Mix Challenge

The Cambridge Multitrack Repository is a well known source which was also considered to be used "If the Mix Challenge is running dry" (which I can't, because legal reasons). Cross referencing is fine. Maybe I should add a pinned thread with more material to learn from.


@Oba Ozai - I still can't see most of your screenshots. But I get the idea. Keep up the good work, experiment more, but trust in Cubase's ability to "compensate" plugins that introduce latency.




I am still on the "Statistics Sheet". I need to triple check the thread and rethink some things in the process. Please give me until the end of Tuesday to post the PDFs.

Hi everyone !

What an amazing experience to hear my song mixed in so many different ways. Super cool to hear how different musical influences and tastes can deliver creative new directions on the track too.

I started listening and making notes on each mix since the beginning because I was expecting to have to review least 20 - 25 mixes.
But wow, I wasn't expecting over 60 ! I'm humbled at how much time you have all invested to mix my track, and share your methods so we can learn from each other, and I am very grateful for that.

I'm also surprised how much I am learning from your mixes. My original idea was "Who can deliver the best possible mix for my track?". But at the same time I wanted to leave the field open, because the mixing process can be as creative as the songwriting process. It can also make or break a song. Which depends as much on the songwriter's preferences as it does on the mixing engineer's technical prowess.

As a result, I've got a huge variety of mixes to evaluate now !

I'm going to give feedback on all the mixes, even the late ones that were disqualified, because I think the primary purpose of this exercise is to learn, and I owe you my feedback in return for the time you put into creating your mix for this competition. I will be spending a fair amount of this week (evenings), especially Friday and Saturday, doing this, and will share my feedback with you all this coming weekend.

I will take into account lots of factors, but the mixes that I will select for round 2 will basically have shown an overall slickness and coherence in their mix even if it deviated in style from the reference mix. And one factor that really differentiates one mix from another for me is variety and stimulation of interest (regardless of whether it's a driving electro style or a laid-back lounge style, both of which I've heard so far). Does the mix enhance anticipation before the delivery, does it carry well the transitions between sections of the song, or alternatively create an interesting contrast between sections ? Does it enhance the emotional impact of the track ?

In reply to cpsmusic who asked about who mixed and mastered the reference track: I did, and I am an amateur mixer like many of you, and I intend to learn from this competition as much as you ! I will share with you after the competition how I did it and with what plugins etc.

Take care, look after your health, until this weekend!

The "Overview of Submissions" PDFs have been uploaded.
You can check them through the upper post. (post #87)

Apologies for the waiting time, this has taken me longer than planned. I will get to that in a minute.


As mentioned in July 2020, this data sheet is used for giving an overview of all entries, and whether or not they are within given parameters (loudness, sampling rate, bitrate). Please take note that creating this is not a fully automated process. I am using Wavelab 10's "Batch Analysis" tool, but the layout and highlighting the issues, is time consuming. If you do not find yourself on this list, please let me know (I triple checked the whole thread, but I'm only human myself).


We have a disqualification rate of 31,15% for November 2020 (61 entries, 19 disqualifications).

In comparison to previous months:
October (33,70%, 92 entries, 31 disqualifications), September 2020 (32,60%, 46 entries, 15 disqualifications), August 2020 (28,57%, 35 entries, 10 disqualifications) and July 2020 (40,37%, 109 entries, 44 disqualifications).




A commentary on this month's entries:

Even though I clearly announced that a lack of documentation (even rudimentary) will result in a disqualification, you will notice that I have really only drawn the line where there were just screenshots of the arranger, or no documentation at all. Despite the announcement on page 1, I've been once again lenient this month. However, there is still so much more room for improvements from/for everyone.

I understand that documenting what you did might eventually not be your thing. But I've read so many posts alongside their entries that really went in-depth of tool usage rather than just mentioning "I've layered the drum loops, and then added some upper harmonics".

So... how exactly did you do that? What tool did you use and/or can recommend?



In my opinion, a better documentation would have been:

Example 1 (completely fictional):
"I've blended the two channels in such a way, that there was a focus on the kick drum, while the rest was blended in to taste. Since the snare drum didn't push through as much as I hopped, I've applied a transient designer (my tool of choice is XYZ, I've overdid it on purpose) and also used a bandpass filter with the cut-off points at 100Hz and 9,5kHz (each with 12dB/Oct). Then I sculpted the frequencies around 3,3 kHz to really make things pop".

Example 2 (a trick that I personally use myself from time to time):
"To get the vocals to stand out more, I've first applied proper EQ (low cut at 120Hz, boosts and cuts at frequencies ABC and XYZ), then slightly compressed it with moderate settings (settings: ratio/attack/release - recommendation for gain reduction). Then to make them really pop, one of my secret saucees is a parallel process that I then mix alongside with the vocals. In this case, I've slightly overcompressed the copied channel, then distorted it with a tube distortion simulation (maybe even band-pass filtered the signal before going into the distortion to get a different tone). The rest is down to taste (blending in). To gel things together - I've also applied a suitable AUX FX (Delay / Reverb)"


This is a way better explanation where people can learn from in my opinion than just writing "I've applied some upper harmonics", and then move on. It really shouldn't be that much less.

What I'd love to read in the future of the Mix(ing) Challenges, even beyond MC072 / December, is just a bit more on that particular behalf. I have revisited the thread several times (which was the most time consuming part with the statistics sheet this month) and have been really wrecking my head about what to do with enforcing this well known and long established rule. I really had to give free passes for some participants, because they did write 1-2 sentences and didn't just post a screenshot, or nothing at all. But it didn't feel fair to all others that really went all out and invested time in their documentation / tool listing compared to just "yeah... I've blended things together as much as I could, I hope you like that".



For the future:

Please provide suitable documentation and/or maybe some additional tips and tricks. Don't just post one sentence and or screenshots of your arranger view/part of your mix console anymore. This community is all about learning from each other. As of now (November 2020), if you do not document your edits by the end of the deadline, or at least talk about one certain sound setup you're really proud off and how you got there (with listing your used tools), you will be disqualified.

I will make adjustments the official rule book by 1st December 2020 to properly address this. Please, we can do better.




Another thing that really stung, was seeing regulars being disqualified for small / careless mistakes.

Most notably, signal overshots. And by that, I mean dBTP max (maximum signal strength). While limiters should ideally not be a thing on the summing bus for plain mixing -- if you don't abuse a limiter / clipper for "squashing purposes", it is (IMHO) okay to use limiters to keep rogue signals in check. Even at -16LUFS ILk, just clipping away the "rogue peaks" has barely any noticeable impact on your mix. That is a dynamic range of +-15dB! Better be save than sorry.

One slight adjustment that will happen to the rule book as well, is me dropping the "lowest average signal strength" from -23 LUFS ILk down to -24 LUFS ILk +-0LU. You might notice that one participant landed around -23,3LUFS on the statistics sheet, yet this was no factor for a disqualification (another factor was). Then there was another participant that went down to -24,5LUFS ILk. However even with the +-0,3LU tolerances, I've drawn the line and said "sorry, but you've undershot".

Taking this slight adjustment into consideration, you can now have target loudness within a range of 8 LU! (-24 LUFS ILk absolute minimum to -16LUFS ILk absolute maximum). This should cover/accommodate every type of workflow.





I (re-)open the field for everyone to give each other feedback (highly encouraged). This will be independent to the client feedback however. Glad to read that @patrlord is already in the middle of the evaluation.


Please watch this spot for the client feedback and Mix Round 2 participant announcement.

In the meantime, why not check out the sample collection thread for SWC041 / Community Scramble (January 2021)?

Well that took a while, but it was very enlightening.
I've reviewed 62 mixes, spending an average of 10 minutes on each, so that's about 10 hours of reviewing.
I'm putting the final touches to my feedback plus identifying some specific additional guidance for the 10 finalists for round 2.
I will post the results in the next day or so, hold on in there !

Has the evaluation results being posted yet I was just checking

It has not so far. Once the feedback is posted, I will update the thread and inform all Mix Round 2 participants.

Hi everyone,

Here is my feedback on your mixes !
It was difficult. There is a huge variety of entries, employing lots of styles and creative techniques.

Before you read my feedback, I want to tell you a story that will put you in the frame of mind for it.

My brother and I are both keen electronic music composers. We started sharing our tracks and giving feedback to each other about a year ago. We have slightly different styles and tastes and respect that. In fact, we were so nice to each other, complementing this and that, and trying not to offend. Of course not much came of it.

Then we shared our track stems with each other with the goal of trying to improve each other’s mixes. And we started becoming directly critical of each other’s tracks without trying to be nice. We decided to risk annoying the other to say what we really think. For my tracks, my brother’s direct feedback led to an amazing improvement in my mix. I disagreed with half of his feedback but it didn’t matter. The other half I realised I could learn from and I am so grateful how much I was able to improve my mix based on just a couple of things I was blind to before.

Please consider my feedback as that critical ear that may be even 80% wrong (or simply doesn’t speak to you because I have a different taste) but even if you only agree with 20% of my comments and that helps improve your mix, whatever your style, then great !

I’ve tried to be balanced, but reviewing over 60 tracks is a challenge.. A single strange snare sound (to my ears) might stand out amongst 20 beautifully balanced stems. Listening to all the mixes, it’s easy to take for granted the overall great flow, balance, and treatment that you’ve applied to what was a really clunky set of dry tracks (I even removed effects that were part of the original DI presets, making them sound nothing like the original preset - the Blue in Grey pad is one example). So if I say ’sits well’, ‘fits in mix well’ etc. that means that it’s really good, it sounds great ! … and my specific comments are usually focusing on the small things that I’d like to improve.

For those of you who want to get a more complete feedback from me, please ask and I’ll provide (as soon as I can, time permitting!)

So here it is : Mix-challenge feedback

I enabled comments so you can add your thoughts within the spreadsheet too.

My top tracks are by:
* Alavault
* Canese
* Flat_hat
* Green-Dog
* Jerze
* JulienMeirone
* Kirurg
* MattRocket
* Photonic (but disqualified, sorry!)
* Rvalle
* Tonnobass
* VasDim

And for these 11 finalists, on top of the individual feedback in the spreadsheet, here are my specific asks:
(I will often reference bar numbers to which my comments correspond).
Please also check my feedback spreadsheet for any other points (e.g. tonal balance).
What’s really cool about this mix challenge is that you can read my specific comments on other mixes and really get a good feel for what I like in different contexts. So you may find what I say about other tracks useful for you too.

—> Specific requests for Mix Round 2: Finalist Feedback

Plus one ask for all of you:
* Please turn the Blue in Grey pad into a pad so it doesn’t sound like an organ. It was never meant to sound like an organ but because I created a ‘dry’ version for the mix, it lost a lot of its original character, which I regret. But if you add some FX you can smooth it out into a pad as per the reference track (listen in particular to the break at bar 89 in the reference track)
* The lead sound is also super weedy compared to my reference track. I stripped out all sorts of FX including saturation and tremolo to give you the dry version which again I kind of hate, so you have to put back all the stuff to give it some body and presence like a true lead

Thanks everyone !

Hi All,

Many thanks to the song provider for the extensive feedback!

I have a couple of suggestions related to the feedback that might be helpful for future competitions and that shouldn't be too time-consuming for the provider.

Firstly, something that I would find useful would be some sort of overall ranking of the mixes that would give the mix competitors an idea of how close they were to getting into the second round. For example, "A" gets into the second round, "B" just misses, "C" is good but misses in several areas, etc.

Secondly, (and the song provider has sort-of done this) if the song provider identifies a problem with a mix, then they could point to another mix that has solved the problem or fixed whatever was wrong. For example, "low end is too boomy, refer to xxxxx.mix for how I prefer the low end".

Anyway, these are just a couple of ideas that would help me to improve my mixes.

Cheers,

Chris

hello @patrlord and everyone,
sorry that I could not do this project, I want to complete my abilities in a different area, and I have no talent to produce reasonable electronica stuff.

but I hope it is appropriate and useful, to give a survey about what and how this one looks to me.

-- at first, we have a composer with detailed ideas, and technically it seems a very instructive challenge to the participants, in how to treat these rather raw tracks, to make something palpatable of it. and we have many remarks on these details, this is really great.


but also, for me some general questions and views seem very important and there may be interest to discuss, perhaps then it should continue in the "philosophic" threads that are general to production and music business.
here in the thread, I will try to relate the remarks to the project.

there is no such thing like telepathy, no one really knows what is not told (perhaps it is so in a loving couple..)
but there may be strong resonance, after the fact of a very good creation.


-- one big question is about self-awareness, to learn more about how the composer sees himself in all relevant contexts.

how do we get from some idea and melody to the paying audience? in short, we can look at a metaphorical layout like this:
- the composer is the deity, and creates a universe of ideas, ideals, emotions, dynamics and moves.
- but then we need the high priest - producer, mixer, singer, journalists - to complete the whole thing and give it a human interpretation for "normal" people to understand and like it. it is the concrete packaging, and paving ways for how to talk about it. also this is its own role because of the huge work to do.
- then, there will be some form of the choir
- and the normal audience

-- and in this picture I have the urgent question:
what is it? anu ba?? nandeska???

I want to see your self-awareness as an artist within culture and civilization.
(question sounds too big but when an answer exists, it will be a quite simple and easy one.)
then I can try to support and enhance a project.



-- one important context is "industry" - to know how many hundred million people are familiar with certain sounds, to see how you get pulled into a certain direction immediately when you use these sounds, and it may happen after you reach over 10.000 plays on social media, and they begin to talk about it.

does it resemble
Real McCoy - Another Night https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pav2f4b-1ZE ??
please excuse the cheesiness but you are using practically the same sounds with less density and less clear intention in the arrangement, aside from the choice and directing of vocal performance,
- the vocal makes me wonder, what is the purpose?
and of course, the bass is massive and has to be!

so, you may not have composed such a thing, but aside from the vocals, I believe you have recorded such a thing.
it is no wonder, that the mixers did, what they did.
- the singer in the McCoy example is the "filipina" type (for reasons of popular singing culture, this has become absolutely a thing in eurobeat and eurodance, which have a huge niche on YT still today with new compilations),
and you could hire such a voice for a couple hundred bucks and she will lay down a hit, given everything else is right. (beware the posers)

we could mention a lot of electronic bands
Voyage voyage https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM2ZhByFcDk
then, there are the Pet Shop Boys and Alphaville (for a male voice and such melody),
or, Depeche Mode https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_3dc6X-Iwo (this live show should make clear the whole vibe that has to be created)
and all these also because of the type of melody!

and where does this music lead at all?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KW1NbZo-ruo I am wondering, what has really moved??
in younger productions, the beats have somewhat different feel, and most vocals have become entirely computerized.

the modern way is of course Billie https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgBJmlPo8Xw



--- so, if it is not this, then...
one guy did something very different, but has anyone noticed it?
- it is franz,
please everyone listen again.
then a few others took it up, more or perhaps less consciously.

what do I mean?
franz took the whole thing, and instinctively saw it as a Musical,
he created two layers: the stage with the singer, and the background music.
and given the vocals, to me this is the only interpretation of the big -"what is it?"- that actually could work at all.
and it sounds like a live musical in a TV production, the modern, cost-oriented production without an orchestra.
this is happening. it has the drama. this is actually doing SOMETHING !!

it might be an "alphaville" hommage musical (look how there is a "Falco" musical), it may be not perfect, but it has a wholeness, it is a credible performance. proximity effect of the mic was left in, and will increase the "live" impression. same for the reverbs that include the snare. the very loud instrumental finale is legit too, because the singer has delivered his message, and the audience now has time to think about it and feel its emotions, before applause is allowed to start.

the singer seems to come from this culture:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGb4hj-EXt0 of course there are electronic versions that save the cost of an orchestra.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr8z-yyGqF8

as another example in this direction,
I think that @Matik did also a great projection of the personality of the singer and of the composer.
I agree that the @Photonic mix sounds great, it might be the BlueRay soundtrack for the musical, but also a single release after the fact.


TL;DR
I believe it is entirely legit and the right thing to do, to give the singer and his way of expression absolute priority.
when the singer sounds "Musical", it IS Musical.
point is, art and music have to tell a story, and the whole process around it makes the story even bigger.
anyone of you can tell a very different or opposing story as well. audiences and ratings will decide...

JohnK wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 01, 2020 21:48 CET

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rzz1powf3oh0r ... K.wav?dl=0

JohnK you did a great job indeed, good luck next time.
Ps: I don't know him but his mix is a very good one, and I'm shocked when I didn't see his name in R2.anyway good luck with R2 everyone.