Jump to content

OCR03015 - *YES* Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 'Saria's Drop'


Recommended Posts

Hi guys, this is my first submission, please be gentle!

Contact

Remixer Name: GlacialSpoon

Real Name: Robert Kemp

Website: happysalad.net (home of my gaming podcast The SaladCast)

OCRemix userid: 52260

Submission

Game: The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time

Arrangement name: Saria's Drop

Songs arranged: Saria's Song with a hint of Epona's Song

Original link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaFDLWbTL4k

About Rob:

Rob has been composing and producing digital music since tracking on an Amiga was a thing under the guises of "Glacial" and more recently "GlacialSpoon". As a hobbyist from Suffolk in the UK, a single track can takes months to evolve and contort itself into something deemed worthy of public exposure. Listen to more at http://www.last.fm/music/GlacialSpoon

Rob's notes:

I hope you enjoy this light, dubstep tribute to Saria's Song from Ocarina of Time. Taking a 30 second loop and extending it out to a full track proved a little tricky and I had to pad out around the main theme with an ambient intro build up, and extra sequences. Hopefully these extending phrases help punctuate the main theme when it takes to the fore. I couldn't make a dubstep track without a bit of a filthy drop either!

Thanks

-----------------------------------------

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is also one of those pieces where there's a lot of usage of underlying progressions at the expense of direct, explicit usage of the source tune. That said, when I stopwatched it, this didn't rely on the progressions as much as explicit use of the source material, which was key for me.

For a 5:06-long piece, I needed at least 153 seconds' worth of overt source usage for the source material to be dominant in the arrangement:

25.75-44, 47.75-51.5, 55.25-58.75, 1:02.5-1:06.5, 1:10-1:12, 1:13.75-1:46, 1:50.5-1:54.5, 1:58-2:00.5, 2:08-2:09, 2:12-2:12.5, 2:26.75-2:27.25, 2:31.25-3:02.25, 3:04.5-3:06, 3:08-3:11.5, 3:15.5-3:23, 3:26.5-3:30, 3:34-3:47, 3:48.75-4:02.5, 4:17.5-4:18.25, 4:24.75-4:25.5, 4:28.75-4:29.5, 4:43.75-4:44.5, 4:46.25-5:04 = 166.25 seconds or 54.3% overt source usage

Onto the production crits, WHOA, :44-1:12 sounded pretty flooded. Definitely pull this BACK. :-D The highs are too piercing/sizzling here (worst offenders were :59-1:11, 3:04-3:34), and there's a lot of needless mud during the densest sections that obscures the detail-work in the writing and layering (e.g :44-1:12, 2:31-2:44, 3:19-3:34, 3:48-4:02).

Arrangement-wise, I'm all over this. The dub-wub elements are used well, the compositional dynamics are good, and the arrangement's extremely creative. However, the soundscape is just too flooded. If the mixing were cleaned up and balanced, so that the high-end sizzle were toned down and the densest sections could breathe a bit, I'd be all over this in a heartbeat. Pains me to do this when the arrangement is WAY, WAY over the line, but one more pass at the production would make this way better IMO.

NO (borderline/refine/resubmit)

EDIT (11/4): Changed vote below.

Edited by Liontamer
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

OMG are you kidding me with this??? This is amazing! I am a lover of dubstep and also of sfx from the game being remixed, and also OoT is my all time favorite game. Source use seems fine to me, and stopwatch Larry has done his stopwatch thing here so we're all good with source use.

There certainly are mixing areas that could use a bit of improvement. Yeah it's a bit busy in places, a little better eq separation of the elements would definitely help, and the track is definitely a little hot, but it's not killing it for me. If the other judges say no to this track due to these issues, I can only hope you'll quickly send back a cleaned up version.

The arrangement and creativity totally carries it for me. Blending in Zelda's lullaby was a nice touch. This is awesomesauce.

YES

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see Larry's crits, but I don't think they're dealbreakers in the mix compared to how fun the arrangement is. Really enjoyed listening to this, and loved the tasteful use of offbeats and sound effects. I think some of the other more production-heavy judges might be on Larry's side, and I wouldn't mind an update myself, but I am fine with this on the front page as-is.

YES

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Oh man, BIG smile on my face as soon as that first drop hit. Super creative arrangement, great chopping and layering of SFX and synths.

I'm gonna side with Larry on this one in that I definitely think that the high and mids could stand to be cleaned up. In this case, I think it's as simple as lowering some elements of the mix--taking off a bit of the compression on the "real" drums, lowering some of the synthetic hats in the mix, maybe lowering some of the really glistening synth stuff so it's not quite as piercing. Some of the pad synths could use less energy in the high-midrange, just to leave room for the leads. Could use just a bit more low end to the entire mix as well, and that might help balance it out overall, too.

So yeah, basically, I love this song! I just think it needs a *liiiittle* bit more production love to get it over the bar completely. I'm not gonna be mad if this makes it to the front page on arrangement strength alone, but I would really love to hear it cleaned up properly.

NO (Resubmit, PLEASE!)

EDIT - 9-9-14

I'm gonna go ahead and change my vote on this one. After listening to the song on several different sets of speakers and headphones, I think the arrangement is good enough and the source shines through clearly enough to go ahead and give this a pass. Yeah, it's a bit crowded, but the source is always legible, and the mixing isn't enough of a distraction on all the systems I've heard to where I can, in good conscience, keep holding this one back.

YES

Edited by Flexstyle
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I really like this one a lot. I was a bit iffy on the lead but the rest of the track is really great. Love how you work in the little fanfares and bits from the game. A really high energy take with some great effects.

YES

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

I can see both sides here. Sweet, sweet arrangement. Cool production ideas, sweet change-ups (loved the "secret found" cameo, Flex and I did something like that recently). Really digging your style man. But yeah, the crowded sections are really killing it for me. :44 was pushing it a little bit, but passable. Once the beats kick in at :59, it's just too much. It's back and forth for the rest of the song, depending on how dense the writing is in a particular section.

I could see this passing as-is and it honestly wouldn't bother me if it did. Still, I think this track deserves a little clean up TLC to really shine.

NO resubmit, please (borderline)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Siding with the YES votes. Separation could be better, as well as frequency balance to a lesser extent, but I heard no dealbreaker issues here. 0:44 was crowded but not bad, and the high frequencies were certainly on the tolerable side of hot, I thought. A creative, restless mix with mostly excellent execution.

YES

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

I'm listening to this again, and while I agree with the sections of clutter I pointed out and I was borderline, I definitely grandpa'ed the vote in terms of the production & volume. :lol: With some time away from it, this production is in fact cool, the mixing is reasonably separated and the textures are working well enough, so I'll definitely flip my vote. Nothing wrong with this intensity, and like I said before, the arrangement was way over the line. :-)

YES

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...