Sign in to follow this  
Chimpazilla

OCR03715 - *YES* Sega Rally Championship, Hybrid Front, Thunder Blade & Marvel vs. Capcom "Autos, Arps & Minimoogs" *PROJECT*

16 posts in this topic

Contact Information

ReMixer name: Txai

Real name: Txai Viegas

Userid (number, not name) on our forums: 10937

Submission Information

Name of game(s) arranged: Sega Rally Championship

Name of arrangement: Autos, Arps & Minimoogs

Name of individual song(s) arranged: Desert Replay

Composer: Naofumi Hataya

System: Sega Saturn

This is my contribution to OCR's VROOM: The Best of SEGA Racing ReMix Project. While listening to the sources available on the project thread, one of the songs was sorta just screaming "Reeeemix meeeeeee!" to me. I started working on it in january 2011 and was pretty much done with it by june 2012. The song itself is a Funky House treatment with lots of varied synths, brass, acoustic instruments, etc. There is also a healthy dose of percussive elements to go with it. AkumajoBelmont was thrilled with my rendition, marking me down as having submitted my final at the time. Enjoy.

EDIT (11/14) - More info from Txai: I am letting you know I certainly used more of the source in my rendition. The soloing from 3:52 to 4:23 is https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=170&v=EJxHEgBRqhM . That is 2:50 - 3:16 of the original.

And if this helps, 4:22-4:54 is https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=46&v=61tn5WXnCws , a Sega Genesis game with music also by Naofumi Hataya.

Would this solve the source usage issue?

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice minimal funky house treatment of this source. The mix is fairly conservative in terms of following the source's structure and chord progressions, but with some VERY sweet soloing and interpretation. Mixing is generally good, the bass could stand to be louder, and the bell-ish e-piano that appears on the right is a bit too loud (and I'm not a fan of extreme panning). The energy stays mostly in one gear throughout the track (making the track feel almost a bit too long), but it's a nice comfortable gear. Works for me.

edit 11/12/14: After seeing Larry's source breakdown I needed to revisit this track, and I believe his source breakdown is accurate. There is a lot of noodling in this track over what seems to be the source chords, but it ends up being *very* liberal and takes the melody too far away from the source tune for too much of the time. I like the noodling a lot, but I have to agree that it puts the track out of the minimum 50% range for OCR. If you can work some more recognizable source into the noodly parts (and hopefully give us your own detailed source breakdown to follow and verify), I think this will work. The other judges have given extensive mixing crits as well which are valid, so I recommend taking a look at those as well.

edit 11/18/14: The newly discovered source use puts it at 57%, although some of it is quite liberal. The production is over the bar for me, even with the issues pointed out by myself and the other judges. Reverting back to YES.

YES

Edited by Chimpazilla

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I'm getting a chippy jazzy funky vibe from this track. The big thing that stands out to me is the multitude of soloing throughout, which really makes it your own and adds an extra level of enjoyability over the original source. There are quite a few dissonant chords at the start of the track, as well as in the break later on at 3:12, and while I wish some parts weren't quite so dissonant, most of this is from the source tune. For the parts that aren't, you do have the skill to make them work and have it under control. This is a jazzy track after all.

There is a sizeable amount of fake-ish instrumentation throughout (some of the horns and strings for example), but this is typical of the genre, and considering the song is predominately led by synths, it fits well IMO. Almost has a protodome feel, which can only be a good thing. There is quite a lot of variation here, both in the instruments used between sections and the various riffing throughout, which really makes this feel like a journey. It doesn't really feel like a section is repeated. The thumping beat and some other percussive elements feel a tiny bit loopy at times, but there are enough fills and things going on over the top to keep it all interesting. I'm particularly fond of those bass licks.

Source wise I think you have it down pretty well. Obviously a lot of original elements in there which set it apart, but you can tell the tune is there. Your production quality is very clear and relaxing on the ear dynamically which is what you need in this kind of song. The slower tempo over the original works well. Overall judge jivey is happy.

YES

Edited by Jivemaster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to admit I wasn't feeling the intro up through around 1:23, but after that things really started to pick up energy-wise. The arrangement is somewhat borderline in terms of interpretation at times, but there is a good deal of personalization you've added, so I think you're good there.

I'm a bit more on the fence in terms of the soundscape you've got going here. I feel like a lot of the track feels a bit too thin, and part of it lies from the samples themselves, and the other part arises from the balance. A stronger lower-end would help the track feel more full and help things groove a bit more. Similarly, the kick drum could use a bit more oomph to it to drive the beat a touch more.

I think I'd like to see this adjusted a bit before I am completely sold on it, but I could see myself being the odd one out. Good luck on the rest of the vote!

NO (resubmit, please)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty far below 50% on source usage for this so far, so anyone who can help me with what I'm potentially missing is appreciated.

:00-:15.5 - 1:01-1:26 of source

:45.5-1:18 - :04-:33 of source

1:21-1:51 - 33:-1:00 of source

2:06.5-2:07.75 - :04-:06 of source

3:12.5-3:44 - 1:01-1:26 of source

EDIT (11/4): Time for a fuller vote.

Timing on the string pad and the e-piano was rigid to start, but we'll see how it goes. The brass lead at :47 was SNES-erific; cool throwback, but also SUPER dry and exposed, so it didn't sound good, IMO. 1:20 moved away from that into a swankier, brass-less chorus. :lol: The groove there until 1:49 was pretty static and bland, but there were enough changeups in the beats and instrumentation to not make some static grooves here and there a big problem. It's certainly a laid back vibe and achieves that well.

Ever since hearing some of your Mega Man compo stuff, Txai, I thought your name on the front page was an eventuality, even if you don't submit often. Aside from some minor crits that didn't amount to much IMO, this was very smart stuff throughout with this composition. It's very chill and Very fun.

Unfortunately, I'm not hearing the Sega Rally source tune used throughout most of the arrangement.

110.75 seconds of a 5:03-long arrangement or 36.55%

I'm going to vote NO at least for now, but if we're mistaken on the level of source usage, let us know. If not, this possibly could be posted in some form as long as more source usage is involved to make it the dominant component of this arrangement.

EDIT (12/2): Thanks to Txai for the added breakdown. And yeah, YOU GOTTA TELL US ALL THE SOURCE CONNECTIONS. The Sega Rally section was one thing; I shouldn't have missed 3:52-4:22. But not pointing out 4:22-4:54 arranging something from an entirely different game... :lol: We were never going to get that one without you telling us!

Anyway, the added minute of VGM usage pushed this way over the top. I get the criticisms on production and shared some of them, but the overall package was strong and the arrangement (and later production) carried this past an underwhelming start. Count me in.

YES

Edited by Liontamer
vote changed to YES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the groove that comes in after the super long intro, but the sounds feel pretty weak to me, with a ton of headroom; like you had the master set to -5db. The personalization is there in spades, but I am in the same boat as Larry, where I am not hearing source a lot of the time. Our boat is awesome, but it would be even better with more dominant source.

My thoughts to get this over the bar:

1. master it so it's not so subdued, and thicken up a few of the parts

2. Add more dominant source, or if there is obscured source, bring it forward a lot.

The song itself is pretty fun once it gets going, but it needs a bit more polish to pass the bar, IMO.

No, please resubmit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3:52-4:23 seems to use the same chords as 33:-1:00 of source with a modification at the end. The bassline is not the same but uses similar notes. I would probably count that section given the chord progression is used earlier in the song and is pretty distinct. That still doesn't put it at 50% but worth noting in case you would count that.

My vote is closest to DragonAvenger's. The level of source usage is borderline for me - certainly could use more but I might be ok with passing it with everything else clicking. But it's not. Like DA, I wasn't feeling this song up until 1:23. The opening e-piano and strings are too stiff and there's some dissonance when the beepy synth enters. The fake brass works in some songs, but was way too dry and exposed here. I'd like to see a revision with the bumpier parts smoothed out and some extra source.

NO (resubmit)

Edited by Palpable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3:52-4:23 seems to use the same chords as 33:-1:00 of source with a modification at the end. The bassline is not the same but uses similar notes. I would probably count that section given the chord progression is used earlier in the song and is pretty distinct. That still doesn't put it at 50% but worth noting in case you would count that.

Thanks for pointing this out. I compared and I wouldn't count it myself, but either way way, if it doesn't pull the source usage above 50% for me, it's a moot point. Source tune needs to be dominant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moved this back and added more comments from Txai on source usage. There's soloing he says is from the source and ALSO something used from an entirely different game which wasn't pointed out before. Hopefully this'll take the source usage over the top! Will come back to this soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My revote:

As for the source, Larry has clocked 111 seconds out of 303 seconds, which is 36%... if the newly uncovered source use is accurate, it adds 63 seconds to the count, giving the remix a total of 57%.

3:52-4:23: this is still REALLY liberal. I really like the soloing here, but the soloing takes the melody quite a ways from what I hear in the source... but the backing chord structure is there, and I believe the bassline follows the source bassline. I'm gonna give the benefit of the doubt, this is pretty darned borderline though.

4:22-4:54: yep, I hear that other source here very clearly, thanks for giving us the link. No way would we have figured out this source use on our own (at least I speak for myself, not having played this game).

I'm gonna go ahead and give the full 63 seconds of credit on the clock, bringing the total to 57% source use.

As this vote has gone on, there have been some great crits given that are valid. I still think the right-panned e-piano is too loud and it is stiff too. I think there are things that could be better balanced and mixed, but overall I think the production clears the bar. My vote is YES, but if this still doesn't pass, please consider the production crits from the other judges.

(amending my original post)

I just wanna step on my soapbox for one second here and say: PEOPLE, PLEASE PROVIDE A SOURCE BREAKDOWN WITH YOUR SUBMISSION, it's really helpful to us judges in cases such as this one, and could mean the difference between a pass and a resub. *steps down from soapbox*

Edited by Chimpazilla

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad you pointed out the other source you used here, but I am going to stick with my vote from before in terms of the production. I feel like the track needs a bit more fullness to give a better impact and will make the groove feel better. A little more volume, especially in the bass will be a good start, and some adjustments to fill out the soundscape. Good luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see what some of you guys are saying about production issues, but none of it feels like a dealbreaker to me. I think this is a really solid take on a tough source. Very groovy piece with some great part-writing. I'm diggin' it. YES!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I somewhat agree with most of the production crits but:

  • Damn tough source tune to mix - great to begin with, but difficult to take in a different direction...
  • Txai's done just that, slowed it down & funked it out, but still recognizable... very smart approach, big props for that
  • Nothing struck me as super-super problematic, and I was nodding my head & tapping my toes the whole time

I'm not saying I think the mix can't be improved on the production front, but I also don't hear anything that would give me serious pause, and now that we've sorted out some of the source usage issues, I'mma gonna go:

YES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

C'mon guys, I've got no major production beefs, and that's usually what I start nitpicking on. :lol:

It's clean. I hear the source, and you did clever things with it. My head is bopping the entire time. Clearly I should give this one a....

YES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this