Liontamer Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) = Download link Contact Information RJ remixes Jonathan Lemethy and Richard Földhazi https://soundcloud.com/rjremixes 51359 Submission Information Donkey Kong Country King K. Rules Donkey Kong Country: King K. Rool We did this remix becouse we love Donkey kong Country and trance, With some influence from Dash Berlin and Armin van buuren! we thought that King K. Rool would rock as an DJ! We hope u like it! ----------------------------------------------------- Edited March 26, 2014 by Liontamer closed decision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted March 17, 2014 Author Share Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) Opened up pretty beefy with some good minor rhythmic changeups. The vox brought in at :29 was pretty fake and slightly behind the beat. Adding more elements at :44 with the wind lead was a must to not expose the vox as much, as it happened again briefly form :59-1:06. The synths were pretty boilerplate synths, but I felt the saws at 1:48 were too generic myself. The melody at 2:03 was OK, as were the beats, but the balance felt off until 2:18 with the beats being too loud. The plucked string sound at 2:35 sounded a bit too exposed, not that it was meant to sound realistic; good doubling though with the wind lead from 2:49-3:04. Nice usage of sound effects briefly after 3:04 as well, and the hand percussion sprinkled throughout was good as well. The track basically kept the same energy level until the drop at 4:09, so things felt a bit repetitive, but mostly good there. There are production things that I'd change here, like the saws arriving again at 4:53 (nooooooooooooo), and that thin clap at 5:00 & 5:07, just things that sound weak in comparison to the other instrumentation. It's not the strongest piece in terms of the sound design, since I found this a bit imbalanced. That said, I thought the arrangement was interpretive for the genre adaptation and was able to barely carry it over the line for me. We'll see if anyone has a strong opinion against it, and I'll likely revisit my own, but despite the flaws the arrangement's solid enough for a borderline YES. EDIT (3/25): I disagreed with the comments about the piece being too repetitive to NO it just on those grounds, but I'll go ahead and flip my vote to close this out more quickly. The fake/exposed/behind-the-beat vox, generic saws, and thin padding are enough reasons to lean toward holding this back. The kick was beefy, but the other elements should be strengthened so that there aren't a lot of weak links in the chain to point out. NO (resubmit) Edited March 26, 2014 by Liontamer changed vote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimpazilla Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 That is one beefy kick. It may be the beefiest kick I've ever heard. I love it, so much. It's probably too loud, though. Unfortunately after I've really started grooving with this kick and a terrific bass groove... what follows is a rather wimpy choir patch which is indeed sounding behind the beat due to it's slow attack. This choir is acting as a lead for awhile, until it is joined by an equally tame faux flute thing, then back to soft choir for a bit, then a breakdown already? Ok here's the buildup... waiting for something epic... generic saw lead, ok. More choir and into yet another breakdown. At 2:35 I like the lead best so far, but it still feels very meek and tame and I'm expecting so much more based on the unbelievably cool kick and bass groove that's still going. At 3:20, super soft pad. At 3:34, more soft choir. Where's the epic lead work? The instrumentation in this mix feels so unbalanced. The other big issue in this track is that the writing/arrangement is very repetitive. The verses, breakdowns, buildups and drops are all incredibly similar, with the writing in each section being super simple. There are three of each and they are nearly identical to each other. The part at 2:35 is really the most unique and best section imo, but the rest is just too similar. The section from 3:04 to 3:34 is just way too sparse. You've got a really thin sounding rimshot break before some of the drops. I'd recommend removing those completely as they add nothing to the drops. Take them out and push the drops up by that one bar where the rimshot break was. The track seems to be mixed pretty well. My main issue is the repetitiveness of the three sections of the track (3 verses, breakdowns, buildups and drops). A bit of more varied writing would help keep it interesting. I also feel that some more exciting lead timbres would really make the instrumentation match better, and maybe a wicked solo section somewhere. This song could really be so epic. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OceansAndrew Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 I think the kick is too loud, and the lead instruments aren't pulling their weight at all. Interesting to me that the kick sounds so well produced and everything else sounds weak and bland. There are a decent amount of ideas added to this, but the 4 on the floor is actually driven through the floor, and the rhythmic changes are drowned out by the overly dominant kick. I do like that some effort was made to mix the beat up, but I think it should be taken a bit further. The arrangement itself needs a lot more interest, as the individual sections feel cut and pasted to me. There are some micro changes throughout, but they arent especially compelling, and the repetition really bogs it down. I think there is a foundation here, but it will need more polish and attention to detail. No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutritious Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 Really good analysis by Kristina here, which I'm finding myself nodding my head to as I'm listening. Personally, I don't think the issue is as much of the kick being too loud as the synths (not counting that nice saw bass pattern) and pads being far too weak in comparison. A good example is the lead that plays at 2:03 & 5:08. It doesn't cut through the mix at all and the slow portamento undermines its energy. The patterned saw is probably an exception to the above as I think it could work nicely in the context of other good elements. The foundation is there... literally both the kick and bass are pretty solid here. It's the melodic portions that need the most focus. NO resubmit, please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkeSword Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 That is literally the most perfect kick I've heard in a long time. Ugh. I'm in agreement with fellow Js though. Sound design really isn't doing it for me here. It's produced and balance well, but the sounds you're using just aren't great. That choice lead in the beginning is actually slightly delayed and it's just off the beat; just enough to bug me. Nit-picky I know, but still. There's this great build up to 1:49 where I'm expecting this big awesome melodic statement in the lead, but all I get is a very sparse bit with the arpeggiatior going through the motions. There's such an unwarranted drop-off in energy there, and it's so disappointing. Things get a little better later but I feel like there's a sparseness pervading the track that needs to be addressed. It's a great approach to the song, but I think you need to take a look at sound design and tweak the energy levels so that you're doing better builds and delivering better payoffs to those builds. A track like this should rock my socks, but right now it's not doing that. NO (resub) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts