Gario Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 Contact Information ReMixer Name: StormSkuggan Real Name: Joakim Stenmark Email: Submission Information Name of game(s) arranged: Chrono Trigger Name of Arrangement: Save The Future Name of Individual Song(s) arranged: Chrono Trigger Comments: This remix started as a fun side project among my school friends where each of us would make game music remixes for the Christmas holidays. I decided to take mine further and try to get it submitted to OCRemix. The song is a progressive metal rendition of the chrono trigger theme where one of the goals was to achieve that metal sound but without guitar. Instead, I used a heavily distorted Hammond organ for the rhythm section and synthesizers for leads. I experimented a lot with time related special effects and production, for instance on the piano and some percussion. I also Initially had sections at the beginning and at the end where music would speed by in reverse to signify time traveling which sounded really cool. The aim then was have a story of a hero fighting to save the future, failing and then reversing time to try again and again in a cycle. I ended up cutting it since I couldn’t convey the time traveling without making the song drag out unnecessarily. Anyway thanks for listening and continue being awesome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gario Posted July 11, 2018 Author Share Posted July 11, 2018 Honestly, you can't have enough of a great theme, so I'm always happy to see more Chrono Trigger theme arrangements. The arrangement is quite epic and all-encompasing, with some really high quality performances and synths used throughout. The reharmonizations and expansions to the theme are generally fitting and interesting, keeping with OCR's stated goal of reinterpretation. The production values are quite good in general, too, with the exception being the mixing. That mixing, though, is a real issue. The solid majority of the track buries the lead behind the SFX and harmonies (listen to 1:23 and 1:50 for easy to hear examples of this), which leads to the entire arrangement sounding muddy and disorganized. While I admit some of the experimental FX take getting used to, they're not bad upon repeated listenings. To be honest, the mixing is really the only issue I have with this, but it's unfortunately a deal breaking issue for me. I know you got the chops to adjust the mixing so that the foreground pops ahead of the middle and background, so I really hope to see this otherwise great arrangement back on the panel soon! -- (Edit 2018/09/07: Vote altered below) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MindWanderer Posted July 13, 2018 Share Posted July 13, 2018 Ugh, I can't argue with that crit. The bass, pads, and some of the percussion are stepping all over the lead, as well as each other, throughout most of the main section. I really like the arrangement, and I personally thought the reversed instruments were cool right from the beginning, but Gario's dead-on about the balance issue. Please clean it up and send it back! NO (resubmit) Update 9/7: I'm sticking to my original impression here. The drums, crash cymbals, and overdriven bass guitar are far too loud, sometimes even louder than the leads, and the pads aren't doing it any favors. It's not just a few places, either, it's pretty much the whole thing. Maybe we want to formally change our standards--and I wouldn't necessarily object to that--but we've rejected mixes for mixing that were mixed better than this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted September 7, 2018 Share Posted September 7, 2018 :15.25-:28, :38.5-:44, 1:18.75-1:32, 1:48-2:07, 2:13.5-2:37, 2:52.75-3:06, 3:18.5-3:47, 3:58-4:07, 4:18.5-4:31 = 141.25 seconds or 50.99% overt source usage My timestamps just cover the more obvious melodic references; the arrangement had other references to backing writing or at least chord progressions throughout. The theme finally arrived in a bigger way at 1:19 after the lengthy build. The accompanying electric guitar chugs were weak-sounding and exposed the sample, but were at least serviceable. The shift back to the source's intro (2:50-2:52) was awkward, but we'll live. 3:05-3:18's writing felt like it briefly went off the rails, but you get used to it on subsequent listens and it wasn't a huge deal. All that said, I particularly enjoyed the unorthodox usage of the theme when the piece followed the progression of the theme without the melody. Production-wise, it's not the greatest execution, but my issues were a few instances of samples lacking realism/depth. Otherwise, the instruments/samples were used reasonably well, and the track had a full soundscape. Unlike the other Js, I didn't feel the mixing choices were a dealbreaker. They're not ideal though, e.g., the melody at 1:19 not being louder and more upfront. But I didn't hear anything disqualifying this re: production because the part-writing was still discernible to me with no problems. Especially with an arrangement this creative, we need to be more permissive on production, or we're taking that half of the bar too high, IMO; I've been guilty of that as well, so let's be mindful of it. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gario Posted September 7, 2018 Author Share Posted September 7, 2018 On 9/7/2018 at 8:58 AM, Liontamer said: Unlike the other Js, I didn't feel the mixing choices were a dealbreaker. They're not ideal though, e.g., the melody at 1:19 not being louder and more upfront. But I didn't hear anything disqualifying this re: production because the part-writing was still discernible to me with no problems. Especially with an arrangement this creative, we need to be more permissive on production, or we're taking that half of the bar too high, IMO; I've been guilty of that as well, so let's be mindful of it. Hmm... Well, I'm willing to go back and re-listen to the track with this in mind, especially since I actually really did enjoy this arrangement otherwise. I'm sticking to my guns on my criticism, though, since that remains unchanged - the mixing of the leads is consistently problematic throughout the track, often getting buried completely. However, looking back at a few other decisions I'll check to see if this is actually a deal-breaking breaking issue. Looking at this from a different perspective, while the mixing is problematic throughout, it's oftentimes a bearable issue, only really burying the lead at 1:23 - 1:46 and 1:53 - 2:30 (2:30 - 2:40 the lead is an octave out of the range of the background, helping it stand out). Much of the rest of the track the lead, while not being mixed much differently, does stand out because it doesn't share the same register as the backing instruments. For those paying attention, this is often an easy fix if you're having issues with the lead getting buried in the middle/background: just bump the lead up an octave. Seriously, this can fix the issue about 50% of the time, since often it's less a mixing issue and more of a crowded EQ range in a soundscape. It's still a mixing issue here, sure, but having it share the same soundspace as the accompaniment really compounds the issue. Rather than being an unbearable issue throughout the track, it's closer to being a noticeable issue throughout, with it being really problematic for about 20% of the track. Yeah, I think I might've come down a little too hard on this the first time around, but please pay attention to how you mix your leads in the future in order to save your future projects from such discrimination. YES djpretzel and Eino Keskitalo 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutritious Posted September 28, 2018 Share Posted September 28, 2018 Intro's got my attention immediately - I like the reversed piano effect here. Kudos for tackling a theme that's been covered many times over the years, yet finding a way to approach it creatively. This never felt predictable as far as direction and melodic approach and flows well throughout. Timing sounded a bit loose near the beginning with the tambourine. I didn't notice it as an issue after that, though. I agree the mixing is a bit weak in points. The sustained pads could be pulled back and some leads pushed forward, but I didn't hear anything egregiously wrong TBH. I can hear all the parts clearly enough throughout. The rhythm guitar notes sound a bit fakey at times, but it gets the job done. EDIT: I just read he used an organ for the rhythm sounds. Color me impressed. /EDIT Lead sequencing is well handled, especially near the end of the track. Super creative and a fun listen. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir_NutS Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 Remixing a theme that has been done hundreds of times and making it truly your own is not an easy task, but I think you managed to do just that here. I am pleased with how far you went with the interpretation but somehow you kept the feeling of the original there at all times. Then you coupled your arrangement with details like the slowing clock at the end and the reversed piano and effects in the intro to make this one of the most interesting remixes of this theme I've heard. The production is ok here, it gets loud when it needs to but I don't hear any clashing that distracts me from the arrangement. Sometimes I feel the leads get buried a bit behind the backing (i.e. 2:15) but as a whole i think the production is above the bar. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts