*NO* Sonic & Knuckles "High Voltage" *RESUB*

[Liontamer ⚖️]

Original Decision
RESUB 1

Artist Name: Seth Skoda

Based on an online argument about genres not making a difference. I previously turned Death Egg Zone's music (also from Sonic & Knuckles) into a trap-ish beat just to prove the point, and it got a lot of attention. So... I started going in on other tunes. I zeroed in on Flying Battery Zone a little more, as that's my favorite tune from the game. Found the good future remix on VGmusic.com, thought it would be cool to include a little bit of it in my mix. The section starting at 1:22 and ending at 1:49 contains the counter melody and 8 bars of the backing from the good future remix. I hope this isn't a deal breaker, as it's otherwise my own derivative work.

Was gonna mostly go EDM with some synthwave, but then I messed around with some 808 bass and it turned into much of the same modern hip-hop sound that I was using at the time. This final mix shows a little bit more of the original intent than previous mixdowns with the 80s drums and synths running alongside the more modern 808 kicks and hihats. I am very satisfied with how this turned out, and I hope it finds its way into many playlists of Sonic Music/VGM remixes.

All that being said about the mix itself, I discovered this website in the mid 2000s and knew that one day I'd have what it takes to get a posted ReMix of my own on this site. This is my third time trying to get High Voltage posted; hopefully it's the charm.

---

Games & Sources

Sonic & Knuckles - Flying Battery Zone Act 2

Composer: Howard Drossin

Edited 5 hours ago by Liontamer
closed decision

[XPRTNovice ⚖️]

You know, when the track first started, I was like "this is going to kill me with loudness" and then when the first drop happened, I got this really pleasant bed of sound that was well-mixed, and yes, full, but not overbearing. I wasn't around for the first submissions here, but it's clear you put in a lot of work, so good job there.

That being said, I don't think it's good to have me think that I'm about to get killed for the first 25 seconds, so I would say it's a good idea to take the claps and hats and bring them way back. Let the arps - the more interesting part of the mix - do the work in that part, so that I'm not bracing myself for a storm that never comes. 

I'm not loving the snare choice at 0:57 and it's borderline mixbreaking. If it were me, I'd push that back in the mix and take some of the verb off, because by 1:20 I was REALLY tired of hearing it. I could only hear the snare. There is no song, only snare. By 1:53 I was really grateful we went back to the other snare. Even that snare could come back a touch, but it's not nearly as egregious as the one that comes in at 0:57.  During that section, I might take down that 808 as well. Again, the more interesting parts of the song are the great coutnermelodies and arps you've got going on. But with that 808 on bottom I kind of feel like I pulled up next to someone I  hate at a stoplight. 

And then god damn it the snare came back at 2:22. At this point I am starting to say yes, this is mixbreaking, and I have to NO the track just based on the fact that it's all I hear for about 50% of the piece. 

Arrangement wise, I think it's a fun take on the source and it is mixed well in almost every other way, except that snare, the boomy bass 808, and the claps. 

 

NO (Please resubmit)

[prophetik music ⚖️]

i voted on this way back in 2022, and primarily had issues with a bunch of notes that were crunchy. tbh i don't remember it much.

opens with some stutter synths and pads, and we get some percs to help it build in. the bass hits at 0:27, and i agree with joe - it sounds nice. the smooth lead is a fun feel, and there's a quirky repeated note in the background that's doing fun stuff. i wouldn't mind if the bass tone was a bit more sustained. the snare at 0:55 is indeed a bit big, but tbh i think it actually needs more reverb, not less (and make it quieter, yes) so it feels more sustained alongside all these other verby synths.

the melodic material there is the first that we've heard, and it's fairly straightforward. there's a continued reliance on viio chords as outlined in the ascending skip section of the melody, and it still doesn't sound right. this is something i called out in my last review of the track - i'll try and spell it out more carefully here.  the chord at 0:58.5 is a G# fully diminished (G# B D F, also called G#o or vii o in this key), and the bass playing something that sounds like an E. the detuning on the bass might be causing this, but overall, the real issue is that you're putting an E in the bass next to an F in the chord. you should probably just make this an E7 (E in bass, and E G# B D above it), and let the F in the melody be a passing tone (or move it around so it fits). this is an issue every time it comes around.

after the melodic section, we get some ascending patterns around 1:22 in the lead. this is a lot of the same lead tone in a row, and may have been better served with a different tone here. and then, at 1:36, you use the same lead tone to do some fanfares (but lower than the other ascending line). this is nearly impossible to distinguish and just sounds overlapping and confusing. the following section at 1:50 is, in contrast, a nice change due to the new lead and feel there. i think you could have moved away from the echoed, gated, chippy backing synth as well, to help reinforce the difference.

there's a fun little break, and at 2:18 we're into a new feel. again, the issue of the G# dim is back, and it's worse here. every time that chord comes around, it sounds like there's obvious dissonance. that needs to be fixed before anything could be posted.

there's a short outro section in ep, and it's done. it's a little sudden, and maybe could have been prepped or fleshed out a bit more.

this is a fun track, and i like the feel. the dissonance is still an issue and this cannot pass with it in there. i'd be happy to help you identify and fix it if you'd like - i suspect it's an easy thing to find. beyond that, the layering at 1:36 needs to be shifted around so it's able to be differentiated - probably by moving one of the parts to a different instrument. i think that snare could use some love too - i didn't mind it near as much as joe, but it does need a more natural reverb tail on it (and to be turned down) so it fits into the instrumentation better. i don't think there's an issue with the 808, as that's endemic to the style. i do agree with joe that the arrangement overall is fun and enjoyable, we just need to fix a few things and then it's ready for primetime.

 

 

NO

[Liontamer ⚖️]

I've never heard the previous two versions, so I'm visiting this sub with fresh ears. I also voted on the revised version Seth included in his comments after he said he noticed the mixing was wrong.

Opens up with a rise in volume of a pad, followed by some basic synths and claps at :13. The theme arrives at :25 and there's some decent density to start. The theme's there, but this is texturally scant despite all this volume. Volume doesn't equal fullness in terms of the writing; right now, the beats sound really barebones.

Hits the chorus at :55 and there's countermelodic supporting writing until 1:22 that sounds off-key, though it's relatively quiet. The melody's quietly brought in from 1:36-1:47 in a way that also sounds sluggish and off-key, like it's being chorused or delayed; not sure what's going on there. Once it hit the chorus from :54-1:22, the interpretation of the source melody itself felt very minimal and straightforward. This combination of sounds doesn't make sense when the percussion, beats, and bass are so minimalist and basic, yet it's surrounded by this busy-sounding yet off-key ornamentation underneath the melody.

1:49 transitions into what's seemingly an all-original composition section where the volume's loud while the texture feels very basic. More off-key supporting writing underneath the melody from 2:18-2:46 that sounds pretty bad on headphones but might not stand out as much on monitors; this writing sounds like it's meant to be doubling the lead, but it sounds clashing the whole way through. I grew up on this theme, but I'm sorry if I'm not recognizing something taken directly from the theme from 1:49-2:18; I couldn't make out any connection. From 2:18-on, I don't recognize that stuff from the source tune either, but it's possible it's taken from some sort of quitter supporting writing in the source or I'm just ignorant in recognizing some sort of interpretation.

The source melody could bear more interpretation and/or variation, the beat-writing is too simplistic, the beats do have some weight to the sound, yet they don't fill the soundscape enough to not let the overall track seem thin, and the densest section are filled with off-key writing adding noise instead of substance. The less dense sections work better on account of the lack of clashing background writing and are, arguably, the track's best feature, yet those sections *still* feel texturally empty, so it's a tough approach to get this to a place where it could rise above the bar here.

(I see you in the community, so the links are more for posterity and for others who may see this feedback and want to take part). That said, Seth, Audiomancer tried 10 separate times with one track before his debut mixpost, so if you have the sticktuitiveness to regularly use the community resources on the Workshop forums and on the Discord server for more feedback and guidance, maybe you can be another success story.

NO