prophetik music Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 (edited) I submitted a much rougher version of this one over 4 years ago, and finally got around to revamping it off-and-on over the last few months after digging up the judging feedback on it. It has synthwave elements, but mixed more like a rock track, as I don't particularly like the sleekness of modern synthwave-y music. I didn't like how straightforward my initial arrangement was, so I added a weird section with Seal of Time playing and then skipping on an almost mono-channel degraded cassette (yes, I know cassettes don't really skip like that, no I can't make straightforward music and I don't have a good reason why not!). The bassline is my favorite part, and still might be a smidge too loud, but I like it too much to bring it down or filter it any further. Most of the music I make for OCR has some kind of story embedded into the music, but not here. Just wanted to make a futuristic-sounding version of The Boy Who Had Wings. Speaking of futuristic, this is my first time using the new submission form. It's beautiful. Games & Sources Game - Ys III: Wanderers from Ys Source tracks - The Boy Who Had Wings and Seal of Time There's a large handful of versions of both tracks due to the game being made for several different platforms over the decades, but the melodies of all of them are pretty much the same. Edited February 24 by Liontamer closed decision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophetik music Posted January 25 Author Share Posted January 25 (edited) bruh. initial synth hits and subsequent bass and beat are exactly what i expected. lead's got some nice distortion effects on it, it's definitely a grittier vibe to synthwave than we've heard recently. transition at 0:40 is a choice. the track kind of noodles a bit after that - i think the inconsistent beat and bass work is why, it just felt very disjointed for a while. there's a break at 1:09 where it's just pads and the really broad, buzzy lead for a bit. it cuts suddenly to the above image with a heavily detuned and filtered section from another game for a while before it suddenly pops back into the main material again at 2:06. the detuning next to the not-detuned stuff sounds pretty mind-bending for a minute and there's some other grunginess in there somewhere in another synth that's got some oddly tuned stuff going on. it trucks through the B section of the melody before a quick recap of A and then it's done quite suddenly. i need to admit i really, really don't like the middle of the song at all. synthwave is all about the constant motion and consistent driving vibe, and the section from 0:41 through 1:09 doesn't really have that at all. it feels like a bunch of disparate ideas are stuck together. the following break loses a lot of energy and is very short, and then suddenly is into the tape section which i really just don't get all. separate from the concept being really out there, it's uncomfortable to listen to something that's so detuned and only in one ear when there's an abrupt transition to it and from it. i'm running into an issue where i don't think these sections are viable but i don't see a specific element of the standards that they're violating. so i'm going to let the other judges vote first and i'll come back to this after some more thought. ??? edit 1/26: at its core, the middle section doesn't belong here. it's objectively an ill-fitting concept that's executed fine but really doesn't go with the rest. if this wasn't Hudak i'd probably already have rejected it just due to how left-field it is. the artist shouldn't matter here. So that's a NO from me as a result. Edited January 26 by prophetik music Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emunator Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 I hate to be that guy, but that long of a stretch with audio only in the left ear is a non-starter for me. Mono/lo-fi is totally fine, but this is just painful to listen to. The rest of the track has some great bones, but the frequency spectrum does not feel like it's filled out properly in the low end, like the bass is an octave up from where it should be. All of the core components sound very good and appropriate for the genre but those two aspects are immediately putting me off here. There are other nitpicks to be had, and I think Brad did a good job covering them, but the frequency balance and (especially) the left-ear panning is enough to sink this sadly :( NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 Pretty lo-fi in terms of the overall sound, and I wish the core beat was more sophisticated with the writing, but it's getting it done, and I respect the approach. Hahahaha, OK, shizzle went kafrizzle and now the track's just in the left channel from 1:30-2:05. You know what, I thought I'd be more annoyed by this based on the other Js reactions, but, even though I wouldn't mind that segment to be briefer, I'll live, and I actually like the overall tone of the track changing, which was actually a very nice touch along with the hiss. It's like the tape got messed up, and was pulled off nicely. In fact, I'm actually more annoyed that the track's energy seemed so reserved once that left-channel-only gimmick ended at 2:05. At 2:05, the soundscape's pretty muddy and busy, but the core beats still feel the same as what we heard in the beginning, so the track's overall progression feels flat, which is undermining the attempt at dynamic contrast, even when things got denser at 2:39. If there's a way to update/vary the core beat pattern at the heart of this without compromising the vision, I'd love that. I may be overstating the issue, because there's other creative writing going on in that final minute, but when you listen to this, the creativity of that final section's undermined not only by the core beat coasting but by the mixing being cluttered. Again, I could argue with Mike that it's a feature, not a bug, but it wasn't that to me. In any case, I'm gonna stay open-minded. This isn't ideal, but this is very nicely transformative and the hard panning gimmick was actually creative and well done. Nah, we ride. YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MindWanderer Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 I try to be open-minded about Hudak pieces, but I was reminded in another vote that we need to be careful to judge all submissions on their own merits, not taking the artist under consideration. In that light, the mono-left section is a dealbreaker, but it's not the only thing that concerns me here. If you're going to use a retro FM synth palette, you need to be firing on all cylinders to create something either novel or period-appropriate, and I feel like this falls short. It's promising up through 0:41, but then it starts to ramble, with leads and harmonies that don't match up, and leads that are sometimes buried. 2:05 and onward has this problem as well, with leads and accompaniment that often don't play well together. The breakdown at 1:09-1:30 doesn't work for me, either. It's lengthy, minimal, bland, and doesn't seem to serve a structural purpose. There are a lot of really cool ideas here, as I expect from Michael. The general idea, of an energetic synthwave take on these sources, is sound. When everything is firing on all its '80s-inspired cylinders, it sounds great. When it gets noodly or experimental, it sounds less great. I don't think the creative structure was an experiment that worked well; even if that mono section were shifted to center, I think Brad's and Larry's criticisms about energy and pacing were dead on, and I'm not sure if the dissonance I'm hearing is a result of "detuning" or just mismatched part-writing. I'd want both of those matters to be addressed if we see a revision of this back on the panel. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimpazilla Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 This arrangement feels completely different from every other Michael Hudak piece I have heard, and perhaps the age of the original submission has something to do with that. I certainly was not expecting synthwave! I actually really dig the left-panned tape-fail section; what a cool idea, and I think it was executed well enough although I think center panning would have been a better choice. I can see how it isn't everyone's cup of tea, but I like it a lot. I do agree with Larry though that the energy of the section that follows is somehow lacking, and I also feel the transition out of that tape-glitch section could have been more impactful with some filter automation (moving from mono to stereo) and/or sfx, swooshes or similar. I would say if this doesn't pass, at the very least shift that mono section to center-panning, and I think it will be more palatable to more people. For me though, the rest of the arrangement and soundscape fall short. The synths sound very plain, mixing is not quite muddy but indistinct, and the writing is noodley and often uninspired. The lead at 0:41 is quite bland and the writing is not too interesting. Meanwhile, the bass is playing a fast line and it somehow doesn't jibe energetically with the rest of the sound palette. (and Emu is right that the bass patch doesn't really carry the low end, in fact quite often the pads seem to be trying to do the bass's job in the lows) Actually I think that the overall energy and cohesion of the piece could be improved by sidechaining every element in varying amounts to get everything grooving together. The ending is rather abrupt... not a dealbreaker per se, but disappointing. I'm sort of borderline because this piece has many good qualities, but for me the mismatch of energy in the part-writing combined with some pretty vanilla sounds and disjointed/noodley writing is enough to put this under the OCR bar. It feels almost like a B-side track on an 80s 45RPM record that doesn't quite engage the audience. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts