Sign in to follow this  
Gario

OCR03617 - *YES* Super Mario RPG "Tricky Labrynth"

Recommended Posts

Jacob Diaz has shared a OneDrive file with you. To view it, click the link below.

 

  • Super Mario RPG
  • "Tricky Labyrinth"
  • "Welcome To Booster's Tower"
  • I can remember this remix being just...a fun project. Plain and simple. However, as time went by it got more complex, enough to the point where I asked my good friend, Jake Groft (@Jehm_Faulking) to help me out with a trumpet solo. The results were awesome and it made the mix stand out even more than I thought it would. 

    P.S. As a shoutout to everyone involved in the SMRPG album...holy hell, what an awesome remix album! Great work all around.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a little torn on the source usage here.  The source's melody isn't used very much here; most of the source usage is the backing arp that's used throughout, and in the chord progressions.  I'm not sure whether that arp is enough to constitute source usage--it's very generic and not recognizable as coming from this source particularly.  The source melody is only clear from about 0:37 (it fades in here)-1:13 and 2:35-2:52.

Also, the leads used in 1:16-1:50 are quite vanilla and, while not loud in an absolute sense, they do drown out the backing instruments.

I think that by a literal reading, this isn't a standards violation regarding source usage, but subjectively I don't think the amount of source that is used follows the intent of those standards.  If you took out those short sections of overt melody usage, I don't think a listener familiar with this source would be able to identify this as a remix of it unless they listened to both pieces of music side by side.

Edit: I'll defer to my senior judges regarding source usage in this case.  It also wouldn't be the first time Jake has eschewed the melody of a source in favor of writing his own melody over its backing elements.  I don't think any but the most meticulous listener would pick up on those connections, but if the only question here is, "Is this a standards violation," then indeed the answer is no.  And the leads I disliked, by themselves, aren't a dealbreaker.  So I'll change my vote to

YES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the weird SFX opening to the ambient padding to the synths to the 9-bit stuff, and even Jake's live trumpet, you have a strong, varied arrangement here, Jake. MW's right about the leads from 1:16-1:50 obscruring your backing writing, but it's not a big issue. Good sound design choices overall.

I'm not sure why MindWanderer thinks the arrangement here is source-lite, but he's just wrong in this case. References to a source tune are way more involved than just the most memorable & upfront components. Once the music starts at :15, Jake is literally always referencing the source tune somewhere for the rest of the track, even without the source melody. Listen to the original SPC (change the extension to .rar and unpack it, then load track 1-35) and isolate channels 2 (bassline), 6 (sustained note), and 7 (piano). The backing writing in this mix is pretty explicitly derived from all of those lines.

For example, let's take the trumpet solo section from 2:08-2:43. Even though the melody's referenced briefly in places, let's pretend that's never there. The entire trumpet solo is on top of the explicit bassline from the source. Because of that direct A-to-B connection with an aspect of the source tune's composition, I count every second of that as valid source usage. In other words, you're focusing too much on using the melody and disregarding other valid areas of source usage.

Let's go.

YES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, the source is pretty clear in this case. While I would argue following only the harmonies wouldn't be enough to count as source (since harmonies by their nature are pretty universal), the background textures, tempo, rhythms of said textures, etc., all help connect the arrangement to the source quite effectively. The theme isn't present, but everything else certainly is.

I have some reservation on the mixing of this, like how the snare has virtually no presence and some of the textures pop out too much (lookin' at you, arpeggio at 0:34), but overall I think the production is on point. It's a pretty cool track, which I'd totally be fine with on the front page.

YES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This track is a really fun take on the original. I appreciate that you didn't immediately go for a tango track, which seems like the obvious choice. Also enjoying that you don't go straight for the obvious connections throughout the piece, but the source is still in there. My small nitpick is that the track does feel like it goes on a tad long due to some elements remaining in play for most of the track, but that's just a minor point. Nice work!

YES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this