extremely true to the original... there's a couple solo breaks but they're in the style of the song and give a short break before heading back into the rock... give it a few listens and let it grow on you, this stuff is contagious.... anyway I'll make it easy on you this time with a source map instead of text. This shows exactly in the session where all the source usage is... http://www.bstrader.net/remixes/unbearablesource.png as you can see it's well over 70%... So it is a little bit on the conservative side, but I think the little change in the bassline and drums might even that out a bit. I've been getting in a lot of trouble with the panel for having too many elements in the songs... I tried to keep it simple this time... there's not a lot of pieces fighting for your attention and everything can be heard clearly and fully. A couple great blues solos that I really enjoyed playing. Anyway, I suck at write-ups so here's my copy pasta from dkc3 secret forum; "I made this song in a couple days from the source "Brothers Bear". I liked the bluesy rock sound of the original, so I stayed very true to that with the remix. The remix is very conservative, meaning that it does have a huge rendition of the source in there, but there are also a couple nice little breakdowns as well. "Unbearable" is dedicated to the highly annoying Emunator, which I severely hate and wish nothing but torment and pain for. The song proudly displays a love for live instrumentation and blues solos!" LT EDIT (9/18): Got a breakdown from Brandon: Hi.The problem in 2010 was production. I didn't change the structure, just varied the leads up a bit as per judge suggestions and "fixed" the production. That png hasn't existed for well over a year, here's new info: Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEIK08yvpCU 0:00 - 0:08 - Intro is 0:02 to 0:03 of the source repeated a few times. 0:08 - 0:16 - Don't think this would be considered source. 0:16 - 1:04 - Straight source pretty much (0:04 in the youtube) 1:04 - 1:27 - Original solo / breakdown bit 1:27 - 2:08 - More source from 0:04 in youtube. Follow the bluesy key progressions, the solos trade off more here and it's less lead melody-based but it's still source 2:08 - 2:39 - Original cowbell solo 2:39 - 3:28 - More source from 0:04 in youtube. 3:28 to end - nice little solo and ending, no source there. This is a really old song now, noticed the first sub was in 2010. I realize it's straight forward but I wouldn't have it any other way, if you hear what I was working with you understand the choices to maintain that musical integrity and not deviate ridiculously far from the original. It's got original bits that are inspired by the mood of the source in the same basic genre as the original and it's a blues song and I haven't done nor plan to do that genre again so it'll be cool to see if this can finally pass. Not sure how I feel about the original write-up but I don't really have too much to say anymore these days, you know what I mean? I'm a tired old man! Thanks, Brandon ------------------------http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEIK08yvpCU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 A little loud and a little crowded, but pretty awesome. The realism of the piano sequencing wasn't there, but the part was buried enough in the background to not stick out like a sore thumb. That said, it's honestly a bit disappointing that part was spruced up further. If it had been exposed more than this, that would have been the one weak link that would have killed this sub dead. I'll be real, please try not to have your piano sound this thin and mechanical again. You may be thinking it sounds like a legit saloon style or something, but the thinness ensures it doesn't; you're a better musician than that. Cool stuff with the Rhodes at 2:08 to give the arrangement some new sounds before transitioning back to guitar at 2:40. Awesome comping-style stuff at 3:28 for the quick finish. The dynamics were understated, but well done. I see in the previous vote that the dynamics came into play, but at least with this version I wasn't bothered here. The source itself was pretty repetitive, but this subtlely avoided that through good original writing ideas to provide variation. The source breakdown Brandon gave in his original submission is seemingly 404'ed (won't load for me now), but there was a lot of original-sounding sections that didn't seem connected with the source despite the claim of a 70% connection, so I'd need a breakdown here. If that checked out, I'd pass it, but aside from the melody, the connections weren't obvious from a couple of listens. I'm assuming there are some backing pattern usages happening according to Brandon, but it needs to be spelled out. No vote until I get more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WillRock Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Pretty cool, but I have to agree with larry's assessment that there isn't enough source here. My own breakdown of source goes as follows: 0:00-0:08 0:16-1:04 1:27-1:32 1:44-1:55 2;05-2:09 2:41-3:06 That gives me about 100 seconds of source usuage in a 230 second remix. Seems to me that the breakdown in the first post also throws in some parts where there are original solos etc. Yes he uses the 12 bar blues for much of the track, and while I am willing to give him some credit for that, I still think this is pushing the bar into the "too liberal" terriority. Production is decent, I really like the guitar playing, and while I think the piano is a bit better than larry suggests, I don't think it quite works in context. Add on some rather strong overcompression to the table and I think that decides it for me. Its a good base, but it needs some TLC to the production, and a bit more source usage for the pass. Keep working at it bro! NO(resub) Revote above ^^^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palpable Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 You've definitely gotta count sections like 1:27-2:08 and 3:06-3:28. I can see not counting the standard blues chords, but the guitar is following the source bassline/guitar (hard to tell what instrument it is) pretty much 1-for-1, it's a really clear connection IMO. I actually agree with Mr. Strader's breakdown completely, which puts him over 50%. Mixing was a little funky - compression a bit high, piano thin. A lot of things sound slightly off, but the overall picture sounded ok. The performances and writing helped smooth over some of that. Yeah I think I'm ok with this. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emunator Posted December 24, 2012 Author Share Posted December 24, 2012 I was a little shocked to see that this was even borderline in terms of source usage, but when I sit down and actually look at it, it's a lot more questionable than I thought initially. I still feel like the overt source usage, plus the bassline and guitar as well as the various solos that loosely reference the original, push this over the edge. Production wise, it's not perfect. I still don't like how the piano's sitting in the mix, but overall this is a pretty energetic performance that's true to the blues style. The guitar/bass tone sounds great, and the added percussion and vocal work is excellent. I feel like this one's comfortably over the bar now thanks to the production overhaul. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OceansAndrew Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 compression is a bit hot, but the honky tonk piano mixing I am definitely fine with. The source itself is really repetitive, which makes the mix's barroom blues rock structure feel pretty fine. There are nice change ups in the mix with breakdowns, and it seems to me like the source breakdown is about right. There isn't much of this southern fried stuff on the site, and while I think some vocals overall would have improved it, I think it's passable. Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WillRock Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 Been looking at responses to this thread, and the YES's this song has, and had a word with emunator about it because this is actually a rather strange occurrence. The source itself, is basically 12 bar blues, but its more than that. Take away the melody and there is literally nothing to tie it to the source specifically. That guitar riff has been used in literally hundreds of blues songs, status quo and ZZ top alone used it over and over again. The bass is root note stuff, and the drums I suppose are distinctive enough but brandon variates them to being their own drum beat effectively during those solos. If this track didn't have the melody you'd have no idea it wasn't a random blues jam. Now, don't get me wrong. I understand that music DOES have its limitations and there is always song out there that sounds like something else. However, we are looking at a chord progression and backing thats basically in the public domain with how simple and overused it is. My question is should we consider that in the vote? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkeSword Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 I see it like this: anything that isn't 12-bar blues in this piece is essentially just original writing. Rough estimate puts this mix at ~135 seconds of actual 12-bar blues material. The thing about a 12-bar blues jam is that it's characteristic of that kind of music to just play the "head" (the basic melody) once or twice and then launch into an extended solo section that could take up much more than simply playing the head once or twice at the start and once more at the end. If you and I got together and played C Jam Blues we could riff for like 8 minutes just going back and forth with solos, but that song that we're playing is still technically C Jam Blues if we play the head a couple of times at the start and the end. Brandon's woven the head of the piece throughout this song, carefully reminding us, despite all the soloing and riffing material, that this is a remix of Brothers Bear. There's enough material here that sticks to the original chord progression to keep the piece on target, and the main melody does show up a lot throughout the piece. It's a good point to consider, but I don't think the ubiquity of the chord progression is grounds for rejection. Soloing and riffing is a staple of the genre. I think it's alright here. All that said, I think it's a solid track. Good playing, good balance between elements. No complaints here. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palpable Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 I can see Will's point here, but I see 12 bar blues as more of a tool to be used in a song, rather than a song itself, and as such I feel ok counting that as source usage. Miiiiight be problematic if that was all Brandon used from the source, but with the melodies in play, it feels overwhelmingly connected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WillRock Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 The thing about a 12-bar blues jam is that it's characteristic of that kind of music to just play the "head" (the basic melody) once or twice and then launch into an extended solo section that could take up much more than simply playing the head once or twice at the start and once more at the end. If you and I got together and played C Jam Blues we could riff for like 8 minutes just going back and forth with solos, but that song that we're playing is still technically C Jam Blues if we play the head a couple of times at the start and the end. Brandon's woven the head of the piece throughout this song, carefully reminding us, despite all the soloing and riffing material, that this is a remix of Brothers Bear. Seems fair enough. After listening to the other judges, and re-evaluating the track, it just about checks out for me, but I still think its borderline. Still, a pass is a pass. I'm cool with it. GO! YES(borderline) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 Forgot to come back to this, but just co-signing with a YES. I was just high and neglecting the steady bassline usage, which more than put the source involvement over the top. WillRock had a good point about the nature of the source tune being standard blues, but as I mentioned in the #j chat last night, that's not really the source's fault. As long as the source wasn't flat out lifted from another non-VGM song, it's valid to arrange. I still poo on the piano here, but this rises above that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts