Chimpazilla Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 (edited) Contact info: Radeitsu Cory https://soundcloud.com/whowantsalick-1 33625 Submission info: Donkey Kong Country 2: Diddy's Kong Quest Asking Lockjaw Lockjaws's Saga Edited November 21, 2014 by Beatdrop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimpazilla Posted September 21, 2014 Author Share Posted September 21, 2014 I find the production on this quite good. Synths, guitars, and drums all sound clean, powerful and well separated. My concern with this track is that it is super short and super conservative. The intro lasts all the way until 0:50, which is quite a lot of a 2:05 track. After the intro, the next section instead of being a verse, is almost like a "pre-verse" and doesn't really get going into a proper verse with a lead melody until 1:33. The source melody is played through one quick time, then the song is over. Not nearly enough development. I wanted to panel this anyway, because I feel like the production is very good. I think at least another full minute (or more) could be added to this, exploring the source melody more and doing some soloing, followed by a proper outro. Really very promising, and I hope to hear this again, much more expanded. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutritious Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 (edited) Kristina nailed it here. Production is quite good. Everything comes through pretty cleanly, with a lot of punch in the drums and strong guitar work. But yeah, this basically comes off as a metal cover. Which, cool as it is, doesn't really jive with our standards here: I feel like you're just starting to scratch the surface on expanding/personalizing the original, but a ton more could be done. You've clearly got the performance and production chops, so I really hope you develop this more and bring it back. (edit: revised below) Reading the additional votes below prompted me to go ahead and give this one a second look. While I never had an issue with the delayed melody appearance, I did base my decision on whether the arrangement expanded enough on the original to meet what is considered acceptable. A/Bing with the source once again is convincing me I was too quick with the "this is just a cover" rubber stamp. While still on the conservative side, there is performance personalization, transition changes and flow. Good call by Clem on this one. Imma Benedict Arnold this one and go: YES Edited October 9, 2014 by Nutritious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clem Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 Production is, overall, swanky. Drums & guitar are on the dry side, but by around 0:20 I'm feeling it. Definition is there. Specific crits on production . . . the stiffness of the drum sequencing, combined with the dryness of the samples, does create an unnatural impression. Especially in the intro, which is an unfortunate spot. I think you overcome this with overall production value and a tight arrangement. By the time we are jamming @ 0:51 I am forgiving the stiff intro. Definitely a dry/crisp mix. There is a sense of artificial. But I can hang The form works well. Respectful disagreement with my fellow judges. I like that the melody is delayed to the end. The first length of the mix clearly uses chords/rhythms from the source, so pushing the melody out for a while and creating emphasis that way is a fair play. Though the harmonic content and many of the riffs are identical to the original, they are articulated with new djent stylings, and placed in an altered song structure. Very cool how you turned the pickup of the melody into a trancy riff. I hear it overall as conservative, but sufficient. Good luck & enjoy YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jivemaster Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 (edited) There is great production work here, a lot of clarity which can be difficult to achieve with this kind of music. Good use of the L/R channels for small variances here and there, and your guitar tone is authentic for the genre. I'm leaning on the side of Justin and Kristina about this sounding much like a metal cover of the source tune as opposed to an original take on the arrangement. I do understand the points by Clem, in that you have added some variation to your playing of the source tune, but it doesn't feel like enough of you is in there (particularly for a track this short). The song just gets started and then kinda ends. You have already ticked the boxes for source usage and production - what's really needed here is some development on the arrangement side to make the song feel like more than an extended intro to something more. If you add some more original sections, this will make a great mix. NO Edited October 8, 2014 by Jivemaster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 The form works well. Respectful disagreement with my fellow judges. I like that the melody is delayed to the end. The first length of the mix clearly uses chords/rhythms from the source, so pushing the melody out for a while and creating emphasis that way is a fair play.Though the harmonic content and many of the riffs are identical to the original, they are articulated with new djent stylings, and placed in an altered song structure. Very cool how you turned the pickup of the melody into a trancy riff. I hear it overall as conservative, but sufficient. Redg articulated the level of