djpretzel Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 (edited) Kinda cool. -djp --- ReMixer name: KamexGame arranged: Pokèmon Mystery Dungeon Explorers of Time/Darkness/SkyName of arrangement: Eternal RemembranceName of individual song arranged: "I don't want to say goodbye"Original soundtrack: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWHPbWIFEXg Edited January 12, 2016 by Liontamer closed decision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OceansAndrew Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 The Pokemon Mystery Dungeon games have a lot of great music, and this song is among them; I love the emotional chords and the melody is pretty great as well. Let's see how you've made it your own! It's an interesting approach to really downplay the melody for most of the track, and while that would be the part i'd want to retain the most, I can appreciate the completely different mood it gives your rendition. I do think the heavy sidechaining gets a bit repetitive, and a section where that drops out would improve the track considerably. The drum loop would benefit from an extra layer of tambourine or hand percussion on top to not feel as static. The fast piano run is also a bit mechanical, but i think in the context of the track works fine enough. Otherwise the production is well balanced and has a good amount of variety in the lead parts. For the mechanical aspects, I do wish you'd add a little bit more modulation and vibrato to your lead synths; they sound decent overall, but more expression is never a bad thing. This is really close, but I think a quick revision of some of the aspects would give this a huge boost, so I think it's worth spending the time to improve it a bit. These are small changes that would have a huge effect on the quality of the piece. No, please resubmit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonAvenger Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 Andrew makes a lot of good points here. The mix as a whole is a lot more subdued than I would have expected and it provides a fresh take on things. I'll completely agree that the sidechaining starts to wear thin after a while, and really could be removed at times to allow the ears to reset a bit.the track also feels a bit repetitive after a while since a lot of the same ideas are used, and a section that feels more strongly different would freshen things up. Also not feeling the repeat/takeout ending. Reallythis is pretty close in terms of style and approach, but I feel like some sections need some overhauling to add more variance and bring something different to the table. The sidechaining feels like the biggest issue and what I would look at first. I'd love to hear this again! No (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutritious Posted January 11, 2016 Share Posted January 11, 2016 Interesting take on the source. I like the concept here. Intro sounds pretty solid with a nice buildup of energy. I was fully expecting the energy to open up at this point, but when the "payoff" hit at :45 it actually stepped the energy back a bit from the transition. Agreed with the "A's" that repetition is really hurting this one. The aforementioned never-ending sidechain synth is the main offender. Drum beat, while a nice core loop, also gets repetitive over the long term because of lack of variation. Beyond that, though, there's a lot of either copy/pasta going on in the second half of stuff we've essentially already heard prior in the track. Without further development, like changes in writing or instrumentation, it's hard to justify the length it currently sits at. Transitions/Progression was a bit of a mixed bag for me. For example, the dropout to strings around 1:50 was a good idea (the backing side-chain sticks around though unnecessarily IMO). On the other side of the coin, the transition to the pseudo bass breakdown at 2:30 & 3:52 sounds awkward because we just came off a short break in the beat a 4 bars ago only to go into a second one here. Quick fadeout ending doesn't feel like it resolves the track well. On the arrangement side, as mentioned, this doesn't utilize the source melodies much, in general. Here's what I stopwatched: :23 - :45 melody 1:39 - 1:49 sounds like it may connected to the piano run in the OST, but it's too liberal IMO 1:51 - 2:09 melody 2:23-2:25 modified resolution to melody line from OST 3:14 - 3:36 melody 3:45 - 3:47 modified resolution 3:53 - wasn't able to link this string lead line to anything in OST so I'm assuming it's original writing Out of a total of 259 seconds, that's 82 seconds where I'd consider the source usage as dominant, or 31.7%. This is obviously quite a ways below the generally accepted 50% mark. I don't want to gloss over this because with this, combined with the issues outlined above, I don't feel that this is as close to passing as Andrew. Overall, this is a pretty solid start, but feels like it could be polished and developed more, not to mention have stronger source usage. Would love to hear this one come back in a resub as the concept is pretty cool. NO resubmit, please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts