Liontamer Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 (edited) Contact Information Your ReMixer name: jnWake. Submission Information Name of game(s) arranged: Final Fantasy VI. Name of arrangement: "A Waltz for a Kingdom". Name of individual song(s) arranged: "Coin Song" and "Edgar & Sabin's Theme". Link to my arrangement: . Links to sources: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6DwKL87XVA and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njdju0gL_xk . This is the first remix I ever finished and even submitted it back on August last year. However, there was some trouble with the mail I sent and the mix didn't get through. I later asked Larry to reject my submission because I felt I could do a much better job... And that's what I'm sending now! Anyway, this mix was born when I was playing "Coin Song" on the piano one day. Suddenly, I thought "How would this sound in 6/8?" and I adapted the song to that measure. I liked it and ended doing an orchestral waltz-y arrangement from that! I added "Edgar and Sabin's Theme" because of the connections between the themes musically and in the games and also because I wanted more melodies to work into the mix. The arrangement, despite the measure change, is quite straightforward, using the sources in ways that are easy to recognize. Source breakdown: 0:00 - 0:35: "Coin Song" (CS) intro played on the piano and switching from 4/4 to 6/8 in the middle of it. 0:36 - 1:02: First theme of "Edgar and Sabin's Theme" (EaST) is played by the 'orchestra' (piano + violin, viola and cello). 1:03 - 1:33: Second theme of both CS and EaST is played first by a flute (joined by a bassoon) and then by the cello. 1:34 - 2:22: Third theme of CS is played by the piano, then joined by the woodwinds and later by the strings. There is a simple transition from F# to A at the beggining of the section. The transition to the next section is took from EaST. 2:23 - 2:52: Repeat of '0:36 - 1:02' but now with the woodwinds also present! Piano also has some more interesting tricks and stuff. 2:53 - End: Slightly original section based on the chord progression from the intro. -------------------- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6DwKL87XVA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njdju0gL_xk Edited October 10, 2013 by Liontamer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted May 2, 2013 Author Share Posted May 2, 2013 (edited) Sorry for the wait on dealing with this, jn. For the the rest of the Js, I originally form lettered the first version of this sub because he was open to tweaking it, so I'm the only one who's heard it before. :53, 2:25-2:27 & 2:41 has some brief, light distortion that's more audible on headphones, and there are very light clicks & pops from 2:06-2:13 that are almost inaudible due to being swamped out but were also worth noting. The sample quality still leaves something to be desired, and I thought the mechanical articulations, most obviously the piano, aren't fooling anyone and drag the quality down over the course of the 3 and half minutes that I'm on the borderline leaning toward NO. Like I told you the first time you submitted this, the production quality was holding back an otherwise strong arrangement. I did also say I felt the mixing was hurting this more than the sample quality, and that was definitely true, but even with the mixing improvements here, the stiffness of the piano sequencing is pushing me to a borderline NO even though I still like the track and hope it has a chance of passing (either in this iteration or another revision). It's a really strong arrangement where the mechanical timing of the piano (the strings had some issues, but not nearly as much) isn't the worst thing ever, but is such a focal element that it needs to sound more humanized before I can get behind without voting against my true feelings. It's close, but needs a LITTLE more improvement to be above the bar, IMO. Don't be discouraged, this is so close if it doesn't make it. NO (refine/resubmit) Edited May 2, 2013 by Liontamer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishy Posted August 13, 2013 Share Posted August 13, 2013 (edited) Yeah Larry is pretty much right here. Some of sequencing comes across very mechanical, and when you're dealing with slightly dodgy samples (see piano/strings) that's only exacerbated. Consider automating the tempo a little bit, this is definitely not how an ensemble would play this. They would slow down a little here and there at the end of sections. The basic concept behind this is fine, but you've got to make it flow more humanly with your sequencing and automation. NO, plz resub Edited August 13, 2013 by Fishy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palpable Posted August 25, 2013 Share Posted August 25, 2013 The first 30 seconds of piano were enough to put the kibosh on this. It's way too unrealistic - both the sample quality and sequencing could be improved. The strings have a similar problem. Pretty nice arrangement, but the production is too much of an issue. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts