I'm stepping in for a minute to clear some open ended questions.
elroms wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 10:38 CET
Hello, I'd really like to understand why I got disqualified. If I insert the wav file in my DAW (Cakewalk) it shows that it peaks at -1.00 dB, while on your sheet it says -0.70dBTP, which is out of the range.
What tool do you do your measurements with And overall what should I have done, set the peaks at -2.00 dB
This can be easily explained
Decibel Full Scale max (aka dBFS) vs Decibel True Peak max (dBTP max).
While your track might have peaked at -1dBFS (and Wavelab 10 confirms this), chances are that you're still having ISP (Intersample Peaks) that exceed -1dBFS, because either your metering tool doesn't read sample-accurate and/or isn't over-sampled, or your safety limiter (clipping off peaks) is not ISP save.
I am measuring with Wavelab 10, in fact, Wavelab 10's Batch Analyzer as written in the PDFs and the posts above. Wavelab is a host with it's original function being "mastering and finalizing files", creating CDs, Podcasts, etc. The analysis features are as close as it can get to, for example, Nugen Audio's analysis tools (which are the most accurate on the market). But this host offers me a spread sheet output with plenty of data as output.
I am measuring the following:
LUFS Integrated (ILk), dB True Peak (dBTP, Wavelab calls this "Exact" peaks, while "Digital" peaks are dBFS), file length, sampling rate and bitrate. This is exactly what you see in the PDFs... the color codes and layout, is done manually.
How to confirm the readouts:
I can highly recommend Nugen Audio's tools VisLM or MasterCheck. But that might be out of financial reach for a lot of people. The IMHO best freeware alternative is Youlean Loudness Meter 2 (Free), set up to ITU-R BS.1770-4 mode. The "Pro" version even offers offline analysis through drag and drop. Highly recommended, updated on a regular basis (adhering to constant shifts in loudness standards), and the Pro version is fair priced.
:arrow
What could have been done to prevent this:
Your entry brought up two issues -- the first one being that the Integrated Loudness (ILk) was at -15,3 LUFS ILk, the second being that your "True Peak" value exceeded -1dBTP. That is sadly even out of range for allowed tolerances. The easiest solution would have been, to pull back the output signal strength a bit -- read, your stereo mix (sum). By about -1dB as starting point. Either with a gain plugin on the summing bus, or a safety(!!!) limiter set up to "clip away" peaks at -1dBTP and the input gain pulled back by 1dB. Else, no further treatment of the signal.
I am sorry that you ran into this, but we have to have strict and fair rules for everyone.
I hope this explains what was going on.
stefanos wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 11:13 CET
lol my track was too hot to pass??ok... probably whoever decides that is not even engeneer.
I
am an Audio Engineer, and I decided on the values of -16LUFS ILk absolute max (unlike broadcast, no +-1LU range allowed) and -1dBTP absolute max for a reason. That being, that
this is a mixing challenge, and I even made even clear in the second post, that
"Edit/Mix in such a way, that barely any after-touches other than loudness adjustments and final limiting is needed in a possible follow-up mastering step.". (also see
post #7).
So yes, you can go absolutely bonkers with your tools, as long as you do not exceed these given values. Which you sadly did.
Your LUFS ILk value is -11,4 LUFS ILk, and your dBTP max value is +0,20dBTP.
That is way out of defined specs, therefore a violation of established rules, which sadly results your entry being disqualified. It is really that simple. And technically yes, your follow-up documentation is also a bit lackluster IMHO, but you did comment on your mix (what you did), but this is a global topic for the whole game, not just your entry alone.
There is just no arguing as it happened a couple of times already with the "real world situations" comment, if the actual real world is also: "
material too loud, not enough headroom to continue working, do again!" or even
"you've not done your job right, I'm looking for somebody else". I've
been there, multiple times -- which is why these rules exist, which is especially beneficial for novice audio people trying to get a foot into the field (knowledge I wish I could have acquired during my early engineering days). Focus on the important part: creating a good mix that barely(!) needs any treatment later, at a certain maximum loudness.
Which brings me to this:
stefanos wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 11:17 CET
anyway i dont care about the competition, bat its totaly bonkers cheers to moderator..
If you don't care about "the competition", and it's
"totally bonkers" anyway... then why make such a big deal out of it? By joining the game, even just for fun, you still adhere to established rules and confirm this by posting in the corresponding game threads. Arguing later and then saying "this is bonkers" (aka: absolutely idiotic) doesn't lead to anywhere and is only disruptive behavior (
and as both host of this place and admin, I now kindly ask you to stop doing that)
If you want to still participate for fun, but be out of competition in the future, then please just mention that right from the start. In the first paragraph, or below your download link. Then your entry will still be analyzed as part of the statistics process and your entry counts as "submitted within the deadline". But you forfeit your chance to maybe get more feedback, and go into Mix Round 2. The choice is yours.
