Liontamer Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 This theme takes the main field theme from The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past (SNES) and Ocarina of Time (N64) and creates a totally different feel for the game. Though kindly short, this theme feels happy and exuberant--more like an overture. I hope you enjoy my first submission to OCRemix! (OC Remix ID#: 28720, ReMixed by smartpoetic. Copywrite Nintendo: 1996 and 1998. Games: The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past (SNES), and Ocarina of Time (N64). Composer: Koji Kondo.) Thank you! ~smartpoetic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big giant circles Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 Symphonic take on a source (or two) that are very easily adaptable to such a style. Let's see how the bricks fall here. I had to re-familiarize myself with OoT's field theme, as it's been years since I've played that one. There is obvious reference to the traditional Z3 overworld theme, and nice job fusing it with OoT's. Strong use of samples, I got no gripes there, really. Underlying snare was kind of dull, but acceptable granted the style. This is pretty good stuff. Lemme get right to the point, here. The song is just still a little too mechanical at this point, but not by much. You've got a pretty good lock on the dynamic variation, but in such a piece, you really could have done well to apply some tempo variance as well, such as 0:12 - 0:16 for example. A nice Ritardando would have been great. Predictable, yes, but far less mechanical. Also, I personally don't mind a *short* mix, as long as it's well-constructed and doesn't simply leave the listener hanging. This ALMOST pulls that off, except for the loop and fadeout copout. If it weren't for the shortness of the piece, I could make perfect peace with a fadeout. However, for a piece that's only 2:07 long (without the outro that is), a specific ending is probably the way to go. Yeah, there's a little bit of preference in this gripe, but it's about 40% my personal preference, and 60% the fact that its a really lackluster ending to an otherwise lovely song, and that really hurts the piece. It's like, rather than going out on stage and giving an amazing performance (no matter how short) and walking out as the crowd applauds after you're finished, you've just walked off stage AS you were finishing, and the crowd is kind of puzzled as to why they didn't hear the ending. I hope that makes sense. Definitely good stuff, very nice work for a 1st submission, and I'd definitely like to hear you come back on this on. Therefore, my vote falls on NO RESUMBIT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jillian Aversa Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 Okay! You're off to a great start with this mix. What impresses me is that you were able to meld the source material with your own original stuff so seamlessly. The arrangement flows nicely- to the point that if I didn't know the games, I wouldn't have guessed where the changes were. Some nice variations appear in the woodwinds at 0:31, 0:41, and 1:57. The sweeping string sections at 0:47 and later at 1:27 are very beautiful, and the harp was a nice touch in the section to follow, too. There are some substantial drawbacks, however. One is that your snare sounds very artificial. The first two attacks in each measure are okay, but there's something off about the rolls. I have no problem with the strings, woodwinds, brass, harp, or any other samples, for that matter. Just dat. (Although you could also explore a little more with the actual percussion part.) There are a couple instances where the initial section from 0:17-0:47 returns in more or less exactly the same form. (1:09 and 2:09, to be precise.) Although you demonstrate some nice variation within those sections, the fact that they occur thrice is really detracts from the piece as a whole. It becomes static, instead of moving forward with that motion you picked up from 1:27 all the way to 2:09. Let's get some dynamics up in this joint! The more sweepy string sections give the illuuuusion of louder dynamics, but I think that's only because the texture is thicker in those instances. Some tasteful swells could really bring this arrangement some needed power. Orchestras can't fade out. They can lessen the dynamic gradually to give the impression that they're fading away, but they can't do what you've done here. If this were a mix of orchestral plus another genre or two, you might be able to justify your decision, but this is straight up symphonic music. Moreover, it just sounds like the easy way out! And for a song with a total duration of under three minutes, more is needed to bring closure to the piece. Don't be discouraged. I see potential in this 'un! NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big giant circles Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 Some tasteful swells could really bring this arrangement some needed power. I completely forgot to mention that. Good point. Coupled with some rit.'s--would be an excellent way to achieve the full-symphonic-awesomeness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted September 18, 2006 Author Share Posted September 18, 2006 http://snesmusic.org/v2/download.php?spcNow=loz3 - "Overworld" (loz3-04.spc) Dunno where the source tune is in Z64:OoT, but oh well. Why is this encoded at 80kbps? It sounds terribly warbly and lo-fi for no good reason; very weak. Otherwise, nice stuff on the arrangement side to start off. Good use of harmonization and support as well varying up the instrumentation. Brass sample at :47 was pretty thin and unrealistic; kind of stuck out (as much as that can happen under the warblyness). The drums also lack meat on 'em. Nonetheless, the texture seems reasonably ok given the sample quality; it's frankly a bit hard to tell given how awful the encoding is. Beautiful, well-crafted arrangement for the first 2:07. I disagreed with the sections being repetitive, as you made sure to vary up each instance of the melody and the material after it with some new ideas. The last section at 2:08 felt like a copout, as it simply repeated a previous section of the arrangement. You can't recycle that badly after a mere 2 minutes. Gimme something else to keep the creativity and variation going. pixie's comments on the lack of dynamics were pretty good, though I was less critical on that front myself; I think a composition like this can get by without drastic dynamic changes, and stick to the more subtle route. I also thought the fadeout was really poorly handled, but most of that had to do with repeating an older section and choosing not to develop the arrangement further. It sounds like a faux pas to fade out an orchestra, but there's no hard and fast rule here as far as I'm concerned. As long as you pull off a good fadeout, I don't care if it's traditionally used or not. Develop the arrangement for another minute or two, bump up the encoding quality, look into fleshing out those thinner, obviously synthetic-sounding samples, and fashion a real ending. Nice first sub; keep at it. NO (rework/resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts