MindWanderer Posted November 22, 2023 Share Posted November 22, 2023 (edited) Firstly I want shout out to TheVideoGamer for a wonderfully made midi. Wouldn't have made this without it. I've never played this game personally and while I do love racing games, I can't say I have any desire to go back in time and try this out. The song felt like a nice canvas to paint my aesthetic on in a way that is conservative maybe constructively but in atmosphere is transformative (I hope). The original is a lot more gritty and has that hard, club techno vibe you'd hear in Blade or something like that. I think what I ended up making is a lot more ethereal in a way but not too much either. This is flawed in its own way (drums lol) and not for everyone but I think this where I stop with it before I move onto the next one. Was very fun getting outside my comfort zone! Games & Sources: Game: Group S Challenge Track: Cut the Corner Edited December 7, 2023 by Liontamer closed decision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophetik music Posted November 29, 2023 Share Posted November 29, 2023 there is little when it comes to melody in this track, so i'll be looking for other recognizable elements in the remix - stuff like the consistent and driving beat, the bassline, and the notes of the sustained vocal lines. opening section is very quiet relatively speaking. the pulsing beat is immediately recognizable, but the head-heavy snare is really not fitting the beat. the bass is doing the two-beat pattern that was throughout the original. 0:31 brings in an arpeggiated chordal pattern that i couldn't identify in the original, but adding some chord elements to this track is not a bad idea given the lack of actual harmonic development. the texture quickly shifts to H36T standard "layer a vocal patch on top" stuff while doing the same thing underneath for a bit, and then eventually hits a break at about 2:00. 2:14's break is not particularly reminiscent of either breaks in the original, so i'm chalking this up to original writing vs. being an arrangement of those two elements of the reference track. we get the beat back at 2:44, but again this isn't particularly reminiscent of any elements in the original, and the strongest elements i can hear (the voice and the beat) are both new writing which doesn't help. 3:44 feels like a build but is more of a transition element to a lower-energy section. at this point we're 4 minutes in and i've heard very little that i can truly tie to the source in a tangible way (part of that is the source's fault). there's a significant build to the largest section of the track at 4:43, and it's back to the quieter beat. it noodles for another two minutes doing the same thing as the previous four plus, and then it's done. barring someone else giving me a source breakdown, i don't see any way this is even close to 50% source, let alone 33%.the original is light on leitmotifs, and what little there is there isn't really represented here. i'm not comfortable saying a two-beat bass pattern and a reversed cymbal is enough to map a track to the original. beyond that, it's very quiet - where is the compression? something this consistent in volume shouldn't be so quiet for so long - and some of the instrument choices seem like default choices rather than crafted for the song, like the head-heavy snare tone. i can't pass this as-is. there needs to be far more clear correlation to the original. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MindWanderer Posted December 7, 2023 Author Share Posted December 7, 2023 Source usage certainly is the elephant in the room. I can catch suggestions of the source material, but they remain suggestions, and they're not very long. However, even with a source breakdown that justified it, I'd have a hard time passing this. It's a very slow burn, spending whole minutes on grooves than barely vary; even for vaporwave/trance, it needs to be more engaging. The drums are indeed LOL-worthy, being barely audible. As proph said, it's very quiet, except for the one tire-screeching section, which is far too loud in comparison to everything else. The soundscape is quite narrow, with a lot of sub (which I can't hear on my setup, but I can see it on the frequency plot) but no mid-bass or highs to speak of. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted December 7, 2023 Share Posted December 7, 2023 I disagreed that this isn't a valid arrangement concept, as the source's rhythmic bassline groove right at the start is the foundation of the song and is present for most of the arrangement. Source tunes aren't solely about melodies. It's perfectly valid to invoke that groove and build around it the same way the source tune does. The original kind of coasts and evolves, and this is meant to do the same. However, I do feel like the evolution's too understated and that the core instrumentation doesn't work. Opened up with snare drums that felt very stilted and didn't match the texture of the other instruments, which dragged the piece down. Kicks at 1:52 sounded like they were slightly (though briefly) distorting. Good changeup of the energy at 2:14, and I liked the presense of the electric guitar line. The percussion brought in at 2:24 doesn't sound bad, but still feels like it doesn't really fit the overall texture. After the vox drops out at 3:17, I'm feeling like the tone of the percussion parts again doesn't click with the other instrumentation. Around 4:47, you make things more active around the beat and a new original lead comes in at 4:57, but I feel like I'm hearing the same foundational textures that don't fully click as the base of the track for most of the way; very tepid sounding percussion that doesn't mesh together with the ethereal sounding stuff for about 5 of the 6 1/2 minutes. If you can't refine the sound design with this instrumentation, H36T, it's not going to get off the ground, but the potential is certainly there. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts