*NO* Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 'Wistful'

[Gario]

ReMixer name : Monsieur J

Real name : Julien Guillotel

Email address : 

Website : http://www.youtube.com/monsieurjofficiel

User ID : 30263

 

Name of game arranged : The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time

Name of arrangement : Wistful

Name of individual song arranged : Gerudo Valley

 

Thanks for your consideration, hope you’ll enjoy it!

 

Regards,

 

Julien Guillotel

 

Edited May 23, 2017 by Liontamer
closed decision

[Gario]

Solid performances, neat vocal work and overall a solid metal representation of the source. It's a pretty easy pass, in my book, though I will count the short length and somewhat static soundscape against it. The good definitely outweighs the bad in this case, but especially in the case of being static (that is, many of the instruments do the same thing for too long a period) keep that in mind and try to avoid remaining on the same patterns for too long of a time.

Still, it's a great track - nice work!

YES

EDIT: Due to one track on site already being called "Wistful" the track title would need a name change if it were accepted either here or at a later date. Just giving the heads up on that.

LT EDIT (4/13): Not quite. The track would need a different title only if the title AND the primary game were the same. Since the other "Wistful" track by Chimpazilla represents Twilight Princess and this is Ocarina of Time, they can share the same title.

GARIO EDIT (4/14): Edit wars! Actually, that's good to know - I thought it was just if the titles were shared. Thanks for the clarifications, there.

CHIMP EDIT (5/12):  You can change the name of mine to "Chimpful."

LT EDIT (5/23): You stinkful.

GARIO EDIT (5/23): What is this oh my God.

[MindWanderer]

The static arrangement is definitely a downside, but I'm not sold on the production, myself.  There isn't a whole lot of presence in the low end, and I find that when the bass, rhythm guitar, and lead guitar are all playing at once, there's some definite crowding going on. I can rarely hear both the bass and the rhythm guitar clearly at the same time when the lead guitar is playing.  At 1:41, when the vocals are added and the lead returns, it gets even more crowded, and only the lead guitar, the vocals, and the percussion come through clearly--the bass is there, but it's muddy and periodically inaudible, and I can only hear fits and spurts of the rhythm guitar.

The intro is also a little on the quiet side, especially the snares--I can't set my volume anywhere that I can hear the intro clearly but the rest isn't uncomfortably loud.  

I don't think this is far off, but I do think it really does need another pass at the EQ before being posted.

NO (resubmit)

[Liontamer]

Watching the performance video, it's so weird how this track is played in live, but the timing still feels so rigid. To me, it doesn't sound as expressive as it could be.

The very mechanical-sounding drums have a decent tone, but just sound very rigidly timed right from the opening. The drum pattern, also first used at :06, was creatively written, but then just looped and barely varied over time aside from some different fills every few measures. So, when the other judges say the arrangement feels static, the rigid timing and looped nature are big reasons why.

Despite the crowding pointed out by MindWanderer, the part-writing feels pretty barebones, probably because the snare stuff didn't quite fill out the background. The texture's decently filled in by the backing guitar part (which was barely audible/distinguishable, unfortunately) and then more noticeably by the added vox at 1:26.

The slow tempo of the machine gun drums at 1:41 sounded odd; they're so far forward in the soundfield and crowding out the other parts. Machine gun drums are usually triggered much more rapidly and sound more intense, so this slower tempo just comes off like a lack of humanization of the drum programming instead of a stylistic choice.

From 1:42-2:14, the timing of the guitar soloing area also sounded very rigid.

The arrangement is fun, but at only 2:21-long, everything needs to be fully developed and clicking on all cylinders. Right now, though your leads and vox sound sweet, the timing sounds too rigid on nearly everything. You also need the backing guitar part to have more presence, need to give the instruments some more breathing room, and should vary the percussion more. Good base here, Julien, but see what else can be done to polish this up.

NO (resubmit)

Edited May 23, 2017 by Liontamer
removed video link

[Chimpazilla]

This sounds like a good, short, extremely conservative cover, but it isn't striking me as a complete arrangement.  The arrangement needs some kind of breakdown at some point, and/or something original thrown in somewhere.  The plodding drum beat does not help with the repetitive feel of the track. The mix is also very mid-heavy.  The guitar performances are good, but I agree with Larry about the mechanical feel to the drums and other elements.  Not sure this is quite ready for OCR, but a fun listen nonetheless.

NO

[Jivemaster]

Not a bad performance. Guitar tones are serviceable, although there are a few holes in the frequency spectrum here making things feel a little hollow at times. Agree with the comments that this sounds very mechanical for a live performance. Clearly some audio quantise has been used here, or excessive nudging of audio has occurred to get it on the grid across the board. This did take away from the liveliness of the track somewhat - it wasn't a major downside for me but it was noteworthy. Choir portion starting at 1:26 was fairly week, with that part feeling quite out of place sonically compared to the other parts. The arrangement on a whole is very conservative, without much in the way of original flair added in. In fact apart from the genre being flipped, I don't think this quite adds enough in original personality to be considered a remix, especially for this duration. Other criticisms aside, we need more you in this mix.

NO