Rexy Posted June 29, 2020 Share Posted June 29, 2020 (edited) Hello, here is my first submission for OCremix ^^. Contact Information Your ReMixer name : mWIND Your real name : Picart Clément Your website : https://www.youtube.com/c/mwind1 Submission Information Name of game(s) arranged : Zelda - Ocarina of Time Name of arrangement : Zelda: Ocarina of Time - Neon Woods (Lost Woods retrowave remix) Additional information about game including composer, system, etc. : Koji Kondo, N64 Link to the original soundtrack : Edited July 17, 2020 by Rexy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emunator Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 Pretty neat! I was worried that the sound palette would not be sophisticated enough based on the intro, which was pretty simplistic, but this fleshed out quite nicely as it went along. The adaptation of the Lost Woods melody to a different key was handled smoothly, and I particularly love the melodic climax at 1:45, really tasteful stuff! After that, you introduced some new mallet and guitar textures which were certainly the highlight of this mix for me, that section sounded awesome! My main concern with this arrangement is that there's not really anything unique after the 2:32 mark. 2:32-3:17 is just a retread of 1:05-1:50, and 3:17 to the end of the track is basically the same as :38-1:05 with some extremely subtle changes. Between that, and the introduction taking so long to build up to the Lost Woods melody, it left me questioning how much is really here and if there's enough to consider this a substantial arrangement. My impression after a few listens is that the song effectively runs of out content at 2:32, which is really unfortunate because that Navi transition sounded like it was leading to something really high-energy. My gut tells me that this mix is very close to the bar, but would benefit from some additional layers to help the first minute of the mix sound more interesting, and to re-write everything after 2:32 so it's not a straight repeat of content that you covered earlier in the song. I wouldn't be upset if this passed, because I really enjoyed what you have so far, but I feel like this could be a much stronger mix if your arrangement were developed further! Good luck either way NO (borderline/resubmit!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rexy Posted July 10, 2020 Author Share Posted July 10, 2020 I don't mind the palette at all. A lot of the timbres are appropriate for synthwave, the percussion is as sharp as the genre expects, and there's some good volume envelope work for dynamics. I agree with Wes's sentiments regarding layers - yet it's for a completely different reason. The mixdown, while nicely balanced, could benefit from some added air, as otherwise, only the hi-hats seem to add to it. Hence, those leads could get doubled up with a more resonant synth transposed up an octave, which should have a low volume level compared to the rest of your instruments. A synth like that would give them some needed mid-high presence. The arrangement left a lot more question marks, though. Melody-wise, the two run-throughs (1:05-1:49, account for 39% of the track's running time - but one of the synths also uses the first three notes in the A section's melody as part of the arp (0:24-0:37, 0:44-1:05, 3:24-3:44) and accounts for another 24%. There's not much done here outside of that and the genre adaptation, but it's still serviceable. However, the repeated sections that Wes brought up are problematic - and with one of them affecting source use as well, it's a sign that the track still needs more development. You've got the geist of it with adding a low pass on the drums during the second loop's B section. Other ideas I can suggest that could potentially fit here are added harmonies, a countermelody, or even variations in the accompaniment writing. As an idea, this track sounds fun, it's got some appropriate tones in the palette, and you nailed the volume balance. But when the mix feels lacking in the mid-highs for a fair chunk of it and half of its source melody use on a repeated idea, little things stack up to having to send it back. A second version would be good to hear - with a way to add more air to the EQ curve and changed up writing on the second variation. Clément, I see potential with you - so I hope you keep going with your craft. NO (borderline / resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkeSword Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 In agreement with the other Js. Love the sound and texture of this but the copy-paste is hurting the track. Here's the thing: you've got this great guitar solo and then...we don't hear the guitar again. What happened? On your second run-through, let's hear some more of that. The track feels done halfway through. You're on the right track. Let's take another look at the arrangement. NO (resub). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts