Emunator Posted May 15, 2022 Share Posted May 15, 2022 Original Decision Hi Emunator, Yeah the rejection stung quite a bit, but I was actually very thrilled to read that the panel really seemed to like my concept! I've extracted all of the feedback from the panel and tried to adhere to every bit, at least to some extent. (Except for Liontamers' note on the abrupt ending, sorry) Notes on what I mainly tweaked: The biggest aggressor, I think, was the mud in the low-end. After reading your feedback, I was able to hear it too and the balance was terrible! This should be cleaned up now for the most part. Furthermore, I've done my best to make better use of the samples I have. The timing should be much tighter, I've switched out some odd registers with instruments that better fit those and some timbres should sound better now as well. The master has less volume fluctuation between the loud and the quiet parts. It's also able to breathe more now as it's only compressed by about 2 Db on average. I couldn't quite understand what MindWanderer meant about the weird drum timing in the climax so I also haven't tweaked that. I'm assuming they're referring to the fact that the final climax is in 6/8 and they were still listening with a 4/4 mindset, maybe? I've attached the new version of the track and I really hope you guys like it a lot more now! Thank you and best regards, Vijay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emunator Posted May 15, 2022 Author Share Posted May 15, 2022 This was always a fantastic concept but the execution is now quite comfortably up-to-par in my book. The samples are utilized well and the timing issues appear to be fully mitigated. The drums sound particularly nice throughout. On the production side, it's amazing what a little remastering can do. It's incredibly evident when A/B'ing with the original version - now that the sub bass isn't hogging so much space in the mix, your mids/highs sound so much richer. The revamped master compression chain also helps your extended breakdowns have a little more volume without compromising the dynamic range, letting moments like 2:13 and 4:03 still sound impactful and full. This is a textbook example of a great resubmission in my opinion, I'm glad you came back around to this! YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MindWanderer Posted May 17, 2022 Share Posted May 17, 2022 Yep, this fixes my main concerns nicely. The instruments sound great and the balance is much better distributed. The attack on the horns is still a bit slow, so I don't know if everyone else will be on board with them, but that was never my complaint, and they don't sound like toys anymore. I'm still not 100% on board with the ending. It just ends in the middle of a phrase. I can see how it might work as part of a real movie score, in context. There's also 13 seconds of silence at the end that could be trimmed. Regarding the timing there, I think I figured it out: the loud kettle drum beats are causing the trumpets to duck slightly, and that's making it sound like the attack on them is even slower than it really is. It's not a big deal, just an odd little quirk that would be nice to address if we were aiming for perfection here. I have no doubts about this being good enough for the front page, though. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted May 18, 2022 Share Posted May 18, 2022 From 1:23-1:50's why's the panning so wide??? I don't like that I'm hearing things so weighted in the right ear, when that's not how sound behaves when you're sitting in a room. If I have to stop listening and put on a control track to make sure my headphones are fully plugged in, something's off. Other than the panning issue popping up there and a bit more later on, my previous YES vote still holds and the mixing and sequencing have been improved since then. I was ahead of the curve, but the improvements are a nice-to-have. Still a YES. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophetik music Posted May 23, 2022 Share Posted May 23, 2022 you ARE ahead of the curve, larry =D oh man, the initial hit with the orchestral taikos sounds so much better without the mud. there's a lot of energy in these parts that i simply couldn't hear before. i really like the section from 3:20 to 3:40 now. ending being in 6/8 is a great way to use the same material in a new way. i still really like the ending, but can see how it could be a turnoff for some. a slight sustain there might have reinforced the intentionality of the choice. silence at the end is unneeded and can be removed. the opening's still way, way too quiet comparatively speaking, but this is a lot better. always nice to see a resub make it. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts