Mix Challenge

Mister Fox, I think there's a mistake in the statistic sheet.
The row for the Martial.Levesque's stats has a "poss. production changes (muting)" comment, but I think this comment must be for me (we have the same forename...).

I checked, and you are indeed correct, @MartialFromentin -- I seem to have shifted a line.

HOWEVER... while your entry used volume automation (mutes), the entry by Martial.Levesque actually has some pitch adjustments (glides) as transition effect that wasn't there before.

I will adjust / update the Statistic Sheets shortly (later tonight)

Hi Mister Fox,

Thank you for the adjustement with MaritalFormentin line, indeed it was not related to my mix.

Also regarding the pitch adjustments you are refering to, i must say that i did not do any, exept using a little bit of chorus on the voice. Also i did not modify the mix after my first submission.

Let me know if you need more info.

Thank you !

I am merely going by your description for the second verse transition, which does mention a bass slide down effect. However, I can remove that comment again. I really can't check every mix in minute detail as well.

Sorry Mister Fox, but there is still a mistake:

Current update:
Martial.Levesque.wav | -0.96 dB / -1.25 dB | poss. production changes (pitch glide as transition FX)
MartialFromentin.wav | -2.05 dB / -1.86 dB | warning: loudness specs, poss. production changes (muting)

But it must be:
Martial.Levesque.wav | -0.96 dB / -1.25 dB | warning: loudness specs, poss. production changes (pitch glide as transition FX)
MartialFromentin.wav | -2.05 dB / -1.86 dB | poss. production changes (muting)

Martial.Levesque, could you change your forename to avoid further mistakes?

MartialFromentin wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 31, 2024 11:10 CET

Martial.Levesque, could you change your forename to avoid further mistakes?

Nah, we all better might be Martial-whatever. It would be more fun. At least one month.

MartialFromentin wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 31, 2024 11:10 CET

Sorry Mister Fox, but there is still a mistake:

This should now be sorted out.

LCM! wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 31, 2024 15:30 CET

MartialFromentin wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 31, 2024 11:10 CET

Martial.Levesque, could you change your forename to avoid further mistakes?

Nah, we all better might be Martial-whatever. It would be more fun. At least one month.

I like that idea. We can call it the Martial Mix month.

In honour of the Martial Amp.

The aim to make it the mix as loud and edgy as possible.

Kind of like changing the gain knob to 11….rock and roll!

On a general discussion topic which I started thinking about during this challenge, should we forget all these 'classic' mixbus compressors altogether? Surely in the digital age we need to be able to choose an attack, release and ratio without the stepped controls? I know it's designed partly to try to make your life easier, but surely we shouldn't be trying to make our lives easier, we should be trying to make the mix better and if our life is hard as a result then shouldn't we try to deal with that challenge? I am thinking of changing to having a digital compressor on the mixbus and then select 'bus' mode and just start listening. Sure try to use the others and compare, but I am sick and tired of being flogged some lie that the SSL has a unique sound to it etc. if it does have a unique sound it could be the characteristics of having the timings set badly. The auto release setting is all very well on the SSL unit but I'm loathed to trust a black box like this, just as I'm loathed to trust "The God Particle". I think as mixers we ought to be trying to make everything manual and everything clear and transparent to us with as few mysterious black boxes as possible.

Thoughts? I suspect the response might well be something along the lines of "do what works for you mate". I do get that different people work better and worse with different styles of mixing and that the tools ought to reflect a style. However there is something I think we need to beware of which is that many companies are trying to flog us things and virtually no-one is trustworthy in what they tell us. If you think something is working for you it could be you've been sold something which you like but in fact it's not helping. There is frankly no way the SSL bus compressor is worth like $300 or whatever it is. Please no-one buy this. Don't even buy it for $30 when they reduce it by 90% at Christmas time. It's not worth anything at all, it's an outdated but cherished piece of music history that should be left behind. Rant over (hope you enjoyed zed999)

scottfitz wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 01, 2025 10:52 CET

...(hope you enjoyed zed999)

Who me? lol
Of course, most emulations seem to be the digital effect + distortion + eq when it comes down to basics.
Then again I can't mix well enough to be looking for that "magic" so maybe it does exist but it's for others more worthy than I.