OCR01624 - *YES* Sonic the Hedgehog 'Green Lane Avenue'

[Liontamer]

Nice track. But too liberal? Definitely one to analyze VERY closely. Will contact the artists for more information - LT

Hey again, routine drill:

Remixer Names: Tepid, AeroZ

Real Names: Philip Schwan, Sebastian Freijman

Email Address: phswan@gmail.com, sebastian_freij@hotmail.com

Website: meh and www.myspace.com/freijman

I'm ID'd now?: u=9600, u=12066

Game Remixed: Sonic the Hedgehog

VG Song: Green Hill Zone (one might think)

Comments: Well, a few ideas can go a long way. I had a little set of jazz chords on the piano which I matched to the Green Hill Zone theme. Soon after I had made a backing track and it escalated violently into a decent start to a mix. I knew after 'To Hot For Heatman' that Seb knew his Reason like Ray Charles knows his jazz, so I sent him the project file and he turned 2 minutes of ideas, into 5 neat organised minutes of mix.

The guitar .REX loops (as Reason users may know them by) were created from scratch by myself through Cubase and ReCycle, and that was a lot of fun, and even more so the ability to rearrange the slices at ease. Seb did the complex stuff, and added the 8bit flair, and phat drums, and many, many fine detailed edits.

Quoting from Seb: "I had so much bloody fun doing it. I was in a trance." His English, and knowledge of English expressions is far too good for a Swede...Also, I believe him to be the fastest Reason slinger in the North (of Europe), performing 978 controller changes in 2 hours. Fantastic.

Anyway enjoy

TO Edit: Further Explanation from Phil regarding the arrangement:

0:13 - source melody thoughout song, different chords, 1:06 another reference to the melody (0:14-0:26 in chiptune).

1:17 - intro chords from source in minor rather than major (0:01-0:13 in chiptune)

1:36 - equivalent to the break in the original texturally but an original melody (was listening to Spring Yard Zone at the time) (0:39 onwards)

2:34 - I seem to think it's from a Sonic theme, but it may be the synth, I'll go back t'ya on that one.

3:12 octaves play melody in from second part of source (coming in at 0:39 in chiptune but a different rhythm)

And the whole 8bit feel with AeroZ's Sonic-esque riffs. The source is short, and I think I've covered about 80% of it with the main melody being 50%.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From a production standpoint, this is solid. Why's there 4 1/2 seconds of silence at the beginning? Unless there's a creative reason behind it, trim it off. The note sequence of the "Green Hill Zone" melody at :13 sounded really...iffy on the first go, but you somewhat acclimate to it.

I'm usually the leadoff on these headscratchers, since I'm masochistic enough to try and break the arrangement down. It's safe to say I'm down with liberal arrangements. But I have to be able to place the connections significantly. "The whole 8bit feel with AeroZ's Sonic-esque riffs" is all well and good, but "Sonic-esque" isn't good enough for these standards. You need "Sonic", and it should be clear enough that it's there when analyzing it (keep in mind I didn't say "when casually listening to it").

Thanks a lot to TO for getting in touch with Phil and getting his breakdown of the source tune usage. The mix still sounds pretty liberal, but if there's enough source usage (>50% being my threshold) then I'm down. At about 5:26-long (sans silent intro), this needs 2:43's worth of recognizable rearrangement to pass by my personal criteria. Let's get cold, unfeeling and statistical:

http://project2612.org/download.php?id=36 - "Green Hill Zone"

• :13-:23, :36-1:00, 1:06-1:08, 4:12-4:29 - (based off main melody - :14-:26 of source) ~ 53 seconds
  
• 1:16-1:35 (1st idea based off intro - :01-:07 of source) ~ 19 seconds
  
• 1:35-1:54, 2:15-2:35, 4:46-5:06 - (1st idea based off chorus - :39-:49 of source) ~ 49 seconds
  
• 2:34-2:53, 5:07-5:24 - (2nd idea based off intro - :01-:07 of source) ~ 36 seconds
  
• 3:11-3:30, 3:48-4:07 - (2nd idea based off chorus - :39-:49 of source) ~ 38 seconds
  
• 2:53-3:12, 3:30-3:48 - No connection that I'm aware of

Adding everything up, that's 3:15's worth of viable rearrangement of the source material, which is more than enough. Even hypothetically subtracting some time from a few of the more liberal-sounding riffs, the arrangement was still on the better side of 50%. There could be other aspects that I'm missing as well.

This is a great piece of music, creative & sophisticated with the interpretation, but pretty far off the beaten path of rearrangement. From a fan perspective, I'd much rather prefer (and connect with) an arrangement that's more overt with the source usage, though that's irrelevant to my vote. I can still pass it, but I'd be lying if I didn't say I wasn't somewhat disappointed that it went this route. Other liberal pieces I've passed still feel more connected to their source material than this.

It's "Sonic-esque", but not overtly resembling the source material for the casual listener most of the time. It dances on the borderline of recognizability, and it's proud of it. I think many people looking for the tired & true "Green Hill Zone" melody will end up disappointed that it plays such a small part, not even a minute's worth of the arrangement. Yet, as is always with the general public, many will love this despite not being able to easily place the connections. Y'all keep a eye on the Review thread for this one and see what I mean.

YES(borderline)

[Malcos]

This is great, no doubt about that. Beautiful chord progressions and voicing, especially in the intro. However, the main issue is to do with the liberal connection to the source. For me, this is just too liberal. Even though there has been a detailed breakdown of the connections, they are not easy to pick out by ear. I'm not asking for a dumbing down at all, don't get me wrong - I just don't hear the connections all that well at all. A clear reaffirmation in the middle and at the end of the mix would have made me easily say yes. I'm definitely keeping this, but I have my doubts about it's suitability for OCR. One of the hardest decisions I have ever had to make as a judge.

NO

[Vig]

Wait, what's the fuckin' problem?

YES

[JJT]

There's enough interpretation here, even if its not readily apparent 100% of the time. This is creative and well produced (I looooove the parts where the rhythm guitar is driving everything), and there's enough of a connection to the original for this to enter the ranks of OCR.

The fact that it sounds awesome doesn't hurt either.

YES

[big giant circles]

Well, liberal as it may be, I heard the source clearly (without having to micro-analyze) within the first 15 seconds, so that's always a relief.

In the style of AeroZ, this is pretty funky and creative stuff. I really dig the guitar loops. Funky and fun and what not.

Now then, after my recent ranting on tracks with questionable source-to-remix ratio, Other than the initial Green Hill zone riff which is clearly heard at :13 or so, and subsequently throughout the track, had it not been for the additional breakdown, I might have been inclined to spend hours more than I would like to sitting down and comparing, so kudos for the extra info--always helpful.

I'm going to agree with Larry that more or less, as long as a track is >50% soundly tied to the source, it's going to fly with me on that level.

I also question the silence in the beginning--is there really a purpose to that, or is that something we should crop first?

Some other mix highlights were the bass, and pretty much the whole section around 1:07--which is fun as hell to listen to. This one slides by for the BGC thumb's-up.

YES