Emunator Posted November 18, 2023 Share Posted November 18, 2023 Diablo I & II Tristram Theme Diablo has to Synth Diablo released in 1996 and the rest is history. Composer of the game's soundtrack was Matt Uelmen. Original soundtrack : Diablo 1 & 2 Soundtrack - Tristram Theme - YouTube In an alternate world Tristram is a cyberpunk Town. Matt Uelmen wrote this magnificent music for Diablo (video game) using his guitars (mostly).Synthesizers took over Tristram and Diablo opened a portal to a cyberpunk world, called the "80's". Contact Information 7DD9 George Karagiorgos Music | 7DD9 (bandcamp.com) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophetik music Posted November 20, 2023 Share Posted November 20, 2023 (edited) initial chord strums are immediately recognizable despite being detuned. there's some extra effecting that comes in at 0:44, but the first big shift is at 1:05 where the original 12-string guitar arpeggios come in. this is, i think, a direct adaptation of what the original plays. it sounds like it's the same synth throughout, albeit with some interesting LFO, EQ, and effects applied. it goes through the various sections of the original and then just kinda ends. it would be difficult to really A:B this to confirm, but i suspect that this is essentially the guitar part from the original dumped into a synth, with most of the changes that were made falling into the category of modifying the synth timbre. it is not pleasant to listen to - it isn't until the second half that we really get any variety of synth tone regularly, and what we do get is difficult to follow since the original does not have a consistent melody throughout to pin the remix to. much of the original's novelty lies in the tone of the guitar, the reverb and delay on the guitar, and the mood it sets. the synth choices and realization shown here do not carry that over, and so we're left with a bunch of disparate sections with no attempt to knit them together. i believe this arrangement is far too close to the original to really have any chance of passing as-is. separately, while eventually there's more variety in synth timbre, there's not for several minutes at the beginning. this needs some significant rework as a result. NO edit 3/5: MW's comments about the second half being farther out necessitated a re-listen. i do hear what he's saying around the second half, but like kris i lost the plot halfway through and struggled to balance the original against what was going on in the remix. beyond that, the detuning made me sick to my stomach so i couldn't listen for very long. if he's saying that there's enough source, then i'll believe him. i do agree with larry that ultimately this is not a pleasant track to listen to - there are muddy sections, and there's a lot of very abrasive elements that seem to be there just for variety vs. being intentional. i don't think that's a standards violation though. this is a functional piece with clear design behind what's going on, even if i will never listen to it again. YES Edited March 5 by prophetik music spelling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimpazilla Posted November 26, 2023 Share Posted November 26, 2023 There is more than just detuning going on, there is some flutter and wow, and it is very heavy and feels disorienting especially since it is so exposed. I'm going to agree with Brad that this is unpleasant to listen to, but I respect the concept. This soundscape sounds like it could appear in a 70s sci-fi movie like Logan's Run. There is definitely an audience for this esthetic. For what this is, it is done well. No outro, just a cold stop. I am not a fan of this type of non-resolving ending to a track. This arrangement is conservative to the source as Brad mentioned (at least until the 3-minute mark after which I am losing the plot), but I don't find that to be a problem as everything has been modified so much. It is certainly not a cover! This is a weird one. I am not going to reject it on those grounds though. I'm not sure what to think of this one yet, I'll be interested to see a few more votes first. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MindWanderer Posted December 1, 2023 Share Posted December 1, 2023 Wow, that modulated detuning. That... that's a choice, for sure. A very loud choice. As Kris and Brad pointed out, it's actually pretty conservative up until the halfway point. The instrumentation changes, but not the mood or pacing, and I'm not picking up any original part-writing. If it were just the first half, I'd agree with Brad 100% about it being too conservative to pass. The second half is definitely not too conservative. The connections to the source material get much more tenuous, but they're there. If this were just the second half, I'd want a breakdown with timestamps, but the first half easily (too easily!) takes this over the 50% mark. Unfortunately we haven't had a consistent voting consensus regarding arrangements like this (which we get fairly often), which are too conservative in the first half and too original in the second half. We've passed some of those and rejected others. This isn't even a particularly extreme example of that sort of issue. So that's certainly a weakness, but not a dealbreaker. Source usage is clumpy but overall sits in the safe range. While I'm in agreement with the judges above that I found this unpleasant and didn't enjoy it at all, I'm not really finding anything that's a standards violation. The synths vary quite a lot, and while they're technically "vanilla," they're chosen in a genre-appropriate, consistent, mindful way, and they're used in clever, engaging (if abrasive) ways. The soundscape gets thin frequently, but again it's intentional and done for aesthetic reasons. I do think the ending (5:17+) is weak, with only two instruments for nearly a minute and then an extremely abrupt end, and if I had one objective reason to say NO to this, it would be that. But out of a 6+ minute piece, I don't think that sinks it. I certainly respect a NO vote here, but I can't justify giving this one myself. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted December 17, 2023 Share Posted December 17, 2023 Opens up feeling like it's going to be a close cover version, just in a different genre, a kind of spacesynth style, so it's not the most promising intro from a Standards perspective, but we'll see where it goes. A countermelody joins in at :43 for a few seconds, and the soundscape seems muddy. Not sure why the mixing's so abrasive starting at 1:05 with this overly loud lead, but it's not pleasent to listen to for sure. There's an unsettling warble to this that's a nice technique in a vacuum, but quickly feels tired and stale by the time we get to the textural change at 1:57. Even though it's melodically note for note with the original, the presentation does stand apart from the original though. 3:05 gets more active with chiptune-style original writing accompanying the source arrangement, so that's notable. More additive writing seems to be here, though the mixing remains abrasive (e.g. the lead at 4:36, 4:46, 5:17, the textures from 4:56-6:09). Going more liberal and "inspired by" for the second half doesn't bother me whatsoever due to the first half invoking the source tune. To me, this is just a rejection on the mixing, George, not the arrangement. If you can rein in this mixing, I'm on board, but right now, it's too abrasive. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemophiliac Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 I've played more Diablo II then I care to admit, and because of that I'm excited to see what this has in store. This reminds me of the opening intro to A Clockwork Orange by Wendy Carlos or even some of the work of Vangelis. I wonder if the subtle filter sweeps were performed live because they have a very nuanced artistic quality to them. Each time I listen to this, I pick up on an interesting different element that I didn't catch on previous loops. The opening chords hit and the detuning is very apparent, a choice to emulate a throwback feel akin to analog synthesizers. While it is almost over the top with the amount of detuning used, I enjoy it. In terms of arrangement this is highly conservative and remains very close to the source in both structure and melody for the first half. In the last section before the ending (5:07-6:08) is when we get the most new material added in the rhythm/chords. The ending does cut off on an awkward beat and leaves me hanging and wanting more closure after a long 6 minute journey. I think if we had got one more beat to end on one, it might have helped with that. Many of the decisions you made feel very intentional despite them causing muddiness, but are textural and add to the progression of the piece. These don't come off to me as violations, but as artistic decisions. This will not be everyone's cup of tea, but I can get behind the synthesized "analog" warmth. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emunator Posted April 22 Author Share Posted April 22 The analog wobble is real! There's certainly a great deal of resonance in the filter envelopes on these synths, but overall I found this to be a smooth set of sounds - because the overall mixdown was balanced with a hefty bass synth that filled out the frequency spectrum, the overall feel of the mix was totally sufficient for me. I'm seeing mud called out in other votes, but again, it feels more like deliberate warmth and less like a mixing-level oversight. The ending fizzled out, but what are ya gonna do? The arrangement has already been covered at length so I'm not going to dwell on it, but in my book, the arrangement approach is fine. The expansion in sound design keeps the first half of the track engaging so that even though it's compositionally conservative, there's something new being offered from the jump, and then you get into more engaging territory with the arrangement as well to round things out. It's a bit unconventional but I don't see any problem with it, and I personally enjoyed listening to this quite a bit! There's a lot to get lost in. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts