Chimpazilla Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 (edited) Remixer Name: APZX Real Name: Austin Simons E-mail Address: User ID: 30429 Game Arranged: Out Run Name of Arrangement: Song Arranged: Passing Breeze Additional Game Information: Out Run's original composer was Hiroshi Kawaguchi. A quick link to the original in case anyone is not familiar with the original track, Passing Breeze My first encounter with Out Run was actually a demo on the Xbox for Out Run 2006 and the track that played was simply fantastic. Now, that there is considerably more information on the internet about things I discovered that there was an original game from 1986 with an absolutely glorious piece of music. I decided one day to just sit down and see what I could do with taking the original and really just make it a bit more my style. ------------------------------------------------------ Edited July 8, 2015 by Liontamer closed decision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimpazilla Posted May 20, 2015 Author Share Posted May 20, 2015 Never heard of this game, but neato source, I like it! Right away I like the sounds in the remix, especially that beefy kick. I'm not a fan of faux-trumpet leads, and this one is sort of vanilla but it works. The soundscape is really lush and you've added nice details and candy. The arrangement is plenty similar to the source, no problems there for me, but the arrangement is... odd. I think the track is too long overall. Parts get repetetive, for example in the intro, once the groove gets going at 0:24, the same pattern plays twice until 0:56 without any significant additional elements or writing variation. At 0:56 we are already into a breakdown, then at 1:20, the same melody plays again twice until 1:52. Another little mini-break, then the same melody again from 2:00-2:16, granted this time there is more to the soundscape. Now I've heard the exact same transition sweep three times. At 2:20, an extended breakdown begins. I like the ocean sounds, but I feel like this breakdown goes on too sparsely for too long (2:20-3:30)(and followed by the same transition sweep), and I'm starting to feel a lot of stop/starts in this track, and it feels awkward. You've used the same transition sweep in the track too many times to count. Way overused. The track seems to end at 6:08, but then the ocean sounds and EP from the breakdown begin again, this seems unnecessary after such a final sounding outro. This track sounds good, mixing is good. The sounds are a bit vanilla but they are used well. But the arrangement I feel goes on too long, and there are too many oddly placed breaks and awkward transitions. The melody writing is simple and not heavily interpreted through much of the track. If you were to cut some of the more repetitive sections of the track in half (such as the sections with two identical playthroughs of the melody), cut the long breakdown shorter, and remove some of the awkward breaks and instead transition the parts together better, this would be a winner! NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutritious Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 How have you never heard of Outrun, Kris? Were you a sheltered child? Things are definitely starting very close to the vest as far as source usage. Same bassline as the original as well as pretty much verbatim usage of the melody line. I would've liked to hear some more variation on the source lines used and/or the progression of the track. Breakdown at 2:16 was a bit unexpected, since we were only a little ways into the second iteration of the main melody. I call it a breakdown section, but it clocks in at 1:15, which kind of kills the energy of the track. I'd definitely trim that down. The build back up at 3:30 felt awkward. Things come back in to the main melody again at 3:36. With a wobbly lead synth layered with the trumpet, which is again on verbatim source coverage. As Kris mentioned, the sounds are pretty vanilla sounding in general. I don't view it as a dealbreaker, but the track could benefit from more expressive and/or realistic samples. There's some fuzzy synth work after 5:00 which sounds out of place and messy. In general, the track gets overly busy after 5:16 with too much stuff competing for space. I honestly thought the track was ending at 4:55, but it kicks back in with the backing pattern again + chords. At this point, the drum pattern here is getting very repetitive, as is the repeated source lines. Honestly, I don't feel there's enough here to fill 6:49 worth of track. The extended breakdown section as well as repeated iterations of melodies and backing patterns makes the song feel like it's dragging on, rather than staying fresh. I know it's a big write-up here with a lot of crits, but that's not to say you haven't established a good start here with some good ideas. It just needs quite a bit of work (IMO) to reach the bar. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jivemaster Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Not a bad start. Things are clear and you have quite varied instrumentation. After some listens, I'm with the other judges on this one. -Production value is mostly solid and your mix has some nice sounds but the arrangement is too close to the original source tune, we need more you in this mix. -The trumpet lead is a bit too cheesy for my taste, I'm a bit borderline on that one. It'd almost be better off as a synth lead. -Your track really feels like it should end around ~4:50 as it brings itself to a close at that point, and I didn't feel the part afterwards added any extra value to your mix. -The breakdown around 2:20 goes for too long and is called in too early, your track would really benefit from this portion being halved and saved for a bit later in the mix. -Your transition sample was good but its overuse dampened its effectiveness each time it played. Consider playing with different transition noises or apply some effects over the sample to make them play a bit different. You have a solid base here and there is little to worry about on the production side. You just need to get in there and make the arrangement more your own and end it more logically. NO (please resub) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts