Liontamer Posted May 22, 2019 Share Posted May 22, 2019 (edited) ReMixer name: MysticGTR Real name: Paul McKenna Email address: Website: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrYAyT0qYzePfmeTMM6qkEQ User ID number: 35604 Street Fighter Ken's Theme Inspired by my love of video games, metal music, guitar and Andrew Aversa's work. YouTube link to the guitar video I made to accompany the audio: I hope I've done this right, I'm new to the website and this is my first submission. Thank you for taking the time to review my track! ^^ Edited August 21, 2019 by MindWanderer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted May 22, 2019 Author Share Posted May 22, 2019 Is it just me or is the production a dealbreaker here? The arrangement's all sorts of great, but I'm getting a lot of mud and clutter, with the cymbals taking up a lot of frequencies and splashing all over :00-1:04, 1:29-1:39, and 1:50-2:10. A musician J can better speak to what's going wrong, but this was too loud and the cymbals are obscuring other more important parts. 2:00 sounded like a cut-and-paste of the bridge and chorus from the beginning section, then 2:27 sounded like another cut-and-paste of the very start, albeit briefly. A track this short really shouldn't be having anything that sounds like an extended cut-and-paste, even if the arrangement is interpretive like this. Nice new arranged section idea for the close from 2:43; you can hear a lot of crackling/distortion particularly from 2:53-3:02, then a weird last note by a synth string that didn't make sense. Tighten up these smaller details, you should be more mindful of things like this. Rein in the cymbals, tweak the cut-and-paste sections to differentiate them from one another somehow, and eliminate the crackling and messed up string decay for the final section. Good base here, Paul! NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rexy Posted August 19, 2019 Share Posted August 19, 2019 (edited) Awww, I wanted to see the performance, but the Youtube video is unavailable. It would've been nice to get a visual on your performance chops here. Seriously, I can't deny the power behind your guitar performance. The playing chops are tight, the solo section at 1:29 is fun and melodically focused, and the tone behind the rhythm guitar is meaty and expressive. Aside from the power metal breakdown at 1:09, the source has a definite presence. Its structure is also clearly source-solo-source, and it sets itself up for a ride through no-brainer fun. The arrangement isn't quite there yet, as Larry pointed out. I enjoyed the framework, but the entire 1:50-2:27 section is a copy-paste of the 0:10-0:47 section before it. Likewise for the 2:27-2:37 section sounding just like 0:00-0:10, but they're bookends, and I believe they can stay as they are. Nevertheless, it would be good to go over the first copy-pasted section I pointed out and make some changes for it to stick out from the early theme variation. It can be changing up the groove, playing around with the melody, adding any new guitar countermelodies, or any other ideas that pop from your head. And then there's the production. Fair play for trying to mix down with broken equipment from what I saw in the workshop, but several errors are sticking out. Firstly the cymbals not only are too loud but also occupy a lot of frequency space in the mid-highs. This issue explains the splashing effect that Larry brought up, and they're usually better off with the sibilance range (2-5k) toned down. It will allow the frequencies above to stand out less harshly, plus give some breathing room for the lead guitars and ride. Going back to EQ, there are two additional issues that I have with the ending at 2:42. The exotic string playing the A section and the guitar playing the B section at the same time is a nice touch, so compositionally it's all good. However, there is a lot of distortion here. I don't know if it's because a sequence part is too loud or the CPU won't co-operate well with it. I also think the metallic pluck noise on it is too harsh-sounding, and can also benefit from an EQ cut along the high frequency. Either way, the ending needs another mixing pass to make it sound as presentable as the rest of the track. Not a bad start at all, but it's still got a way to go. Look at the second variation and see if you can make it stand out from the first, tame the cymbals, and revise the mixdown on the ending. Consider finding a spectrum analyzer online as well - if you've got broken equipment and not a lot of money for a repair/replacement at this moment in time, a visual indicator of your frequencies can be a sufficient substitute. Keep rocking on for us, Paul! NO (resubmit) Edited August 20, 2019 by Rexy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MindWanderer Posted August 21, 2019 Share Posted August 21, 2019 (edited) Yeah, the playing is superb, but there are both production and arrangement issues here. Rexy and LT made some good recommendations about mud, clutter, and repetition, but I have a few additional comments. The rhythm guitar transition switches jarringly from lead to bass at 0:10. It's so abrupt, and such an odd choice, that it almost sounds like two arrangements pasted together there. There are also some off notes in the rhythm guitar that sound like mis-plays, although they could be distortion; I caught some at 0:24, 0:51, 1:33, and 2:04 at least. I'm also not sold on the original material at 1:09-1:29. The transitions into and out of it are abrupt, and it's very different, making it sound more like a medley with some other source. I wasn't crazy about 1:40-1:50, but at least the transition out of it works. Finally, that conclusion... it's neat (although it crackles badly), but it's severely at odds with the rest of the piece. I think it would be really neat as a bookend--starting the arrangement as well as ending it in this style--but just as a conclusion I don't think it works. I thought the final synth note was fine, though. It's a solid first effort, but it definitely needs some work. Clean up the production, switch things up a little in the second loop of the source, take another look at the solos and their transitions, and think about revising that intro. And of course it needs a real name. It sounds like a lot but you have the meat of a good ReMix here; the hardest part is out of the way. I hope to see a revision! NO (resubmit) Edited August 21, 2019 by MindWanderer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts