*NO* Dragon Warrior 2 "Epic FootSteps" *RESUB*

[prophetik music]

all five previous submissions
most recent rejection

It has been some time since I have taken a crack at this track. This one is a brand new project, and I tried to use some of what I learned on my Twisted Systerz submission. It's the first walkabout theme from Dragon Warrior 2. I give thanks for the time and consideration ahead of time:)

---

Games & Sources

 

Edited 17 hours ago by paradiddlesjosh

[prophetik music]

if this is a brand-new project, i don't know if it counts as a resubmission.

opens with some organ outlining the chords and the opening melodic line. there's a stutter synth here that doesn't really fit the organ and voices, but then an edm beat comes in so it makes more sense. beat feels pretty cluttered - the snare has a lot of low content, kick feels unfocused, there's several low synths in this section, and the fills feel like they're layered on top instead of being different things the drums are doing.

0:27 has the melodic content come in for the first time in full. i really don't care for this lead as it's very occluded and hard to hear what it's doing.  i do like the call and response concept that's going on there though! there's a break right after this for a bit, and then we get a new lead at 0:55. and then another new synth bass at 1:09, and another new lead at 1:23! it's a lot of change in a short period of time. it's ok to lean on one tone to help to tie sections together - this feels a little too bouncy between ideas (although i like the ascending arp a lot, and the 404 bassline that's right after it). there also continues to be a lot of drum fills that are complex and dense, and a little less there might be ok - a few well-timed tom hits are better than the same complex fill over and over.

there's a break at 1:47 - and then a bigger break at 2:02, with some sound design on the transition. this goes into an outro that repeats the opening idea, and it's done.

after hearing it, i'm remembering this one from when i voted on it in 2022 (and several times before). i think you've got a lot better overall sound quality than you did last submission! i'd like to see more cohesiveness from section to section, a few of the more complex leads reined in, and a lot more work on the drums - less of the same big complex fills and more intentionality about what it's doing.

 

 

NO

[Liontamer]

Very mechanical organ sequencing to open it up. Moved over into some dense beats at :11. The synth design's pretty vanilla, but we'll see where it goes.

Oh man, the lead at :27 is pretty brutal; too loud and the warbling like-effects on the lead are arguably obnoxious. A decent changeup at :43, but the balance of the parts doesn't make sense; leads were so bright. Very ugly, sluggish-sounding synths at :57 and the beats behind them are pretty plain, followed by a very awkward transition into some more generic synths around 1:08. At 1:23, the louder part of the doubled melody's OK in principle, but sounds like it has too much high end volume, so it's also not pleasant to listen to.

Better stuff to an extent from 1:22-1:33, but the part-writing still sound very stilted and robotic. Cool transition at 2:01, though going back to the opening organ at 2:09 was a mistake given how behind the beat the attacks were.

Right now, the sound design's very unsophisticated, but at least the efforts there to texturally expand on and broaden the energy of the source. It still needs a ton of TLC, though Audiomancer did eventually get his other Dragon Warrior arrangement passed after 8 or 9 tries, so the possibility is absolutely there to refine and retool this into a success, even if it takes numerous tries to get there. Keep at it!

NO

[Chimpazilla]

I voted on this in 2022 so I'll use that vote as reference, even though this is a new file.  I give you a lot of credit for being this persistent in your resubmissions!  I still think this is a cute and well-crafted arrangement, but the sounds and mixing still aren't getting it done.

I said in my previous vote that the soundscape sounded "dated" rather than nostalgic, and I still feel that way, although I feel like it has more to do with the writing than the sounds themselves.  These sounds come off as very plain and vanilla, and the simple gridlocked writing does not help.  The sequencing of everything sounds stiff and forced.

The organ in the intro does not go with the rest of the soundscape at all so it sticks out.  The volume has been lowered since last time but it still does not sound right.

I agree with Larry about the lead at 0:27, it is not a pleasant sound for a lead, it is bland and low-midrangey and it is doing a phasey thing that sounds comical rather than cool.  This lead sound just brings the vibe down rather than up. That little section of lead would be completely improved with a beautiful glassy synth or delayed pluck playing that motif instead.  I agree with proph that the call and response in that section is very nice.

At 0:42, with no transition or signaling, we are into a drumless breakdown, but the bubbly backing synth sounds weird to me, although I appreciate that it has some filter movement on it.  The lead pluck sounds very plain and uninspiring here, and the countermelodic patch is very sharp sounding.  The instruments in this section do not work well with each other in my opinion.

The layered lead at 0:57 has a similar problem.  I think I hear at least three patches playing the motif there, and those patches do not compliment each other well.  The whole thing together sounds boxy and heavy with low-mids.  A layered lead needs to sound like one patch.  I recommend choosing patches that sound more similar to each other, and definitely something with fewer low-mid frequencies; something prettier like a glassy legato saw patch.

From 1:08-1:23, the bassline sounds very bland and simple.  The sound itself is not terrible, but it is missing something.  I honestly think that if there was any sidechaining in this mix (I still don't hear any, anywhere), if the kick was sidechained to this bassline and I could hear it ducking the bass, this little section would sound cool, but as it stands now that section lacks any kind of groove for me.   The bass here sounds almost off-timed with the drums, but I am not completely sure.

I really like the arp that begins at 1:15.  That's a good sounding patch.  I wish it would do something interesting though.  That would be a fun sound to experiment with automated filtering or panning (NOT too much, keep it subtle) or other kinds of effects.  

At 1:23 the faux-trumpet lead is yet another sound that isn't well suited to play a lead line.  It just doesn't sound sophisticated or modern, it has a ton of low-mids, and the filtered attack gives it a quacky sound that detracts from the more serious nature of the writing and the rest of the instrumentation.  This trumpety synth is paired with a tiny glassy bell which sounds great but again the two sounds are so dissimilar and they don't compliment each other well at all, it does not sound cohesive in any way.

At 1:47, that's the best lead sound I hear in the entire mix.  I would love to hear some filter movement on it, that would be super nice. 

At 2:01 going into the outro, there's a filtered bass patch that sounds amazing.  I want more of that kind of thing throughout the arrangement!  Then the organ and choir return for a complete set of organ/choir bookends.  I'm not a fan of the organ, choir sounds workable though.

The drums throughout the arrangement are mostly on autopilot other than the fills, so the drum groove becomes repetitive as the piece moves along.  

This arrangement could use some stronger transitional elements to prepare the listener for all the shifts in energy throughout the piece.  The drum fills are good for this, but there are many other options for transitions to really stitch the piece together and give it nice flow.  Some of the sections have no transition at all.  Other than that though, I actually think the arrangement itself is pretty great, it has good energy control and arrangement dynamics.  One thing I really like about this arrangement is that care has been taken to change the instrumentation as the piece moves along; no one element outstays its welcome and that is a very good thing!

I admire how tenacious you have been while working on this over a long timespan.  I still think this arrangement is workable, but it needs to sound more cohesive, more modern and more sophisticated.  It just takes time to learn what sounds good and how to make that happen.

NO

 

Edited February 3 by Chimpazilla

[Emunator]

^ what she said 😆

Seriously though, I recall giving some very in-depth feedback on earlier versions of this track, and I am happy to say that this feels much further along in terms of personality and production quality than what I remember! The pace may be slow, but you're almost always moving in the right direction, and I admire the tenacity.

I'll address just a few of the most prominent things that I heard to try and give some actionable advice, since others have done a good job giving a comprehensive overview of the song and what needs to happen with it.

I actually like the idea of the church organ and the choir in isolation, but there's nothing pinning it to the rest of the song, so it feels tacked on. The jarring transition into the beef of the arrangement makes this intro feel detached, and when it returns at 2:10, the fade-in feels similarly unnatural. I think the idea can totally work, but the intro doesn't have enough time to develop. What I might try is actually extending the length of your intro, and starting with just the choir and organ and then fading your synth arpeggio in gradually over the next few bars before dropping into the EDM section. This can give each of those musical ideas some space to signal the upcoming transitional change to an electronic palette, without throwing too many brand-new ideas at the listener all at once.

Chimpazilla did a great job addressing the lead synths so I'm just going to agree 100% with her critique there on what you got right and what needs work.

1:10-1:15 has some squelchy synths that are mixed very loud and sharp, almost like they're clipping unintentionally. Bring those down in volume. The backing synth plucks at 1:48-2:03 cause a similar problem - they are just as loud as everything else in the soundscape, but are clearly not intended to be the main point of focus, but because of how they're mixed, my ear can't help but focus on them. The hi-hat is also very loud and panned off to the right side - it's not playing a very exciting rhythm (not that it needs to be) but the mixing makes it hard to pay attention to anything else. This leaves me feeling everything feels like it's demanding my attention, and as the old adage goes... if everything is urgent, then nothing is.

I'll highlight a few things that I liked about this to point out areas where I think you're on the right track. The filter sweep synths and rolling bassline from :13-:28 was great at establishing tension. I love the variety of sounds you used in here, it shows that you're experimenting to create a unique palette of instruments that has something original to offer. Overall, the use of filter sweeps makes the mix feel kinetic and engaging, there's never any points where you're dragging on the same ideas without any variation. I think you could probably stand to develop some of the ideas further and give them room to breathe before moving onto your next idea, but a short, punchy arrangement is definitely preferable to one that drags on too long.

I don't feel that this arrangement comes together cohesively yet, but I certainly feel more of your artistic voice here compared to earlier versions, and the execution is leveling up slowly but surely too. This can definitely get there!

NO (resubmit)

[jnWake]

I'm a new judge so I haven't been here for the previous versions, which means I come with 100% fresh ears!

This starts with some choirs and a church organ doing the main melody of the source before we get a quick drum transition into a more electronic vibe at 0:13. Around 0:28 a new melody enters, which as far as I can tell doesn’t come from the source even if it’s similar in style. At 0:42 we get the B melody from the source on electric piano while a synth bass follows the original’s chord progression. We then get a reprise of the intro before another electronic break around 1:08. Around 1:23 a synth plays the A melody again and then some sort of synth solo follows. 1:47 has a breakdown similar to 0:42, changing the lead to a synth now. We get another intro reprise for the end, closing with the D major/minor progression from the source.

On the production side I have some mixed opinions, I think you did a pretty good job with some of the basses and pads, especially when you added extra effects to make them feel more alive. However, the same isn't true for other elements like leads, which are often very basic sounding. Percussion I'm mixed on as well, kick is somewhat punchy but the snare doesn't really cut through the mix well. Drum writing is generally very basic (mostly kick on 1 and 3, snare on 2 and 4), but I did like the fills you added every once in a while.

On the arrangement side I'm not sold at all. There's no issues with source usage, as it's evidently there for most of the track. My issues are with the structure of the arrangement, as it constantly shifts between energetic parts and breaks, never truly building up to anything. Similarly, it constantly shifts between sections A and B from the source but never truly expands on any of them. As a result, it feels like a collection of reinterpretations of said sections more than a song that flows between different parts.

Overall, I think this needs work on both production and arrangement fronts. On production, focus on sound design of the less sophisticated parts, they could really use a level up. On arrangement, try to imagine the song having a clearer direction instead of simply moving between A/B melodies/moods. It'll end up sounding more cohesive, which is its main flaw.

NO

[paradiddlesjosh]

Howdy, Audiomancer! I’m another new judge, so like jnWake, I’m giving this one a first listen. The other Js have brought up a number of arrangement and mix issues previously, so I’m more or less co-signing on those here. Drums are a specialty of mine, so I do have some notes to add.

One additional thing I’d like to note about the organ in the intro is that it sounds like its stereo image was artificially widened. It sounds okay in headphones, but strange in speakers and studio monitors. If you’ve modified the stereo width on the organ, I recommend backing that off about 25-30% – too much artificial width can create issues with mono compatibility through comb filtering and phase cancellation.

The closed hi-hat that plays on the beat for the drum groove starting at 0:11 is too loud relative to the rest of the kit; lower velocities on these hi-hat hits plus bus compression on your drums will create a sense that your drums are making up one combined instrument instead of disparate parts or samples.

We get the B-section melody at 0:43 on the electric piano. The countermelody synth is too shrill here. Recap of the A section at 0:57 on the organ, it seems to fit better in the mix here.

Break down to drums and bass at 1:08; the new drum pattern is a nice touch here – if the hi-hat pattern were to change as well, this would sell the shift even better. The ascending arp at 1:15 is nice; not sure why the drums switched back to the first pattern here, though, because they continue with the new pattern at 1:23 with another recap of the A-section melody. Committing to the bit would greatly benefit this new section. Also, Chimpazilla’s on the money about the relationship between the kick and the bass in this section; this is a prime opportunity to add some sidechain compression if you haven’t already done so, or get more aggressive with it if you have.

Drums exit at 1:47 for a B-section recap. As before, the countermelody synth here is harsh at the top end. We get an 808-like drop and slowdown at 2:01 into a false ending; organ and pads come back at 2:10 to recap the A section one more time for a bookend finish. It sounds like a synth plays an extraneous note at 2:21, and then it’s done. The extra A section at the very end feels like copy-paste.

I’m going to sound like a curmudgeon here: the nine drum fills you’ve used (at 0:11, 0:25, 0:40, 0:55, 1:06, 1:14, 1:21, 1:32, and 1:45) all sound nearly identical. They’re all built on a similar foundational rhythm and they all take up a bar of time each. It’s a great fill idea but, overused as it is, it compromises the melodic and harmonic changes you’ve orchestrated for the different sections. They also highlight how static the drum writing is overall, with two grooves over the runtime.

I’m also hearing mix issues in the lows and low-mids. The bass seems to dominate between 100-350 Hz, which buries the fundamental of the snare. Additionally, the bass and kick sound out of tune with each other, muddying the overall sound.

For how short the source material is, you’ve managed to get some good mileage out of it here! At this stage, the lack of drum fill variety and the mix issues are significant enough setbacks that I would like to see them corrected before this one’s ready for the front page. If you haven’t already, I’d recommend taking this one over to the #workshop channel on the OCR Discord server for some ideas if you get stuck. I’d love to hear this one again when it’s ready!
NO (resubmit)