interpretation well here, and I agree with him all the way. This is short, and relatively conservative with the structure, but the genre adaptation, original additive writing, constant dynamic shifts, and different buildup here relative to the source all added up to something that stood enough apart from the original song to be a unique interpretation. I would have LIKED another 30-60 seconds of further ideas, but due to the constant subtle textural changes, you NEVER hear anything wholesale repeat at any time here, and that's VERY important for such a short piece. We have room for approaches like this. I also didn't agree with criticizing the "long build." Builds comes in all shapes, and I don't have a problem with how it was done here. I felt the NOs had an inadvertent bias/expectation toward needing to hear the main Lockjaw melody come in much sooner. I'm fine with Cory NOT doing that, and going with this non-conventional structure, as there was creative arrangement of the first part of the source that had great dynamics and variation until finally getting to the main melody. He thought outside the box, and it worked. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutritious Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 Revised vote, yo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OceansAndrew Posted October 22, 2014 Share Posted October 22, 2014 I think this is really well done, with good production and crisp playing, as well as a lot of varied tones that work together nicely. The arrangement is personalized, but the development of an entire song isn't uite there for me; I agree with Larry that it needs more content, as right now it feels like a nicely produced sketch to me, rather than a full on song remix. I think some more melodic parts added to the end, as well as a few ways to get more milage out of the source would put this over for me. A solo, or the melody itself varied, or a key change, and a proper ending would all be quality ways to make it feel like an entire song. This is a great start, it just needs more content! No, please resubmit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palpable Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 I like Larry's point that nothing repeats here for the short 2 minutes it lasts. That's salient given that this has the risk of being underdeveloped. I also thought that quite a bit was changed structurally; it was interesting how the countermelody became the main melody of this, and the main melody was only brought in towards the end as a coda. It was well produced and performed too, which always help. Gets the green light from me. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beatdrop Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 I can't really say anything that hasn't already been said. It seems like everyone's pretty much on the same page concerning the strong aspects and the weak ones. The recording clarity is really nice, and I agree that everything is mixed well. Good timbres at play. The dryness bothers me even after it starts to fill out a bit more, though. Some reverb would go a long way here. No issues with any performance elements; what's played live is played cleanly. The right-panned guitar at 1:11 sounds a little awkward to me when the rest of the instruments drop out, probably because it's just a touch too soft. The bottom line here, and the thing that seems to be the make-or-break for this track as far as the panel is concerned, is that I'm of the opinion that the arrangement is not substantial enough to warrant the short length. As has been mentioned, although it doesn't really repeat anything, the fact that it can go 2:05 without doing so and then just abruptly ends tells me that there's way more room for expansion on the original. I'm in complete agreement with OA that this sounds more like a good start than it does a finished track. That said... NO (definitely resub) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djpretzel Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 I almost always tiebreak into a yes/approval, but in this case I'm going to have to side with the NO's. It's not that this is an absolutely verbatim cover, but it's VERY conservative, and when you couple that WITH the brevity of the piece, it makes it worse. Crunchy sound, good concept, but just needs to do a little... bit... more. Seems like this should be REALLY straightforward to expand a bit & add some original material to, or extend with a variation. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexstyle Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 Wow, I can really hear why this one is getting a split vote. The song itself brings a lot of energy, and the production is ace, which would usually be where I'd get hung up. It's not a terribly satisfying arrangement, though. I think Beatdrop has said exactly what I was thinking here: I'm of the opinion that the arrangement is not substantial enough to warrant the short length. As has been mentioned, although it doesn't really repeat anything, the fact that it can go 2:05 without doing so and then just abruptly ends tells me that there's way more room for expansion on the original. I'm in complete agreement with OA that this sounds more like a good start than it does a finished track. That said... And I'll just go ahead and echo his vote, too. NO (please resub, I wanna hear this done justice!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts