Mix Challenge

It is the 24th August 2023, 00:08 UTC+2/CEST - the extended first Mix Round has officially ended

This month I'm working a bit different. There will be the usual official "End of Mix Round 1" post, but I do need to clean up the thread first, as there are a lot of double posts that have been deleted, and one possible entry that might have been deleted by accident. This in turn shifts things around, and I rather triple check that I have everything.

For the time being, I do count circa 80 entries. I will know a definite number after working myself through the thread again.


HOWEVER:

⚠	Moderation Message from Mister Fox
	While I am in the process of cleaning up the thread, which will take me a couple of hours (since Songwriting Competition 072 also just closed out), I am offering you one final chance to get your links and filenames in order. You have until 25-AUG-2023 03:00 UTC+2/CEST to fix your file access, and change the filename to the correct template. The template is still (see #post 001 and the Mix Pack bundled TL;DR Rules.txt) Code: Select all MC093__Rocketgoldstar__Born_Taurus_Man__ForumUsername.wav Affected users: File not accessible (would otherwise result in "Tagged OUT") -- @servandisco, @Jo Sanas File not associated to user/participant (would otherwise result in "Tagged OUT", also check filename!!!) -- @TheodorChatzopoulos (even got a PM), @IMM, @AnalogDomain, @Goranotti Filename template not used (would otherwise result in "Tagged disqualified")-- @Necaster (even got a PM), @Christoph Stoll (even got a PM), @Ntsakosoul (even got a PM), @servandisco, @DOUGLAS COSTA, @Slickster716, @monjeco, @jetwolf You are only allowed to fix your download link and the filename. No re-upload / no re-post - I will cross-check the corresponding posts for timestamps. This is a one-time offer - please don't let this go to waste.

I'll follow-up with the usual posts shortly.



EDIT 25-AUG-2023 5:20 UTC+2/CEST:
@AnalogDomain and @jetwolf changed the filename hours after the allowed deadline for changes...

Sorry for the typo. Fixed.

Thanks so much Mr. Fox for the warning it is much appreciated. It should be fixed now.

Hello everyone! Can I just say thank you so much for taking part in this mix contest. I really means a lot to me.

For a large part of my life my world was dominated by Rocketgoldstar but time passes and it just hasn’t figured in my recent life. We have never split up but just have these indeterminate periods of inactivity. Busy bees etc. However…

This mix challenge so far has been delightful as so many of you have been incredibly kind and complementary. It really does reignites the passions in me for this band that has been in my life for so long. I still believe…

So a big big thank you not just from me but also from Frank and Sion who have been following along.

I'd like to jump on here to point something out, as 10 minutes after uploading my mix I realized I'd made a mistake. However, due to the rules of no re-uploading, I left it as is and will just suck it up

But I figured I'd share as this is a learning community, and in the real world if I had sent this to a client, I would have made the correction and re-sent an updated version with my explanation. Since I can't resend anything for the challenge...I'm going to at least give an explanation, in case the band reads this stuff.

During the mix, at some point I slapped autotune on the vocal...to see if it would make things sound a bit more "modern" and also as a reminder to go over the vocals and manually tune anything that was needed (although nothing was really needing to be tuned on this song to be honest). Anyway, since I waited until the last minute to do this mix, once I had an hour left to make my bounce and upload before the timer ran out, I knew there was no chance to go through and manually tune the vocals...but....in my hurry....

I FORGOT TO TAKE THE AUTOTUNE OFF!!!!!!! And, unfortunately it is really blowing a few notes way out of key. Totally a dummy mistake and I just want to document the fact that it was just that...a mistake. I'd love to apologize to the band for that. It was really just on as a reminder to go back and do it properly, but in my rush I messed up and left it in.

Live and learn. But anyway, if anyone would like to comment on my mix, aside from the horrible autotune in spots...it's on page 13. I'm looking forward to going through and listening to more mixes. Good luck all!

It is the 25th August 2023, 05:55 UTC+2/CEST - the first Mix Round has officially ended

First and foremost, let me thank @Gaz Williams for his very positive feedback on MC093. This is very appreciated, and I hope this will result in even more interaction on our community in the future.

Then another very warm welcome to all new participants, nice meeting you and I hope you'll enjoy your stay. I assume, most of you dropped in through "Sonic State". As usual, a huge thank you to everyone that is spreading the word about the Mix Challenge.

Most notably @Gaz, and his guerilla promotion during "Sonic TALK #766" (09-AUG-2023), and apparently now also "Sonic Talk #768" (23-AUG-2023), indeed.

Please also help get the Songwriting Competition as popular (SWC072 is currently in the voting process, SWC073 will start on 01-SEP-2023).


On to the Statistics - which took me a while to work myself through the thread. I am still waiting for a response from one user via PM that might have accidentally withdrawn an entry. If I will get that sorted out within the next 24 to 48 hours, I will re-add this user to the overall statistics.


STATISTICS:

• If I didn't miscount, we have 82 submissions this month (82 prior to the deadline, 00 after the deadline, not counting re-submissions)
• We have 0 submissions after the deadline (as of 25-AUG-2023 6:05 UTC+2/CEST)
• We have 1 submission that could not be downloaded by the time of this post and is therefore disqualified (re-checked 23-AUG-2023 5:20 UTC+2/CEST)
• We have 0 submissions not submitted in public, but via PM (see Rule Book, post #6, Upload and Submission Guidelines)
• We have 1 submission that has been withdrawn (entry counts as "submission within the deadline")
• Overview of Submissions - is your entry within given parameters? (PDF - updated: 29-AUG-2023 05:30 UTC+2/CEST, full sheet)
• Overview of Submissions (disqualifications only) (PDF - updated: updated: 29-AUG-2023 05:30 UTC+2/CEST)

INFORMATION:
Statistic Sheets have been updated (on 29-AUG-2023 05:35 UTC+2/CEST)
Statistic Sheets are not available yet, please wait for the official announcement post -- sheets will arrive by mid 27-AUG-2023 latest
.

⚠	Moderation Message from Mister Fox
	Important Update: As of MC081, the Song Providers can now decide from the start, or once the Statistics Sheet has been provided, which route to go in terms of providing feedback. You can read more about this in the Mix Challenge - changes to main game (October 2021) thread. Our Song Provider for this month, @Gaz, decided to go the "(Feedback for) Top 15" route. We will keep you updated.

.


I now open the field for everyone to give each other feedback (highly encouraged). This will be independent to the client feedback however.


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

Good luck to all participants.





The Songwriting Competition 072 (SWC072) is in the voting period.

If you want to, please check out all 11 amazing entries. Outside feedback is always welcome (voting is not necessary). And if you like the overall concept, you're invited to join SWC073, starting 01-SEP-2023.

Please spread the word!

SDB_12 wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 25, 2023 03:44 CEST

I'd like to jump on here to point something out, as 10 minutes after uploading my mix I realized I'd made a mistake. However, due to the rules of no re-uploading, I left it as is and will just suck it up

But I figured I'd share as this is a learning community, and in the real world if I had sent this to a client, I would have made the correction and re-sent an updated version with my explanation. Since I can't resend anything for the challenge...I'm going to at least give an explanation, in case the band reads this stuff.

During the mix, at some point I slapped autotune on the vocal...to see if it would make things sound a bit more "modern" and also as a reminder to go over the vocals and manually tune anything that was needed (although nothing was really needing to be tuned on this song to be honest). Anyway, since I waited until the last minute to do this mix, once I had an hour left to make my bounce and upload before the timer ran out, I knew there was no chance to go through and manually tune the vocals...but....in my hurry....

I FORGOT TO TAKE THE AUTOTUNE OFF!!!!!!! And, unfortunately it is really blowing a few notes way out of key. Totally a dummy mistake and I just want to document the fact that it was just that...a mistake. I'd love to apologize to the band for that. It was really just on as a reminder to go back and do it properly, but in my rush I messed up and left it in.

Live and learn. But anyway, if anyone would like to comment on my mix, aside from the horrible autotune in spots...it's on page 13. I'm looking forward to going through and listening to more mixes. Good luck all!

Bad luck about the mistake but a good lesson for everyone to learn. I almost did something similar a while back - decided to check the mix in mono then forgot to reset it to stereo for the final render! I caught the mistake but could have easily missed it if I was rushing or not paying attention.

Cheers!

Hi all,
I have always believed that modern music should have a bigger dynamic range, classical music benefits so much from this and I feel like it's been long forgotten, it's become normal that we expect limited dynamics from pop/rock/dance etc.

On this tune we can see some of the challenges of a more dynamic recording. On my mix, I wanted the listener to be very aware of the differences in the lead vocals, with a moderate level at the drum entry to a louder level as he hits those higher notes. To achieve this it needs to be that the drum track sounds strong vs the voice initially and then is enveloped somewhat later.

The downside is that when the vocal level is relatively low, it doesn't impact as much and as we know, louder sounds better and I feel this is the slippery slope that has lead us to having commercial vocal tracks which deliver that constant pressure. In my mind, we are waiting and 'saving up' the energy to make a bigger impact later and in this way music can be more emotionally satisfying.

I remember seeing a documentary about Queen and I noted that they were described as never being thought of as "cool". I think one of the aspects that their music has which leads to this is the dynamics and it's relationship with classical music (which is never cool in the slightest). The sad thing is that Queen were probably the best rock band ever, but history hasn't written it up this way because well, they weren't cool! It's almost like they were too good, too humble and too playful and destroyed the illusion of 'the rock star' that others achieved by simply playing up to what people wanted them to be.

Anyway the point of all this is that throughout the mixing process I was wondering how can we do a thing like set a global vocal compression setting and similarly on other elements when this is such a blunt and almost disrespectful way to treat the music? Perhaps the constraints of time simply don't allow us to do more, but I did consider splitting the music into separate sections which each had their own compression settings, sadly I had nowhere near enough time to attempt it. Did anyone else start to think like that or have a different way to understand what needs to be done?

Well said, @scottfitz. I think you've hit the nail on the head here.

I also feel that this is what the song provider was referring to, when he mentioned that there might almost be a right and a wrong way to mix this kind of production. The wrong way being a static mix.
Automation is absolutely the key here, in my opinion.

I tried to really embrace the dynamics, at the risk of being too bold about it. (e.g. 'Silence...')
But I also felt that to try and make it work, I had to compromise a bit, and not certain at all if I have achieved that goal.
Vocal tone is still at the center of my worries. The fatness of the drums and other elements as well. There is still so much left to improve. You could really dig in and automate all of your compressor settings, and you probably should to some degree, but be conscious how much this can also alter the tonal balance. It's so tricky. Then you'll be tempted to start automating EQ and well that's probably also a very dangerous thing which I would try to avoid, especially in multi mic setups.

Speaking of which, I think I've botched the piano, because it is all over the place spatially, and a lot of it just disappears in mono. I like how it sounds in stereo, but I fear it's not actually a great stereo sound. Probably the blend of the second mic pair, which might have been better off with the pan reversed. I might have also flipped the phase of one pair because I thought it sounded better. I'm missing experience to judge if that was okay. Probably not. But well, I'm here to learn.

I could have spent another few days tweaking, too, but I was really worried that I would end up making it worse and at some point drew a line (pun unintended) and thought, now is the time to wait for client feedback. To see which way to go from here, if I get a chance. But I also knew there would be a hot weekend coming up, and no way my PC could have coped with that. It shut itself down several times during rendering when it wasn't that hot. It's a very old machine, I'm saving up for something new. Until then - anyone have tips how to adjust rendering speeds in Reaper? I would be fine with real-time, but not a fan of bouncing.

Still very unsure if this would work at all on modern distribution channels or even today's radio to be honest. Although it's ridiculous, because everywhere (well except vinyl perhaps), the available dynamic range should be much higher today than it was fourty odd years ago. Probably including vinyl if you factor in all the amazing pre-mastering options available today, even if cutting lathes have literally remained the same. (... I wrote pre- because I have learned that cutters can be extremely specific about certain terms).

But much of it has to do with listeners habits of course (tried to avoid the word consumers here), and well from that standpoint I guess the last 20 years have just been a steep regression. Technology didn't make us better listeners I'm afraid.

As far as I know, A Night At The Opera was one of the first productions (if not the first), to make use of computerized automation systems. invented by Neve. The first systems became commercially available a year or two later, so I'm guessing they used a prototype Neve console, or some kind of insert rig. That is pure speculation on my part. I wasn't able to find more detailed information about this online, unfortunately. Actually done on a Trident console. Thanks MrFox.

I think it's hard to appreciate just how much of a game changer (hate that word but true) and enabler that technology was and continued to evolve into over time. The older ones among us have had a similar experience with the digital audio revolution. Just look at your DAWs, any of them (but Reaper in particular, hehe) and the plethora of options they provide, along the miles of rope to hang yourself with. It all sort of started back then.

Enjoying this discussion at the risk of giving all my game away.

Yeah, Queen was never cool, Mr.Fahrenheit.
Damn, can I change my user name? Wish I had thought about it earlier.

Edit: a word, or three

scottfitz wrote: ↑

Sat Aug 26, 2023 01:05 CEST

Hi all,
I have always believed that modern music should have a bigger dynamic range, classical music benefits so much from this and I feel like it's been long forgotten, it's become normal that we expect limited dynamics from pop/rock/dance etc.

On this tune we can see some of the challenges of a more dynamic recording. On my mix, I wanted the listener to be very aware of the differences in the lead vocals, with a moderate level at the drum entry to a louder level as he hits those higher notes. To achieve this it needs to be that the drum track sounds strong vs the voice initially and then is enveloped somewhat later.

The downside is that when the vocal level is relatively low, it doesn't impact as much and as we know, louder sounds better and I feel this is the slippery slope that has lead us to having commercial vocal tracks which deliver that constant pressure. In my mind, we are waiting and 'saving up' the energy to make a bigger impact later and in this way music can be more emotionally satisfying.

I remember seeing a documentary about Queen and I noted that they were described as never being thought of as "cool". I think one of the aspects that their music has which leads to this is the dynamics and it's relationship with classical music (which is never cool in the slightest). The sad thing is that Queen were probably the best rock band ever, but history hasn't written it up this way because well, they weren't cool! It's almost like they were too good, too humble and too playful and destroyed the illusion of 'the rock star' that others achieved by simply playing up to what people wanted them to be.

Anyway the point of all this is that throughout the mixing process I was wondering how can we do a thing like set a global vocal compression setting and similarly on other elements when this is such a blunt and almost disrespectful way to treat the music? Perhaps the constraints of time simply don't allow us to do more, but I did consider splitting the music into separate sections which each had their own compression settings, sadly I had nowhere near enough time to attempt it. Did anyone else start to think like that or have a different way to understand what needs to be done?

The usability of the dynamic range strongly depends on the target group and the listening situation. If we listen to something in an environment with normal environmental noise, we only have a limited range at our disposal, otherwise numerous nuances of the musical performance are simply lost. This certainly pleases neither the musician nor the listener.

Fortunately, the human ear (or brain) interprets volume not only by actual level, but to a large extent also by sound. For example, shouting or whispering in a movie never take place at the natural level, otherwise we would not understand anything in one situation or have to cover our ears in the other. It is no different with musical instruments and singing. That is why it is absolutely important that they are played with the appropriate dynamics during recording. If we then reduce the dynamics in the mix, the listener will still perceive a greater dynamic range due to the sound differences than is actually present.

Likewise, the perception of dynamics in classical music is not only determined by level, but to a much greater extent by the orchestration. That means who plays when with whom and who has how much share in the overall sound. Transferred to popular music it is the same. We can and must significantly reduce the dynamic range of many instruments/vocals, but can create highly dynamic mixes through good composition, orchestration in the mix (x,y,z position and sound), and by always redistributing the volume ratios in the big picture.

So much for the theory, now I just have to manage to put it into practice ;-)