MIX CHALLENGE - MC056 July 2019 - Winners announced

[Mister Fox]

It's the 30th July 2019, 4:00am - the 2nd Mix Round has officially ended.

Sadly, not everyone has sent in an edit (unless I missed that entry, LocalMusic)
We have no submissions after the deadline.
Please check your upload links again, and have an eye on this thread for the final results.



I'm now opening up the room (again) for Q&A's and giving each other feedback (which is highly encouraged)


The next games will start on 1st August.


See you on the flipside.

[Mister Fox]

Apologies for not getting back at certain comments any sooner.

@Mister Fox thanks for the count down, that helps!

You're welcome.
A lot of time was put into the functionality and look - especially for mobile devices.

btw kudos mister fox. You´re doing great work and that should be honored.

Thank you, appreciated!

Two ways you can help:
1) consider making a donation to keep the server up and running
2) spread the word on social media, chatrooms, newsletters, maybe even befriended people at magazines to help the Songwriting Competition to get as popular as the Mix Challenge

@ Mr Fox: Thanks for that great service here! All rules for participation are really clear and sometimes described several times. Nevertheless, there seem to be always misunderstandings. Maybe because everything is described in too much detail? You know, long reading is not is not everyone's hobby ;-). So, how about a small tabular checklist (maybe printable)? according to the principle:
Sample rate = 48khz? Check!
LUFS <= 16db? Check!
No Mastering on Mixbus? Check!

Interesting idea. Can you maybe elaborate a bit more in the Gossip Thread? That would be great. Maybe I can implement it in the "Rules and Guidelines" for future challenges (if we get more audio material up and running - even beyond Fall 2019).

Thank you.

[Chriswilson83]

I will download the entries today and start to to listen to them. The final entries are also being sent to the band to decide as well so the outcome may take longer than the first round results.

[HalfinHalfOut]

I will download the entries today and start to to listen to them. The final entries are also being sent to the band to decide as well so the outcome may take longer than the first round results.

Take your time man! Hopefully you guys find something you really dig! The best part is being exposed to different styles of mixing and finding out what would fit your vision for the project.

[White Punk OD]

some mix updates are great!

[3ee]

some mix updates are great!

I guess that mainly denotes the importance of client feedback.... I mean, I more often than not, don't nail the mix from the 1st try..

[White Punk OD]

for me, both is equally relevant, client and competitors.
the client in the MC has the same risk about his decisions: results might or might not hit the taste of the audience.
although, when it is an established local band, the situation will be quite stable. they know their fans personally.
(if the purpose is not to use the mix, I see quite some aspects losing reality.)

so in reality, to me it is important that the environment where I have access to, will like my portfolio, no matter what the corresponding (non-paying) clients think about. because these are options, what we might do, if the paying client finds it nice.

two sides of feedback: engineers and listeners. competitors can take both roles, depends on how they currently think about the matter.
to win a plugin, the MC client is boss. but that's no more interesting to N minus 3 competitors, after the fact. they will aim real clients with what they do.
so to say, I am a fan of Phil Tan, because he is quite unpredictable. he is bold with ideas. some others do mostly certain rock styles, because they are the best, and sounds change only slowly over the years, though every song has to be distinct.
or with a major label, the producer might be the mixer also, but reports to the A&R more than to the artist who is a newbie.

what Chris is doing, has very high value, because it is physical and objective. everyone understands their score, and basically knows what to improve.
OTOH, success in mixing in my goal is defined by success of the song in the market. you mix for "school" only so often.

[Dodgingrain]

Mastering I think I only disqualified one specifically for this but it was without a shadow of a doubt a master (and at CD volume if I remember). I think anything touching 14LUFS is a little too loud for a mix imho is digital streaming masters start at this. Mastering starts to become a need to turn down things in order to do it properly, and if you don't the platforms will do it to the master themselves (with limiting in a few cases).

I personally fown at a limiter and "pseudo-mastering" on a master mix bus as you're capping the dynamic range and options available for a master. I've clocked this on quite a few mixes and commented on it where I can but there is a likely chance I've not caught them all. That said I will be more detailed than just doing a level/headroom check and mono/M/S sweep with the top 10. And those production notes need to tell the whole story...

Curious on everyone else's thoughts on this. I've been working with a pro mixing engineer who also spent time doing mastering who mixes to as loud as -6LUFS short term. Often they have multiple limiters on their master bus to get there. The limiters are removed when the mix is sent to mastering but they are NOT removed when sending mixes to clients for evaluation. The arguments for this are:
1. If you don't mix to this loud then the mix will come back from mastering sounding different which obviously is a bad thing so mixing into limiting is a requirement, not something to avoid.
2. Mixing to that loud of a level highlights problems in the mix with uncontrolled dynamics and bad balances between tracks that otherwise wont appear until mastering. These issues won't necessarily become apparent at a quieter level and its better to deal with them in mixing.
3. At no point has anyone from a label ever asked to have a mix done at a certain LUFS level much less asked to have a mix turned down in level. Labels have asked to have a mix louder however.
4. Let the mastering engineer worry about the LUFS level depending on the format and supply the mixing engineer with both the limited and unlimited versions. The mix through the limiters acts as a guide to the mastering engineers similar to how a rough mix acts to mixing engineers.

Based on that I would argue that we should be mixing as loud as we can. Having the client listening to a version of the mix without the limiting to get to a loud level doesn't make sense as the mix won't sound the same. The choice then becomes one that we make as mixing engineers on what amount of dynamics are appropriate for the specific song/genre.

Again, curious on everyone's thoughts, mixing that loud is a new concept for me.

[HalfinHalfOut]

Mastering I think I only disqualified one specifically for this but it was without a shadow of a doubt a master (and at CD volume if I remember). I think anything touching 14LUFS is a little too loud for a mix imho is digital streaming masters start at this. Mastering starts to become a need to turn down things in order to do it properly, and if you don't the platforms will do it to the master themselves (with limiting in a few cases).

I personally fown at a limiter and "pseudo-mastering" on a master mix bus as you're capping the dynamic range and options available for a master. I've clocked this on quite a few mixes and commented on it where I can but there is a likely chance I've not caught them all. That said I will be more detailed than just doing a level/headroom check and mono/M/S sweep with the top 10. And those production notes need to tell the whole story...

Curious on everyone else's thoughts on this. I've been working with a pro mixing engineer who also spent time doing mastering who mixes to as loud as -6LUFS short term. Often they have multiple limiters on their master bus to get there. The limiters are removed when the mix is sent to mastering but they are NOT removed when sending mixes to clients for evaluation. The arguments for this are:
1. If you don't mix to this loud then the mix will come back from mastering sounding different which obviously is a bad thing so mixing into limiting is a requirement, not something to avoid.
2. Mixing to that loud of a level highlights problems in the mix with uncontrolled dynamics and bad balances between tracks that otherwise wont appear until mastering. These issues won't necessarily become apparent at a quieter level and its better to deal with them in mixing.
3. At no point has anyone from a label ever asked to have a mix done at a certain LUFS level much less asked to have a mix turned down in level. Labels have asked to have a mix louder however.
4. Let the mastering engineer worry about the LUFS level depending on the format and supply the mixing engineer with both the limited and unlimited versions. The mix through the limiters acts as a guide to the mastering engineers similar to how a rough mix acts to mixing engineers.

Based on that I would argue that we should be mixing as loud as we can. Having the client listening to a version of the mix without the limiting to get to a loud level doesn't make sense as the mix won't sound the same. The choice then becomes one that we make as mixing engineers on what amount of dynamics are appropriate for the specific song/genre.

Again, curious on everyone's thoughts, mixing that loud is a new concept for me.

This brings up some great questions and also has a lot of valid view points. I think it probably depends on how good of a working relationship you have with your mastering engineer, and what they prefer to work with. On the flip side, their limiters and hardware are going to perform completely different from ITB plugins. With how we perceive loudness I can understand being wary of sending lower output tracks to uneducated clients.

[Chriswilson83]

Hi Dodgingrain,

I would say most mastering engineers I have worked with would grind their teeth when receiving a loud mix.

I understand why some people send a sort of master to clients but 1, that's not the rules of this challenge and 2, who's to say your temporary master actually shows the mix in it's best light or maybe even hides some issues?

You're correct labels don't ask for certain LUFS, but all digital streaming services do and have very exact requirements. Why mix at 6LUFS when a CD is usually 9 and digital 14? Working at such silly volumes is a recipe for fatigue and long term ear damage....