Mega Man: The Wily Castle Remix Gauntlet 2013

[KgZ]

Yeah. I want to emphasize this. The point is not to have 50/50 balance, but to use elements from both pieces meaningfully.

Agree. When I listen to the songs, I'm not thinking about arrangement or how you combined the songs. Simply, I want to enjoy good music and quality production. As a producer/composer, you need to be able to write music with what tools are at your disposal. General Midi instruments don't fly in a serious production. If you don't have any good sounding midi acoustic instruments, don't use them- make an electronic song.

[ectogemia]

Yes.

I saw a couple of guys posting breakdowns once voting started for Round 2. Honestly, you shouldn't have to justify your arrangement by explaining it; the arrangement should be enough on its own. People should be able to listen to the song and hear the source usage.

I posted a breakdown because Larry got upset with me that I didn't include breakdowns in the two tracks I've had evaluated by the judges' panel Then again, those were super liberal interpretations (also coincidentally both from the last WCRG compo). The one I submitted to the compo this week, however, was a pretty good balance of source and original, I think. Sooo yeah, I just posted the breakdown for convenience for anyone who was interested rather than for defending my remix I know mah arrangement is fiiine, girl *triple snap*

Well I'm up this week.

Needless to say I'm freaking excited. <3

Let's bring my A-game.

I'm also excited. I love me some Tuberztunez <3. Future OCR/chiptune scene star. You heard it here first, folks.

Edited July 29, 2013 by ectogemia

[Ivan Hakštok]

I pretty much butchered Moliarty's Tower but I still think it's recognizable. Also, I'm too lazy to write a source breakdown.

[KgZ]

Also need to get some of you guys past just doing two separate remixes and tacking them together; remember, the goal is to make one cohesive song. Someone unfamiliar with the sources should not really be able to tell that you remixed two piece of music together.

Disagree completely. It's shouldn't matter how the person uses the source material, so long as it sounds good. Who cares if it sounds like two separate remixes on a cohesive or arrangement standpoint? Different effects of how you arrange or produce provoke different emotions for the listener. As long as you have a focused vision of what you want to express, you're good to go.

Ever been to a live DJ set? It's absolutely cool as hell when a DJ flips between one song and another back and forth.

[ectogemia]

Disagree completely. It's shouldn't matter how the person uses the source material, so long as it sounds good. Who cares if it sounds like two separate remixes on a cohesive or arrangement standpoint? Different effects of how you arrange or produce provoke different emotions for the listener. As long as you have a focused vision of what you want to express, you're good to go.

Ever been to a live DJ set? It's absolutely cool as hell when a DJ flips between one song and another back and forth.

My man. ;o I've been thinking this as long as I've been writing music. That being said, it takes more skill to weave two unrelated sources seamlessly, but yeah, I have 0 preference for that vs. using the source tunes successively, both as a writer and as a listener.

Also, I love this WCRG I think it has the most talent of any OCR compo I've ever seen, plus we've had some nice, gentlemanly debates. Fun shit, so fart! Not even gonna fix that typo.

Edited July 29, 2013 by ectogemia

[Esperado]

I pretty much butchered Moliarty's Tower but I still think it's recognizable. Also, I'm too lazy to write a source breakdown.

I feel you. mines pretty obvious. first half is moliarty, second is flame man. im definitley one of the newbs Darke is talking about. not even gonna pretend not to be. first attempt blending two full songs ( aside from that rim elm cameo in my drakes castle remix from way back) and im not proud of it but, thats part of learning.

i think it would be really cool if people aimed to make the remixes go along with the "story so far" so this round would be that the remix not only incorporates both sources, but is befitting an epic rocket chase to the moon.

edit: also, where are the reviews? i cant seem to find them.

[DarkeSword]

Disagree completely. It's shouldn't matter how the person uses the source material, so long as it sounds good. Who cares if it sounds like two separate remixes on a cohesive or arrangement standpoint? Different effects of how you arrange or produce provoke different emotions for the listener. As long as you have a focused vision of what you want to express, you're good to go.

Ever been to a live DJ set? It's absolutely cool as hell when a DJ flips between one song and another back and forth.

Sure I have.

But what I'm saying is that in practice, what I'm seeing here is that some guys are just writing two remixes that don't really have any commonality between them at all, tacking them together, and calling it a day. When a pro DJ does it in a club, it can be awesome. What I'm hearing here is just jarring.

That's not the purpose of this competition. It's an arrangement competition, not a production competition; the idea is to really dig in to the source material and understand what's going on musically, to find common threads, to take a song that has certain harmonic qualities and adapt it to fit in with a song that has different harmonic qualities.

That's why I have people choose one source track that they'll carry through the entire competition. I can't just write a straight genre adaptation of Blizzard Man every time it's my turn to remix; I have to examine Blizzard Man in the context of MM10 Wily Stage 1, and then I have to do the same thing with MM6 Mr. X Stage 1, and then look at Blizzard Man again in the context of MM2 Wily Stage 1. My approach to Blizzard Man is going to be different every time because I have to think "what's the music like when Blizzard Man is fighting through this stage?"

I know production is important; having great production gives the artist the means to express and execute their concept fully. But when people are both arranging and voting, I don't want them to focus on whatever "just sounds good." Both sources should be used effectively. And "effectively" certainly can mean doing a back-and-forth style arrangement like you talked about, but even a professional DJ spinning tracks in a club understands concepts like pacing, build, and dynamics that let him effectively manage the energy on the dance floor. Transitions, even if they're as quick as turning on a dime, are still important.

[Sir_NutS]

Source usage percentages.. source breakdowns... key compatibility and transposition... liberal interpretation levels...

GUYS relax and just make good music. When you start thinking too much about it, it all goes to shit. Follow your ears and your heart.

[DrumJ8]

Source usage percentages.. source breakdowns... key compatibility and transposition... liberal interpretation levels...

GUYS relax and just make good music. When you start thinking too much about it, it all goes to shit. Follow your ears and your heart.

my ears are full of wax and my heart is full of nervousness, anxiety, and low self-esteem

my turn to mix this week

[KgZ]

Sure I have.

That's not the purpose of this competition. It's an arrangement competition, not a production competition;

That seems a bit narrow minded don't you think?

I know production is important; having great production gives the artist the means to express and execute their concept fully. But when people are both arranging and voting, I don't want them to focus on whatever "just sounds good." Both sources should be used effectively. And "effectively" certainly can mean doing a back-and-forth style arrangement like you talked about, but even a professional DJ spinning tracks in a club understands concepts like pacing, build, and dynamics that let him effectively manage the energy on the dance floor. Transitions, even if they're as quick as turning on a dime, are still important.

They're not mutually exclusive. A well polished production and arrangement will fall into place by sounding good naturally. I strongly recommend that you re-examine the end result or goal you're accomplishing in this contest. The people listening to this music who aren't musicians aren't going to care about "breakdowns". They aren't going to care about the details you put in the arrangement. If the production is terrible, it doesn't matter. Ultimately, they care that it sounds good. If the production is good, then they'll appreciate the arrangement if they already know the sources. As the leader of this contest, you should encourage participants in this contest to explore creative direction without pressure of what's appropriate and what isn't.

Edited July 29, 2013 by KgZ

[shadow24]

Awesome mixes everyone

Looks like I'm up this week.

Also, I'm working on a mix for the first week when I get time. Here's a WIP if you guys want to listen. https://soundcloud.com/darrencsmith/saint-elmos-fire.

[ectogemia]

That seems a bit narrow minded don't you think?

They're not mutually exclusive. A well polished production and arrangement will fall into place by sounding good naturally. I strongly recommend that you re-examine the end result or goal you're accomplishing in this contest. The people listening to this music who aren't musicians aren't going to care about "breakdowns". They aren't going to care about the details you put in the arrangement. If the production is terrible, it doesn't matter. Ultimately, they care that it sounds good. If the production is good, then they'll appreciate the arrangement if they already know the sources. As the leader of this contest, you should encourage participants in this contest to explore creative direction without pressure of what's appropriate and what isn't.

I agree that production is an extremely important part of this and any competition. Unless you're writing chiptunes (and even then...), production is an essential part of creating a really memorable, listenable tune. In fact, my primary musical goals for months now have been to focus on production, and now that I have a fairly strong grasp on it, I feel much more musically capable than I ever have.

[Lemonectric]

It's shouldn't matter how the person uses the source material, so long as it sounds good. Who cares if it sounds like two separate remixes on a cohesive or arrangement standpoint?

*raises hand*

There's a point where subpar production hinders my enjoyment of a piece of music, but the writing has always been more important to me. I don't feel engaged when I hear a track with kickass production values and boring or conventional writing. Anyway, to each their own, but I think it's reasonable for this competition in particular to value arrangement as much as it does. It's entirely based on combining multiple pieces of music, after all. A competition like the FL Studio Remix Gauntlet would probably have a different take on the arrangement/production balance just because of how it's structured.

[Phonetic Hero]

*raises hand*

There's a point where subpar production hinders my enjoyment of a piece of music, but the writing has always been more important to me. I don't feel engaged when I hear a track with kickass production values and boring or conventional writing. Anyway, to each their own, but I think it's reasonable for this competition in particular to value arrangement as much as it does. It's entirely based on combining multiple pieces of music, after all. A competition like the FL Studio Remix Gauntlet would probably have a different take on the arrangement/production balance just because of how it's structured.

THIS IS WHAT I'VE BEEN WANTING TO SAY, PUT MUCH MORE SUCCINCTLY THAN I WOULD'VE SAID ITpoop

[ectogemia]

Let's also not forget that everyone is entitled to their own voting criteria

Also, HL makes a good point because his music is the shit, but he doesn't rely heavily on flashy production or modern sounds. There's certainly a tipping point on the axis between quality production and quality arrangement. I don't think anyone is judging tunes based solely on a single factor, but certainly, we all weigh things differently.

[KgZ]

*raises hand*

There's a point where subpar production hinders my enjoyment of a piece of music, but the writing has always been more important to me. I don't feel engaged when I hear a track with kickass production values and boring or conventional writing. Anyway, to each their own, but I think it's reasonable for this competition in particular to value arrangement as much as it does. It's entirely based on combining multiple pieces of music, after all. A competition like the FL Studio Remix Gauntlet would probably have a different take on the arrangement/production balance just because of how it's structured.

That's because you're a composer. Of course each of us participants care about arrangement because we know to look for it. But, the majority of people who are going to appreciate this contest and listen to our music are not composers/producers. They're not going to normally catch *insert obscure melodic motif* from 1:37 to 1:38. In their minds, they're going to listen to our music as, "Oh cool! A different interpretation of one of my favorite songs."

On my own personal note, I believe that a naturally good song has all the factors of strong production, arrangement, and vision. They need to go hand and hand. That's pretty obvious. However, a strong production (final sound) is the end all be all. You need to have that.

You can vote/enjoy any song you want- that's totally cool. I'm bringing this up to raise awareness that the overall attitude of this contest is about encouragement of creative ideas in every facet possible.

Edited July 29, 2013 by KgZ

[MindWanderer]

Let's also not forget that everyone is entitled to their own voting criteria

If you've ever watched Olympic figure skating, I think of it that way. The judges get a lot of boos sometimes when the most entertaining routines get low scores, because the judges have specific things they look for irrespective of their personal preference.

Except that it's Darke's compo, so he decides what the voting criteria should be. That's not to say you can't have your own opinions about how to apply them, but it does mean that source usage, which means integrating the two sources into one coherent whole, should be the most important factor, followed by production and enjoyability. In practice, most people reverse the order of those when voting. In fact, I personally rarely vote for the pieces that make it into my own playlist, because the ones I enjoy are often not the ones that best meet the voting criteria.

[ectogemia]

Except that it's Darke's compo, so he decides what the voting criteria should be. That's not to say you can't have your own opinions about how to apply them, but it does mean that source usage, which means integrating the two sources into one coherent whole, should be the most important factor, followed by production and enjoyability. In practice, most people reverse the order of those when voting. In fact, I personally rarely vote for the pieces that make it into my own playlist, because the ones I enjoy are often not the ones that best meet the voting criteria.

If you've ever watched Olympic figure skating, I think of it that way. The judges get a lot of boos sometimes when the most entertaining routines get low scores, because the judges have specific things they look for irrespective of their personal preference.

This isn't the Olympics, man, and we're grow'd up guys. We can choose our own criteria for voting. Not to mention the Olympics require a numerical system of "objective" scoring so that the competitors have a VERY specific set of skills to work towards. By rigidly defining the voting criteria of this compo as arrangment-first, that forces the artists to focus on that skill if they want to win instead of focusing on all facets of musicality, and I don't think anyone here believes that's a good idea.

[DarkeSword]

That seems a bit narrow minded don't you think?

Not at all!

They're not mutually exclusive. A well polished production and arrangement will fall into place by sounding good naturally. I strongly recommend that you re-examine the end result or goal you're accomplishing in this contest. The people listening to this music who aren't musicians aren't going to care about "breakdowns". They aren't going to care about the details you put in the arrangement. If the production is terrible, it doesn't matter. Ultimately, they care that it sounds good. If the production is good, then they'll appreciate the arrangement if they already know the sources. As the leader of this contest, you should encourage participants in this contest to explore creative direction without pressure of what's appropriate and what isn't.

I'm not really disagreeing with you here, but top-notch production with a very boring arrangement is also going to affect the enjoyment of the piece. Even as just a listener, I'd rather listen to a track that's really creative in how it combines two themes into one song than a track that sounds like two unrelated shorter tracks put together. If you're going to do a back-and-forth arrangement, do a really fun back-and-forth arrangement; don't do a boring back-to-back one! xD

And part-writing and song structure is just really important. Sometimes it doesn't matter how well you mix and master everything, or how well your musicians are performing the piece, because there's invariably that one part of the song where the transition is so awkward and jarring and you just go, "whoa...what the hell?!" Even people who aren't composers understand when something is harmonically off. The classic example is playing a C scale on a piano, and then playing a C# instead of a C when you get to the top. Everyone in the room will cringe or scrunch their nose or look at you funny if you do that.

That's because you're a composer. Of course each of us participants care about arrangement because we know to look for it. But, the majority of people who are going to appreciate this contest and listen to our music are not composers/producers. They're not going to normally catch *insert obscure melodic motif* from 1:37 to 1:38. In their minds, they're going to listen to our music as, "Oh cool! A different interpretation of one of my favorite songs."

Sure, but my goal is to have it be more of, "Oh cool! They used both of my favorite songs and put them together in a cool way! That's awesome!"

I'm not saying production is not important. I personally often vote for tracks that have great production, but those tracks are usually also tracks that use their awesome production to realize great arrangement ideas. Like you said, they're not mutually exclusive, and production quality is listed as something voters should consider when making their picks every week.

Great production makes a great arrangement amazing, but it can't save a bad one. Conversely, a great arrangement can make a well-produced track really stand out, but a great arrangement won't get you anywhere if it just sounds bad.

You can vote/enjoy any song you want- that's totally cool. I'm bringing this up to raise awareness that the overall attitude of this contest is about encouragement of creative ideas in every facet possible.

I really appreciate all your comments.

This isn't the Olympics, man, and we're grow'd up guys. We can choose our own criteria for voting. Not to mention the Olympics require a numerical system of "objective" scoring so that the competitors have a VERY specific set of skills to work towards. By rigidly defining the voting criteria of this compo as arrangment-first, that forces the artists to focus on that skill if they want to win instead of focusing on all facets of musicality, and I don't think anyone here believes that's a good idea.

I do actually point out that the usage of both themes is the more important factor to consider, but that production and general enjoyability of the track should also be considered in the voting guidelines. How people apply this criteria is up to them. I just don't want people to forget about the fact that artists should be using both sources. For example: if I mix this week and do the most amazing remix of Blizzard Man the world has ever heard, with impeccably recorded live orchestra fused with a top-notch EDM soundscape, but I only use like 12 seconds of The Moon tacked on to the end, you should not be voting for me. xD

Edited July 29, 2013 by DarkeSword

[Lemonectric]

But, the majority of people who are going to appreciate this contest and listen to our music are not composers/producers. They're not going to normally catch *insert obscure melodic motif* from 1:37 to 1:38. In their minds, they're going to listen to our music as, "Oh cool! A different interpretation of one of my favorite songs."

I do think source usage should be recognizable. My ideal entry for this type of competition is one that combines the two assigned sources in a way that is creative, cohesive, and clear, with reasonably strong production values. I'm more likely to vote for something if the source usage is obvious, but arranged in a light I hadn't considered before. You make a good point that more accessible arrangements will score more points with the voters; I think accessibility is compatible with arrangement creativity.

[KgZ]

I'd rather listen to a track that's really creative in how it combines two themes into one song than a track that sounds like two unrelated shorter tracks put together.

A strong production makes that arrangement all the more better

I really appreciate all your comments.

Thanks for listening

[DarkeSword]

A strong production makes that arrangement all the more better

Which is exactly why I'll vote for that one over the really well produced track with an utterly boring arrangement. xD

In sum:

.

[KgZ]

Which is exactly why I'll vote for that one over the really well produced track with an utterly boring arrangement. xD

You sly context changing dog.

[ectogemia]

I do actually point out that the usage of both themes is the more important factor to consider, but that production and general enjoyability of the track should also be considered in the voting guidelines. How people apply this criteria is up to them. I just don't want people to forget about the fact that artists should be using both sources. For example: if I mix this week and do the most amazing remix of Blizzard Man the world has ever heard, with impeccably recorded live orchestra fused with a top-notch EDM soundscape, but I only use like 12 seconds of The Moon tacked on to the end, you should not be voting for me. xD

True, true. As I said before, 'sall about tipping points between the axis of arrangement and production. Commensurate quality of each is ideal. but production is super important, youguise

Ladies and gentlemasters, I'd like to point out that we just successfully completed a debate on the internet without slinging a single shit-word or ad hominem premise, a first for all of mankind. Remember where you were this day, because people will ask about it years from now.

On that note, KgZ, you and I need to have a talk about production ;o I have much to learn.

Edited July 29, 2013 by ectogemia

[MindWanderer]

This makes me wonder: has anyone ever tried a pure production compo before? For instance: The organizer provides a MIDI, and participants are not allowed to change or remove any notes (though possibly notes could be added?), but they can do anything else they want.