Jump to content

OCR01461 - *YES* Mario Paint 'Intense Color'


Recommended Posts

Remixers: sephfire, SuperGreenX

my email: sgxmusic@hotmail.com

Game: Mario Paint

original: sorry, I don't know the title of the original, but we have a midi we referenced: http://www.wam.umd.edu/~danadler/mariopaint_bgm.mid

Name of Remix: Intense Color


Comments from sephfire: "This remix probably isn't what most people would expect to hear from source material like Mario Paint. I'm not even completely sure what musical genre this remix is, but it was darn fun to make and it gave me the opportunity to butcher classic Mario tunes.

Big thanks to NNY for making the request and to SGX for offering to help take this remix to the next level. After working together with him on various projects, it's an honor to finally have an official collaboration to submit to OCR.

Enjoy! "

From SGX: "Sephfire sent me his remix a while back asking for comments. I liked it a lot and thought that I could add some to it and make it sound much more powerful, so I offered to do so with his input. I mainly worked in Acid Pro 5 bouncing pieces from sephfire's Reason file into the project so I could do all kinds of odd drum chopping, reverb distortions, reverses, pads, distorted sounds and the like. I just in general made stuff sound evil. It was great fun because I had sephfire's awesome stuff to work with."


- Danny</P></DIV></html>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://snesmusic.org/spcsets/mpnt.rsn - "Creative Exercise" (mpnt-09.spc)

Wanna firstly point out that I like the track. I think it's good stuff. The main issue I had though was on the production.

This sounds really muddy, indistinct, and cluttered in the mid-range (:10-15 was kind of piercing); not just on account of the reverb or anything, but a lot of sounds are stuffed into the mid-range. And while I hear stereo being employed, all of the effects make the whole thing sound lo-fi and too centered. I've heard SGX employ lots of effects, and his stuff (check out his originals) has been incredibly crisp, IMO.

I'm on the borderline here though. I don't want to be closed minded, but I feel like SGX has pulled off the gritty, dense, and overloaded sound before, and this on the other hand doesn't do it.

1:13-1:41 & 1:56-2:28 & 3:12-3:39 is original, while for the rest, the arrangement seems pretty apparent. I can understand why the arrangement would be scrutinized and/or NOed. The source tune chorus is used briefly (nicely done with the piano, BTW), but source usage is limited to rearranging one or two melodic lines.

Personally, I don't mind the arrangement approach. While admittedly dicey, Sephfire & SGX use the source in a constant and recognizable way. Nonetheless, I can understand NOs based on mainly 1) using only a small section of the source tune, as well as 2) using said section in a perceivably repetitive manner, as well as 3) the original additions deemphasizing the arrangement content. It really depends on one's perspective.

In any case, my concerns are mainly on the production level, as I feel the sounds need to be spread out a little further through more panning and (more importantly) EQing to eliminate some of the very thick clutter going on. If I'm being too picky and this is a solid YES, I'll be outdone by the consensus. I feel like zircon would have the best grasp of the situation. Very enjoyable track, though, and certainly good luck with the rest of the vote, Dan & Danny.

NO (borderline)

EDIT: Vote changed, read below for more information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I love it. Not so familiar with sephire's work, but this has a sgx-type sound with a particularly non-sgx type approach.

Beefy as hell. The production sounds fine to me.

I think we need to set up a donation fund so Larry can stop judging remixes on $30 headphones.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Pretty badass! The production is absolutely badass. Masterful drum/synth work. I think some of the orchestral feel a bit out of place at times (like the marcato strings towards the beginning) but that is really a small gripe. As vig said- VERY beefy, very unique style. A lot of this reminds me of BT of course, particularly the stuttering.

The arrangement is really good too considering the simplicity of the original. The ReMixers really took it in a whole new direction. One could argue that at times it's TOO far but there are enough cameos of the different motifs from the original that I think that argument would not work. Structurally, there's a lot of motion and the whole thing is arranged logically in terms of dynamics and "energy".

No brainer!


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard this mix through all its wip stages and especially during the stages sgx took over and started working on it.

I wasn't going to vote on this, since SGX is probably one of my best friends in the scene; however, I think this decision has dragged on way too long personally, and our apologies to sephfire and sgx for the delay.

Personally I think my most ify issue in the mix is the arrangement. It does get way too liberal at times. SGX had me listen to a wip before and I asked if he could include more of the source material more overtly, and he's done that, so I feel satisfied in that.

The production, I can see where larry is coming at at times. I mean, mixes of this nature and of this strength tend to create a wall of sound that larry finds unappealing in this case. Personally I don't think it's an issue. SGX's fx processing here really made this mix as far as I'm concerned.

Hot, catchy mix.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had revised my vote yesterday and changed it over to YES, but no one was clear on where the change in my POV was, so we try again. After letting the track marinate a lot more, I should have went solid YES on here. Not using bLiNd as THE benchmark (as SGX certainly has his own stuff to compare with), but I listened to EarthBound "Snowbound" just to compare this with an even more dense track, and this just sounds louder yet a lot cleaner and more polished here. Not correcting a snap judgement, but I always remain willing to revisit borderline material to see if I have any new thoughts on it, especially at the recommendation of other judges but moreso of my own choosing.

The "wall of sound"-type approach did bother me a little bit like Gray pointed out, but it shouldn't have been anything substantially affecting my vote. For some reason, this had struck me as a lot more messy and dull-sounding initially. There were still some piercing portions like :10-:15 & 1:42-1:55, and 2:29-2:57 & 3:39-3:54 sounded noticeably more cluttered and messy to me. Some of the loudness really managed to undermine the panning work and make things sound too centered at times, like I mentioned before.

Nonetheless, I think those sections were at least better than something like Adhesive Boy's EB mix where some brief sections, IMO, unfortunately made that track simply sound unskilled. (I can respect the experimental choice, but there's no skill in simply knocking the reverb settings up to 100 and hugely overcompressing things, tantamount to arguing that anything makes for fine music simply because it's possible.)

Overall though, the packed texture wasn't as bad or messy as I had initially made it out to be, so my opinion shifted the other way and I have seen the light. The light's got some intense color. The bombastic sounds are pulled off very well most of the way through. Things were clicking well, and while Gray noticed the somewhat liberal arrangement approach, I'm still a proponent of only arranging a small section of a source as long as it's done in a meaningful, substantial way. Looking forward to the Dannys and their next collab.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Create New...