*NO* Kirby 64 "Relax"

Recommended Posts

Cutting right to the chase: I've done a chill-out style remix of Quiet Forest from Kirby 64, one of my all-time favorite OSTs. I've done music production for over 10 years, and figured I'd submit this current song to your website, just to see how you like it. Thank you for your time!

MP3 (16-bit, 192kbps, 44.1kHz) Download Link: 

Contact information:
Remixer Name:  Pichuscute
Real Name:  Benjamin Busche
User ID:  35858

Submission information:
Game Arranged:  Kirby 64: The Crystal Shards
Name of Arrangement:  Relax
Name of Song Arranged:  Quiet Forest



Edited by Liontamer
closed decision

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how you did it, but you made the track source dominant without using any part of the main melody.  With source use stripped back to the arpeggio in section A, I can see why you opted to go for the "evolving soundscape" route - and with the way the track paced itself, it makes for a calming listen in a vacuum.

However, it's how the arpeggio got used that counts - and all I heard was the same 8-bar formation, with 4 bars of the original scale and 4 bars of it transposed down two semitones.  Even with the pleasant subtractive writing, the source's use doesn't develop throughout and remains static.  While it can be possible to change up the pacing of the arpeggio, these open spaces are ideal for you to fit in whatever parts of the main melody you see fit.

The production sounds serviceable, but two further issues stuck out:

  • First of all, the track distorts whenever the kick pedal shows up.  As you have a big sub-bass tone, the two instruments as they are have left the mix prone to clipping.  Since both of them are slow-moving, I can see a side-chain on the bass taking the edge off.  An EQ cut could be possible if you don't want to side-chain, but it'll also be riskier to execute.
  • The Rhodes piano carries the source, thus it shouldn't sound shrill and bone-dry.  In an ambient setting, leads are expected to feel just as aired as the accompaniment around it.  Additionally, the shrillness is present because the resonance is overpowering, especially during the intro and at the breakdown at 1:47.  To address the first part, consider adding some subtle reverb; and for the second part, see if making a high EQ cut can ease it off.

As it stands, I can't accept the track in its current state.  The source use is underdeveloped, and the harsh sounding kick and Rhodes piano didn't do any favors either.  It'll be nice to hear another version with more arrangement content and the two problematic instruments fixed.  With ten years of production-related passion behind you, I hope you get the chance to contribute to the community as well as return to the inbox in the future.

NO (resubmit)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

from a production standpoint, i had to go through several sets of audio options before i found something that actually voiced your sub-bass tones properly. while that's fun, i feel like there's a lot missing in this track without those tones (it's even more empty without them), so having something that the majority of audio options can't represent is a problem in my book. beyond that, i'd argue that the main body of the track is undercompressed, in that the kick caused the mix to go 1.2db over every time it hits. adding some compression without losing the pretty nice dynamics and soundscape that you lay out is a must. i definitely don't feel that the kick is too loud, but there's room to adjust the balance so that it doesn't cause distortion. further compression, as you'd see in youtube or other media, would only emphasize this distortion more.

from an arrangement perspective, i really liked the idea of ignoring the melody entirely, as the arpeggio is a clear and representative part of the source. the track's immediately recognizable, although i wouldn't complain if there was some melodic material in there. i agree with rexy though that it simply doesn't do anything. it's fun to hear it fade in and out, but there needs to be some level of transformation in order to call it 'arrangement'. i don't see that here.

there is a conflicting note at 1:28 that's super distracting as well. i can't tell if it's the sub-bass playing two notes simultaneously, or just a result of the stutter synth being low, but it's obnoxious with the bass turned up (to hear those low tones in the first place).

ultimately, although the track is fun to listen to, there's some issues on both the production and arrangement side that cause this to miss muster. i don't think it'd be difficult to add in some more melodic content in an arranged fashion to make this more your own, or to fix the mastering so it doesn't peak constantly, and that'll make a better track overall as a result.




Edited by prophetik music

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's pleasant but it honestly gets kind of boring without any of the melody. Feels like it's relying the gated synth pattern for the first half, which is arguably less interesting than actually just...using the melody from the source. The arrangement clocks in at just under 3 minutes and I honestly feel like it's just one big extended intro that never pays off. The production and sounds are nice but ultimately the arrangement is half-baked; needs more time in the oven. NO (resub)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.