*NO* Silent Hill 2 "As If the Toluca Lake Was Empty"

[Liontamer]

Hi!

Here is my submission : 

Your ReMixer name : Nomys_Tempar
Your email address : 
Your website(s) : nomystempar.fr

Name of game(s) arranged : Silent Hill 2
Name of individual song(s) arranged : Promise (Reprise)
Your own comments about the mix, for example the inspiration behind it, how it was made, how the source material was referenced in the arrangement, etc :
        The track was made in 2019, the main inspiration was the band Type O Negative. I wanted to make a metal cover of Promise and I though the weirdness of Silent Hill would fit the
elusive/complexe gothic style of Type O Negative.
        I mostly just break the original track into pieces and put it back into another order with some harmonic changes along the way.

LT EDIT (11/9): Nomys reached out and said he made a mistake in stating his source. It's "Promise" rather than "Promise (Reprise)". Since a small segment found in "Reprise" is used, I'll leave that video there, but also include the main source, "Promise". Let's revote!

 

Edited March 4 by Emunator

[prophetik music]

nearly 3dba of headroom.

kick drum right off the bat sounds really weird - essentially no drum sound, just the beater without any bass. there's some sfx and the descending arpeggio in the background, and it does this for over a minute. there's some guitar that comes in at 1:05, and it doesn't appear to have any verb or room tone on it initially as compared to the backing parts. it's also much louder relative to what's in the background. this continues in the same slow, intense method until 2:05 or so.

at 2:09 it switches to double time and is primarily a rhythm guitar pattern with some other stuff underneath, but the guitar crushes everything in terms of volume. there's some piano doing stuff that sounds reminiscent of the original but it's honestly hard to hear. this continues until 2:48 when it's back to being the original tempo. there's some guitar noodles above some synthy noodles, until we get a riding pattern from the guitar again at 3:18. this builds to a silence break before a brickwall transition at 3:55.

the section at 3:55 continues to be all guitar. there's still no bass instrument let alone any bass tone in the kick, so it's still a bit top-heavy. it chugs through until it drops to half-time again at 4:28. it stays in this lower-energy groove until the track's end at 5:32. there's no real resolution there either, it just kind of ends.

i think this track needs quite a bit of work still. i think the underlying concept - a patient, slow yet intense, expansive approach to the motivic elements of the original using heavier guitars - is definitely something that could work! there's some cool ideas here. however it's balanced very poorly throughout and there is a lot of noodling instead of intentional motivic development, so it's hard to really hear the original consistently. fixing the mastering of the individual instruments and adding a bass presence would also help ground the chords you're using which will subsequently help root what's going on in the original.

 

 

NO

edit 11/9: my vote will not change.

Edited November 10, 2023 by prophetik music

[Chimpazilla]

Drums are very weak, especially the kick as Brad noted.  I'm not sure I understand what is being portrayed in the first minute, I cannot connect it to the source tune.  The guitar is super loud and dry when it comes in.  The mixing needs a lot of work and mastering seems nonexistent.  

I can't recognize the source material at all; I would need to see a source-use breakdown before I could really comment on that, but I don't hear it in a cursory listen.  

This arrangement comes off as extremely loose and noodley.  This concept could work, but it needs to be mixed much better than this, and the source connections would need to be more apparent.

Edit 11/9/23:  Listening again with Promise source.  I finally hear the motif from the Promise source, starting at 2:16, played suuuuuper quietly on a piano or plucked instrument way in the background.  The motif lasts from 2:16-2:48.  After that, from 2:48-3:20  I hear the arp pattern from Promise(reprise).  From 3:20-3:52 I think we are back to Promise.  From 3:56 to we are back to the section 2:16-2:48 but without the source arp, so I don't think we can count that as source.  After that, all the way to the end, I don't hear any more source.  So if the source has truly been deconstructed and put back together, it has been done very stealthily.

I still think the drums sound weak, and the arrangement is very noodley and not mixed well.  Still a

NO

 

Edited November 9, 2023 by Chimpazilla

[Liontamer]

Not recognizing the theme used in here to start, but we'll see where it goes. 2 minutes in, I'm not recognizing anything, so I'm hoping the back half is loaded with arrangement.

Once the track picked up around, 2:07, the mixing was very muffled; the little melodic notes sprinkled in from 2:16-2:48 are barely audible.

Source theme finally get referenced in a way that I can recognize from 2:48-3:19.

Whatever sustained lines those are from 3:55-4:28 are definitely shrill/piercing, so tweak the mixing for those.

Though this has a plodding pace/energy, it's very well performed and sounds/feels intentional, so in a vacuum, I can get behind this deliberate, grungy concept, even if the mixing isn't ideal.

I'm not understanding how "Promise (Reprise)" is referenced in this aside from 30 seconds' worth in the middle though, Nomys, so whatever I enjoy about this piece is a moot point unless the source tune is overtly referenced in the majority of the arrangement. If there's something we majorly overlooked or other Silent Hill 2 themes are also referenced, please let us know and we can revisit this.

NO

EDIT (11/13): OK, there's "Promise" from 2:16-2:47, albeit mixed super quietly. IMO, it should be more prominent. Then the backing pattern found in both "Promise" (right at :00) and "Promise (Reprise)" from 2:48-3:19. Then "Promise" again, referencing 2:47's section from 3:19-3:49. From 4:29-5:38, it's arranging "Promise" (:33-1:21) in a minor key. There may be connection prior to 2:16, but with 3 1/2 minutes of source usage, I'm OK saying this is a substantial enough arrangement of "Promise".

Alright, cool, the source is there for most of the track. Like I said, the mixing's not ideal, but the performances are solid. It's not like something CotMM or Steve Pordon would have made, but I'm an old school OCR fan, try my best to stay open-minded, and appreciate arrangements taking things in a more grungy and less melodious direction. Chimpa's calling this "loose and noodly", sure, but that's a feature, not a bug, so I don't agree with her POV at all. It's capably performed, and aside from 3:55-4:28 being piercing, mixed in a way that's meant to sound dark, dour, and dreary. These judges sti-ink. I'm the only one vibin' here.

If this doesn't make it as is, Nomys, don't change this arrangement/writing if you don't want to, just see how you can tighten up the mixing.

YES (borderline)

[MindWanderer]

Even after the correct source was identified, the source connections still seem loose to me, and would benefit from some timestamping. But the mixing, as Brad and Kris pointed out, is a dealbreaking issue regardless.

NO (maybe resubmit with a source breakdown)

[Emunator]

I found a lot that I really enjoyed about this - your guitar tone is excellent, and for the most part, I thought your kit drums fit the style you were going for great. The weak link is definitely the kick drum though, and the bass is practically inaudible in the mix. Without any low-end presence for most of the track, it just feels imbalanced and doesn't set a solid foundation for the rest of your instruments. This especially takes the wind out of the transition at 3:55, which should pack a huge punch when the instrumentation drops back in, but it just falls flat.

Source usage aside, I do think this warrants a resubmission on mixing grounds alone - the lack of bass presence is a dealbreaker, but if you were to resubmit this, I'd encourage you to include a breakdown of all the areas you used the original source and how it was adapted, so we're not potentially missing anything.

NO (resubmit)