Mix Challenge

Mister Fox wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 24, 2020 04:59 CET

Frequency Painter wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 24, 2020 00:50 CET

I'm scratching my head here, my metering indicates a level of -1.1 dBTP. What could be the cause? I can read that the EBU calibration standard allows for a 0.6 dB (+0.2/-0.4) tolerance. This is just very strange. Any idea why this could be?

dB Full Scale (dBFS) is not the same as dB True Peak (dBTP). Very basically spoken, and you probably know this already, dB True Peak uses oversampled analysis to find out if your signal overshoots.

According to your posted screenshot, you're using ProTools. I'm not that familiar with ProTools anymore - but unless the meter bargraphs are set to PPM 5ms (IEC 60268-10 Type I/DIN), which might give you a -1,1dB readout (due to transients slipping through)... you should have gotten a -0,65dBFS readout (notice dBFS - ProTools doesn't have dBTP on the summing bus IIRC).

I just pulled your project into Wavelab again, and shows me: -0,6525dB as highest peak for both dBFS and dBTP.

Also - the +-0,2dB/-0,4dB tolerance is not quite correct anymore (I think you got this from the Fabfilter forum, and the old Limiter "True Peak" test page). It depends on the oversampling ratio used. If it's 4x, then the tolerance is +-0,5dBTP. But if it's 8x, we already talk +-0,16dBTP. Izotope tools should(!) show dBTP - at least the Ozone Analyzer should (I don't know at what oversampling ratio though).

For reference:

► Show Spoiler

R-REC-BS.1770-4-201510-I!!PDF-E.pdf
Algorithms to measure audio programme loudness and true-peak audio level ITU-R BS.1770-4 (10/2015), Page 20.

Link: https://www.itu.int/dms_pubrec/itu-r/re ... !PDF-E.pdf

Then again, if you (for example) mixed at a reference level of -18dB = 0VU, and your VU range is between +-3VU (aka: -21dB to -15dB avg signal strength, 300ms ballistics, unweighted -- aka a VU), then only extreme transient processing should result in exceeding -1dBFS or even -1dBTP. Most of the time your signal doesn't even go higher than -2dB though (speaking from experience).

Your mix is technically not clipping "yet" - but definitely in the red zone and outside the in the rule set recommended "limitations". As mentioned in my long last post: if I would have been the song provider, I wouldn't have disqualified you for that in this mixing game (unless your mixdown clearly exceeded -14LUFS), just asked you to have an eye on that in the future.

Snarowitz wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 24, 2020 02:08 CET

I had some thoughts on the discussion before the rd2 announcement were made:

Ultimately, I agree with what all were saying. It’d be nice to be able to have more direct conversations with the song provider, and even a relationship. As sound mixers/engineers, and many musicians I’m sure, we are capable of being more involved in production, and creative collaboration. However, because this is a competition with many (many, many) entries, I think it is paramount to maintain a level playing field for all. This is, after all a mix challenge. So it makes sense that no production changes, or mastering techniques are allowed.

While the rules clearly state "no mastering" or "do not change the arrangement, unless otherwise stated", there is nothing that holds you off from asking questions. I always encourage communication between the participants and the song provider. Sometimes it works, and really well on top. Sometimes not. I really have no control over this.

Snarowitz wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 24, 2020 02:08 CET

I’d love to be a part of a production challenge, but I don’t see how this could be possible with 50+ contestants. As a song provider, I couldn’t imagine having to build relationships with 50+ collaborators in 3 weeks. And, even if you could build all of those relationships, how would you ever pick a winner having been so involved with all the mixes?

This is why we tried the Remix Challenge ever so often.

Else, a pure "production challenge" is definitely the monthly recurring Songwriting Competition. Complete with a very, very detailed premise each month, and plenty of audio examples to get inspired from (if you're not familiar with this genre). Maybe take another look.

Clueless wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 24, 2020 02:32 CET

So, I've probably said enough already, but
Should, I, in future just go for a mix that pleases me, reducing or muting stems that I don't feel add to the mix I want to achieve?
I'm somewhat lost, I read the rules and try to adhere, should i, in future, if I participate submit my own take of what I think works.?
As there are many paths that can be taken in order to make a mix. Big reverb, stripped down bare, more bass, less atmosphere, more ambient, chilled out., the list is endless, almost.
Would love to hear other's opinions expressed here, or should this be taken to another post?

I've asked a lot of questions, I'll leave and hope that others can give me some clarity

It is quite simple really - and this is why the "Words by the Song Provider" exist, and why I try to get as many information for the mix packages as possible.

You take and edit the provided multitracks "as is". You are not allowed to omit tracks unless it's... a stereo track where there is no stereo content in it, you've split it into multi-mono and discard one of the channels. Or if there are like 5 microphones used for recording a sound source, and you decide "blending 2 of them is enough to get the same over-the-top sound". Another example would be "clean cutting" a drum set - if you're after that super sterile pop rock drum sound rather than more vintage with various type of mic bleed.

Everything (else) is basically working by your gut instinct. You can either go by the provided "demo mix", which is setting a certain mood, or read up on (hopefully) provided references or hints in which direction this could go, then shape your own sound. As in: big reverb or not, a balance between instruments, blending similar sound sources into one "sound cloud", etc.

Or as I wrote it for every mix(ing) challenge: try to create a mix that complements this production - in your own style.

This is what the Mix(ing) Challenge is trying to teach... the same is happening in the real world. You... have an own style of mixing, your own "sound". A possible client approaches you because of that particular reason. The Mix(ing) Challenge is basically a "Mass Audio Engineer Shootout"




I'm reposting this topic (Clueless) in the Mix Challenge - General Gossip Thread. I invite everyone to continue the conversation there to keep the thread a bit more streamlined.

GaryRegnier wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 23, 2020 21:21 CET

Shoma
Good start and I really like the way you have brought the rhythm to life and tightened it all up. 2nd section the low synths could lose some low end, only a little, taste rather than a technical point. Maybe lose some mids on solo vocal section? Nice dynamic ending too, like the handling of strings at end as well, very good work