*NO* Tekken 2 "Devil Kazuya (Seveneyes Mix)"

[Liontamer]

Would need a unique title if approved -LT

Artist Name: Seveneyes

I'm a big fighting game fan, so a lot of my musical choices are based on them.  This theme from TEKKEN 2 has always been a favorite!!

I joined the server in late August because it's a goal of mine to compose music for games.  The sages have definitely helped me a lot and everyone has been very welcoming.  I've sat in on the Office Hours sessions where they will review tracks and thats become one of my favorite times of the week.  I was inspired to at least TRY a remix, since that's what this collection of producers is all about. I'm grateful to contribute in any way I can.  Thanks for all the hard work guys!!

---

Games & Sources

Hello!  Here is my first remix submission.  The source track is from Tekken 2, and here is a link to the original work - 

 

Edited December 29, 2024 by Hemophiliac

[prophetik music]

not much to hang your hat on in the original.

opens with very similar synths and sweeps, and a bigger tom sample. i'm pretty sure this is original audio with better drums on it and a vox clip. there's the first big hit at 0:23 - there's a lot of neat percussive elements brought in, and i think the vocal clip works well in here too. the detuned horn noise threw me off a bit but i see what you're going for.

first big band section is at 1:08 with a huge bass synth. this is a cool-sounding section but i don't really get a link to the source in it, it's more original. this goes through various iterations and sounds really fun, just no source.

2:17 is where i expected the melody to be referenced, but instead it's the string break from 1:07 in the original. it's expanded a bit, but then we do get the main melody at 2:39 when it changes up. there's a break/falling action that starts at 3:25 and transitions to a double-time section at 3:49 - this is again a great vibe, there's just no source for most of the time. this trucks through for a while and then fades out, kind of a lame ending. i'd have loved to see a lower-energy recap with melodic material here given how little you used of it.

this is a fun track with good dynamics and a great vibe throughout. there's some general songwriting missteps - i don't think the first 20s contributes anything, and the track takes a minute to get going - but once it's going it's a compelling, interesting track. it sounds good, you've got interesting synths doing interesting stuff, and the master's fairly clear. but there's, like, no source in it =( i tracked roughly a minute and a half of source in a five plus minute track (i am not counting the opening 20s which sound to me like the original audio). if i'm not missing anything, that's nowhere near enough source. the original's tom pattern is something i'd consider counting as well but that wasn't used at all to my ears - not in the intro or in the big band sections. this feels more like you made a banger and then layered some tekken on one section.

so this is a bummer =( but there needs to be more to tie it back to the original.

 

 

NO

[Liontamer]

Opens up pretty conservatively (definitely sounds like the source audio itself being sampled), and then some vox lines are the main additive component. The soundscape has good energy, though the sounds around :23, :34, :39, and :45 sounded lossy or distorted somehow, kind of a low quality feel to it, like it was a low bitrate encoding. No connection to the source that I can make out.

Anyway, more good energy at 1:08 with the beats coming in; the pattern is mixed in a way that prevents it from being easily and immediately identified, but it's the "1-2-3 4, 1-2-3 4, 1-2-3" timing/pattern taken right from :00-:55 of the source. The electrosynth lead stuff is just so much louder by comparison though, so it's being drowned out; the mixing makes it a viable criticism to say it's not a "dominant" enough referencing of the source material relative to our submissions standards, so I would make that component louder.

By 2:05, I was wondering where this would evolve into something else because the build felt overlong; not a dealbreaker, just a personal preference thing, as this feels like a well-constructed piece of music. Beats dropped off at 2:16 for a more synth-focused section until the beats returned at 2:39, where the lead feels like it lacks high-end sharpness, not that that would be a dealbreaker. Good transition at 3:25. From 3:25-on, I wasn't recognizing anything arranging the source, though this was good original writing, arranging/interpreting past original compositional ideas Seveneyes included.

As far as source tune usage, this was hard to wrap my head around, so I could be undercounting this by a lot and am happy to be corrected. The track was 5:32-long, so I needed to be able to identify source usage for at least 166 seconds. I didn't count the direct audio sampling of the source from the first 20 seconds because that wasn't arrangement, just an FYI.

1:08-1:29, 1:31-1:52 (beat pattern, :00-:55 of source); 1:54-2:15 (barely audible beat pattern), 2:17-2:28 (:06-:11 of source, two notes repeated twice), 2:39-3:25 (:31-:55 of source, with beat pattern from :00 of source underneath until 3:02) = 120 seconds or 36.14% overt source usage

Alright, let's summarize. As a standalone track, well-developed compositionally, good dynamics, creative sound design. You're already got something here that easily clears the production bar here. IMO, the mixing could stand to be cleaner/brighter; maybe it's a stylistic thing, but there's a lack of high-end clarity that makes it not ideal, just nothing that would make me be close to saying NO on a production level. I agreed with prophetik on not needing the sampled intro, but as long as the track arranged the source tune in a dominant and identifiable way, I wouldn't care about a few moments of the directly sampled audio being in there.

Our Submissions Standards say "The source material must be identifiable and dominant", so I look for arranged source material to make up over 50% of the length of the arrangement. If we're missing something on the arrangement side, definitely clarify with timestamps how section A in the original is referenced in section B of the arrangement, and I'd be glad to revisit this. As best as I can make out though, this doesn't reference the source tune enough in the arrangement. Of course, don't change the track into something you don't want it to be just to fit the Standards here. What's there is strong though, so if you'd be willing to revisit this, there's plenty of ways to get this above 50% source usage. Hope to hear more from you, there's definitely a spot waiting for you on the front page, Alex!

NO (resubmit)

[Hemophiliac]

I really want to rubberstamp this so you can get your feedback and move-on, because both Liontamer and prophetik nailed it already. Alex, you have great production chops and it'll only be a matter of time before you figure it all out and get something passed. It's been nice to see you join the community and be involved in the workshop as well as helping out others 

As far as this Tekken track goes, unfortunately there's not enough source usage to consider this identifiable and dominant. At times the beat does feel inspired by the beat from the source, but that alone does not really hold strength when there are other elements that are not used or are recognizable. Right now, this is more of an original piece of music...though, it's an awesome original piece. Extremely well produced and awesome to listen to. You absolutely used every single piece of headroom this had available and keeps the limiter busy and this is impressively loud.

One thing that I really liked and wanted to point out was the transition at 1:53, great use of triplet gating. That sudden use of off-time rhythm really is effective when everything was so straight previously.

To summarize, great production chops but I can't pass this because there's not enough source material to get by.

NO