Discussion: Faithful Remixes and OC ReMix

[NyxTheShield]

I have been a follower of OCReMix since 2007 aproximately, been lurking this forums since 2010 and became a member just a couple of years ago. And something i have noticed here, is that faithful remixes, or remixes that don't variate a lot from the original sources are often (And in the majority of cases) ignored or criticized only because they are just faithful, ignoring basically everything else from the remix (How it sounds, instrumentation, arrangements etc). And in the other hand, i have seen remixes that have been praised or straight accepted into the site because they variate a lot from the source.

Taking some sources for example:

http://ocremix.org/forums/showthread.php?t=48839&page=2

This is an incredible liberal that changes basically almost the entire harmonization of the original track. It received a lot of good feedback. When i listened to it, i barely could get the Shadowman theme out of it (Even when it's there, the harmonization just make it sounds like a totally different track). As it stands, is more likely to be accepted into the site.

In the other side:

http://ocremix.org/forums/showthread.php?t=48893

I submitted this as a mod review, the overall sound of the track was liked, same for the atmosphere, but the track was said that it would mostly get rejected for being too close to the original source, despite the other aspects being good enough.

What's your opinion about this kind of remixes?

[timaeus222]

One of the focuses of evaluating an OC ReMix candidate is on a nice balance between enough interpretation to make it your own and being close enough to the original that it still sounds like the original. It's not so much "how different is it"; rather, it's more like, "how well does this differentiate".

Nostalvania's remix, though seemingly very liberal, actually retains the melody (and the bass line, too) but indeed changes the harmonies. However, it's still quite recognizable because the core motifs shine through, and in being recognizable but still adapted to cohesive new harmonies, it imparts plenty of creativity in it and so the personalization is more evident and the conveyed effort put into it is more evident.

In your case, it just so happens that when it sounds too close to the original, it just doesn't convey as much effort (even if you believe you put in the effort, what is conveyed will not be quite the same as you intended) since the original has already been written. If it's close to verbatim, as Gario stated, it doesn't take anything more than transcribing it to different instruments to fit your new context, and that shows less of your capabilities than if you reformulated the source tune's structure, harmonies, melodic contour, or other aspects. In other words, writing a really conservative remix is "too easy".

---

I honestly prefer the higher level of personalization because that tends to emotionally click more for me. Incorporating your own ideas to spice up a mix shows that you were having fun in writing it, and not just writing something for the sake of making a souped-up version of the original.

For some other people, it really is about sticking to the vibe of the original, and they may refuse to take it any other way (for example, a ballad tune turned into an aggressive dubstep remix). Specifically, OCR is still in part about retaining the recognizability of the original, but the idea of elevating the VGM is more emphasized.

Edited February 20, 2015 by timaeus222

[RoeTaKa]

I rather like remixes/arrangements that feel like extensions of a game or its soundtrack, as if they belonged to it or are catering to what people liked about it. Those to me are ones that stick. I have heard some that feel too different or have too many original parts, sometimes those naturally make me disconnect no matter how much I appreciate the work and creativity gone into it because I've come in expecting to hear the soundtrack I've enjoyed and come out not getting that so much. At the end of the day you make up your own mind about what you enjoy.

One of my absolute favourites is Aquamarine by mv from Terranigma: http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR01335

It's one of my favourite games of all time and this remix felt like it brought it to life in a new way without straying from it's original sound too much...which is something that always impresses me. It has some personal touches and adds some things that feel like they belong. The ending is so so but by that point I'm already stolen away. Who knows if it would pass today.

Then on occasion I do really enjoy remixes that feel completely to the original but they really have to be memorable enough for me to "get it". One such remix is garlic by posu yan "po" from Castelvania: http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR01776

It really shakes up the style and feels fresh, there's a lot added to it with some nice twists but it never loses sight of the source so I'm constantly feeling like I'm hearing this great jam by someone who loves the soundtrack. Paying tribute like a mo'fo'.

I'm not totally familiar with the sources in your track but I thought it was a pleasant listen that could be touched up a little more. With more intimate and laid back songs I do enjoy hearing the all of the acoustic guitar rather than a clean recording of the string notes too (as long as there is not too much production going on). The ending is almost non existent which to me says there probably was more you could do to give your own personal touch and show the artist in you. If this really is more of a straight cover of the songs then yknow there's nothing to stop you putting it on YouTube or wherever and finding an audience, there are tons of people that just want nice performances and covers. But don't be defeated, this probably isn't too far off.

[NyxTheShield]

I rather like remixes/arrangements that feel like extensions of a game or its soundtrack, as if they belonged to it or are catering to what people liked about it. Those to me are ones that stick. I have heard some that feel too different or have too many original parts, sometimes those naturally make me disconnect no matter how much I appreciate the work and creativity gone into it because I've come in expecting to hear the soundtrack I've enjoyed and come out not getting that so much. At the end of the day you make up your own mind about what you enjoy.

One of my absolute favourites is Aquamarine by mv from Terranigma: http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR01335

It's one of my favourite games of all time and this remix felt like it brought it to life in a new way without straying from it's original sound too much...which is something that always impresses me. It has some personal touches and adds some things that feel like they belong. The ending is so so but by that point I'm already stolen away. Who knows if it would pass today.

Then on occasion I do really enjoy remixes that feel completely to the original but they really have to be memorable enough for me to "get it". One such remix is garlic by posu yan "po" from Castelvania: http://ocremix.org/remix/OCR01776

It really shakes up the style and feels fresh, there's a lot added to it with some nice twists but it never loses sight of the source so I'm constantly feeling like I'm hearing this great jam by someone who loves the soundtrack. Paying tribute like a mo'fo'.

I'm not totally familiar with the sources in your track but I thought it was a pleasant listen that could be touched up a little more. With more intimate and laid back songs I do enjoy hearing the all of the acoustic guitar rather than a clean recording of the string notes too (as long as there is not too much production going on). The ending is almost non existent which to me says there probably was more you could do to give your own personal touch and show the artist in you. If this really is more of a straight cover of the songs then yknow there's nothing to stop you putting it on YouTube or wherever and finding an audience, there are tons of people that just want nice performances and covers. But don't be defeated, this probably isn't too far off.

Oh for sure! i am fond on what i create, i came to understand that my material is not what OCR needs, i stick more the original tracks because if i am remixing them, it's because i liked them how they were, at most i will add a coda or mix a couple of songs together. I will not go down the spiral because i am not OCR worthy heheheh, i still have my channel where i upload my stuff. In fact i only have submitted one track to the site (

) because i know most of my tracks wouldn't get past the judges. I was honestly curious about the opinion around the forums, certainly most of my favourite remixers and remixes are not in OCR because they stay close to the sources-

[djpretzel]

I like both types of arrangements, for the record. Here are my personal opinions, which more or less echo the thinking behind our site standards:

• If a ReMix is on the liberal side of things, I still want to be able draw lines and hear how the source was taken in a new direction. I don't mind having to do a little work to make that happen, as I appreciate arrangers being both creative & "crafty" in re-purposing things - that's part of the art of arrangement.
  
• If a ReMix is on the conservative side of things, I still want to hear that the arranger thought about each decision s/he made with regard to tempo, chord progression, structure, instrumentation, etc. If those are all identical or there are large swaths that are identical, I have to ask: Where was the arrangement? What decisions were made? Making the decision to keep an individual component intact, verbatim, is a PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE choice, but it still needs to be a choice, not a foregone conclusion... if tempo, progression, AND structure are all left intact verbatim, there are two possibilities: the arranger thought about each of those aspects at length and decided that, for their specific vision, they needed to remain the same... or the arranger didn't think about them at all. Usually you CAN tell, because of other aspects of the arrangement that come into play as far as addition/subtraction, interpretive performances, melodic modifications, etc. This delineation is nevertheless one of the most subjective and challenging aspects of evaluating submissions. It is not our job to read the minds of submitting artists and divine the thought process involved, but we DO have to be able to analyze whether there's interpretation going on, and to what extent.
  

I object to the word "faithful" in the topic title - it's the "glass half full" adjective to describe near-verbatim arrangements. The "glass half empty" adjective would be "lazy"...

I'd object to that adjective too, though, because it's not a glass half full/empty situation... if arrangement is conservative or, in extreme cases, almost verbatim, I don't think of it as a question of "fidelity" or "faithfulness" to the original, nor do I think of it as pure laziness on the part of the artist involved (unless they are explicitly claiming otherwise - that they really "made it their own"). It's just an inquiry that speaks to suitability for being posted on OCR, where we explicitly value arrangements that are interpretive to a certain extent, because we DO want artists to make it their own...

[Brandon Strader]

This post is gonna mirror heavily with the post I made in Willrock's thread yesterday called "What do you like to hear from remixes?"

On the discussion of how faithful I prefer a remix to be, the answer is for regular listening of the music, I really do not mind how faithful a remix is. If I have a personal investment in the song in question, like if someone remixed The Last of Us and it was a trance remix that ruined the solemn mood of the original, and was otherwise overly liberal, I wouldn't like that but I would still enjoy the song for its own artistic merit. The question would be then are you listening to the music to enjoy it because it arranges the existing VGM song, or are you listening to it just as a regular song to enjoy it in that way. Especially on OCR, it can be easy to just "forget" the fact that it's arranging VGM -- in a lot of cases the remixes don't sound overly gamy. So that suspension of disbelief, if you can call it that, is possible for a lot of the very well made remixes that are posted on the site. I enjoy remixes that arrange games I have played, but very often songs are posted from games and sources I have never heard, so I just enjoy them as I would a regular song without checking out the source (because I have no particular need to analyze it as a VGM remix, but instead can just enjoy the song). As for conservative stuff being disliked, I don't understand that and I don't remember having seen that on posted remixes recently. Especially on Youtube it seems like the listening audience gravitates more heavily towards praising stuff that can be recognized. On OCR, the remix needs to have roughly 50% source usage, which means the other half of the song can be original, or original writing including source interpretation. Maybe I've been away too long but I haven't seen a lot of that kind of complaint going on lately, about whether stuff is too conservative or too liberal.

Everyone has their own tastes so you could really arrange in whatever way you want, just make sure to have at least 50% source, and don't make a cover because that is not allowed here. There have been cases where judges have lined up the source with the remix and decided that the structure was so close, they matched (I've seen that a couple times in recent judgements) and the song was rejected as a result. The personalization is a big part of what OCR is about but there have also been cases where VERY conservative mixes (and even multi-source linear medleys) have been passed! In the end it's a case-by-case scenario.

But to summarize personally I just like music.

Edited February 19, 2015 by Brandon Strader

[Nabeel Ansari]

As an arranger, it's your job to interpret. An arranger is a composer with material prepared for him (and a composer is an arranger without material prepared for him; in other words, they're synonymous jobs with different circumstances) and your job in either case is to demonstrate your level of musical craft as best you can. You should have a vision for some original musical contribution when you arrange something, not simply re-orchestrate (replace instrumentation) switch the form around.

I'm going to disagree with timaeus that the purpose is to retain the vibe of an original whilst differentiating. That may be your personal preference as a type of arrangement, but keep in mind the mission is interpretation. You can completely tear down the vibe of something and give it a new one, and if it's interpreting the source, that's probably the ideal scenario for an OCR, and it requires a highly skilled arranger. For instance, if I turned the FF7 battle theme into a piano waltz (and somehow made that happen successfully, as in using the material of the battle theme like the melody but giving it the proper harmonic vibe and phrasing of a waltz), that's a no brainer direct post for OCR. I'm not going to do this, though, and don't ask me to, because the answer is no.

I still want to be able draw lines and hear how the source was taken in a new direction. I don't mind having to do a little work to make that happen, as I appreciate arrangers being both creative & "crafty" in re-purposing things - that's part of the art of arrangement.

Edited February 19, 2015 by Neblix

[Brandon Strader]

That's an interesting idea Neblix, and it would stand as a good example of arrangement. You should do it.

[Nabeel Ansari]

That's an interesting idea Neblix, and it would stand as a good example of arrangement. You should do it.

Is it bad that I started working this out on the piano >_>

[Brandon Strader]

Is it bad that I started working this out on the piano >_>

No that is a good thing my friend

[MindWanderer]

Also, it's worth pointing out that Gario (the mod reviewer on that piece) said that it was a close call on originality. I think if you cleaned up the production issues he mentioned, it would really make the judges think hard about whether to accept it anyway.

OCR does accept remixes that stay vary close to the original, even these days. Pearly Gates is very similar to the source stylistically (while adding original content), and Umaro's New Groove uses the original melody almost verbatim while taking a creative direction in style and flow. Guile's Theme Goes With Metal is a more typically conservative remix: mostly very cover-ish but with a lengthy original bridge. All are perfectly legitimate approaches.

[Darangen]

I probably have about a dozen remixes I did that were never submitted because I know they stray too far from the source.

Doesn't make them bad arrangements, just not necessarily fit for OCR.

[timaeus222]

I'm going to disagree with timaeus that the purpose is to retain the vibe of an original whilst differentiating. That may be your personal preference as a type of arrangement, but keep in mind the mission is interpretation. You can completely tear down the vibe of something and give it a new one, and if it's interpreting the source, that's probably the ideal scenario for an OCR, and it requires a highly skilled arranger. For instance, if I turned the FF7 battle theme into a piano waltz (and somehow made that happen successfully, as in using the material of the battle theme like the melody but giving it the proper harmonic vibe and phrasing of a waltz), that's a no brainer direct post for OCR. I'm not going to do this, though, and don't ask me to, because the answer is no.

I never said I prefer retaining the original vibe, assuming you see it as including atmosphere and rhythm as some possible aspects of "vibe". In fact, I said that I prefer interesting personalization. I also didn't say that the purpose is specifically to retain the vibe of the original; I just said that it should be close enough to tell that it's a remix of the VGM in the first place. All it needs to be is recognizable, and that does not imply having the same vibe. You can surely have the same melody but change the harmonies, structure, melodic contour (to a certain extent), etc.; it's what you just said. I definitely said interpretation and keeping the recognizability of the original is a balancing act.

The core of what I said earlier was: You have to start somewhere, and you might start with original content, maybe you might start with a conservative take and build on that, etc.; generally the reference (or at least my reference) is the source as it is verbatim, and you go out from there along a spectrum of interpretation/personalization, until you get to a point where it's just about right where you want it, and it just so happens to also fit nicely for OCR too. Or, when the judges evaluate something, they tend to start at the source tune as the reference and go out from there to find where the interpretation stops, and they think, "is this enough for OCR?" and/or "what makes this stand out from the original?". They might do the reverse direction of that (remix -> source), but whatever works for them.

One of the focuses of evaluating an OC ReMix candidate is on a nice balance between enough interpretation to make it your own and being close enough to the original that it still sounds like the original.

[...]

I honestly prefer the higher level of personalization because that tends to emotionally click more for me. Incorporating your own ideas to spice up a mix shows that you were having fun in writing it, and not just writing something for the sake of making a souped-up version of the original.

[...]

Specifically, OCR is still in part about retaining the vibe [or recognizability] of the original, but the idea of elevating the VGM is more emphasized.

So no, I don't disagree with you. In fact, I do agree with you.

Edited February 19, 2015 by timaeus222

[NyxTheShield]

Also, it's worth pointing out that Gario (the mod reviewer on that piece) said that it was a close call on originality. I think if you cleaned up the production issues he mentioned, it would really make the judges think hard about whether to accept it anyway.

OCR does accept remixes that stay vary close to the original, even these days. Pearly Gates is very similar to the source stylistically (while adding original content), and Umaro's New Groove uses the original melody almost verbatim while taking a creative direction in style and flow. Guile's Theme Goes With Metal is a more typically conservative remix: mostly very cover-ish but with a lengthy original bridge. All are perfectly legitimate approaches.

I would love to try to give it a second shot but my HDD crapped, i wouldnt be able to replicate the same sound :c And it already sounds good to my ears, when i finish a track i usually touch it up for details only. I would submit it to the site either way to see what happens though lol

[Nabeel Ansari]

I never said I prefer retaining the original vibe, assuming you see it as including atmosphere and rhythm as some possible aspects of "vibe". In fact, I said that I prefer interesting personalization. I also didn't say that the purpose is specifically to retain the vibe of the original; I just said that it should be close enough to tell that it's a remix of the VGM in the first place. All it needs to be is recognizable, and that does not imply having the same vibe. You can surely have the same melody but change the harmonies, structure, melodic contour (to a certain extent), etc.; it's what you just said. I definitely said interpretation and keeping the recognizability of the original is a balancing act.

The core of what I said earlier was: You have to start somewhere, and you might start with original content, maybe you might start with a conservative take and build on that, etc.; generally the reference (or at least my reference) is the source as it is verbatim, and you go out from there along a spectrum of interpretation/personalization, until you get to a point where it's just about right where you want it, and it just so happens to also fit nicely for OCR too. Or, when the judges evaluate something, they tend to start at the source tune as the reference and go out from there to find where the interpretation stops, and they think, "is this enough for OCR?" and/or "what makes this stand out from the original?". They might do the reverse direction of that (remix -> source), but whatever works for them.

So no, I don't disagree with you. In fact, I do agree with you.

Well, you said "vibe" which is a much different thing than "recognizability", considering recognizability is a subjective quality determined by how musically trained and/or perceptive the listener is. Vibe is very much rhythmic motion and atmosphere, which is subjective to absolutely qualify but in relative terms (comparing like, the FF7 battle theme and a Romantic Waltz version) is more of an objective thing that has less wiggle room.

All I'm saying is that you feel OCR wants to retain the vibe of the original (which I disagree with) and also that the purpose of OCR is to maintain recognizaibility (which I do agree with). I feel like as far as vibe is concerned, OCR cares not, and actually encourages different vibe as part of the artistic goal of arrangement (and specifically, in your words, you said "OCR is still in part about retaining the vibe", so I'm not putting words in your mouth here).

The balance to be struck and strove for is the recognizaibility aspect of a liberal mix, yeah. It's hard to make something recognizable but at the same time re-texturize it, re-harmonize it, etc. and like you, I also feel OCR is about maintaining recognizability. I mean, doesn't matter that I pool in and invert the notes of the melody (making it theoretically very similar) if most of the judges don't really hear the source in there. I seem to recall someone telling me once that they changed the mode (scale) of one of the melodies and some judges mistakenly didn't recognize the source, so the panel is also fallible and no one should treat them as the end all be all for arrangement ideals anyway. That anecdote was just word of mouth, though. At the same time, the judges are musically perceptive people, and if they have a hard time hearing the source even if theoretically it's all over, then it's probably within the mission for them to say NO, considering that any general public listener wouldn't be able to hear it either. The general principle is that you can't give the academic paper detailing how well you incorporated the source to a listener. If they can't hear it, it might as well not be there.

This got me burned when I fought WillRock in the second GRMRB. I transposed Elec Man to a minor key and otherwise used it verbatim, but many votes went to WillRock because of "no Elec Man usage". Wasn't particularly mad, since Will had a great mix, but I learned from that experience that you can't really rely on general listeners to figure stuff out, because they don't really listen with a discerning, theoretical ear (and even newblood arrangers on this site don't... I seem to recall something someone said about "source has no discernible key" when a track used a leading tone in minor).

Edited February 20, 2015 by Neblix

[timaeus222]

Well, you said "vibe" which is a much different thing than "recognizability", considering recognizability is a subjective quality determined by how musically trained and/or perceptive the listener is. Vibe is very much rhythmic motion and atmosphere, which is subjective to absolutely qualify but in relative terms (comparing like, the FF7 battle theme and a Romantic Waltz version) is more of an objective thing that has less wiggle room.

All I'm saying is that you feel OCR wants to retain the vibe of the original (which I disagree with) and also that the purpose of OCR is to maintain recognizaibility (which I do agree with). I feel like as far as vibe is concerned, OCR cares not, and actually encourages different vibe as part of the artistic goal of arrangement (and specifically, in your words, you said "OCR is still in part about retaining the vibe", so I'm not putting words in your mouth here).

The balance to be struck and strove for is the recognizaibility aspect of a liberal mix, yeah. It's hard to make something recognizable but at the same time re-texturize it, re-harmonize it, etc. and like you, I also feel OCR is about maintaining recognizability. I mean, doesn't matter that I pool in and invert the notes of the melody (making it theoretically very similar) if most of the judges don't really hear the source in there. I seem to recall someone telling me once that they changed the mode (scale) of one of the melodies and some judges mistakenly didn't recognize the source, so the panel is also fallible and no one should treat them as the end all be all for arrangement ideals anyway. That anecdote was just word of mouth, though. At the same time, the judges are musically perceptive people, and if they have a hard time hearing the source even if theoretically it's all over, then it's probably within the mission for them to say NO, considering that any general public listener wouldn't be able to hear it either. The general principle is that you can't give the academic paper detailing how well you incorporated the source to a listener. If they can't hear it, it might as well not be there.

True, while really similar vibe ~= recognizable result, recognizable enough =/= really similar vibe necessarily. However, you took the instance of me saying "vibe" at the end as mistaken (which it was), and extrapolated it to be my whole point (which it wasn't). Basically you took my misspoken words as what I actually thought. So while I do agree with what you just said, what you believed to be my thoughts was not what I actually intended to say in my first post and does not represent my thoughts.

(By the way, when I said, "For some other people, it really is about sticking to the vibe of the original, and they may refuse to take it any other way", I'm referring to the YT people Brandon was thinking of who love conservative remixes, or really, anyone like that, and not specifically OCR-goers)

Now that that's cleared up, /OT

Edited February 20, 2015 by timaeus222

[MindWanderer]

This got me burned when I fought WillRock in the second GRMRB. I transposed Elec Man to a minor key and otherwise used it verbatim, but many votes went to WillRock because of "no Elec Man usage".

That's weird... I usually have a hard time with subtle use of theme (I agree with the OP about that Shadow Man mix, and I still don't get where Stone Man is in Crystal Cypher), but it was really clear to me in Blackout Tower. And, in fact, I'm going through the votes and comments; the presiding sentiment seems to be that you made better use of the Elec Man theme than Will did. Everyone picked up on it despite the key change, and you used the second verse (elegantly) which he barely used at all.

[Nostalvania]

I actually wasn't aware of how liberal my remix sounds to people. For me the source is pretty clear and not subtle, but of course i'm biased because i wrote the arrangement. For example the bassline is (almost) the same as in the original and also all the melody parts are there. However, i think i can see why some people might have trouble to recognize the source, i really changed pretty much everything (tempo, time signature, chords) and i just realized that i accidentally changed some of the melody notes (i always play songs by ear/memory).

Well yeah, i really like to reharmonize songs, for me that's one of the most exciting parts of remixing.

[MindWanderer]

I For example the bassline is (almost) the same as in the original and also all the melody parts are there.

This is actually something I see a lot when these discussions come up in compos. The remixer thinks they used a lot of the source because it borrows heavily from the source's bass, harmony, chord structure, etc. but uses the melody only briefly. The accompaniment becomes a lot more obvious when you've spent several hours listening to the original and pulling it apart (especially if you started with a MIDI). Most listeners are expecting to hear mostly the melody, repeatedly, throughout, although they're tolerant of a certain amount of transformation. Neither is wrong, but they're listening to and for very different things.

[timaeus222]

This is actually something I see a lot when these discussions come up in compos. The remixer thinks they used a lot of the source because it borrows heavily from the source's bass, harmony, chord structure, etc. but uses the melody only briefly. The accompaniment becomes a lot more obvious when you've spent several hours listening to the original and pulling it apart (especially if you started with a MIDI). Most listeners are expecting to hear mostly the melody, repeatedly, throughout, although they're tolerant of a certain amount of transformation. Neither is wrong, but they're listening to and for very different things.

That's the problem; the interpretation Nostalvania had is beyond the comprehension of many people who don't have much of a critical ear, but for those who DO "get" it (or are specifically told exactly how it all connects), it actually works.

[NyxTheShield]

That's the problem; the interpretation Nostalvania had is beyond the comprehension of many people who don't have much of a critical ear, but for those who DO "get" it (or are specifically told exactly how it all connects), it actually works.

That's exactly my "but", the source is there, it works, but it doesn't necesarily makes it noteworthy (No offense intended). I mean it sounds good as an standalone song, hell he could publish it as a copyrighted track and nobody would notice. My point is i hear that and say "Hey this is good", not "Hey this is a good Shadow Man remix". For example i hear this

and my reaction is "Oh WOW this is an INCREDIBLE remix", but i doubt it would be OCReMix worthy because it's too close to the original, and the only real variation is the solo and the intro riff (Which is basically in the same harmony line). Edited February 21, 2015 by NyxTheShield

[timaeus222]

This is actually something I see a lot when these discussions come up in compos. The remixer thinks they used a lot of the source because it borrows heavily from the source's bass, harmony, chord structure, etc. but uses the melody only briefly. The accompaniment becomes a lot more obvious when you've spent several hours listening to the original and pulling it apart (especially if you started with a MIDI). Most listeners are expecting to hear mostly the melody, repeatedly, throughout, although they're tolerant of a certain amount of transformation. Neither is wrong, but they're listening to and for very different things.

In any case, here's what I was hearing:

ReMix = Source (Times, Instrument)

0:00 - 0:22 = (0:03 - 0:09, Bass)

0:22 - 0:26, 0:28 - 0:32, 0:34 - 0:38, 0:40 - 0:44 = (0:09 - 0:20, Melody) + somewhat different intervals on the perfect 4th jump portion

0:44 - 1:06 = (0:03 - 0:09, Bass)

1:06 - 1:32 = (0:20 - 0:43, Melody)

1:32 - 1:37, 1:39 - 1:43 = (0:09 - 0:20, Melody) + somewhat different intervals on the perfect 4th jump portion

1:44 - 1:48 = (0:20 - 0:43, Melody, slight)

1:48 - 2:28 = Solo

2:28 - 2:38 != (0:20 - 0:43, Melody, vague resemblance though too different)

2:40 - 3:00 = (0:47 - 0:58, Melody)

3:03 - 3:14 = (0:03 - 0:09, Bass)

3:14 - 3:28 = (0:20 - 0:43, Melody)

Total: 231 secs

--> 22+4*4+22+26+5+4+4+20+11+14 = 144 secs

144/231 = 62.4% = good to go!

Edited February 21, 2015 by timaeus222

[Nabeel Ansari]

That's exactly my "but", the source is there, it works, but it doesn't necesarily makes it noteworthy (No offense intended). I mean it sounds good as an standalone song, hell he could publish it as a copyrighted track and nobody would notice. My point is i hear that and say "Hey this is good", not "Hey this is a good Shadow Man remix". For example i hear this

and my reaction is "Oh WOW this is an INCREDIBLE remix", but i doubt it would be OCReMix worthy because it's too close to the original, and the only real variation is the solo and the intro riff (Which is basically in the same harmony line).

So what's the problem here? Are you saying OCReMix's standards are flawed because of the narrowed arrangement ideals? Are you saying that OCReMix should abandon its mission of artistic interpretation and instead turn into a cover site?

I'm not sure what your point is, if you're lamenting that OCReMix is limited in mission, or if you are trying to prompt change in its mission, etc. I'm just asking for clarification.

[NyxTheShield]

So what's the problem here? Are you saying OCReMix's standards are flawed because of the narrowed arrangement ideals? Are you saying that OCReMix should abandon its mission of artistic interpretation and instead turn into a cover site?

I'm not sure what your point is, if you're lamenting that OCReMix is limited in mission, or if you are trying to prompt change in its mission, etc. I'm just asking for clarification.

I am basically a random guy so my scope is not really changing the vision of OCReMix (It has been around for as long i has been living in fact LOL) but yeah, kinda lamenting that some epic remixes are you straight rejected because the arrangement police.

[A-RoN]

I tried voicing concerns similar to this but after years of seeing what can result from that, I just simply try to enjoy the music, listen to a song carefully, or simply ask if the source isn't recognizable. I honestly have no opinions now as long as I can actually determine what source is there in a remix even if my ears can't seem to do it (hence the list of what original was used on a remix write-up page).