Emunator Posted April 30, 2022 Share Posted April 30, 2022 (edited) Hey OCRemix! I'm Chiptop (Remixer Name) and I've been listening to OCRemix since grade school, and never thought to submit one of my own remixes until now. Game: Dark Souls 2 Name of Arrangement: Majules Name of Individual Songs Remixed: Majula (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9hoAyx3-0I) Made in Reason shortly after Return to Drangleic, I just had to show my appreciation for the melancholic, relaxing vibes of Majula. Edited June 24, 2022 by prophetik music Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted May 26, 2022 Share Posted May 26, 2022 Sounds very similar to the original to start in terms of apeing the lead, but we heard some support and ornamanetation come in at :31 and voice sampling from :45. A beat comes in from 1:00-1:48 that sounds super dry, lo-fi, and unsync'ed with the timing. That can potentially work, and I see what you're going for with the off-beat, but the sound doesn't click here at all; there's absolutely no synergy and the other parts don't even feel like they share the same soundscape. The second beat from 1:51-2:39 was properly positioned in the background, fit more comfortably and seemed to click together better with the production of the bassline and SFX. After 2:43, the strings sustains didn't sound realistic, but served as semi-effective padding, while the lead became significantly brighter until the dropoff at 3:08. If you're paying attention, you notice the nice and (again) subtle build of an even more optomistic sound from 2:55-3:08 for some effective contrast before the finish at 3:08. Dynamics-wise, I appreciated the understated builds and breaks; very low-key addition and subtraction is going on throughout, and its so, so easy to mistake the laid-back sound of this as lacking energy or substance. Sound design-wise, I generally was digging this; not a blowaway palette, but the glassier leads had a very nice tone to them, the SFX were integrated well, and nearly everything here fits with a kind of trip hop vibe. That said, most of what works comes from directly sampling the original audio (e.g. comparing :12 of the source to 1:13 of the mix, 2:00 of the source to 1:51 of the mix), so I couldn't vote in favor of it without that being replaced by your own instrumentation from the ground-up, otherwise it's a Standards violation due to extensive samping, IMO. IMO, I'd need 1) the direct audio sampling of the original replaced, 2) to hear the beat from 1:00-1:48 replaced with something that's produced to mesh and be properly balanced with the other instrumentation. For #2, it's nearly a quarter of the track and thus a deal-breaker for me. The beat writing could be the same, and I'm not saying it needs to use the same sample, mixing, or effects as the 1:51 beat. Because the texture from 1:00-1:48 doesn't work, the dynamic contrast I was praising elsewhere doesn't really show through there. Hopefully a musician judge can further elaborate and clarify what may be going on. That said, you have a vision for this piece, and it might not fit OCR because of the extensive direct audio sampling, so if we don't get a revision of this, I look forward to hearing something else in your repetoire, Chiptop! NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MindWanderer Posted May 27, 2022 Share Posted May 27, 2022 I don't have a big problem with the production of that one drum, but it is off-beat. Overall I felt like the mix of clean bells and pads with the lo-fi drums worked just fine. I didn't think the "strings" were even trying to be strings, just a synth pad, and I have no problem with that. As an overall package, I felt like it basically worked. The big issue is how nearly the whole thing is overlaid on either a direct sample or a soundalike of the source material. It's just too close. I think that altogether it's just transformative enough to meet our standards of interpretation---although a great deal of it, especially the first half, is not---but the use of the exact same bells makes this not the sort of thing we look for. I think if you replaced that one thing with a reinstrumentation of your choice, even a very similar one, this would probably be acceptable. A bit more reinterpretation in the first half and slightly cleaner timing on the drum would be nice to have as well. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophetik music Posted June 24, 2022 Share Posted June 24, 2022 the direct sample is a deal-breaker - no chance of it passing with that in there. the snare at 1:00 is regularly ahead of the beat slightly and it's intensely distracting as well, especially since there's so little going on most of the time. those two would be each enough for me to say NO on this. i like the concept. adding a simple beat that isn't huge behind the original is fine since it's got such a spacious, loose vibe to it. that said, i think you stayed too close overall to the original. there is snippets of significant change that are great, but overall it just feels like you took the original and put a beat behind it (which, to be honest, you did for at least part of the track). that's not enough interpretation. make something that's more chiptop and less sakuraba and i think you'll have something pretty neat. as it is there's not much here. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts