*NO* River City Ransom "$3.50 x 2"

[Liontamer ⚖️]

Artist Name: 8055 LEVEL

Since I was a kid, I always wanted to hear a more aggressive dance version of the music from the encounter with Benny and Clyde in River City Ransom. That music always got me pumped up and made me want to shake my ass. I tried to lean into that feeling when writing $3.50 x 2...

I avoided using too many SFX from the game in my remix, or doing a whole lot of post-production to tweak effects, with the exception of the coin sounds at the end. Otherwise, this was all produced on my Yahama RM1x. Hope you like it!

---

Games & Sources

River City Ransom on NES. 

Edited 4 hours ago by Hemophiliac
closed vote

[prophetik music ⚖️]

fade in to start, with some pretty dull drums and big buzzy synths. the statement that this was made on a groovebox tracks (no pun intended) - the late 90s sound is right there. the whistly synth was a bit too high-pitched for me, it bothered my ears a bit. this trucks through the A theme and hits the B theme at 0:55 - on the downbeats, no less, which is a refreshing change from the original's slightly off-beat start. there's some noodling around the descending pattern that changes over time with the synths chosen, and then shifts to a bit of a chippy approach at 1:43 for a bit. the same fill keeps getting used for every transition, which is noticeable earlier but really starts to be obvious here.

there's a whistle effect that comes in at 1:52, and it persists for more than a few bars and really becomes irritating after a while. there's some more build-up from the earlier drop and then it gets back to a similar vibe as the earlier representations of the A section. this feels pretty repetitive at this point, and there's still another minute left - this definitely needed a significant shift to feel different by this point, or else something else to really mix it up. one or two more repeated patterns from earlier as part of an outro, as well as a few sfx, and a fade-out finishes it off (but not before the last pattern cuts off, so we hear it just kinda end).

i love the idea of a more beat-centric, energetic take on this theme! and honestly you did some fun stuff with this old hardware (it being >25 years old is nuts though). but what's here is just too repetitive even if the beat had more oomph to it. i think this needs at least a minute of repetition cut out, and some more transformative arrangement concepts brought in (at least to the second half) so it's not the same descending pattern being hammered over and over with the same fill in between sections for >4 minutes. separately, the drums really lack oomph - so maybe exporting from the RM1x and doing the drums and the mix separately would help. right now, this isn't there, but you've got some fun ideas!

 

 

NO

[jnWake ⚖️]

Certainly a fun idea doing a remix fully on a Yamaha RM1x!

Begins with a fadeout straight into the source's intro. You use a standard beat here rather than whatever the percussion is doing on the original. That said, the drums sound quite dull with almost no punch and their writing isn't particularly varied (there's a snare fill you use A LOT during the track). Source usage is super conservative, with the remix following the original's structure with no variations until the break at 1:40. On the section around 0:55 I hear some artifacts on the track, almost as if it was clipping. Break around 1:40 is very appreciated as something fresh but then at 1:54 you bring a very high pitched sound that's honestly very annoying to hear... and it plays for a loooong time. There's some cool ideas and variations on this section but they're almost drowned by that one annoying sound. After this the arrangemet basically repeats itself and then on the end it noodles over the main riff.

On arrangement this needs more work to fit OCR's standards. Outside of the section starting at 1:40 the entire remix is basically doing the source 1:1 with a different percussion. Besides from that the arrangement is extremely repetitive, overusing the main motifs of the source. As prophetik said, there's definitely space to either change up how you use the original's riffs or to simply cut the length.

On production the track shows the limitations of the way it was made. Sounds are dated, most synths are very simple and unexciting. Drums lack punch and the writing doesn't help, repeating the same beats and fills for most of the track. There's some synth samples that are extremely heavy on high frequencies and get very grating, like the arpeggios on the main riff and the annoying sample at 1:54.

Overall, this isn't near the bar for OCR yet. There's fun ideas here, especially on the 1:40 section, but both arrangement and production need refinement.

NO

Edited yesterday at 05:13 AM by jnWake

[Hemophiliac ⚖️]

There's an energy here for sure, but there's many issues.

This is a highly conservative arrangement. Outside of the percussion it's nearly identical to the original source. This is also repetitive to the point that it honestly gets tiresome before we even get to the 2 minute mark. The original isn't very long before it fully loops too (~50 seconds). I would suggest to add some of your own interpretation or change-up some elements from the source. Not only will that help with the repetition but it will add one of the biggest missing elements from this piece: your own unique interpretation and ideas.

Having a drop at 1:40 was a good idea, but it's still just playing the same thing, just with less parts. The texture and dynamic contrast is good, but we need some new ideas! Consider adding more textural shifts later into the track or cut repeats to reduce the repetitiveness.

The drums don't have much punch to them and honestly feel over compressed.

In terms of sound design much of the synths are very plain and vanilla. They could be much more sophisticated and interesting sounding. I don't like to say anything straight up doesn't sound good, but the whistle that enters at 1:53 is unpleasant. Not only does it stand out, but it lasts a long while, it just keeps going and takes a while before we get a break from it.

I like the energy you're trying to bring, but there's simply too many problems as is.

NO