FFX (Lulu) vs. FFV (Lenna) - "Sovitus"

[Eino Keskitalo]

This is my final round entry from the Final Fantasy Crystal Clash tournament. It's a dreamy major-key affair with a noisy beat. The mixing may be a bit washed-out and cluttered, I kinda like the mass of sound thing but I might just be able to hear everything clearly enough because I know what's in there, that might not be the case for the listener, so feedback on the mixing is especially appreciated! Looking to get this posted.

final candidate one (2022-02-19): https://www.dropbox.com/s/opbhtwwoans6c4g/eino_keskitalo_-_sovitus-20220219.mp3?dl=0

---

update: WIP 2015/03/13

I've lessened the clutter a bit in the arrangement, especially purging/varying a little bit of the drumming. Nothing drastic.

-- old:

I know I'm going to work on the percussion, to vary it up a bit more, give it some breathing space and I recall I wanted to mix something a little more quiet, the snares or something.

WIP: 2015-02-17

 

 

Here's the source breakdown (outdated).

The long intro:

0:00-0:07 no source anywhere

0:07-0:24 The descending pizzicato from Lulu's theme (from the start) is there on the violin to the right, adjusted to major key.. if you'll accept that

0:24-0:41 Pizzicato continues; Lenna's bells from 0:00-0:10 on the chippy synth to the left

0:41-0:50 Pizzicato

First "verse"

0:51-1:24 Lenna's bells + melody (on the fake guitar, different rhythm) from 0:06-0:28.

Second "verse":

1:25-2:00

Bits of Lenna's bells (1:25-1:27, 1:34-1:36, 1:43-1:44, 1:52-1:53)

Bits of Lenna's melody (1:25-1:27 from 0:30-0:31, 1:28-1:38 from 0:30-0:38 (as if a lower harmony), 1:44-1:47 (0:18-0:20), 1:48-1:51 (0:21-0:24), 1:52-1:55 and 1:56-2:00 are derived from 0:24-0:30 but different, I guess.

From Lulu, the melloflute melody 0:14-0:25 adjusted to key (& rhythm) at 1:27-1:32 & 1:43-1:49, (0:19-0:25) at 1:37-1:40 and (a further adjusted 0:14-0:19) at 1:56-2:00. These on the organ + chippy synth.

I think I need to include that bass thing from Lenna's @ 0:39-0:42!

2:00-2:03 A little break

First "chorus":

2:03-2:07 The lead sounds like a hybrid of both bells in Lenna's 0:55-1:01.. I might adjust that to fit the source better. Sounds a bit hyperactive, the source is very pretty and it would give a nice contrast in the piece perhaps?

2:07-2:11 Lulu's melloflute from 0:14-0:19

2:12-2:20 2:12-2:14 and 2:16-2:20 you can hear the higher bell from Lenna's at 0:55-0:58 in the background.

2:21-2:25 The descending pizzicato from Lulu's plays @ 2:21.

Third "verse":

2:25-2:59 The Lulu's B-part melody from 1:09-1:34 plays twice I believe. Lenna-bells from 0:06-0:28 on the chippy synth.

3:00-3:01 a little break

Second "chorus":

3:02-3:10 The lower bell from Lenna's 0:55-1:06.

3:10-3:36 Variations of the previous bit; the original melody is there in the background.

3:36-3:49 a wind-down.

Edited February 28, 2022 by evktalo
completed review

[Eino Keskitalo]

WIP 2015/03/13

I've lessened the clutter a bit in the arrangement, especially purging/varying a little bit of the drumming. Nothing drastic.

[Eino Keskitalo]

Here's the source breakdown.

The long intro:

0:00-0:07 no source anywhere

0:07-0:24 The descending pizzicato from Lulu's theme (from the start) is there on the violin to the right, adjusted to major key.. if you'll accept that

0:24-0:41 Pizzicato continues; Lenna's bells from 0:00-0:10 on the chippy synth to the left

0:41-0:50 Pizzicato

First "verse"

0:51-1:24 Lenna's bells + melody (on the fake guitar, different rhythm) from 0:06-0:28.

Second "verse":

1:25-2:00

Bits of Lenna's bells (1:25-1:27, 1:34-1:36, 1:43-1:44, 1:52-1:53)

Bits of Lenna's melody (1:25-1:27 from 0:30-0:31, 1:28-1:38 from 0:30-0:38 (as if a lower harmony), 1:44-1:47 (0:18-0:20), 1:48-1:51 (0:21-0:24), 1:52-1:55 and 1:56-2:00 are derived from 0:24-0:30 but different, I guess.

From Lulu, the melloflute melody 0:14-0:25 adjusted to key (& rhythm) at 1:27-1:32 & 1:43-1:49, (0:19-0:25) at 1:37-1:40 and (a further adjusted 0:14-0:19) at 1:56-2:00. These on the organ + chippy synth.

I think I need to include that bass thing from Lenna's @ 0:39-0:42!

2:00-2:03 A little break

First "chorus":

2:03-2:07 The lead sounds like a hybrid of both bells in Lenna's 0:55-1:01.. I might adjust that to fit the source better. Sounds a bit hyperactive, the source is very pretty and it would give a nice contrast in the piece perhaps?

2:07-2:11 Lulu's melloflute from 0:14-0:19

2:12-2:20 2:12-2:14 and 2:16-2:20 you can hear the higher bell from Lenna's at 0:55-0:58 in the background.

2:21-2:25 The descending pizzicato from Lulu's plays @ 2:21.

Third "verse":

2:25-2:59 The Lulu's B-part melody from 1:09-1:34 plays twice I believe. Lenna-bells from 0:06-0:28 on the chippy synth.

3:00-3:01 a little break

Second "chorus":

3:02-3:10 The lower bell from Lenna's 0:55-1:06.

3:10-3:36 Variations of the previous bit; the original melody is there in the background.

3:36-3:49 a wind-down.

[timaeus222]

Nice use of Cinematic Synthetic Drums (or Juggernaut-free)! Personally I think there's a bit too much treble going on; the snare is lofi, and it mixes in with the digital arp (from 0:40) and creates a constant, upfront lofi texture that ultimately gets grating. I think you should pick something you want to keep that trebly, and low pass the other instruments near perhaps 12000 Hz or so.

This sounds to me like it wants to be a chippy, ambient, chillout style. You might want to try bringing that snare (the one that has more treble) back further by lowering the reverb dry mix a touch so that the drums are closer to each other in terms of depth in the stereo field.

I do agree with you that there's definitely still clutter. I don't think it's too washed out, but I do think there is currently a large amount of midrange going on. Anything that's not leading, you can stand to lower the midrange even a little bit. Anything background definitely counts towards something that doesn't need a whole ton of midrange; just enough to not be too hollow is all they need. I can kind of hear what's going on if I really try, but the treble clutter is distracting me from doing that properly.

Arrangement-wise, you're probably valid on the source breakdown, but I would take another look at the flow. The dynamics need to change more to give the listener a break from the "main" portions. If I look at what you have to drop off the dynamics, you have 2:01 - 2:03, 2:21 - 2:43, and 3:00 - 3:02. On top of that, I hear hardly any obvious transitions, and partly due to that and partly due to the way the arrangement goes, it's hard to tell where the remix wants to go; there's a lack of direction. That seems to be a common issue. Try not to have wandering melodies, or new sections that don't start with a transition element of some sort.

And as a general rule of thumb, I try to have a 'breakdown section' at least halfway through the song if not earlier. Usually I have one at about a minute in and about halfway; whatever feels right for the particular remix. For example, in this remix---one of my personal favorite arrangements I wrote/contributed to, there's a dynamic dropoff about 3/8 of the way through for about 24 seconds, and another one (a breakdown with a solo) a little over halfway through for about 24 seconds (like earlier).

Edited March 17, 2015 by timaeus222

[Eino Keskitalo]

Thanks! That sounds pretty spot-on and valid both mixing & arrangement-wise, exactly what I was needing! The transitions, or lack of thereof, are indeed pretty steep. That's something that I hadn't considered before, and the rest confirms what I was suspecting. Again, many thanks!

[Eino Keskitalo]

Well, I've been chiseling away on this since the last time...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/kdp7igo8trkh5ny/eino_keskitalo_-_sovitus-20220214.mp3?dl=0

[Eino Keskitalo]

Iterating ... https://www.dropbox.com/s/nsg4uw0cx3iv158/eino_keskitalo_-_sovitus-20220215.mp3?dl=0

[Eino Keskitalo]

Final candidate before submission: https://www.dropbox.com/s/opbhtwwoans6c4g/eino_keskitalo_-_sovitus-20220219.mp3?dl=0

[timaeus222]

I think from what I can tell, the mixing feels cleaner in the reverb, and the treble has a lot less clutter! I believe you also added a bit of an ending too which is nice. For the most part I think the arrangement has stayed pretty similar to what you had before, though I haven't exactly A/Bed it very much. Just looking at the waveform though, I can see the dynamics changing more effectively.

Overall, I still think it isn't easy to tell whether this would be a YES or not. The arrangement doesn't seem to have changed much since then (it's still tough to follow the melody and realize what direction it is going, imo), but as far as the mixing goes, it's a huge improvement. Much better on the dynamics and upper treble mixing. I'd say give it a shot and see what the panel thinks!

Edited February 24, 2022 by timaeus222