MIX CHALLENGE - MC069 September 2020 - Winners announced

[Oba Ozai]

Mister Fox, you wrote "There were no "tempo edits" in this Mix(ing) Challenge", but that was not what I found. On the percussion tracks the tempo did vary significantly. From 119.97 to 120.40 (I did take notes). Also the balance at some of the track was set in a way that was difficult to change, I had to change all the tracks to mono and I still had issues with the one of the main Bass tracks. Again, im a student, I only ask because im confused.

[Square]

Mister Fox, you wrote "There were no "tempo edits" in this Mix(ing) Challenge", but that was not what I found. On the percussion tracks the tempo did vary significantly. From 119.97 to 120.40 (I did take notes). Also the balance at some of the track was set in a way that was difficult to change, I had to change all the tracks to mono and I still had issues with the one of the main Bass tracks. Again, im a student, I only ask because im confused.

Hi Oba,

Unless I'm mistaken, I believe it was meant that we weren't to make our own tempo edit on the mix as opposed to anything like that pre existing.

Also, without knowing your testing methods, I would say that variance under 1 BPM like that is normal, in fact I think a mix would sound quite robotic if there was no variance at all.

As for the balance, I'm a bit confused by what you mean. Are you referring to the balance of panning of the individual tracks?

Cheers

Square

[Mister Fox]

Seems the rules does not allow any kinds of edits even if the deadline for the "contest" has not been reached; is this correct ?

As the Rules and Guidelines indeed clearly state, "Your entry is final - no re-submissions with changes allowed unless you're selected for Mix Round 2". You can edit your post to update your documentation, but absolutely no edits/re-uploads of your mix.

Since you're realized you've uploaded in a different sampling rate than the source material was in (44kHz, not 41,5kHz!), and you also pointed that out, your entry would have been disqualified regardless of your loudness values. I didn't see your 48kHz version at the point of download (21st September), so I can't confirm any loudness values.

If you join MC070 in October, please triple check the first two posts of each thread for the ground rules before you start mixing.

Mister Fox, you wrote "There were no "tempo edits" in this Mix(ing) Challenge", but that was not what I found. On the percussion tracks the tempo did vary significantly. From 119.97 to 120.40 (I did take notes).

Never assume that the production you get to edit, in a perfectly quantized, MIDI based production. A lot of the percussion were "live" recordings (fingers knocking on wood, etc). There were no BPM offsets to take care of, or fix a BPM from (for example) 140bpm to 130bpm. We've had such games before, but they resulted in a bit of chaos.

Please consult the FAQ section of the official rules regarding "timing corrections". Most notably Q11.

Also the balance at some of the track was set in a way that was difficult to change, I had to change all the tracks to mono and I still had issues with the one of the main Bass tracks. Again, im a student, I only ask because im confused.

If I remember correctly (I can't check right now), some tracks had certain effects "printed" with no chance to get access to a "clean" version. And you have to make the best out of what has been given to you. This is also part of each month's challenge - as this is also a real-world scenario.

[Oba Ozai]

Thanks

"Unless I'm mistaken, I believe it was meant that we weren't to make our own tempo edit on the mix as opposed to anything like that pre existing. " that makes sense.

Seems the DAW makes a "guess" on tempo when it "reads" the track (im not sure). How ever the way it loaded to my DAW (Cubase 10.5) sounded way off and out of sync. It was not until I changed all tracks to mono and set tempo at 120 that I was able to hear it better.

As for Bass one of the main tracks balance sounded way off to one of the sides, I think it was the L. In any case I decided to change all the tracks to mono, that helped me with the balance.

As for my mix I did not try to put emphasis to each and every track, I was thinking more in spacial terms. I tried to manifest all 3 dimensions.

Im grateful for the challenge, I study on my own, mostly as a hobby.

[Oba Ozai]

Mr Fox, Thanks for your comments, you are correct in both cases, I did change my initial upload and the one you downloaded was at -14 LUFS.

[Mister Fox]

For the future, check if "musical mode" in Cubase is off (Media Pool window), as this activates time stretching.

This is why it's imperative that provided multi-tracks are "consolidated" (all tracks having the same length, although Logic Pro X cuts away silence at the end of the track if there is no more content).

As for the bass(es), there were two bass tracks in stereo with effects on them. You might have needed to "balance" them (as in - pull in center). If I remember correctly, these were some of the tracks that were not made "from scratch" for this particular Mix Challenge. Other than that, there were no split audio tracks or something else weird going on. Else, I would have pointed that out (also during Integrity Checks, which every track goes through before it's added to the Song Pool for future games)


But again - never assume that you get access to perfect recordings / source material.

[Dodgingrain]

Thanks

"Seems the DAW makes a "guess" on tempo when it "reads" the track (im not sure). How ever the way it loaded to my DAW (Cubase 10.5) sounded way off and out of sync. It was not until I changed all tracks to mono and set tempo at 120 that I was able to hear it better.

As for Bass one of the main tracks balance sounded way off to one of the sides, I think it was the L. In any case I decided to change all the tracks to mono, that helped me with the balance.

Definitely not necessary in cubase. You should be importing the wave files into the pool, setting the project tempo to the bpm indicated, and then select all the files in the pool and drag them into the main window. IF you need to time stretch a track set the files original tempo in the pool first, but there was no need for that in this mix imo.

The left/right balance on the bass tracks was fine as is so probably an issue with how you are getting the tracks into cubase

[E.C.Miraldo]

There were no "tempo edits" in this Mix(ing) Challenge

Yeah i mean, not "tempo" edits. But small offsets in the percursion recordings. My bad

[Mister Fox]

What if the "offsets" were intentional, to create a certain groove/wide feel?

Again, this is a question that has been coming up a couple of times, and I can only refer to the FAQ section of the guidelines, Q11. This is where gut instinct over absolute technical perfection comes in.




Regarding the Cubase topic:
I am using Cubase myself - in fact every(!) production that has ever been provided for the Mix Challenge, went through an Integrity Check in Cubase.

The way I always perform is:

• Open up a new/empty project
• Check in with the TXT what BPM this song has, set the tempo map accordingly (CTRL+T)
• Check what the sampling rate and bitrate is, and then set that accordingly for the project
• After that, I drag and drop all WAV/AIF files from by file browser into Cubase, see if I have to confirm any conversion or not (if I set up everything correctly, then there is no warning message)
• I then open the "Media Pool" (CTRL+P) and check if the checkmarks of the "Musical Mode" (the X in the squares) are off. Since we're importing consolidated frils from another host (probably), the tempo number will not be correct

I then give the track a listen and compare it with the demo mix (if the demo mix is based upon the most recent multitracks). If something is off, I'll hear it now. No need to first import into the Media Pool, and then drag and drop from there. Especially since Cubase creates new audio tracks per important wav track.

The next steps are then: setting markers, arranging tracks so that they make sense (maybe put them in subfolders), gain staging, "cutting clean" (if needed), start mixing.

Now I only hope that Cubase 11 will finally get the "Switch Mono Channel to Stereo/Stereo Channel to Mono" feature... but being with Steinberg since the 1990s, I don't think we'll get this quality-of-life feature like Apple/Emagic Logic Pro X has. But this is something for another thread.

[E.C.Miraldo]

What if the "offsets" were intentional, to create a certain groove/wide feel?

I they were then I guess the artist hates me now

For real now, it was the only way i could get the percursion to sound the way our artist referenced with the tracks he gave. Haas effect is something that exists. Maybe it was my bad, maybe it was something good i've done. I understand it's a risk I took, but I think it was a necessary one that doesn't affect the production/art or personality of the song, but only the tightness of the mix.