Jump to content

*NO* The Witcher 'Witcher's Tale'


Chimpazilla
 Share

Recommended Posts

Greetings, my name is Vladimir Kuznetsov and this is my first submission, so please forgive me if I'm doing anything wrong.

Contact Information

 

Edited by Liontamer
closed decision
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well this is absolutely beautiful and amazing!  And I don't hear the source at all.  I think I hear a bit of the motif starting at 1:05 but I'm really not sure.  Help appreciated.  I hope I'm just missing it.... but without hearing a substantial link to source, this is sadly a

 

NO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Yeah I'm afraid I'm going to have to agree with Chimpazilla's assessment here. There are light sprinklings of the source, such as at 1:36, but I would venture to say that this is like 95% original composition. It's AMAZING original composition (very, very well done), but I don't think it could be considered a true arrangement of the original track.

 

Not much of a point in dissecting it further than that. Beautiful composition, but regrettably still a

 

NO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright guys, got a chance to look at this further. Looking at just the vocal melody that shows up at 0:07 in the source we have these notes:

La Mi Re Ti Do Re La

Listening in the mix I'm hearing that used quite a bit, most especially the first 4 or 5 notes. Most notably;

0:16-0:30

0:34-0:38

1:06-1:13 - in the chorus

1:14-1:18 - backing staccato strings

1:36-2:01 - female vocals and strings

2:06-2-16 - strings

So that stuff alone comes to 47% with 73 seconds to me. I'll admit the rhythm is often changed and 4-5 notes is a bit small to work with, but I felt like it was iconic and strong enough to be recognizable. I can also see some nitpickers saying the big section has some variation I included that isn't straight source, but I'd argue it's variation and fits well enough with the source.

I do wish the first half had a bit more of a connection to it, which would totally seal the deal 100% for me, but I honestly feel like there's enough there that is recognizable as source usage/personalization that I am fine with giving this a Yes. I encourage Kris and Dain to look at this again.

By the way if anyone picks up any other source usage point it out! Also maybe a reach out to the mixer would help too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

this is epic and awesome but it sounds like a part 2 of the song rather than a reinterpretation of it. If the song was twice as long, this sounds like it would be a prety natural expansion, but as is, it feels like the mood and chords are there, but the melodic content is not precise enough compared to the original. It doesnt need to be exact, but it does need to be more present. Great work, but not quite an arrangement by OCR standards.

 

No

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well i lost my long ol review for this lol so here's at-bat #2:

starting first with the obvious: this is downright beautiful. the soundfield is robust and the atmosphere, rich. orchestration is fantastic, everything is balanced. the arrangement packs a lot of motion to it, i especially love how it builds steam around 1.30 and then after going full throttle for a minute, drops you off the precipice into a near silent body of water that just trickles away from you. that ending is just one example of how thoughtful the transitions and phrasings in this arrangement are. love.

now as far as the source goes, this is that awesome grey area we love so much! i'm not a seconds counter (don't have the patience for it) so i use an ear test and my ear tells me that, for our guidelines, it's quite sparse. but i hear it. despite only focusing on one aspect of the theme versus a full treatment of it, it's there and maybe even more importantly, it is a thoughtful interpretation that always feels like a Witcher track tape to tape. not to get too sappy on y'all but the essence of this piece embodies everything it sets out to do; interpret and tribute Witcher music.

 

if i'm going to be on the fence like everyone else, i'm gonna ere on the YES because this needs to be on the site and if DA's +/-47% source usage checks out or passes or whatever, then we really oughtta let this one fly.

YES(pending source check)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

very well done track. the original piece is tough to hear at all in your arrangement. all of your melodies and harmonies, while in the same vein, sound distinct. I do hear the recurring motif Deia pointed out. I also agree with zykO's argument. despite glinting/abstract source usage, this piece is a mad skilled tribute to game audio . . .

 

YES

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Great mix production wise. Solid choice of instruments and excellent balancing between parts. Everything is clear. 

 

The arrangement on this is interesting, if a bit short. I enjoyed the changes here but felt it could've gone longer, which would have given more opportunities to add in verbatim source and put the source usage argument to rest.

 

I'm borderline Yes on this one. There is a lot of original interpretation of the main melody here - maybe a little too much, but I think this interpretation is near enough to the original to be considered source based.

 

Regardless if this passes, this is truly an impressive first mix, nice work.

 

YES (borderline)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Urgh. Try as I might, I'm just not hearing enough source here. When it is used it's very cool, but the song as a whole takes too many liberties with the melody, to the point where it's almost an original song. Really, I have nothing bad to say about this. The execution, writing - immaculate. Just not kosher with the standards, as far as I can tell.

 

NO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Man, I hate to do this, but gotta agree with the No crowd.  Loving the production and writing, but hearing very little source connections.  I mean, I do hear the occasional nod to the first few notes from the OST melody, but it's like it's faking me out then going in an original direction.  As much as I love the track, the source usage in no way feels "dominant" to me.

NO resubmit, please

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I do hear the source, but I'm going to lean NOI think this track is well-composed, but what's built here isn't built around the source.  The melodic motif is sprinkled in, albeit with a different rhythm.  I think the rhythmic change to the melody alters the character of the source enough that it's relationship is pretty tenuous.  I don't feel like any ideas in the source are developed or expanded upon.  Nice track, but I think it's more of an original, in spirit if not by the hands of the clock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
#judges said:

<Liontamer> I will say, I'm still holding tight on that 4Y/6N Witcher vote, but Deia had a good breakdown
<Liontamer> there was one section she cited that I was like "I dunno, too lib for me", but the rest, full agreement
<Liontamer> still comes up light, but I hesitate to vote because I'm not sure there's something else being overlooked from the source (though I don't think there is)
<Liontamer> probably will go NO today and wrap it up
<DragonAvenger> larry, the witcher i can see going no on, i disagree because of how i hear it, but i do understand the no votes completely
<DragonAvenger> maybe worth contacting the dude and seeing if he has extra input?
<Liontamer> It almost doesn't matter, only in the sense that for whatever reason, even people saying they "hear it" are going NO
<Liontamer> but we can try
<DragonAvenger> hearing it and thinking it is enough is another thing
<DragonAvenger> i think its enough, but i recognize that using half of a phrase makes things kinda tenuous
<Liontamer> "1:36-2:01 - female vocals and strings" was the only part where I thought the flourishes got too liberal, so the melodic notes would be there for a second, then deviate wildly
<DragonAvenger> similar to the BOF2 mix i did with stevo for unsung heroes
<Liontamer> and I could be missing stuff there; I heard everything else you said very explicitly
<DragonAvenger> used half of the phrase of the source, but i know it's too liberal

The track was 2:35-long, so I needed to hear the sources used in at least 77.5 seconds of the piece to consider the VGM source material dominant in the arrangement, per the standards ("The source material must be identifiable and dominant.").

0:14.75-0:29.5, 0:33-0:38.5, 1:05.5-1:18, 2:06-2:16 = 42.75 seconds or 27.58% overt source usage

Like I mentioned to DragonAvenger, part of the issue of why it's not a closer call for me is because even the judges who agree with her breakdown believe this treatment is still too liberal. You could take my vote on YamaYama's Ocarina of Time mix, do a find/replace of the relevant terms and it would generally be the same vote. In other words, this sounds fucking incredible as far as the production and presentation, but the arrangement is too liberal. For the only long section where I disagreed with DragonAvenger's source usage credit (1:36-2:01), I thought the notes of the melody were altered too much and I couldn't count most of those supposed variations as source usage. Even if that was counted in full, that wouldn't pull it up to the source tune use dominating the arrangement.

On 1/2/2016 at 4:21 PM, Liontamer said:

That said, I've always voted down tracks with sources used somewhere for less than 50% of a track's length. A pass here would be relaxed and lean toward musicianship, but be arbitrary and inconsistent with stating that the source material has to be dominant. If there's any source tune connection's I'm missing, I'd love to ID 'em and not have to be the bad cop.

Yeah, so thinking about it, I'm going to go NO, but, Vladimir, if there are other aspect of the original song that you used in this arrangement that we are simply overlooking, please let us know and we will go back and revisit this vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...