MIX CHALLENGE - MC080 September 2021 - Mix Round 2 in evaluation (staff taking over)

[Mister Fox]

Sometimes "splitting" a track (or multing) is a valid means of editing. But you also have to keep in mind, that this can heavily influence the natural tone of a recording (as mentioned). Especially if it's a very instrument limited production like this.


A couple of go-to examples for this would be:

Vocals... you carefully slice the vocals and reduce certain sibilants/words words, and/or raise quiet words to make things a bit more up-front and personal. Less work on your signal processing array, right? But that alone is already a strong altering of the sound / natural performance and goes more towards surgical perfection.

Another example are "modern rock kit sounds", where you might slice up every hit, "strip silence" them, even quantize. Basically the same deal. You alter the groove in favor for perfection.

For guitars, it depends. Like... if the original had a one-take on certain settings. But now you have access to the DI and want to change up the tone a bit, see where this goes. You might cut away the solo and give it a different effect than the rhythm. That is a bit of a grey-zone, but not uncommon these days.

A totally different topic would be, if you copy parts to "double" them with additional sounds (prime example: bass processing a-la Tech21 Sansamp with blending a distorted and DI tone together), or maybe try ADT techniques.



The bottom line is this:

With such edits, you can make a very subtle performance easily bland and sterile. Wrong note in the arrangement? Just fix it - it will result in a better end-product, right? But does it really? You have to find a balance, fitting to the given production. And that only comes with experience.

[cpsmusic]

Thanks for the reply.

Although there isn't a strict definition of "multing", what you're referring to isn't how I understand or use the term.

"Multing" is taking a section of a recording and moving it to a separate track. A section in this case refers to something like a verse or a chorus. Alternatively, it's a consistent performance section like a fingerpicked guitar part as opposed to a strummed guitar part. The reason for the separation is that it makes processing simpler. For example, you can change a compressor's threshold if a part is louder or more percussive.

I can see no reason why separating a verse lead vocal from a chorus lead vocal would "make a very subtle performance easily bland and sterile."

What you're referring to is "editing" (or probably more correctly "micro-editing") or "pocketing".

I respectfully disagree with what you've said.

Cheers!

[cpsmusic]

Here's a discussion about "multing" as I understand it:

https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=430577

Cheers!

[cpsmusic]

For those interested:

Balancing, Multing & Compressor Choice

First, let me repeat myself: concentrate on the balance of the tracks in your mix. If the tracks balance fine as they are, no‑one will arrest you for leaving them alone! The trick is to wait until you spot a fader that you can't really find a suitable level for (the sound may disappear in some places, or have sections that feel too loud): that's where you may need to compress. In the first instance, though, see if you can solve the level problem by splitting the audio onto two different tracks and balancing them separately. This is a common technique often referred to as 'multing'. It's easily done in most DAWs, and can head off a lot of rookie compression mistakes. Again, you may find that you don't need any compression at all to find a balance that works.

Multing can solve a lot of problems on its own, but quickly gets very fiddly if you try to use it to deal with lots of short‑term balance problems (lots of single notes or words that are too loud or quiet), and this is where the automatic processing offered by a compressor can begin to complement multing. For example, you might mult out a guitar solo from the main guitar track to give it a higher fader level, but still compress that solo so that a few over‑zealous notes don't pop out too far. So try multing to solve balance problems at first, but don't be afraid to let compression take over when it suits the job better.

Sound On Sound 09/2009

[Mister Fox]

We're still talking about the same thing, and this is actually also the exact same Sound on Sound article I've linked to in my post as well, @cpsmusic.

[cpsmusic]

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then

As an experiment I'll do a null test on a multed/unmulted track. I'll post links to the two files in the general forum and people can see if they can pick the difference - how's that?

Cheers!

[Mister Fox]

Thank you everyone for being patient regarding Mix Round 2.

I want to apologize for the abrupt decision to halt things. There has been a lot of commotion regarding possible missed entries, possible lack of feedback, and overall frustration on the topic. I apologize for the inconvenience, but let me please assure you that nobody was left out, especially not on purpose. I downloaded and forwarded every entry. Even those that were made available after the deadline (see first open debate on "what happened with links").

After a lengthy email conversation, I now know for certain that every entry has been listened to. Some several times even. Technically, the Song Provider is only mandated to give feedback to the top 20 entries (this particular rule didn't change since July 2020). I understand the frustration with the given feedback - it is not all entries, and it is also more than the 20 mandatory ones. I sadly can't fix that decision for any of you that participated and didn't get feedback. However, there has been no foul play whatsoever, and I ask everyone to please not drag this out any further. The Mix Challenge is already a special case with getting feedback in the first place, but as mentioned, only for the top 20 entries.

I will however take consequences from this, and for future games either insist on the absolute bare minimum, or feedback to every entry no matter the amount. Nothing in-between anymore. The only one to blame for this recent chaos, is me. I apologize for the inconvenience. Let us please end this topic, and move on.





With that said, ladies and gentlemen, let us restart Mix Round 2, which will end on Wednesday, 20-OCT-2021 23:59 UTC+2/CEST

As of this moment, that is just about 5 days (plus the days since the original announcement). There has been no change in participants, therefore the "shorter" deadline. If you already worked on your edit, please sleep one night on it, then upload it within the given time-frame. All Mix Round 2 participants will be sent a reminder via mail shortly.


There is a GLOBAL COUNTDOWN available to check for deadlines.
Just follow this link: Global Countdown (on homepage)



The following 12 participants go into Round 2 (alphabetical order), with "wild-cards" being pointed out (if present this month).
(all Mix Round 2 participants should have been pinged)

@anthonyw
@Christoph_K
@dadomachado
@elroms
@Frequency Painter
@JamesMusic
@ManuC (wild card offered, reason: not within loudness specs, signal too low)
@MattP (wild card offered, reason: not within loudness specs, signal too high)
@maxovrdrive
@Mork (wild card offered, reason: wrong sampling rate)
@unclesnuggles
@violintch02 (wild card offered, reason: wrong sampling rate)
.

!	Bonus Info
	Please read more about the "wild card" game mechanic here viewtopic.php?f=20&t=452

The feedback to the productions can be found here:
viewtopic.php?p=11625#p11625


If you are unsure what to do exactly with your mix, reach out to the song provider and engage in a conversation here on the forum.
And please keep the Rules and Guidelines (post #6) in mind regarding submitting your entry.

Please keep up the conversation on the mixes (giving feedback to each other). However, please keep things on topic, or move your concerns to the corresponding General Gossip thread. Thank you.

[elroms]

Thanks @Square for choosing my mix!
I have a couple of questions about the feedback, you said the delay is a bit loud sometimes but there is no delay on the voice, I wanted to make sure you were talking about the voice reverb?
And what did you mean by the mix is "cloudy" at the beginning?

[JamesMusic]

Hi all,

Thanks @Square for including my mix in the final 12!
I have made some changes, thanks for your suggestions. Here's the link - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1acR_5Z ... sp=sharing

-Changes based on feedback-
1. Turned up the piano
2. Turned down the lead violin in the intro
3. Made the delay on the pizzi strings more clear
4. Turned down the cello in final chorus
5. Added back in the ending portion

In addition to this, I have tried to spread out the strings a little, and have restored some of the top end on the strings, I think I may have been a little heavy handed with the low-pass filters first time around. I have also boosted some clarity in the vocal so that it still stays present among the adjusted strings.

Hope you like the revised mix. Looking forward to hearing everyone else's round 2 mixes.

Cheers,
James

[Christoph_K]

Thanks again to @Square for voting my mix to round 2! Here’s what I’ve changed:

I revisited the EQ´s for the strings to carve out the nasal frequencies. I reduced the amount of reverb for the piano and the guitar in the chorus to gain more clarity. In the first break I used a different reverb for the pizzicatos. I also slightly reduced some sibilance on the vocals with a deesser.


https://www.dropbox.com/s/3c3t0kasn2c4u ... 2.wav?dl=0