Emunator Posted August 30 Share Posted August 30 (edited) Artist Name: tibonev This was arranged for Pixel Mixers's Earthbound Album "PM Rocking", my idea behind the arrangement was to make it a fun, bouncy, clearly 80s inspired version, but implementing different elements, like clean electric guitars, distorted lead guitars, lots of synths (backing and bass, for instance), basically making something that on parts would be out of place in a club in europe in 1987, but also, sounding unique enough to be completely out of place in that same enviroment. The name means: "For Sale", because i always found it funny that you can buy a "for sale" sign in the town of Twoson, also, it ends up being a shallow reference to The Beatles, which influenced the original OST. Breakdown: 0:00-0:33 - slightly changed version of chord progression from source 0:41-1:22 - original source melody 1:22-1:30 - altered chord progression 1:30-2:02 - new arpeggios with different backing and variation bassline 2:02-2:11 - original source melody 2:12-2:26 - new guitar solo 2:26-2:42 - original melody 2:42-2:50 - altered chord progression from source 2:50-2:59 - new guitar 2:59-3:06 - original melody 3:06-3:31 - new arpeggios over the original chord progression 3:31-3:50 - slightly changed version of chord progression from source Edited December 11 by prophetik music Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophetik music Posted September 5 Share Posted September 5 (edited) this is hard cut at -1dba, which is kind of interesting. it clearly hits the limiter hard a lot. opens with some chord stabs and a nice open ringy pad. kick and bass come in at 0:16 and are a bit loud initially. this builds in an additive fashion until we get to the melodic content at 0:41. the melodic performance in the guitar and synth is intentionally a bit blocky, and i found the opening synth to be a bit bright compared to the guitar tone. the comping behind the synth melody is a little hard to hear and sounds a bit confusing on first and second listen - the rhythms there were tough to grok initially. i didn't like the change to the chord at 1:11 either, i don't think it fits as well as a borrowed V7/IV would have sounded. there's some fun flanging on the backing elements near the end of this and i liked that a lot. we get a short break at 1:21 that refers back to the opening. there's an lfo-panned arpeggio that kind of helps build into the next melodic representation at 2:00. i think this transition took a bit too long, but when it lands it feels good. the guitar solo at 2:11 starts with a very out-of-tune note but is fun with what it says after that. there's another build at 2:42, and the riding guitar pattern at 2:50 is fun but the chord didn't make sense to me (is it a G9 chord or something?). from there it's mostly descending action - one more trip through the melodic content, some drum work and ascending panning synth, and some outro synth chord stabs. from an arrangement standpoint, this one doesn't take a ton of chances but does a nice job translating the original pop-inspired structure into a similarly poppy vibe with the new instrumentation. i think there's a lot of repeated elements (the ascending arpeggio, the drums throughout are pretty basic, the melodic approach between the guitar and synth), and there's certainly a lot to nitpick that i heard. overall though this is a solid genre translation, handled with a sure touch. i think this is over the bar. YES edit 12/11: being the first one to vote most of the time means that occasionally my bar needs calibration. on a second listen after reading the other judge comments, i think i agree that there's more unintentional crunch than strictly needed, and i think i also agree that the backing elements do lack some quant. i get that it's earthbound and there's some uncanny valley/purposefully weird vibes around it, but i still think it'd be a more enjoyable track with a few changes. so i'll change my vote. NO Edited December 11 by prophetik music Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted September 23 Share Posted September 23 Opens up with a very similar tone to the original "Twoson", but then some sustained synths join in and then some 80s-sounding beats. Backing at :50 sounds off-key for a second, but no big deal. Loved the transition at 1:20 to just the melody, then some cool countermelodic wackiness over the top of it. Beats joined in at 1:53, then there was a different accentuating effect at 2:01 for a different sound. Not gonna play-by-play this, but I appreciated the different sound design and instrumentation changes for a constant paying around with the textures. Mixing felt cohesive the whole way through. Nice work, tibone! :-) YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexstyle Posted November 5 Share Posted November 5 Sour note alert at 0:51! And 0:54. And 1:06. And anywhere that chord progression is used. Watch those backing chords (sounds like rhythm guitar and/or backing pad/keys), make sure they're in key. That needs to be fixed before getting posted. The overall arrangement is...fine. It's very conservative, and the parts are played adequately for the most part. The drums could benefit from some more nuanced part writing, and the hi hats in particular feel a bit loud to me. Guitar lead tone is also harsh in some spots, particularly when higher notes are played. Bassline is very conservative and would benefit from some syncopation at least. None of these would be dealbreakers though if it weren't for the sour notes in the chord progression. NO (resub) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emunator Posted November 23 Author Share Posted November 23 Time to play the game of "are the sour notes actually sour or just some weird Earthbound shit?" Hmm, yeah I don't love that alteration to the chord progression, I can see why Flexstyle decided it was a hill worth dying on. Things get way too crunchy there. I also felt the first note of that guitar solo at 2:11 in my bones, and not in a good way. The rest of the solo was good, and offered some much-needed expressiveness to the song, but man, that was a jarring start. Aside from that, the lack of groove to the drums and bassline actually bothered me more than the rest of the judges. The hi-hats are incredibly sharp and in-your-face in the mix, and they're playing a VERY static rhythm so the first thing I notice about the song is how rigid it is. That ends up drawing my attention to the fact that the rest of the drum kit, the bassline, even most of the melodic synths, have the same issue. I know that, to a degree, this is a genre convention but there's a lot you can do with simple velocity/micro-timing adjustments or even delay/effects to add some of that rhythmic life back without having to actually change your part writing dramatically. I don't think this is a massive dealbreaker relative to the sour notes mentioned above, but it impacted my listening experience a lot more than the rest of the judges thus far. At the very least, if you're not going to adjust the drum programming, that hi-hat needs to come down in volume. Sorry, but I don't think this is there yet! NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimpazilla Posted November 23 Share Posted November 23 Those chords Flex pointed out are sour indeed. This is a very conservative arrangement, which is fine. But the rigid bassline, synth writing, and repetitive drums give this track a very plodding energy. The hats are sharp, loud, dry, and so stiffly sequenced that it becomes distracting. The synth starting at 0:48 and 2:25 sounds very vanilla and dry, and the writing is stiff and gridlocked. The lack of overall groove due to the stiff and simple bassline and drums bothers me the most I think, same as Flex and Emu. There are arrangement variations as the piece moves along but generally it sounds repetitive to me as the instrumentation never changes. Varying the lead instrument or backing elements or drum sounds/writing here and there would help to break up the repetition. I like this generally though, and the guitar work is very good. But it needs a bit more production love. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemophiliac Posted November 25 Share Posted November 25 In a macro sense, I think this arrangement was pretty good. It's just got the minor issues holding it back from being the complete package. For me the biggest offender and the reason why I can't give this a pass is the dissonances in the backing elements. 2:35 stands out to me the most with regards to dissonances, doesn't sound like an individual note here but a chord choice not fitting. Flexstyle also pointed out other timestamps that should be addressed as well. Hi hats also stand out in the mixdown, feel hotter than the leads to me. Guitar work was good and sits within the mix well, just check for dissonances in the chords. Also liked the subtle movement on the synth leads when they would occasionally pop-in. I know you're capable of revision in a manner that will address our concerns and keeps your idea intact. Please revisit this and send it back when you're ready. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts