Rexy Posted April 5, 2020 Share Posted April 5, 2020 (edited) Remixer name: Twisted Reality Real name: Robert Vroemisse Email: Userid: 36240 Name of game: Metal Gear 2 -Solid Snake- Name of arrangement: Introducing Metal Gear Name of song arranged: Theme of Solid Snake (Opening BGM 1) Link to original soundtrack: Comments: I composed this dance arrangement with Propellerhead Reason. I use a sample of the title screen sound of the original Metal Gear for the MSX 2 in this track. Edited September 3, 2020 by Liontamer closed decision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rexy Posted June 10, 2020 Author Share Posted June 10, 2020 As is typical for progressive trance, there is a lot to take in for its lengthy running time. First and most importantly, you nailed source dominance by using every motif in the intro to fill in space between melody uses. I find it interesting that you used the bass rhythm in the source as an additional melody, first appearing at 1:24 and having some modified pitches every four bars to fit the style better. The initial arpeggio had some notes removed for the adaptation - and that got changed up further during the build at 2:36, adding in some 16th notes into the mix including one every four bars that step down to the G note more gracefully. Outside of this, the genre adaptation is way more straight-forward, and I can slide with it. What's important to keep this genre engaging is the sound design and the framework. Reason doesn't necessarily have the most engaging defaults to work with; for the most part, a handful of your synths have thin qualities to them only pushed up with subtle use of delay. I feel it'll be a good idea to see if you can layer multiple synths at once, and see what kind of fleshed-out textures would emerge. The framework starts well with some good trance tropes - the slow build of the beat, the breakdown at 2:16, and then back in with full energy at 3:00. However, from that point, there were no further breakdowns until at 6:00, where the drums became more breakbeat-like while going to the source's B section, all in anticipation of the climax and ending. The last thing anyone wants when listening to tracks like this is to tune out suddenly, so finding another way to break down between those timestamps can regain interest. The mixdown, however, needs more work. There are a handful of sections throughout with clipping at 1.2db maximum, the first one appearing at 1:24 and the most concentrated clips occurring from 6:21-7:25. Consider lowering your instruments' volumes or adding a limiter to your master chain if there isn't one already. Even with the loud master out of the question, you have some high-pitched sweeps throughout taking too much attention away from everything else, so see if you can bring them down further. Also, the high-frequency resonance on the synths is too strong and can damage hearing in its present high intensity. See if you can make EQ cuts to tame them. You may get some more detailed palette-related feedback from some of the techno-oriented judges, but what I heard was a potential club mix idea that ran close to outstaying its welcome. But the thin palette, loud mastering, and excess of high-pitched frequencies are worth addressing should you wish to keep working on it. Good progress so far, Robert - I await your next move. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimpazilla Posted September 2, 2020 Share Posted September 2, 2020 I like this! The mix is definitely clipping, although I don't hear artifacts per se, it needs to be brought under 0db because YouTube compression will probably bring out artifacts. There is no reason it needs to be mixed this loud. The synths do sound simplistic but effective for this genre. The highs on some of the white noise sweeps goes into painful territory briefly, and there are a lot of them. The progression of the track goes on for quite awhile without anything incredibly interesting being introduced, which is ok but not optimal. The transition into breakbeat wasn't as jarring as I was expecting after reading Rexy's review, but I admit I'm glad I wasn't dancing to it at the time! Overall I think this is pretty solid, but the length of the track really calls for more interest as it develops. At an absolute minimum, the mastering must be brought under 0db. NO (resubmit please) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jivemaster Posted September 3, 2020 Share Posted September 3, 2020 Good choice of source. The opening builds up over the first minute with some blips and atmospheric elements. At the 1:00 mark we’ve got a fairly standard dance beat, where different blippy synths start to enter the fray. Things are fairly minimal but there is enough going on, at least initially. There are some hot piercing frequencies in here however, I’m unsure if that’s due to clipping or some untamed synths. You need to check that. The arrangement takes some breaks here and there across the duration but mainly keeps the same pacing. At 3:50 we get a chorus like section. The synths have a bit of an 80’s feel to them. The next break in the arrangement at 6:00 is quite interesting, though I wish more happened. I feel at this point, things really feel like they’re retreading on previous territory and could end much earlier. The 7:20 break is ok, with some differences to earlier sections. We end just past 8 mins. Production is ok, however the piercing frequencies are still present right up until the end of the mix — above all else, this needs to be fixed. I also think the mix could benefit with being shortened to reduce the repeated feel of some sections. Have a think. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts