Liontamer Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Over the filesize limit, but we'll deal with that - LT Red Tailed Fox, zyko caio moraes ferreira , waleed hawatky wmhawatky@yahoo.com www.zykomazika.com zelda, again. this time, it's a really fun collaboration with my buddy caio from beautiful rio de janeiro. a beautiful mixture of ideas here, i believe; he came to me with the body and soul... a gentle, wispy forest musik that tripped me and transported me. what i heard was excellent zelda forest music and instantly fell in love... we cooked up a structure to the track over instant messenger but then his hard drive crashed and all we had of this track was a mix down of one full cycle of the A and B sections of the track he had concocted. i played surgeon the rest of the way and this is what we've got the intro is actually borrowed from my remix "The Woods of the Invertix" from way back god knows when. hope you dig it. ---------------------------------------------------------------- I knew I recognized that intro. Let's see what's there. http://www.zophar.net/usf/lozusf.rar - 35 "Lost Woods" & 64 "Water Temple" In my opinion, the sum total should sound more cohesive, but clearly this was clicking for the major majority. Caio's bassline work felt retread-ish given what I've heard in "Brinstar Bonsai Garden" and other (more relevant) slower originals he's collabed on with Malcos and Shnabubula, but that was a more minor criticism. Nice usage of "Water Temple" from 1:43-2:09. Heard the same animal SFX used here as I did in Caio's rejected DKC2 sub "Fixbit Forest". Went into some pretty liberal interpretations from 2:36-4:05, but always grounded in working with the "Lost Woods" theme which was good. Whoa, really jumpy change at 3:11; I'd check the source files there and fix that if possible; not sure if some Js will let that slide before it went up. Awkward move in the same vein back to "Water Temple" at 4:22 for the finish. The finish there wasn't cohesive but was interesting. Good stuff, and I'd argue fairly solid synergy. Since the filesize is too large anyway, let's double check if we can get those jumpy transitions fixed, 3:11 especially. YES EDIT: Vote changed. See below. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jillian Aversa Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Went into some pretty liberal interpretations from 2:36-4:05, but always grounded in working with the "Lost Woods" theme which was good. Whoa, really jumpy change at 3:11; I'd check the source files there and fix that if possible; not sure if some Js will let that slide before it went up. For the first part of this quote, I don't feel that the interpretation is ever particularly liberal. Definitely coheres well with Lost Woods. Excellent arrangement, IMO. The transitions into the Water Temple usage are a little abrupt, but it doesn't bother me. What is this jumpy change you're referring to at 3:11, Larries? Sounds pretty natural to me. Very chill, but this piece definitely maintains interest throughout. You guys have so many awesome musical ideas; I love it! The take at 1:30 is particularly cool. Nice water drops and birdies, too. I do have a couple of issues, however: 1) There is clipping/distortion at 3:49, and again even more noticeably at 3:57. 2) The guitar solo-age is pretty consistently flat across the board. 0:21, 0:32, 1:04... Some sour notes around 2:16, 2:20, 3:05... I've noticed that particularly in your ascending lines, zyko, you tend to undershoot the pitch; take 3:19 for example. The entrance at 3:38 is also very flat, and then the echo part at 3:55 as well. Ouchieeeees... It doesn't have to be perfect, but when it becomes a significant distraction I think that's a problem. 3) The ending fades out a little too quickly for my personal taste. If you have a decent auto-tune program, I bet the pitch issues could be fixed manually. And maybe that would be easier than doing multiple takes to get it how you want? But I'm not sure what's causing the clipping/distortion at 3:49 and 3:57, so you may have to rerecord those spots depending. Touch up those things, and I'll YES this in a heartbeat. NO PLEASE RESUBMIT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkeSword Posted November 10, 2007 Share Posted November 10, 2007 Agree with Jill on the clipping; needs fixin'. I don't however, agree with Jill on the issues of the sour-notes in the guitar soloing. Notes like that in jazz improvisation are transitional and in this mix, worked in context. I'm not so sure I agree on the significance of the flatness of the notes either. I didn't find them all that distracting, and I think that's part of an organic performance. All in all though, excellent interpretation of the classic Lost Woods theme. Quite relaxing. YES, on the condition that the clipping is fixed. -- Well, it looks like we can't get a fixed, clipping-less version. Upon further listening, I can see how the intonation could be an issue and while it doesn't bother me as much as it might bother others, it's still there. Alas, I must say NO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vig Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 Fantastic atmosphere, arrangement, etc. Great expression on the guitar. I'll admit the tuning bothers me. I think this is a great remix. My only real complaint is the tuning, but I can let it slide. Fix the clipping and you're good. YES (cond) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palpable Posted November 14, 2007 Share Posted November 14, 2007 Alright, dub! There isn't much like this on OCR and it's great to hear some. The Lost Woods melody works perfectly in this laidback setting - excellent interpretation. Awesome instrument choices and usage of effects. I wasn't entirely feeling the shift to the Water Temple theme, with the complete change of instruments. I'd prefer the two sections were tied together more, even just by bringing the beat in earlier, before going back to Lost Woods. Also, the transition to the Water Temple near the end was very abrupt. Neither of these come close to sinking the arrangement for me though, since it has plenty going for it otherwise. I heard the weird jump Larry was talking about, at 3:13 - I thought the song had skipped. It sounds like a fraction of that beat has been accidentally edited out, and it didn't sound intentional because there's a strange amount of time missing. I'd definitely want it to be fixed. Also, the clipping on the guitar echo has been mentioned. That needs to get fixed too, because it happens a lot on the midrange of the phasing sweep. The tuning of the guitar distracted me in too many parts that I could overlook it. Particularly that call and answer part at 0:41 where I could easily compare the pitch of the guitar to the synth. Jill has covered this pretty well, and a hint of auto-tuning would fix it. I hope the issues I mentioned don't require you to totally redo anything, because this one is very very close. It's a great song - just a couple of tweaks and it's good to go. NO (resubmit) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zykO Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 i really dont know any other way to say it but i don't hear what you hear. literally i don't mean that figuratively =) i'm most probably tone deaf, tuning-blind and i kinda make all my music like that. i'm not going to take an auto tune to it... that's like saying you're gonna slap a hemi on a mini cooper. it is what it is and if it doesn't pass, it doesn't pass i have plenty more where that came from =) oh yea, the source files are all gone. so a resubmit isn't likely. and the transition at 3.11 is intentional.. come on y'all, its me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zircon Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 Very nice mood. The arrangement is quite creative and the instrumental texture is chill, between the smooth keyboards, nature FX, and wah guitar. Ultimately though, as much as I hate to reject something that can't be resubbed, I feel like I'd otherwise have a double standard because I have personally NOed other mixes with clipping issues. It happens at least three times that are obvious and a couple of other times that are less obvious. Additionally I thought the guitar tuning was a little more noticeable this time around because (as Palp said) there are times where you can reference it directly with another part and it just doesn't sound spot on in pitch. Sorry man, I just can't quite let this one on as is. NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vig Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 Fantastic atmosphere, arrangement, etc. Great expression on the guitar. I'll admit the tuning bothers me. I think this is a great remix. My only real complaint is the tuning, but I can let it slide. Fix the clipping and you're good. YES (cond) Translation: If clipping=fixed, then YES If clipping /= fixed, then NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zircon Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 OK, just wanted to be sure, since zyko said the mix can't be changed at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vig Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 That's a damn shame. I'll give it another listen, but unless I change my mind.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liontamer Posted November 23, 2007 Author Share Posted November 23, 2007 Hate to add to this, but if that blip can't be smoothed out, I gotta go NO as well, since I would need that to be fixed, intentional or not. There are good skips and bad. :'-( I had 0 problems with guitar tuning. The arrangement was otherwise solid enough, IMO. Looking forward to your next subs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts