DragonAvenger Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 (edited) Greetings! This is my take on the M Bison theme from Street Fighter II. It started as a submission for PRC 172 in 2010, which unfortunately had no other submissions. By listening to it a while after I realized it had potential. It's an upbeat trance remix with a focus on the main melody of the source. Big thanks goes to the former organizers and the present organizer Bundeslang and all remixers who keep PRC going, you've had a great impact on my musical development! Source: /OneUp Edited June 8, 2013 by Liontamer closed decision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vig Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Very groovy and atmospheric. The string gets a bit washy, but I like the tone of it. Maybe just pull it down a bit. Huh. The beginning was definitely reminiscent of the source, though I really don't hear the melody until 2:30. am I missing it? The leads are pretty flat and unmoving. The groove and atmosphere are great, but the melodic elements just aren't there. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutritious Posted April 30, 2013 Share Posted April 30, 2013 Very groovy and atmospheric. The string gets a bit washy, but I like the tone of it. Maybe just pull it down a bit. Huh. The beginning was definitely reminiscent of the source, though I really don't hear the melody until 2:30. am I missing it? The leads are pretty flat and unmoving. The groove and atmosphere are great, but the melodic elements just aren't there. NO Hmm, it's not super obvious, but the delayed plucky lead from 1:02 - 1:28 hits the bison melody. I couldn't really place what the bell synth is playing immediately following that, though, which does stretch from 1:30 - 2:30. As mentioned, the melody comes out more clearly between 2:30 - 3:28. Again, it's followed by that bell pattern, which I can't clearly connect to the source. Still, the above, coupled with the intro connections to the OST bell part & later melody lines is enough source for me. Ending felt lazy and was a bit of a disappointment TBH . I'm definitely guilty of the same, though, so what can I say? I do agree with Vig on his lead crits. They do have interesting texture, but do feel a bit flat on dynamics and partwriting. Overall, though, production is good: solid groove, good backing synths, nice atmosphere, good energy. I M Cool with this. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palpable Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 Hmm I have more production issues than you guys did. I thought in the sections where the bass was going, there needed to be more mid to the track, it sounded kind of dull. In contrast the breakdown around 3:30 sounded more full, strangely, and really sparkled. It could be an issue with the compressor clamping down the rest of the track when the low-end goes full bore. The source usage was also kind of odd. I heard snippets of source here and there, and then sections where the melody was obvious. Hard to have the timestamp mean something in that case - I'll say the source was a little marginalized and I would have liked to see it used more overtly. With both those concerns, I'm gonna call this a NO, but it's a close vote. I don't think it would take much to push me over to a YES, but something needed to be stronger. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonAvenger Posted June 2, 2013 Author Share Posted June 2, 2013 After reading Vinnie's vote I think he is right on for this. The source feels a little too pushed to the side for a good portion of this track, and I think a little more incorporation would strengthen this a lot. Similarly, Vinnie's production crits make a lot of sense. The bass seems like it needs a little more, and there's definitely a difference in the sound when the bass isn't present that I wish was more clear throughout the track. I do think this is a close one. Send it back with some fix-ups please! NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted June 8, 2013 Share Posted June 8, 2013 (edited) Opening sounded REALLY fuckin' cool, straight out of a Japanese pro arrange album; great quality there. Bass kick at :17 sounded sweet but, dare I say it, might have been a little TOO beefy. Nice lil' usage of the bell line from the source starting at :32. Claps at :46 were kind of weak, as well as the drum shot build at :52, and the mixing felt odd once things moved over into the melody at 1:00. I'd bump up the melodic line playing the source some more. The boom-tss percussion added in at 1:14 also sounded really generic and shouldn't have been so loud/upfront. Once that part drops back and layers with some other stuff at 1:28, the boom-tss sound incorporates much better into the overall texture, adding depth without sounding cheap. Damn, what happened to using the Bison theme, bro? From 1:28-2:28 NONE OF THAT sounded like it had much of anything to do with the source theme. Even if it did, it's way too abstract to be able to tell what it's from, and I grew up on this theme. You really need to get the source theme to be a more central element here, and make this less about the original writing. Even just adding elements of the source tune in the background while not changing what you've already written would be great. Yeah, the soundscape sounds flat from 2:29-3:26; the way it's mixed sounds pretty dull exactly like Palpable pointed out, then 3:26's section was mixed much better. Definitely fix the mixing when that bass is in play, try to the give the leads some more energy, and perhaps create some stronger clap layers if you have the time/interest. The Bison lead at 3:54 was too quiet compared to the rest of the track; you need to push that up but also declutter the soundscape. It sounded better at 4:23 though. I didn't agree with Nutritious critizing the ending; I thought it was a strong outro and did a nice job subtracting elements for the finish. It resolved totally fine, IMO. ----------------------- All that said, I thought the overall piece here was pretty cool to listen to. If the Bison theme were more involved in this piece, I would still YES it, despite the flaws, because the production is adequate and the composition and flow are pretty good. However, the source tune connections weren't there, so now I'm gonna have to call out Nutritious on this YES. The mix was 5:34-long so I needed at least 167 seconds' worth of overt source usage to put that over 50% of the track and have the source tune usage be dominant in the arrangement. :28.5-30.25, :31.5-:35, :38.75-42.25, :45.5-:49, 52.75-56.25, 1:01-1:17, 1:21-1:28, 2:29-2:43, 2:50-3:03, 3:04.25-3:11.5, 3:18.5-3:30, 3:34-3:37.5, 3:47-3:52, 3:54-3:59.5, 4:01-4:08, 4:15.75-4:19.25, 4:23-4:28, 4:29.5-4:31, 4:51.5-4:55, 4:58.5-5:02, 5:05.5-5:09 = 119 seconds or 35.6% Let me make this VERY clear for all of us, just so we don't get complacent making these calls. This is bearing in mind that I could be drastically overlooking something from THIS arrangement that overtly ties to the source and making the wrong call entirely. It's not enough to "feel" like the arrangement has enough connections to the source material. It's not enough. When you hear tracks like this were the source tune and wholly-original writing have fairly good flow and synergy like they do here, it's very easy to just accept it because the overall composition sounds strong. To some extent, it's anal-retentive, but when I stopwatch stuff and time things out, it's so that I understand exactly how an arrangement relates back to the source tune. It's important to understand that relationship BEFORE you vote on the track. ESPECIALLY when YESing a track, please do the due diligence of understanding how much the source tune is used. Just going off your general feeling can sometimes be misleading. -------------------- Anyway, OneUp, I love you. This is definitely the best piece I've heard from you yet, and I like the creativity hear. The mixing/clarity should be tightened up a little, but it's OK enough to get by. And I'm sorry if I'm missing some obvious usage of the Bison theme, but again, I know that one well and listened to the source again, and I'm not hearing it used enough in this arrangement. Please figure out a way to use it throughout more of the piece if you want this to pass; right now, this arrangement is too liberal. Hopefully, you're still willing to look further at this, but if not, this is still awesome, it just falls outside of our arrangement standards. NO (resubmit) Edited June 8, 2013 by Liontamer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts