MIX CHALLENGE - MC099 August 2024 - Mix Round 2 in evaluation

[Mork]

Thanks…
That sucks tremendously!

[Mister Fox]

Since there are questions regarding the Statistic Sheets, let me please get that sorted out.

I also have to inform you, that I've just updated the Statistic Sheets (see post #114), also in response to the questions / concerns that have been brought up. There is unfortunately no change in the disqualification rate (yet).



Question on the Wild Card Mechanic...

Is the Wild Card automatically used if I get into the next round or do I have to say something before?

Every user has 2 Wild Cars per user account. You can opt to give up one of your Wild Cards to advance into Mix Round 2, if your entry has only been "tagged disqualified" (as marked with an X on the Statistic Sheets) and that entry has been selected for Mix Round 2. You are always free to say "thank you, but I will not advance". In this case, no card will be used.

The whole mechanic is explained in the thread Mix Challenge - Addendum: Statistic Sheet and Wild Card Mechanic (see post #003).




On to the questions about specific entries...


@MilkMonster already got the answer via PM

This particular has been "tagged OUT" due to two main reasons:
1) the original entry didn't use the filename template, and there was also no forum username. Therefore the entry couldn't be associated with any existing forum user
2) the entry was then re-uploaded and posted with a new link before the Statistic Sheet was finished. I understood that the participant meant, that this is a fixed link. In this case, it would be an additional re-upload on top of that

...
Maybe the name got trimmed during download or something, but it's definitely named correctly in the cloud! Would attach a screenshot, but still don't know how.
Please reconsider the disqualification.

I am so sorry. In fairness to all other participants - I unfortunately can't.


Icedrive legit shows me the following

Code: Select all

MC099__LosTimpanis__Falling_Mork.wav

There is only one underscore between the song name and your username. Therefore, the automated scripts while creating the Statistic Sheets were thrown off. I even checked again with Firefox and Chrome, if there might have been a hiccup.

Here are screenshots from my check just now (the screenshots will be auto deleted in about 1 month):



Remember - this does not result in "tagged OUT". Should your entry be selected for Mix Round 2, you can still advance with the help of the Wild Card Mechanic.

But, sorry, I didn't use any additional harmonies. Maybe you hear "shimmerverb" and delay in the chorus. I tried hard to get the rules, cause, like everyone else, I got many additional ideas, which were not included in this task, and so I didn't do it!

I invested more time into listening, and in fact even tried STEM separation to get a better picture.

What threw me off with your documentation, was the mention of H910 Harmonizer on the vocal bus, and various chorus effects on the reverb. And while listening to just the vocals alone, it sounds like a "double take", with a creeping added 3rd on top of that. You mentioned Lexicon 480L and ValhallaDSP Vintage Verb. Neither of them have pitch shifting. Eventide "ShimmerVerb" however does, and so does ValhallaDSP Shimmer.

However, I must also admit that I do not have all the tools that you folks list, I can only know / use so much myself. So I have to go by what you're saying that you did. And then I can only do spot checks - in which your entry did stick out, as this is quite the prominent effect.

Maybe my ears did fool me on that behalf. So I am inclined to give you a free pass for this time. But I have to trust in your honesty!

You can send me screenshots and an audio demo of just the vocals via PM or via Discord (if you're on there). Let's see/hear what "really" happens here. Then I can edit the Statistic Sheet accordingly. Apologies that you have to stay in limbo for the time being.

I don't understand in the statistics I have a HARMONY with a nice question mark, the truth is I didn't do anything else to the tracks beyond saturating them a little bit and just equalizing them, maybe the vocals, I don't remember now, but sometimes I like to give it a little bit of stereo amplitude as well as the high end of the bass, I used several types of reverbs and several delays with different settings, I don't know if any of that contributed to the confusion or maybe the parallel processes of the drums or the vocals, especially I think I remember doing parallel band compression on the vocals in 3 different channels. It's not a complaint, I was just curious.

I didn't take this as a complaint. But just in case, I took another listen.

I think the reason why I wrote "HARMONY?" and not added a "tagged disqualified" was, because it was inconclusive. The unison in combination with the drums sound like as if there is something "creeping up" from below. Yet after looping the sections several times, and also listening through different devices (speakers/headphones)... I can't put my finger on it.

To put your mind at ease - I updated the Statistic Sheets and removed that label. Your entry wasn't "tagged disqualified" otherwise.

...
Could I get some feedback on the reason my entry was disqualified with "SHIFT" please?

I understand the rules on this, which is why after originally posting my mix with one element 'Shifted', I then re-read the rules to ensure I would not be disqualified and subsequently went back and corrected this. I then edited my post with the corrected mix which was done well before the submission deadline.

Unless the first incorrect mix was downloaded straightaway and used for submission, I think my corrected mix would not flag this "SHIFT".
...

And this is exactly where the confusion lies.

You see, it would have been easier if you didn't edit your post and remove the comment that you "accidentally shifted" material and left this way. Then proceeded to edit your post a second time roughly 9 hours prior to the deadline, while you also did sneak in a new mix. Something you just admitted to even - therefore breaking the established Rules and Guidelines.

One of the reasons why it takes so long to create Statistic Sheets, is because I triple check that I have all files. And while in that process, I also re-read all posts again, check for post edits, and also the time-stamps of uploads. However, after a while, numbers and text get blurry from all the back and forth. My brain must have thought "the time stamps are close to each other, all is good". Looks like, I I need to pay more attention for the next game.


You posted your initial entry on 20th August 2024 18:19 CEST -- I downloaded that entry on 21-AUG-2024 at 7:38. If I am around, I usually do that as the "files drop in" - to catch possible re-uploads. At that time, your post still mentioned "shifted hihat and shaker by accident" and that you "left it this way". While listening to all entries after the deadline, I noticed that the percussion work does indeed not line up, hence you receiving the additional "SHIFT" tag on the Statistic Sheet.

I did not notice that you did more than that. So after your post just now, even admitting that you "fixed the entry", I went back to your post, checked both the text and the entry (mix) again. The linked file now has a time-stamp of "upload 21 August 15:17" -- which is 19 hours after your original post, and over 14 hours after I downloaded your original entry. I can also confirm, that the files do not properly cancel each other out -- the new version does use different effects on the vocals and trumpets, and the percussive work has been "shifted back".

Here is a screenshot from my "phase cancellation" test, to only focus on "what changed" (the screenshot will be auto deleted in about 3 months)



It has been clearly stated multiple times: No re-uploads - your submission is final.

I appreciate your honesty. However, in fairness to all other participants, you broke the rules. Unfortunately, I have to retroactively place your entry as "tagged OUT". You can no longer advance into Mix Round 2.





This should answer all questions.
Thank you for reading, and apologies for any inconvenience.

[Mork]

Icedrive legit shows me the following

Code: Select all

MC099__LosTimpanis__Falling_Mork.wav

Sorry, my mistake! Thought you only saw „Mork.wav“.
Don’t know how that underscore got lost, I always copy paste the template.

[zed999]

Icedrive legit shows me the following

Code: Select all

MC099__LosTimpanis__Falling_Mork.wav

Sorry, my mistake! Thought you only saw „Mork.wav“.
Don’t know how that underscore got lost, I always copy paste the template.

On my screen I cannot easily see whether I have one or two underscores - you have my commiserations.
I've started to put on an extra pair of glasses and getting up close just to check this!

[cpsmusic]

It's easy to accidentally erase one of the underscores when changing the placeholder username.

[Sonnea]

Hi Mr Fox

Thank you for the response.

So to be clear, the "SHIFTING" is rule breaking (which is fair and I understand) but also to re-upload so as not to break the rules... is actually breaking the rules? So I am doomed either way. I'm unsure why the vocals and trumpets have appeared in the test as I had done nothing to them in the post mistake mix.

Also my interpretation of the 'Your submission is final' rule is that once the deadline closed then that's it, your download link cannot be altered, however it seems this is not the case? Could this rule be explained to me as well please? Would it not be more efficient to download all links after the deadline and then disqualify any latecomers/re-uploaders?
When submitting university assignments online your final submission before the deadline is the one that gets marked. Should it not be the same?

Thanks

Sonnea

[Strange]

Strange wrote: ↑Tue Aug 27, 2024 12:53 CEST
But, sorry, I didn't use any additional harmonies. Maybe you hear "shimmerverb" and delay in the chorus. I tried hard to get the rules, cause, like everyone else, I got many additional ideas, which were not included in this task, and so I didn't do it!
I invested more time into listening, and in fact even tried STEM separation to get a better picture.

What threw me off with your documentation, was the mention of H910 Harmonizer on the vocal bus, and various chorus effects on the reverb. And while listening to just the vocals alone, it sounds like a "double take", with a creeping added 3rd on top of that. You mentioned Lexicon 480L and ValhallaDSP Vintage Verb. Neither of them have pitch shifting. Eventide "ShimmerVerb" however does, and so does ValhallaDSP Shimmer.

However, I must also admit that I do not have all the tools that you folks list, I can only know / use so much myself. So I have to go by what you're saying that you did. And then I can only do spot checks - in which your entry did stick out, as this is quite the prominent effect.

Maybe my ears did fool me on that behalf. So I am inclined to give you a free pass for this time. But I have to trust in your honesty!

You can send me screenshots and an audio demo of just the vocals via PM or via Discord (if you're on there). Let's see/hear what "really" happens here. Then I can edit the Statistic Sheet accordingly. Apologies that you have to stay in limbo for the time being.

I can tell you what happens:
The H910 Dual Hamonizer widens the chorusvocal (like in many other productions int the last 50 years).
The "shimmerverb" reverberates the delays of the "cy" of "prophecy" with modulation and +12ct pitchshifting like in many other production to jump the vocals into the chorus. It's not my ambition to fool you. I think it's all about learning. I hope you get it.

Greetings
Peter

[Edling]

I can tell you what happens:
The H910 Dual Hamonizer widens the chorusvocal (like in many other productions int the last 50 years).
The "shimmerverb" reverberates the delays of the "cy" of "prophecy" with modulation and +12ct pitchshifting like in many other production to jump the vocals into the chorus. It's not my ambition to fool you. I think it's all about learning. I hope you get it.

Greetings
Peter

I think the interesting part of this discussion is, where does mixing stop, and where does production start. If I get a song with electric guitars I will assume that the guitar player recorded distorted guitars where that was intended, and that chorus was used where that was applicable. I would not add effects to the guitars that alters the sound to a completely different sound. The same goes for vocals. If the singer wants a very particular effect, because it's part of the sound, I'm expecting that effect to be applied in the wav-file I'm downloading.

Now, the artist can of course ask for specific effects on certain parts, like "make the vocal sound like an old radio during the bridge", but then the production choice was still made by the artist, you only execute on it. Likewise I think it's perfectly fine to try to mimic ideas from the rough mix but in your own way as the rough mix was usually done by, or in collaboration with, the artist.

If effects end up altering the source too much, then it's getting dangerously close to production territory, which I don't mind personally since I find it very rewarding, but it's not part of this particular challenge as I've understood it

Please note that I'm not addressing YOUR mix in particular, that's the job of the moderator, I'm only trying to get the discussion going

[Strange]

Please note that I'm not addressing YOUR mix in particular, that's the job of the moderator, I'm only trying to get the discussion going

I'm nearly 100% your opinion!

[Strange]

I think the interesting part of this discussion is, where does mixing stop, and where does production start. If I get a song with electric guitars I will assume that the guitar player recorded distorted guitars where that was intended, and that chorus was used where that was applicable. I would not add effects to the guitars that alters the sound to a completely different sound. The same goes for vocals. If the singer wants a very particular effect, because it's part of the sound, I'm expecting that effect to be applied in the wav-file I'm downloading.

Now, the artist can of course ask for specific effects on certain parts, like "make the vocal sound like an old radio during the bridge", but then the production choice was still made by the artist, you only execute on it. Likewise I think it's perfectly fine to try to mimic ideas from the rough mix but in your own way as the rough mix was usually done by, or in collaboration with, the artist.

If effects end up altering the source too much, then it's getting dangerously close to production territory, which I don't mind personally since I find it very rewarding, but it's not part of this particular challenge as I've understood it

For me, Mixing is a part of the creative production of music. Every mixingdecision is part of the product. We can fight about the level of creativity, but not about mixing as a part of the creative process. So noone can decide exactly where production ends and mixing begins. You can make rules for a challenge, that's okay and we agreed to it by being part of this challenge. But, as you see, it is hard to describe the exactly demarcation. What are additional harmonies? Extra vocal tracks? Extra melodyne-tracks or vari-audio-tracks or whatelse? Or the pitched vocal-reverb of shimmerverb? Or the extra harmonies of a saturation-plug-in? who knows the objectiv answer? You can only describe your point of view as exact as possible. And by doing this you kill any further creativ ideas.
And who decides? Maybe the artist (if he has enough money), maybe the producer (if the artist allows it)... but at least the one who pays for the production.
And so it's your decision what kind of mixer you like to be or how much money you need to earn with your job.

These thoughts don't want to play down technical knowledge, good ears and experience which I always try and need to increase.