OceansAndrew Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 Your ReMixer name - CJthemusicdude Submission Information Name of game(s) arranged - Cheetahmen 2 Name of arrangement - Karate Cheater Name of individual song(s) arranged - Level BGM Link to the original soundtrack (if it is not one of the sound archives already available on the site) - Your own comments about the mix, for example the inspiration behind it, how it was made, etc. - http://imgur.com/LC8Eu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halc Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 was kinda disappointed when that bass at the beginning dropped out right at the first impact. would love to hear that carry on, maybe just tone it back a bit, and do more with the filter. That bass has a really great, bouncy tone that's begging for some more sweep/LFO. The lead synths are really vanilla and just kinda cheesy, and the bit with the bells at the end could have been less stiff, more human sounding. overall I think this makes it just over the bar, but an edit on those synths might be for the best, and could even see them drop some NO's despite the strengths of this mix. your production is definitely reaching a point where your sounding pretty consistently, so props on that and keep up the good work and improvement. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonAvenger Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 I'm hearing a lot of what Halc is saying here, but I think I'm just on the other side of the fence. My issue mostly stems from the second half of the mix. Listening through, the second half isn't nearly as interesting as the first. Part of it is the lack of melody that's relating strongly to the source. Also, the constant tempo/sound structure start to wear thing as things go along. I think there's more that you can do here to bring things together more strongly, so I want you to revisit this one. I will say your production is definitely getting much stronger, as Halc also said. Balance is clear, and the elements are represented well. Send this one back please! NO (resubmit, please) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OceansAndrew Posted November 13, 2012 Author Share Posted November 13, 2012 I think the sounds are really cohesive on this, but the arrangement does feel like it's lacking i development for the second half, and maybe a little too much reliance on the chord progression + kick for the majority of the track. The expansion that was in there was good, but i think more melody in the second half would definitely help. There is a lot of good stuff in this mix, I think it's in need of just a little more melodic interest and reference to the source. No, please resubmit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 Yeah, this is a great start, and I actually didn't mind the approach de-emphasizing the melody, as the source tune structure and writing was still pretty apparent. I thought this was pretty close. The opening was definitely hot with some basic but good rhythmic changes to the source. 1:24's section had the blandest, most generic sounding synths of the entire track without some creative processing and effects to flesh the sound out and make it sound like a good amount of effort and creativity was invested. Leading up to 1:40's transition, this quick section felt pretty aimless and off-key with the rest of the song. Tighten this up. There's some subtle dynamic changes here from section to section, but the textures were ultimately pretty basic. The slow, constant tempo left the basic textures here sounding pretty exposed, and also made it seem like the track dragged and was repetitive, even though no group of sounds stayed in place for more than maybe 40 seconds or so. I think DA and OA are on point here: this sounds like a very strong base, but the second half lost steam, and I also though that one brief dropoff from 1:26-1:40 was sloppy and the low point of the piece. If you can create a bit more dynamic contrast with some new ideas, that could lift it up to a YES. It's definitely something you can improve, CJ, so give it a shot! Good potential here! NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palpable Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Everything I'm hearing up to 1:24 makes it sound like a pass. Really tight beat, good production, interesting changes. There was a little bit of a dropoff in quality at 1:24, but it didn't last long. Just when I wanted to hear something new, you introduced the dropout section at 2:12, which had some cool distorted growling in the background. I can see why some of the other judges want to see more to this, but both the short length and tight production worked in your favor and I think it's a pass. Best of luck getting YESes. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishy Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Yeah this is a tricky one, its certainly close. I would say that overall its just a NO from me. The first half is pretty good but it's sooo bass light on the drop. You need a proper bass in there, try out whatever you have at the moment an octave down, or keep the first bass going. After 1:30 it starts to sound a bit short on ideas, and there's plenty to work with in the theme especially in terms of a solid melody. Have a re-think of the direction in the second half, and you can change this from a borderline no to a solid yes. NO, plz resub Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WillRock Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Wow. This hits HARD. I dig it. I really like the base here, its solid. The leads duck under the rhythm a little too much because of the compression but the production otherwise is solid. There is also a lack of bass at points in the mix. There IS a bass present, but it doesn't hit in till 1:42. It sounds much much more full there as a result. My problem was that it feels like you meant for there to be some sort of build up, but I didn't really notice one. As a result, I felt it climaxed at the beginning, felt it needed a bit more, then BAM at 1:42 with the bass, but by then it had started to get stale with the same textures and rhythms. I think something that would make this work better from a structural point of view would be to really play around with the dynamics more. That way, you'll really be able to maximise the potential of your arrangement, because what you've got is a bit too good not to be complimented with the lack of a suspenseful build up. You could of course choose to tackle the arrangement some other way, but I feel it is just borderline on the NO side because of the structural problems. Even so, this is awesome, and if you don't send this back, I will kick you. NO (resub) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts