Liontamer Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 Hi! Hope this is good enough to go on the site (under 6MB and all ID3v2 tags as required). game: Agent X remix: 'David Arnold' ost: ftp://mirror.support.nl/pub/mono/follindrome/spectrum/tim-follin/agent-x-1.zip year: 1986 sys: ZX Spectrum length: 2:57 remixer: Cheveron composer: Tim Follin comments: Tim Follin did impossible things with the one channel beeper on the ZX Spectrum, like creating a 5 channel score for Agent X. Tim compared the sound to 'nails in a vacuum cleaner'. On the other hand it's a rather nice tune, so I wanted to create a slightly more listenable version. For some reason the AY file plays too slowly on my AY player so after exporting the WAV file I had to speed it up in Audacity. Then I imported it into GarageBand and mucked about until I figured out the BPM (exactly 114 until halfway through when it starts skipping beats). Listening very carefully to the original fuzz I was just about able to recreate the original 5 channels, I rounded out the strings, added a few horn dubs, threw in an analogue synth effect and then just dropped some beats over the top to create a sound reminiscent of David Arnold's 007 remixes. -------------------------------------------------- ftp://mirror.support.nl/pub/mono/follindrome/spectrum/tim-follin/agent-x-1.zip - Title Thanks for providing the source tune, and your interest in the Dirge for the Follin project. Right now though, this isn't much beyond an attempt at a sound upgrade of the original. Js, turn down the volume on the source here, as it's really loud and grating on DeliPlayer. I dunno why it sounds like that, but moving on... The arrangement is fairly conservative and uninterpretive; only major difference is that it doesn't grate the ears. Even at :50, your bassline is exactly the same as the bassline in the original (you can barely hear it in the original). The synths are pretty generic, the texture is bland, and the melodic content isn't particularly musical. The ending fades out with some new ideas that could have been interesting but simply weren't really touched upon. Wish I could be more enthusiastic about this one, but you need a lot more work on the fundamentals. Head to the ReMixing forum to learn more about working with your current soundset and finding some free samples that are of a higher quality, then post any future material to Works for some fan evaluation just to give you some criticisms to work with as you develop. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jillian Aversa Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 Heh heh, wellll... Although I'll agree with Larry that this remix may be less grating than the original, it's still pretty in-your-face. There are no dynamic changes throughout the piece, and you're relying way too heavily on that Garageband loop. The transition at 0:49 is whack; why does it come in ahead of the beat, and why isn't it in the same key? The section to follow sounds rather off rhythm as well. Sounds like you need to do some time correcting with the lead synth there (and yes, Garageband is capable of that). The backing strings start to sound redundant after a while, probably because you're not making a considered effort with dynamics. Fadeout = copout in this context. Where's the arrangement? Where's the personality? Keep at it. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zircon Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 Before I begin with the analysis of the actual mix, I should point out that we frown on direct sampling as the basis for ReMixes here. People are generally encouraged to listen to the original song and transcribe it by ear, part by part, as this is often more conducive to the addition of original material. That's how I look at it, anyway. This is somewhat confirmed by the fact that the arrangement is on the conservative side, sticking close to the structure of the original. You should try to make a distinction between a song that is an 'upgrade' from a source tune, to one that can stand on its own as an interesting piece of music. This ReMix falls closer to the former category, which is not necessarily 'bad', but not exactly what OCR is all about. On the other hand, your production values are OK - GarageBand loop aside (I wouldn't have caught that). I would, however, suggest adding more changeups to the different parts throughout the ReMix. For example, the supersaw lead; try automating the cutoff there or assigning an LFO to modulate it. This will give 'motion' to the sound that makes it more interesting to listen to. You might want to consider changing the brass parts to something else also, as they don't sound very realistic - particularly the transitions at :49 and 1:42. In short, try adding more original material and being more creative with your sound design. Also, especially with mixes that are shorter than 3 minutes, real endings are preferred over fadeouts... so take that for what it's worth. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts