Chimpazilla Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) My ReMixer name: Joe Sua My real name: Joshua Matthews My email address: My website: Soundcloud.com/joesua My userID: 53952 Name of Game: Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time Name of Arrangement: Lost Woods/Saria's Song Original Composer: Koji Kondo Name of individual song/ReMix: Saria's Dreamland Link to Original: Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of time - Lost Woods Link to ReMix: Saria's Dreamland Your own comments about the mix, for example the inspiration behind it, how it was made, etc: Greetings Judges, This ReMix came about as a result of a remix assignment I was given in school. Since I am a fan of the Legend of Zelda series, I wanted to pay homage one of my top favorite songs: Saria's Song/Lost Woods. Given that the song is already refreshing but albeit short, I decided to add my own arrangement for the intro, ending and stretch the theme a bit. In the intro, I wanted to give the listener the feeling that they are flying through a tunnel of light particles with a "spacy" backgrop. For this I decided to use the piano, chimes and layered synth pad. For the next part I used bells and the piano to lead the listener through a portal of light to the Village of the Kokiri to meet Saria. For the main theme I decided to use violins, flute and lead synth for the melody, piano and woodwind section to capture the accompaniment and Mark I (with panning wah effect), cellos and bass section for the chord progression throughout. I added the bells and panning harp to bring out the magic and innocence of the original theme. For the ending my goal was to leave the listener desiring to hear the song again and since some of my favorite anime/rpg songs fade out without resolving the progression while leaving me wanting more, I figured I'd would try to incorporate that idea into the remix. Saria's Dreamland was ReMixed/arranged/performed by me alone and is the first remix I've made. I took care to read the instructions you left. I've read some of the critiques on the submissions so I know I'll receive some great feedback even if the song is declined. I hope you all enjoy the remix. If possible, I would like you to leave the link of the submission on your decision. Thank you for listening and for your consideration, Joshua "Joe Sua" Matthews ------------------------- Edited July 6, 2015 by Liontamer closed decision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimpazilla Posted May 27, 2015 Author Share Posted May 27, 2015 No problem hearing the source tune here! Intro piano is nice but a bit mechanical. Violin lead at 0:44 is very fake, writing is extremely conservative. I like the writing variation from 1:12-1:26. The drumming is sounding very repetitive overall. Not a lot of bass in the soundscape. The source melody is being played through quite a few times verbatim without variation. At 2:40, finally some more interpretation, I like it, but the lead timbre for this solo is really plain and gets piercy and thin when it hits the stratosphere at 3:08. That whole solo section could sound so much better with a more expressive lead, and even a countermelody added. FADEOUT ENDING. Growl. I'm not sure here. I have a few production issues and the writing is quite conservative. Gonna see what others say. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 Opens up with some pretty liberal interpretation on the source that goes off into mostly original territory. At :29, it shifts into an original line over the foundation of the source before going into the source melody at :44. The string articulations are pretty exposed as unrealistic, so it was much better at :58 when the lead was tweaked and mitigated the realism issue. The snare/hi-hat "THUMP-THUMP TSS" pattern from :44-1:54 was repetitive and plodding; you need some quick/simple variations in the core pattern so it doesn't just function on auto-pilot and undermine the dynamics & interest of the piece. Good dropoff of the beats at 1:54; I liked the string writing behind the lead, then you had more good stuff at 2:12 with the bowed & plucked strings. Repetitive beats back from 2:26-3:48 for the rest of the track. You had a creative original synth section from 2:40-3:28, but it was undermined both by the beat pattern droning on, as well as the lead timing sounding too stiff/quantized. Super-extended fadeout ending at 3:27 was a disappointment; fadeouts aren't bad in and of themselves, but when you just repeat those beats and pads from the previous minute and a half, it's just another instance of plodding repetition. Literally 2/3rds of the track is just the same beat over and over and over. It's not THAT good. You don't need to go wild in terms of diversifying up the beats, you need need to employ subtle variations -- simple stuff like occasional off-beats or rhythmic changes -- to keep the show fresh. Right now, the arrangement is melodically conservative, but you did do a good job of changing the other instrumentation around it to personalize your arrangement. Some further melodic interpretation would be welcome as well to keep the melody from getting too repetitive, so consider doing that as well; same as the issue with the beats, it's nothing to go wild over with changes, but do something to create more variation. That said, the main issue for me is taking your beats off autopilot. Promising material so far though, Joshua; now it's just a matter of further detail work to fully realize the potential here. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vig Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 The intro is extremely quiet and washy. Need more presence. The middle of the song is better mixed, but the pads fill up space without being dynamic at all. Gotta make that part a bit more interesting. 2:20 is a welcome break, definitely one of the more interesting sections so far. Overall it's kinda meandering, and the fadeout ending kinda proves that point. I'd say the arrangement needs more direction. I don't see what larry's talking about when he says it's "Mostly original." this is a pretty straightforward arrangement. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 I don't see what larry's talking about when he says it's "Mostly original." this is a pretty straightforward arrangement. I agree it's straightforward, and I said that in the last paragraph. I was only referring to the opening until :44, but I can see how it could be misinterpreted as saying the whole thing was mostly original writing. That's only talking about the intro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkeSword Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 I feel like the big wooshy pads are hurting this track. Makes the whole thing feel like it's flooded. Think about transforming that into some kind of rhythmic accompaniment. Gotta agree that the violin is SUPER-fakey and not working for me as a lead at all. You really need to revisit that choice. There's also some stuff happening in the harp that I'm barely catching that could be brought out more. Not a bad approach to the source, but it could could have a bit more going on. NO, resub Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts