Rexy Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 (edited) Hi OCRemix Team; We're a video game cover band from Barcelona (Spain). After 5 years of live performances across the country we recently have released our first studio album with some of the tracks we used to play live. We would like to submit one of those tracks to your site, so we're sending to you the file (attached) and the required information below. Kind Regards The Belmont's Revenge Team. Submission Information Name of game(s) arranged Punch-Out!! Name of arrangement Fighting Spirit Name of individual song(s) arranged "Fight theme" and "Little Mac Down" Additional information about game including composer, system, etc. (if it has not yet been added to the site) Released by Nintendo on 1987. Composer: Kenji Yamamoto Link to the original soundtrack (if it is not one of the sound archives already available on the site) Your own comments about the mix, for example the inspiration behind it, how it was made, etc. This track it's a heavy metal medley of two songs from Punch-Out!! played with the classic rock formation: 2 guitars, bass & drums. All instruments are played entirely by us, no previously programmed rhythms. This was recorded at GoldenAxe studios (Barcelona); sadly, it no longer exists, we blew it up at the moment we start to play... just joking, all the crew is fine Contact Information Your ReMixer name Belmont's Revenge Your real name Marc Belmont (Guitars) Jordi Cartes (Guitars) Carlos Puig (Bass) David Barqué (Drums) Your email address revengebelmonts@gmail.com Your website Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC37ZRqSL_e_z94EXguzOjoA FB: https://www.facebook.com/belmontsrevenge/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/belmontsrevenge/ Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/user/ziazuq6ndsc5pk5x89e19o5tq Web: http://belmontsrevenge.es/ Your userid (number, not name) on our forums, found by viewing your forum profile 36858 Edited November 5, 2020 by Liontamer closed decision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jivemaster Posted October 21, 2020 Share Posted October 21, 2020 Mixing is decent, with the bass and drums having a nice level of separation from the guitars. Rhythm sounds fine. The phaser/flange on the lead guitar sounds a little muffled, pulling out a lot of the highs. Otherwise I think the production here is well done. The major problem I have with this is the arrangement — it’s very cover heavy, and while there are some subtle changes from the original, I didn’t think enough was done here to separate it from cover territory. Perhaps the others will feel differently. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rexy Posted October 24, 2020 Author Share Posted October 24, 2020 Hey, this a fun performance! Performances are mostly on point, every instrument has its own defined space in the mix, and the balance is precise. Your lead guitar's flanger effect is very subtle and helps contribute to expression, so I didn't feel it needed more presence than what it got. I do have two little concerns for the presentation. Firstly, the countermelodies at 1:20-1:30 are looser than the rest of the mix, so a re-take can refine it if editing the raw audio can't. And secondly, the tail end of the track got cut before it can fully fade out - so watch out for those with future renders. Neither of the production issues feels that troublesome in comparison to the arrangement, though. To your credit, you presented the run-throughs for each source in a different way. You distinguished the first two of the fight theme with a lead in different octaves and the third relying on harmonies. Meanwhile, Little Mac Down had similar-sounding first and third run-throughs separated with different rhythm guitar rhythms and the second having the accompaniment stab in the background while the melody did its thing. But neither the core melody itself nor the chord structure get changed up in all variants, as did the drums outside of fills - and when there's not enough done to the sources, that's a critical flaw. Finding ways to modify the chord structure or melody further in individual variations could make them stand out, add an original solo on top of the existing chord structure, or even a temporary sub-genre change during one of the loops. Those are just a few ideas of many, though I also encourage you to jam together and look out for new performance ideas as well. You all did great together with a well-produced rock cover, but that's pretty much what it is right now - a cover. Right now, it needs more interpretation before getting shown on OCR, so it'll be nice if you can all get together and start experimenting. Keep going! NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimpazilla Posted October 24, 2020 Share Posted October 24, 2020 I'm sorry but I can't let this get rejected purely on being a cover. First of all, the complete genre change over from chiptune to rock/metal is a major personalization to these sources. Secondly, there are LOTS of bits of writing variation here. There are TWO sources being integrated into one cohesive arrangement. As my fellow Js have pointed out, the performances and mixing are great, no issues there. I am enjoying this track! The mix is very conservative, but to call it a straight-up cover seems wrong to me. I do hear that the ending got cut off, but that would be a quick fix to fade it out properly before we post it. I like it! YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophetik music Posted October 28, 2020 Share Posted October 28, 2020 the band mastering as a whole just jumps out of the speakers right up front. love the band sound, it's a great tone. i'm not a fan of the flange on the lead, though, since it loses a lot of power from having a bunch of the highs cut out. there's also little verb and no delay/chorus/reinforcement on it, which makes the more rhythmic style less impactful and makes it sound less powerful. from an arrangement perspective, there's not a ton here. there's very little of the personalization of the melody line, chord structure, drums, etc. that we expect from the transition between a chip track to a band setting. there needs to be notable levels of arrangement to make it over the bar. i'll add that Little Mac's track is so simplistic by itself that the fact that there's two originals being included in this doesn't make me more impressed with the arrangement, since it's essentially tacked on the end to make the track make it past two minutes before the ending sustain. while i don't think the lead sounds great in this track, the arrangement of the actual songs beyond the transition to rock is sadly lacking in this one. there'd need to be a ton more personalization and arrangement before a track this short would be able to make it over the bar. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimpazilla Posted October 28, 2020 Share Posted October 28, 2020 You guys, am I just missing something here? I totally get not thinking the mixing is sufficient, but I am really not getting the rejection on grounds of it being a cover. I'm not sure why I'm the only one who feels this way and I'm legit confused. Perhaps @Liontamer could shed some light on this? Larry if you think this is truly a cover, I will relent. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonAvenger Posted November 5, 2020 Share Posted November 5, 2020 I do think this is pretty coverish, but I don't think it's as bad as the others are making it out to be. There's definitely the addition to the drums, the change up between octaves and the harmony in the third repetition, plus the addition of the second theme (which actually had more arrangement to it than the Fight Theme overall I felt). That being said, I would have loved more change-ups overall. Add to that that the flange on the guitar really makes it feel muffled which really cuts the power of the lead. Similarly, the harmony that comes in 1:10 feel awkward because it doesn't match articulations with the lead, and at 1:21 the two parts are fighting in the same space on the counter melody (maybe some subtle panning of each instrument to opposite sides would help there). I think the combo of the low amount of arrangement and the production issues are what are doing it for me, but I'd like to see this one again. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted November 5, 2020 Share Posted November 5, 2020 This seems like a perfectly valid cover approach to me when it comes to OCR's standards. The melody's straightforward, but all of the supporting instrumentation around it is wholly original. You can go melodically conservative and still have a valid arrangement approach if there's different or expansive original writing integrated with it. This would have been approved in the oldest days of OCR when it had a lower bar for the level of interpretation/personalization. This does go well in the right direction, but I thought it still lacked some polish and complexity in the presentation. I'd argue it wasn't complex enough, so it felt like the track was texturally pretty empty and underdeveloped, and that's the biggest issue I had I'd argue this would have been better with more melodic interpretation, and while there was variation in the instrumentation for the lead (e.g. 1:09 with the new sounds for the doubled leads), the melody itself was very by-the-numbers. Outlier or not, I don't think Chimpa going YES is against the spirit of the Submissions Standards, but I do think, while this is in the right direction of personalizing a cover-style arrangement, more melodic and/or textural development would make this more likely to meet our arrangement criteria and stand apart more from the original song. Good stuff so far though. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts