OCR03214 - *YES* Super Mario World 'Psy Castle'

[Chimpazilla]

Contact Information:

 

Remixer name: "B-laze"
Real Name: Kenneth Nordsveen

Email: 

Userid: 51675

Track information:

 

Game remixed: Super Mario world SNES
Name of arrangement: Psy Castle

Name of song arranged: Castle SMW
Original soundtrack: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0aoqbDNKaA

 

Comments:
This is a Electro/Club remix of smw castle theme.
I have a few custom melodies in there, and the "drop" is a anti climax drop.
I find the original soundtrack very unique and mystic so i decided to do something

clubby out of it.

 

[Chimpazilla]

Omg... ok I can actually see this vote getting split quickly into YESes and NOs.  Dayum, it's creative.  I might even say this is Sofa King creative.  I absolutely adore the ideas here.  So much yes based on that alone.  But I'm afraid I have a boatload of mixing crits.  Stream of consciousness:

 

There's some kind of rendering pop at 0:02 after the opening synth bit.  The bass used at 0:03 does not really fit with the concept, oddly it works really well, maybe because it cuts through the mix perfectly (which is needed because this is one heck of a busy mix).  The synth at 0:11 is very plain sounding and almost abrasive.  It does NOT need more reverb, and it cuts through fine, I guess I just don't like it (I like it better in the section starting at 1:07, so don't change it just for me).  The whole intro (ok the whole track) is drowning in reverb but it works.  Pad is too loud.  The filtered-in drums are great.  Buildup to the drop at 0:53 is great.  DAT DROP.  At 1:07, the wide sidechained synth sounds too loud and dry, it is taking too much attention away from the lead.  The sfx are awesome but they are too quiet and buried, could have more impact a little louder.  Wubs at 1:39 are fantastic, they sound great and the panning is just right.  Nice transition at 1:59!  Pad beginning at 2:12 is too loud.  Screaming lead at 2:20 is super great.  At 2:35, I think the pad needs to be quieter, it is competing too much with everything in that section (this section sounds really busy, but I think the lowered pad will fix that).  At 2:59 I can barely hear the low lead synth over the loud pad.  3:30 is another dynamite drop, love it.  At 4:00, the lead writing and timbre are the same as at 2:20, but everything around it is different so it's fine, but again the wide sidechained saw is too loud.  I love the varied drumming throughout the track.  Dat trance/step kick, it's just fine.    Ok so I just listened to this six times.  

 

Ok, to summarize, I love this.  But I'm gonna be a hardass and toss it back for some mixing and balance cleanup.  It's too good to not be even better.  I can see this getting yesses as it is though.  For me, when this is cleaned up, it's going in my favorites folder.  (That said, if I'm the only NO, I'll switch.)

 

edit (later that same day):  Nah, aw heck.  Too good to even kick back for small changes.  Going with

 

YES

 

(But my crits still stand, please use for next time)

(and now I've listened ten times)

[Liontamer]

Not to be dismissive, but I just didn't hear any major production or balance issues in this that would make me think we need to hold this back at all. Chimpa had some detailed criticisms, but I really couldn't co-sign.

 

I was worried about the sampled beats from :19-:43, in that they could have been leaned on too much (but they were just in there briefly), and the transition at :45 feeling awkward (but the rest of the track flowed together nicely).

 

Source tune was used in spades, but for anyone curious for a cursory breakdown: :00-:49, 1:07.5-1:16, 1:22.5-1:32, 1:35.5-1:38.5, 1:58-4:30.25, 4:32.5-5:07.

 

The arrangement was super creative and energetic, and I felt the instrumentation was more than adequately balanced and clear. Though the track's dense, the elements were very distinguishable.

 

Nothing but love for this one, Kenneth. Nice work!

 

YES

[Nutritious]

Nice opening.  Wouldn't have minded a bit more meat to the synth lead, but that's (at least partially) a preference thing.  Nice use of heavy side chaining once everything kicks in.  The breakdown at 1:37 was well handled, with the wubs vs mario sfx & source content.  I thought the transition around the 2 minute mark seemed like an odd choice.  I mean, it works, it was just odd to have a complete drop off immediately after the breakdown section.  The energy was already pulled back as is.  Not a big deal, though.

 

Beat at 2:36 is pretty hawt, though could've used more variation.  Even if it's a canned loop, you can slice it up fo sho.  As Larry said, this is a pretty dense mix.  I think it could benefit with some EQ crafting to get more clarity from the various parts (example, less mids on the synth arp in the second half, less highs and more body to the synth leads in general, etc).

 

Cool transition back to the dance-y side-chain riff at 3:30.  Really liked how you brought the track back to connect with the initial theme.

 

I like.

 

YES

[Emunator]

Excellent track here. I was apprehensive at first due to how closely it hewed to the original source during the intro section, and how many times I've heard this source adapted to various electronic subgenres in the past. Once the drop at :45 occurred though, I was sold on your concept. This is a very nuanced, liquid arrangement that, in spite of a few minor flaws that have already been pointed out, succeeds at mixing the nostalgic source tune with a myriad of modern EDM tricks. Nothing in here is too off-the-wall or experimental (though the tempo-changing arpeggio transition at 1:58 was really pro - definitely a personal highlight!) but this is well-executed, competently produced, and above all, fun to listen to. I've got no trouble signing off on this!

 

YES