Jump to content

OCR02811 - *YES* Plok 'Dolphin with a Shotgun'


Recommended Posts

At long last, I present the track I mentioned a while back at MAGFest when we were discussing the Tim Follin project.

Remix Title: "Dolphin with a Shotgun"

Remixer: Mazedude

Game: Plok - http://ocremix.org/game/298/plok-snes

Original Track: "Shotgun"

Description: A remix of the "Shotgun" theme from Plok. Original theme by Tim Follin. The idea here was to take one of the goofiest tracks from the Plok score, and arrange it to sound as though it was from the soundtrack to Ecco: Defender of the Future, which was also composed by Tim Follin. An odd experiment, but fun, and I'd been wanting do an "underwater" style remix for a while.

I know that for many, a remix that goes to a completely different genre, feel, and sound from the original can be weird. But, it can also be a great chance to show the power of arrangement. Such is what I did here, by taking a goofy, silly Plok track and re-working it to sound like the aquatic, ethereal feeling of the Ecco score. If you listen carefully, closely, and pay attention to the string, choir, keys, and leads in my remix, and compare them to what the tuba plays in the original Plok track, you'll hear the same melodies. There's also a brassy counter melody, the brassy chords, little xylophone bits, and more from the original that all correlate to the material in the remix. Granted, I spiced things up a bit with the arpeggios in the background and some added harmonies, but the actual notes heard all should match the original.

Incidentally I've made it easy to compare that two one after the other on my site - http://www.mazedudemusic.com."

That detailed enough do ya think? Let me know if you need anything else.

If you're interested, there's also the opposite concept - an Ecco track in the goofy style of Plok - on http://mazedudemusic.com. Look for "Flipper Costume."

All the best,


EDIT (2/24): Got a breakdown from Chris:

ORIGINAL - 0:00 - 0:08 - tuba theme

REMIX - 1:22 - 1:57 - synth lead

ORIGINAL - 0:15 - 22 - tuba and xylophone

REMIX - 1:58 - 2:32 - synth lead and accomp.

REMIX - 0:46 - 1:20 - soft strings and choir

ORIGINAL - 0:08 - 0:15 - tuba secondary melody

REMIX - 2:33 - 2:50 - bells melody, w/ some decoration

ORIGINAL - oompah oompah chords

REMIX - soft, ethereal string and choir chords; easier to hear at beginning

Hope that helps! If it's still too abstract, don't worry about posting it, just move on to my more popular "Torvus Chips" Metroid Prime 2 remix from HoH 101% Run. :)


PS - To really hear the main theme smoothly in the remix you'll need to play it at like, 400% speed. :)

Edited by djpretzel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be honest. As first blush, it seems too liberal, which could be more of a byproduct of slowing it down and simplifying the melodies, but it's not readily apparent to me as of yet. But I asked for a breakdown, and Chris compared some of the part writing, which is included in the above submission comments. I still don't have a first A-to-B grasp of what's here. but I'll ask.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Oh mazedude, why you got to remix this source in such a creative way??? YOU"RE KILLING ME!

Okay, I went back and forth and back and forth, and indeed I did hear the source. What's there to say. Your remix is beautiful right in the soundscape, it never wears out its welcome, and I can't really complain about anything.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

What? There's a Tim Follin project? Oh THAT old thing... ;)

Checked out Chris's site and I have to say, it would be really nice to have a little "compare to original" button while judging.

So yeah, wow. This is a tough one to judge from an arrangement perspective. I really had to depend on the provided timestamps to figure out exactly what's going on. Not sure how I feel about this arrangment yet, TBH. Gonna let it marinade for a while.

The production has all of the Mazedude charm & creativity we've come to expect, so no issues for me there.


Ok, so I've finally come back to this one. Re-analyzing source usage and some careful listens did bring more to light in my mind. Thanks to Larry for the breakdown as well.

If you're here looking for Plok nostaglia, you should probably check elsewhere. HOWEVER, if you are here looking for more crazy Mazedude creativity, you've come to the right place.


Edited by Nutritious
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Definitely a clever and interesting approach here; Chris went for a distinct style change, and I think he achieved a good result here. It definitely takes a few listens to wrap your ead around the mix and where things are situated, but I think once that's established there's plenty of recognizable source here. Dunno how the crowd's going to react to it, but I thought it was enjoyable none-the-less.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Finally. Took me a long while to wrap my head around this piece, but (after a lot of back and forth comparisons) I hear the source in there.

I rearranged Chris's breakdown to make more sense in following the arrangement:

REMIX - soft, ethereal string and choir chords; easier to hear at beginning (LT Note: :11.25-:37.5 of the arrangement, though Chris would possibly argue it lasted until :46)

ORIGINAL - oompah oompah chords (LT Note: looping in source background from :00-:07)

REMIX - 0:46-1:20 - soft strings and choir

ORIGINAL - 0:15-0:22 - tuba and xylophone

REMIX - 1:22-1:57 - synth lead

ORIGINAL - 0:00-0:08 - tuba theme

REMIX - 1:58-2:32 - synth lead and accomp.

ORIGINAL - 0:15-0:22 - tuba and xylophone

REMIX - 2:33-2:50 - bells melody, w/ some decoration

ORIGINAL - 0:08-0:15 - tuba secondary melody


The track was 3:27.75 long, so I needed 103.875 seconds of overt source usage for the pass on arrangement:

11.25-37.5, 46-1:11.5, 1:21.5-1:47, 1:57-2:03, 2:05.75-2:13, 2:14-2:19, 2:50-2:54.75, 2:56.5-3:03, 3:05.5-3:08 = 109.25 seconds

Once I got past the source usaeg threshold I was looking for, I stopped, so there's definitely more I'm not counting. This arrangement'll definitely (and understandably) fly way, way, way over people's heads, so if they don't like this, I get it. Slowing the tempo AND changing the rhythms of the melody like this (e.g. 1:22's section) gets pretty dicey, but those source parts are there, just like Chris said they were. I wouldn't speed up the track 400%, but 150-250% did help, for anyone curious enough to try.

In a vacuum, I love it. It's too abstract to appeal to most people as a Plok arrangement, so I would have liked something a bit more melodically straightforward, but that's more a subjective concern than anything else. It's definitely a liberal take, but as long as the source usage is clear to me, I'll allow it.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Create New...