OCR04592 - *YES* Gremlins 2 "Astral Office"

[Liontamer]

(revision 1/21/2024)

(old version)

ReMixer name: Astral Tales
Real name: Ernesto Bernal
Email address: 
Website: astraltales.bandcamp.com

Submission Information
Name of game arranged: Gremlins 2 The New Batch The Videogame
Name of arrangement: Astral Office
Name of individual song arranged: The Office Theme

Own comments about the mix: I always found that this song had a naughty nature that conveys quite well the personality of the Gremlins. It had that "horror" taste to it, but also some funny characteristics, exactly like the movie. It's a blend that we usually found in the 80s, and it was a bit of a challenge to translate into a remix. I decided to give it a cyberpunk twist (after all, the leader of "the new batch" had a mohawk, right?). When exploring with different sounds, the song asked me for a heavy and nasty rhythm section, so I added some powerful bass lines and heavy rhythms. The chaotic and naughty nature of the Gremlins was approached with a crazy lead that plays the main theme of the song, and finally I added two softer parts to help the tune have some dynamics that helped to give some variety and contrast against the madness of the main sections.

 

I hope you enjoy it!

Cheers!
 

Ernesto Bernal

[Liontamer]

The source tune feels like Ghosts'n Goblins with beats; I dig it.

Track was on the crowded side for me. It's not muddy in terms of parts stepping over one another; the different parts actually seem fairly clean, but something about how they all form this texture makes the track seem cluttered and less sharp than it should. Maybe the grimier/crunchier sounds that start around :04 could have been saved for the repeat of the verse & chorus at :31 or later at 1:18, which could have made the middle seem like a subtle escalation of the energy instead of a retread.

From 2:29-on, I would have liked to have heard something new with the textures and writing ideas to make for a stronger close, especially after the dropoff section at 2:00; right now, ideas (albeit creative ideas) are cut-and-pasted with the same sounds and intensity (e.g. verses at :03, 1:18 & 2:43); instead of feeling like a satisfying bookend, the lack of variation in places made the finish repetitive and disappointing. That said, maybe other Js won't mind the structure as much as I did. It's still a solid arrangement by Ernesto with driving energy!

YES

[MindWanderer]

I'm in instant disagreement with Larry about this not sounding muddy. The bass is really loud and steps all over the spectrum, crushing the poor leads into mush. The SFX suffer even more; the laughing, chittering Gremlins are only identifiable when they're exposed, then turn nearly into static as the bass steals all their air.

However, the composition is pretty darn good. The original solos are absolute fire, and I love how you incorporated synths that are vaguely reminiscent of the ones used in the movie's theme song.  I have to agree with Larry about the verses feeling repetitive: it's a 15-second clip used 5 times,  meaning a full minute of the track is copy-pasta in this way.  I thought the bookending worked great, though.

Clean up the production and reduce the repetitiveness of the main hook and this will really be a bright light in our catalogue instead of being all wet.

NO (resubmit)

Update 1/22/24: Mixing is much, much cleaner, great job! A few of the synths are a little too quiet, e.g. the octavo lead at 0:32-0:46 and the pad I didn't even realize was there until 1:18. I'm not doing an A:B comparison, but it didn't feel repetitive to me this time, either. And the original riffing is just so good. Feed me some of this after midnight, please.

YES

Edited January 22 by MindWanderer

[prophetik music]

Quote

...this will really be a bright light in our catalogue instead of being all wet.

uuuuuuggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh lol

the initial band sound is *awesome*. i love how beefy the bass synth and kick are. there's a ridiculous amount of sub-40hz content that desperately needs to be rolled off (you don't need that much at 20hz!), but the upper synths sound great. they are indeed repetitive but it's not a big deal initially.

there's some fun laughing synth work and chromaticism in the section at 0:46 that's appropriately killer clown for the original. 1:18 comes back to the same lead riff, and i'm starting to think that the usage is too repetitive. it'd be nice to hear that in a different synth each time to mix it up. the subsequent solo is great though, and throughout it all the random blurbs from the bass are great.

there's a big drop at 2:01 (finally!) with no drums for a while, and this is a good setup for the end run. 2:29's big hit is similar to early material, but the outro is fine and a good way to end it.

while i found it a bit repetitive, it's got a great groove and is fun to listen to. it is very bass heavy but i didn't find that being a negative. drop an EQ on it in the final chain to filter out the sub-bass content and i'll call it a yes.

 

 

CONDITIONAL

edit 1/22: mixing sounds cleaner. it's still very sub-bass heavy but i found that overall it had less than before. there's some slight changes to the structure but not anything earth-shattering. my conditional was solely around removing some of the mud and this has happened to my ear, so I'm a Y now.

YES

Edited January 22 by prophetik music

[Chimpazilla]

The reason this mix sounds so crowded and dense is that there are so many elements playing in the same frequency range, and mixed such that they all occupy the same position in the soundscape.  The low end sounds fine to me generally.  The bass is deep and satisfying.  Probably the elements other than kick and bass could use EQ cuts to remove unwanted lows, that would clean things up and let everything sound clearer, but the overall effect is fine in my opinion.  Brad is right about the 20Hz content though, it seems to be coming from the keys, most noticeable at 1:15-1:20; when they play alone I can see the 20Hz swell on SPAN.  Careful cutting of unneeded lows on everything other than kick or bass will give you a cleaner/tighter low end and more mastering headroom.

My bigger issue is what Larry mentioned, that the soundscape, energy, instrumentation and writing all end up being quite repetitive.  While there are multiple softer breakdowns, and believe me I appreciate this as it gives the arrangement very good dynamics, the big sections are all essentially identical.  The section from 0:04-0:18 repeats verbatim FIVE times.  The section from 0:18-0:32 repeats (maybe not verbatim but close) THREE times.  That is a LOT of repetitions of the same stuff, played the same way with the same exact instrumentation each time even if there are tiny writing variations.  The other sections all seem to have original writing which is great and it does help to break it up, yet the instrumentation and energy are always the same. 

The ending is.... so disappointing.  We get just that tiny synth pattern from the intro, and then that that one final note just seems like a joke, following such big arrangement and ending with very high energy and then just.... bam.  Oof.  

All that said, I really love this!  The energy and detail in the mix are very exciting.  I love the big bass, huge leads, squelchy synth patterns and pounding kick.  You really captured the vibe you were going for!  I just think that those sections, most especially the five-times-repeated section, repeat too often in the exact same way.  I would ask that a few of those be altered somehow, either with different writing or a different instrument or element added/removed/replaced, for variation.  While you're in the file, some EQ work would be a good idea, to make sure to cut unwanted lows out of everything that isn't kick or bass, to keep the low end ultra clean and preserve mastering headroom, and if there's any way to make the laughing details stand out a bit more clearly against the other instrumentation going on at the same time, that would be great (it is obscured by the lead and keys mostly).  The EQ stuff is not required for me to pass this, but the repetition has to be addressed.

NO (fix repetition of sections and resubmit please)

 

[DarkSim]

Hey, great remix! Big energy from the outset, and the vibe is perfect for those cheeky little critters.

2 main issues for me are the mixing, which is on the muddy side, and the ending, which doesn't do the arrangement any favours.

Firstly the mixing. I love that bass - the smooth, fat saws sound great. Arpeggio and slight sidechaining? Check. Right up my street. The accompanying instruments are somewhat smothered by it though, and there could be some better separation there. Strangely, the synth that comes in at 0:04 and is present for a lot of the track seems quite dry through the mix. Snare sounds quite buried in amongst things, but kick and toms sound good. Other synths have good sound design and sit better in the mix than the main backing synth. As a whole, there's room for improvement, but this one scrapes by.

The repetition in the arrangement doesn't bother me up until that final section. It's noticeably the same as the beginning, when I felt like there needed to be a bigger, more telegraphed finish. Ending on a solo would work well, or syncopating the backing synth somehow, maybe add an extra percussion layer. I get the 'bookending', but when you have this section in the middle as well, it doesn't help the listener orientate themself in the flow of the track, and the ending comes as a surprise and feels a bit underwhelming. Again though, aside from the last 30 seconds or so, I enjoyed the arrangement, and I'm not sure a lacklustre ending is enough to sink this one either.

It's a close call, but

YES

[Emunator]

I approach repetition the same way I approach source usage - instead of timestamping, I typically opt for a "vibe check" to see if a track feels like it's dragging. I actually find myself in total agreement with DarkSim on that front - it feels like a missed opportunity to do something different and exciting to cap off the arrangement, but on the whole, you switch back and forth between the repeated passages frequently enough with enough variety interspersed that those loops don't feel that bad to me. Plus, it's a short enough arrangement so it doesn't drag on in terms of length. If this track went on even a few measures longer, we'd be treading into "too repetitive, plodding" territory, but for my tastes, you fell on the right side. It helps that the synth design is all very cohesive, the groove is infectious, and the production issues that were called out don't tremendously impact my listening experience. It's closer than I'd like, but what I'm hearing here works well!

YES

[Gario]

Fun source, but then again it's Sunsoft so I'd hope that'd be expected (never played it, I might give the game a shot sometime). The arrangement starts very strong, and it does have some nice variations in the soundscape. That repeated section, though, really does grate on the ears after five repeats; I don't think I can in good conscious pass this on without that item being addressed. The form of this arrangement makes sense, but if the material just repeats it's unfair for the listener to go through the material again and again. Even the smallest amount of variance will make the sections sound interesting and fresh, because right now 33% of the track (I stopwatched it, it's 1/3 of the track) is the same repeated material.

What was done with the section at 0:18 - 0:32 when it comes back at 1:32 - 1:46 is great, switch things up for that repeated section like this even once or twice will really bring this entire track together, as then even the repeats will be interesting (since listeners won't *know* it's going to repeat each time).

Enjoyed it, needs some work on those repeated sections and then it'll be good for the front page.

NO

[Emunator]

Sent current votes to Astral Tales, waiting on a response!

[XPRTNovice]

I love this track tbh - it's mixed great, the vibe is fun, the instrumentation is fun. But I have to agree with the other judges that it falls short of its potential due to repetition. I would say by 50% through the track I had already heard and felt everything it had to offer, and when I caught myself looking at the time bar and seeing that it was only halfway through, I was a little surprised. All the other judges have made great suggestions on how to vary this up, so I won't belabor the point, but you might even consider adding in a couple of instrumental solos in there - there's tons of room, and this track functions well as a background. There's LOTS to do in here, and it won't take much to make this shine.

 

NO

[Flexstyle]

I'm hearing what everyone else is hearing -- I can definitely see why the NO votes exist, and I can definitely see why the YES votes exist. I believe this is just barely over the bar as-is, because of this: it's mixed well enough, it's a FUN arrangement, it's got very clear source connection, and it's a pretty good genre execution. Energy flows well enough, even with the repetitiveness. Like Emu said, the "vibe check" is there. This wouldn't be out of place in our catalog, IMO.

If it gets rejected, I'd really love to see a bit more variation and embellishment on the repetitive sections -- give them each their own personality so the track moves along better -- and maybe some risers to help transition through certain sections (although probably with the mid frequencies cut out pretty aggressively so as to not overwhelm the already-busy midrange). Heck, if you want to REALLY turbocharge this one, I could see a collab working out...this is pretty solidly in my wheelhouse of sound profile....

...anyways. All that to say:

YES

[Rexy]

You know, Jack got the sound presentation right on the head.  The bass is amazingly well textured, filters had worked great for the FX and arpeggios, and that choice of drumset has enough air in its snare tone to compliment everything else.  Yet, the bass has so much coverage in the mix that it had also been smothering everything that isn't necessarily percussion or a synth lead, masking some of those background pads and textures like the gremlin laughs.

A frequency analysis showed the sub-bass problem that Brad pointed out.  Cutting that back could help alleviate the clutter, but a general cleanup wouldn't go amiss.  It's not a dealbreaker, though, as the few flaws mix-wise more than compensate for it in the sound design, and that wore that badge loud and proud.

Now, the arrangement is transformative.  You've relied on mainly the A section for your core hook, a tweaked variation of the B section to compliment these, and then used your E and C sections for your builds.  Rather than using the original chord sequence, you opted to go for your own to fit your EDM vision and have similarly chopped up entire melodic stretches in your favor.

Yes, the repetition would be an issue, but here's how I broke it down.  Your B variations at 0:18 and 2:29 approach the same kind of core melody line, though the latter one had some additional higher-pitched textures during melodic downtime.  The B variation at 1:32 had the melody line do its own thing.  Then there are the A sections, where the first and second ones at 0:04 and 0:32 differ with their drum flourishes, while the other three at 1:18, 1:47, and 2:43 are the verbatim patterns.  Those loops impact around 30 seconds of a 3-minute track, which isn't much in the long run.  For me, the way you treated the source more than made up for the flaws here, though making textural differences more obvious would be an idea worth exploring in the future.

Honestly, this was a toughie, but the pros barely outweigh the cons.  It's got that bounce I usually associate with you, and that source transformation is too hard to brush aside.  Cool stuff.

YES (borderline)

[Emunator]

Astral Tales has provided a new version. @XPRTNovice @Gario @Chimpazilla @MindWanderer @prophetik music Let's see if this is enough to flip anyone's vote!
I was a YES on the previous version but this one sounds even better to me.