Liontamer Posted January 17, 2023 Share Posted January 17, 2023 Greetings! I couldn't get enough of Zircon's Monstrous Turtles when it came out and always wanted to remix the theme myself. This track came out in a purely inspired moment and turned out to be a fine bass house remix of the castle theme. I originally wanted to include this in my upcoming album Snesteryears but unfortunately, the source tune isn't available to cover. No loss, however, because I am sending it to ocremix. Hope you enjoy Jordan bLiNd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted January 17, 2023 Author Share Posted January 17, 2023 Always interesting to hear these arrangements, with so many different ways to keep the atmosphere dark yet really dig into unique sound design choices. 2:29 & 2:40 was an opportunity to add some more spices instead of cut-and-pasting :33's bridge & chorus sections wholesale. I think there's enough interpretation of the theme to weather to repetition, but some differences in the instrumentation, effects, or textures would have been small, easy steps to give this a more varied presentation (instead of having to make an argument that it's not TOO formulaic). That doesn't make this a borderline YES for me, but it would have been a ZOMG easy peasy, why-are-we-paneling-this YES for me with observable variations. We'll see if the amount of cut-and-paste is a dealbreaker for others; the context matters for me, with the level of interpretation being so strong to begin with that this can get past that hurdle. For me, the synths, beats, and voice clips combine in a good way for a busy beat-driven piece of business that's energetic while still retaining some dark SMW vibes. Good stuff, Jordan! YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MindWanderer Posted January 20, 2023 Share Posted January 20, 2023 This wears the influence from Monstrous Turtles! on its sleeve, for sure, but does stand out as a unique take. The voice samples and EDM blips add a unique texture. That said, the voice samples in particular wore on me and highlighted how repetitive the track is. 2:29-4:22 is an exact copy of 0:32-2:25, a full 41% of the track. There's some tolerance for repetitiveness in EDM, but that's too much. There should be some type of progression or transformation in the second loop to make it distinct from the first. I'm afraid this much exact copy-pasta is grounds for a NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkSim Posted January 20, 2023 Share Posted January 20, 2023 Really difficult decision here. As usual, your production is amazing, and the sound design, particularly on the bass, is fantastic. The arrangement is very basic though, with virtually all the original writing going on in the bass, and of course the second half is an almost exact copy of the first. The only differences I caught between halves were a few percussion dropouts. Monstrous Turtles! is a classic ReMix, and mentioning it in your submission email invites comparison, even though one must judge objectively! Although the arrangement doesn't excite me, it is a significant shift from the source, so it's got that going for it. I just don't think I can get past the repetition, particularly without a decent break in between. I passed a remix recently that had a similar amount of repetition, but it was broken up by 2 superb solo sections, providing a much more interesting arrangement. This needs something more to keep my attention for the whole track. It really kills me to reject such a well-produced track, but I think if I'm honest, I switched off for the second half of this, and that's never something I want to find myself doing. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimpazilla Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 Jordan's tracks always sound ZOMG GOOD to me, his production is the best I've ever heard and this one is no exception.... but.... after the intro, it is two exact repetitions of break/bridge and drop, and no outro (super abrupt ending). I layered the parts over each other to make sure and both sections are identical with nothing added or removed. Are we passing arrangement like that? What's here is groovus maximus and production delight, but I'm thinking, based on our standards, NO If our standards have changed or I've gotten it wrong (as Larry thinks this level of repetition is ok), someone please let me know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted January 21, 2023 Author Share Posted January 21, 2023 1 hour ago, Chimpazilla said: If our standards have changed or I've gotten it wrong (as Larry thinks this level of repetition is ok), someone please let me know. I wouldn’t say you’re wrong at all. There’s a super-dated example of a repetitive arrangement that the judges passed in 2003, “Snow Motion”, obviously with a lower bar back then. Based on that example, I’ve seen that the Js would allow a repetitive arrangement as long as the interpretation felt substantive enough. That said, the amount of cut-and-paste IS a lot, so anyone thinking it’s too much is right. I happen to feel that the interpretation is creative enough that it can bear it. Happy to be an outlier, but I know it’s tough to argue (otherwise, I wouldn’t have panelled it). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XPRTNovice Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 Ahaaaa this groove is great, and the interpretation is fun as hell. I love the style, and as always your production is phenomenal. What a great take on this source. But I do have to admit I agree with everyone else's opinion on this one. There's opportunities for variation that weren't capitalized on throughout the piece, resulting in a lot of what seems like copy/paste, to the point where I feel like I can see the patterns in the waveform as I'm listening to it now. I don't mind the ending being abrupt, as you pick apart the music before you get there, resulting in a sort of deconstructed dropoff, which I don't think is counter to the style at all. I don't think it's far off, but it needs some variation, or some trimming. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts