MIX CHALLENGE - MC101 December 2024 - Mix Round 2 until 09-JAN-2025 23:59 UTC+1/CET

[Paramnesia]

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?

The reason people use those plugins is yes partly because of timing changes and imperfections but also because of the saturation (addition of even order harmonics) to whatever you run through it.

Digital has the ability to be cold and perfect and just do whatever math you want to a signal where the analog domain is full of imperfections due to components having tolerences. Not even two SSLs in the real world are identical.

You could as you say go digital and get the compression right by your ear but then you would be missing the saturation that was added from the analog circuit that these plugins aim to emulate so you could then just add a saturation plugin and go from there.

As is the nature of mixing if it sounds good its fair play I'd be curious to hear if you come up with something cool!

[scottfitz]

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?

The reason people use those plugins is yes partly because of timing changes and imperfections but also because of the saturation (addition of even order harmonics) to whatever you run through it.

Digital has the ability to be cold and perfect and just do whatever math you want to a signal where the analog domain is full of imperfections due to components having tolerences. Not even two SSLs in the real world are identical.

You could as you say go digital and get the compression right by your ear but then you would be missing the saturation that was added from the analog circuit that these plugins aim to emulate so you could then just add a saturation plugin and go from there.

As is the nature of mixing if it sounds good its fair play I'd be curious to hear if you come up with something cool!

Yeah they add harmonics but again how do we know that the mysterious harmonics that the SSL decides to produce today are right for this song? We must be able to do better now? The same argument goes for all the emulations, although it's all less critical to worry about it it's not on the mixbus. I would suggest that if people do want harmonics added on their mixbus, then definitely get plugin doctor and find out what they are doing exactly. Additionally I would say we should try to hear those harmonics, we need to hear the music with those extra harmonica and without, keeping the other things the same so that we can make a decision that it's better with them, rather than saying "we place on the magic sauce, just because"

[Paramnesia]

Yeah they add harmonics but again how do we know that the mysterious harmonics that the SSL decides to produce today are right for this song? We must be able to do better now? The same argument goes for all the emulations, although it's all less critical to worry about it it's not on the mixbus. I would suggest that if people do want harmonics added on their mixbus, then definitely get plugin doctor and find out what they are doing exactly. Additionally I would say we should try to hear those harmonics, we need to hear the music with those extra harmonica and without, keeping the other things the same so that we can make a decision that it's better with them, rather than saying "we place on the magic sauce, just because"

They aren't mysterious though. It's just even order harmonics, this is the same debate that people had for years about digital, solid state and tube amps. Tube amps add harmonics due to their circuit design and thus sounded "warmer" the reason is that with the harmonics added into the output notes wouldn't sound so harsh because instead of just having a peak at lets say 200 Hz you now have smaller peaks at 100 Hz and 300 Hz (just for an example I'm not doing any real math here) and this would help to round the sound out.

Pure notes just don't sound as nice and have a tendancy to be harsh which is why people gravitated towards analog gear. Imperfections just add vibe to the sound, you could get super precise with other plugins and try to manipulate exactly how much of each harmonics gets added etc. but at the end of the day just try a plugin and see if it sounds good then just roll with it.

If you want a simple test, play a pure sin wave at any frequency and watch it on an EQ plugin. You'll see the peak at the frequency of the sin wave then add whatever plugin you want and youll see the harmonics it adds.

It's not magic sauce just because, its all tried and true. A proven process and proven gear. Doesn't mean its the only way but it does work very well.

[Dodgingrain]

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?

The reason people use those plugins is yes partly because of timing changes and imperfections but also because of the saturation (addition of even order harmonics) to whatever you run through it.

Digital has the ability to be cold and perfect and just do whatever math you want to a signal where the analog domain is full of imperfections due to components having tolerences. Not even two SSLs in the real world are identical.

You could as you say go digital and get the compression right by your ear but then you would be missing the saturation that was added from the analog circuit that these plugins aim to emulate so you could then just add a saturation plugin and go from there.

As is the nature of mixing if it sounds good its fair play I'd be curious to hear if you come up with something cool!

Yeah they add harmonics but again how do we know that the mysterious harmonics that the SSL decides to produce today are right for this song? We must be able to do better now? The same argument goes for all the emulations, although it's all less critical to worry about it it's not on the mixbus. I would suggest that if people do want harmonics added on their mixbus, then definitely get plugin doctor and find out what they are doing exactly. Additionally I would say we should try to hear those harmonics, we need to hear the music with those extra harmonica and without, keeping the other things the same so that we can make a decision that it's better with them, rather than saying "we place on the magic sauce, just because"

Honestly who cares what the plugin is actually doing, the question is does it get you closer to what you want or not.

You know if its right for the song by learning the tools and learning when each tool is appropriate based on you're personal style of mixing and what you are trying to accomplish. In reality there is no "right", just what whomever is paying likes the most. I have an SSL compressor on my pre-master bus in my template for glue and because I like the vibe/feel it gives, it gets used on my mixes most of the time since most of my mixes are pop or singer/song writer but sometimes it gets taken out and replaced with something else if I can't get the vibe I want for the mix.

To me the best way to work is to come up with a workflow that gives you reasonably high level results using the same tools over and over. Then if the result isn't getting to where you want its knowing what each tool in the chain tends to do so you know what to change out. In order to even do that there is a lot of controls and guiderails you need in place to get the consistency. Only way to really get there is doing lots and lots of mixes where your getting feedback from someone else. That and ignoring most of the nonsense on youtube about mixing, lol.

[scottfitz]

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?

The reason people use those plugins is yes partly because of timing changes and imperfections but also because of the saturation (addition of even order harmonics) to whatever you run through it.

Digital has the ability to be cold and perfect and just do whatever math you want to a signal where the analog domain is full of imperfections due to components having tolerences. Not even two SSLs in the real world are identical.

You could as you say go digital and get the compression right by your ear but then you would be missing the saturation that was added from the analog circuit that these plugins aim to emulate so you could then just add a saturation plugin and go from there.

As is the nature of mixing if it sounds good its fair play I'd be curious to hear if you come up with something cool!

Yeah they add harmonics but again how do we know that the mysterious harmonics that the SSL decides to produce today are right for this song? We must be able to do better now? The same argument goes for all the emulations, although it's all less critical to worry about it it's not on the mixbus. I would suggest that if people do want harmonics added on their mixbus, then definitely get plugin doctor and find out what they are doing exactly. Additionally I would say we should try to hear those harmonics, we need to hear the music with those extra harmonica and without, keeping the other things the same so that we can make a decision that it's better with them, rather than saying "we place on the magic sauce, just because"

Honestly who cares what the plugin is actually doing, the question is does it get you closer to what you want or not.

You know if its right for the song by learning the tools and learning when each tool is appropriate based on you're personal style of mixing and what you are trying to accomplish. In reality there is no "right", just what whomever is paying likes the most. I have an SSL compressor on my pre-master bus in my template for glue and because I like the vibe/feel it gives, it gets used on my mixes most of the time since most of my mixes are pop or singer/song writer but sometimes it gets taken out and replaced with something else if I can't get the vibe I want for the mix.

To me the best way to work is to come up with a workflow that gives you reasonably high level results using the same tools over and over. Then if the result isn't getting to where you want its knowing what each tool in the chain tends to do so you know what to change out. In order to even do that there is a lot of controls and guiderails you need in place to get the consistency. Only way to really get there is doing lots and lots of mixes where your getting feedback from someone else. That and ignoring most of the nonsense on youtube about mixing, lol.

I appreciate what you are saying about the nature of the work and that in some sense nothing matters apart from pleasing the client so if SSL pleases them then we go with that.

Whether something gets us closer to what we want or not is a bit tricky. What I'm concerned about is that something does get us closer, but not nearly as close as if we used something better to do that. Our assessment of what we think we want and how good we think it can be could be misguided and limited if we are using an inferior method.

[Dodgingrain]

I appreciate what you are saying about the nature of the work and that in some sense nothing matters apart from pleasing the client so if SSL pleases them then we go with that.

Whether something gets us closer to what we want or not is a bit tricky. What I'm concerned about is that something does get us closer, but not nearly as close as if we used something better to do that. Our assessment of what we think we want and how good we think it can be could be misguided and limited if we are using an inferior method.

lol, its art so it doesn't really matter. Everyone only cares about the result. The only one that cares about the method is the person doing the work. I doubt even most people that mix care what eq I used on the drums for instance. Its a probably more interesting and important why I did what I did and what the goal was verses how.

Simple example is I would never mix a track like this at -16lufs. It doesn't get the track to where it needs to be in my opinion. Is that wrong? Only because there is a rule that we use and takes away one of our creative choices. To me the track should be mixed at the lufs that best serve the song and in this case to me its quite a bit louder and I think we are doing a dis-service to the track but our leader disagrees with me and that's fine. Neither one of us is right (well.... I'm pretty sure I am ).

[Paramnesia]

lol, its art so it doesn't really matter. Everyone only cares about the result. The only one that cares about the method is the person doing the work. I doubt even most people that mix care what eq I used on the drums for instance. Its a probably more interesting and important why I did what I did and what the goal was verses how.

Sure the end result matters more than why things work the way they do.. but the original question was why do people seek these plugins out. Which I thought merited some explanation as to what they did.

It's not great to get hung up on which plugin is better or why something is the "best" but I think it's still good to understand how things work so you can more efficiently get a sound you are going for or trying to emulate. Similar to how a musician can use music theory to help them out a bit with songwriting but will still usually write from feel or vibe. Back to the main topic, If you go from an analog device to a pure digital one you won't be able to get the same sound because it's not doing the same things.

Normally this statement "The only one that cares about the method is the person doing the work." would be true if this wasn't a forum for everyone to learn things and improve as mixers, songwriters and engineers. Not everything may be benificial to you but it will still benefit some and when it comes to producing art everyone has a different process.

[Ronson79]

I appreciate what you are saying about the nature of the work and that in some sense nothing matters apart from pleasing the client so if SSL pleases them then we go with that.

Whether something gets us closer to what we want or not is a bit tricky. What I'm concerned about is that something does get us closer, but not nearly as close as if we used something better to do that. Our assessment of what we think we want and how good we think it can be could be misguided and limited if we are using an inferior method.

lol, its art so it doesn't really matter. Everyone only cares about the result. The only one that cares about the method is the person doing the work. I doubt even most people that mix care what eq I used on the drums for instance. Its a probably more interesting and important why I did what I did and what the goal was verses how.

Simple example is I would never mix a track like this at -16lufs. It doesn't get the track to where it needs to be in my opinion. Is that wrong? Only because there is a rule that we use and takes away one of our creative choices. To me the track should be mixed at the lufs that best serve the song and in this case to me its quite a bit louder and I think we are doing a dis-service to the track but our leader disagrees with me and that's fine. Neither one of us is right (well.... I'm pretty sure I am ).

This! That's why I documented my thought process/goal for the tracks.

Also tje -16 LUFS is nonsense in terms of learning as you rightfully pointed out. What will beginners or intermediates learn with this rule?! They learn that their mix won't work and they need to adjust and rethink certain mixing decisions if they want to go to -6 to -8 LUFS short term in the chorus.

[Mister Fox]

Okay... I'm stepping in for a moment, because this is really starting to annoy me. Not only because such commentary has been made several times, and I actually find them utter nonsense.

Simple example is I would never mix a track like this at -16lufs. It doesn't get the track to where it needs to be in my opinion. Is that wrong? Only because there is a rule that we use and takes away one of our creative choices. To me the track should be mixed at the lufs that best serve the song and in this case to me its quite a bit louder and I think we are doing a dis-service to the track but our leader disagrees with me and that's fine. Neither one of us is right (well.... I'm pretty sure I am ).

Also tje -16 LUFS is nonsense in terms of learning as you rightfully pointed out. What will beginners or intermediates learn with this rule?! They learn that their mix won't work and they need to adjust and rethink certain mixing decisions if they want to go to -6 to -8 LUFS short term in the chorus.

I am legit getting more than tired of the "the -16 LUFS rule is <insert argument here why this is not working for a learning factor>" commentary.

I had to hear this argument since the inception of the Mix Challenge, I heard this even more after I created the Addedum regarding Summing Bus Treatment (which is arguably massively outdated, plus it has always been completely ignored by participants), and I keep hearing this now.


You folks are aware that you can mix at any loudness you want, with as much processing as you want.
Your only task is to deliver at -16,0 LUFS / -1,00 dBTP max.

A bonus side effect is... if you're using "character" compression/limiters to push loudness... you can actually let the transients breathe, therefore have a perceived higher impact while listening. Rogue clips are easier to handle with clipping/limiting than a full broadband signal that needs to be squashed by 8dB, because you're trying to push -6,0 LUFS ILk, because "the genre of music demands it". This is something I straight up despise in our industry... "some" people stating "it has to be this way", if it's in fact not true at all.


In case of Hip Hop, especially the more aggressive type like Dirty South, Crunk, Horrorcore, Hardcoore Rap, early Trap, etc... let's look at their origins from the around the 1990s. At that time, Vinyl and Tape were still a huge thing. In fact, "Mixtapes" were still dominating over CD. And guess what - those mediums (Vinyl and Tape) have a loudness limit (and that doesn't exceed -14 LUFS ILk by the way!).

Same goes for pop, rock and especially electronic music.

Was the music bad at that time? Were the mixes not aggressive? Far from it, actually. There were albums from that time period that hold up to this day, while certain modern day music is forgotten within 3-6 months time.



So please, take a step back and rethink your approach.

Does the track need more group processing? Can I run a summing bus compressor but hotter than 1,5dB Gain Reduction "glue"? Can I maybe overdrive a certain signal more to get a different impact? Is "more clean" more usable for that mix?! How much can I get away with things?

That is what the Mix Challenge is about.

And you do not do that at -6 LUFS, because "this is a stylistic choice". That choice is lifeless, ear fatiguing and ultimately at a loss of perceived punch and energy if streaming services "Normalize" your mix down - because there are no more transients left to invoke that feeling. Although yes, you can definitely hear that song poke through in loud traffic.

Even if you say "I usually mix at -12dB RMS (reference level) or -10dB RMS (reference level -- because this is how you "learned" and always did things), you can still have a Dynamic Range of 7-8 dB (max loudness to maximum signal peak). Less ear fatiguing, more punchy and still hold up both at loud distribution (e.g. Spotify Loud at -11 LUFS) or loudness normalized to -14,0 LUFS ILk / -16,0 LUFS ILk (depending on the platform). Maybe that is your compromise. And this in turn results in more conscious mixing choices.



I will state the following once, and then never again:

If you don't like the -16,0 LUFS ILk rule, or think "rule abc" is arbitrary -- you don't have to join the Mix(ing) Challenges. It is really that simple.

If you participate however, and then there are follow-up arguments or disparaging remarks, I will step in.

[Mister Fox]

Status of MC101 Mix Round 1...

There will be an update from the Song Provider later today.

Please have an eye on this thread.