Mix Challenge

Looking/posting my mix graph, I probably had a high pass filter somewhere that I was not aware. However my honest gut feeling is that I just have not achieved the skills to produce a low end like the mixes of other 2 graphs I presented above.


https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Z88-HC ... sp=sharing

The "Overview of Submissions" PDFs have been uploaded.
You can check them through the upper post. (post #129)



As mentioned in July 2020, this data sheet is used for giving an overview of all entries, and whether or not they are within given parameters (loudness, sampling rate, bitrate). Please take note that creating this is not a fully automated process. I am using Wavelab 10's "Batch Analysis" tool, but the layout and highlighting the issues, is time consuming. If you do not find yourself on this list, please let me know (I triple checked the whole thread, but I'm only human myself).


We have a disqualification rate of 33,70% for October 2020 (92 entries, 31 disqualifications).

In comparison to previous months:
September 2020 (32,60%, 46 entries, 15 disqualifications), August 2020 (28,57%, 35 entries, 10 disqualifications) and July 2020 (40,37%, 109 entries, 44 disqualifications).


You will notice, that there is one disqualification not due to wrong loudness, sampling rate, or bitrate, but due to a lack of documentation. This is the first time that I am fully enforcing this particular established rule to "document your edit", which does add to the learning factor of this community. In fact - and in agreement with the Song Provider - people that only lacked documentation, have been given a second chance and were contacted via PM to update their posts by end of 24th October. After that, we have drawn a clear line.

For the future: please provide rudimentary documentation, don't just post screenshots of your arranger view or part of your mix console anymore. This community is all about learning from each other. As of November 2020, if you do not document your edits by the end of the deadline, or at least talk about one certain sound setup you're really proud off and how you got there, you will be disqualified.




I (re-)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 client feedback and Mix Round 2 participant announcement.

Mister Fox wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 25, 2020 04:41 CET

The "Overview of Submissions" PDFs have been uploaded.
You can check them through the upper post. (post #129)



As mentioned in July 2020, this data sheet is used for giving an overview of all entries, and whether or not they are within given parameters (loudness, sampling rate, bitrate). Please take note that creating this is not a fully automated process. I am using Wavelab 10's "Batch Analysis" tool, but the layout and highlighting the issues, is time consuming. If you do not find yourself on this list, please let me know (I triple checked the whole thread, but I'm only human myself).

Hi Mr. Fox,
i found my entry in the list of submissions marked with "23bit". Ups? The file was produced with Studio One 4.5 as 48khz/24bit. I double checked that now again. And also my editor say it's 24bit. Where can this Bit been lost? There are some other submissions wit the same problem. Are you sure your batch processing works correct in this point?
Cheers
Thomas

TomImmon wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 25, 2020 08:58 CET

And also my editor say it's 24bit. Where can this Bit been lost?

Thomas

PMFJI
some analyzers have a result parameter that does not talk about the data format selected for rendering the mix, but do checks for effective use of all bits within the format.

this might be the case here, and in certain DAW systems, having concurring level boosts (compressors etc.) and drops (gain plugins) on the stereo bus might have just that effect, e.g. if it is not a floating point math system. but if it is the last bit only, (look up its dB value,) it is unlikely someone ever would complain about audio quality for that reason.
just my 2 cents how I would look into that issue.

good to see you not disqualified.

thanks to Mr.Fox for fast technical evaluation.

Oba Ozai wrote: ↑

Sat Oct 24, 2020 14:37 CEST

Looking/posting my mix graph, I probably had a high pass filter somewhere that I was not aware. However my honest gut feeling is that I just have not achieved the skills to produce a low end like the mixes of other 2 graphs I presented above.

Comes time, you sure will find out because you have the love.
For not diluting the thread that is only about the current contest song, please come over here:
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=8&p=9034#p9034

Mister Fox wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 25, 2020 04:41 CET

this data sheet is used for giving an overview of all entries, and whether or not they are within given parameters (loudness, sampling rate, bitrate)

It's really strange to see that reason by which my mix was disqualified.
I thought this competition is about mixing (as was mentioned - the focus of this game is "mixing" - NO MASTERING" )
Also nowhere was mentioned that "loudness" must be in range which highlighted at bootom of that PDF.
Interesting fact, provided for reference original mix is -15.0 LUFS (same as mine), wile everything above -15.7 mentioned as Loud
DBTP - is more mastering related, mastering engineer can turn down level, and compress mix as required.
We had loudness war, but now we have battle for silence (It's a joke)
Anyway! Good luck to survived participants!

Hi everyone, my mix was disqualified.... ops I probably should have read the rules before starting ..... for me, it's a little strange to have these rules because of the volume, the bit rate Etc... It's something that can be changed in about 2 minutes, in my opinion, it should be more about setting the tone for the song/mix, same stuff with the documentation, I probably would like to check how the best mixes were made but have it 1st round is a bit excessive.

I think if the provider doesn't like the mix it's okay otherwise we can always fix the problems but anyway these are the rules and I'm new here, I just discovered this forum (by mistake) so I accept it, have 100 mix to look and check is not an easy task.

I saw someone liked the mix in the post, so here is the final version (in parameters) with documentation in case you want to recreate this kind of sound, or if the band wants an extra version, maybe 92 wasn't enough hahaha. Good luck to the finalists and see you next time ...

Sam

Song new version
https://www.dropbox.com/s/nsrf2v9apzu0w ... v.wav?dl=0


Documentation
https://www.dropbox.com/s/rz6vxlr6ztaf3 ... t.pdf?dl=0

Greetings to all,

@White Punk OD Thanks for your kind words.

Yesterday I spent a few hours of study with my mix and I reached the conclusion that it must be something more than just EQ and Compression. My guess is that something else is saturating that bass/kick area. Is almost like some people can make their lows look like if they where on steroids. . No even the Original mix provided achieves these levels. And if I can remember correctly that was at -15.1 LUFS TP -1.08
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I5759L ... sp=sharing

Obviously I cant check all entries, but here are a few that I saw that caught my attention.

ECMiraldo -18LUFS TP -2.20 db
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vvgn7Y ... sp=sharing

IbanezO -17LUFS TP -1.32
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CQFboM ... sp=sharing

Gaurav Taljera -17.6 LUFS TP -2.53
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1m7ut7y ... sp=sharing

Im concluding that it has nothing to do with fader levels, loudness, or peaks (true or digital). Is something else, somehow these low frequencies are being saturated; and I don’t quite yet understand the physics behind.

To all,

I also wanted to encourage the disqualified (I was one of them last month) to read the rules and keep trying.

Thing is that this "contest" (I don't like to use that word because im not completing with anyone) has some rules, for many good reasons. Just think how many hours a month Mister Fox spends dealing with this. 90+ entries this month. A lot of work.

The other point I see is that for people that can use the English language (even if broken, like mine) is a bit disrespectful (in my view) just to post a link and write "here is my mix". We (as Mister Fox has well explained many times) are supposed to be sharing a bit about how we work, not just the mixes and expect someone else to evaluate it for "free". There is no "free ride", someone always pays the tab. Surely some have expressed they won't be giving their deepest secrets on to how they work their "mixes", that's fine. But that is not what is being asked here. So if you feel and reason that you can contribute with a comment, please do. Even if it hurts, because only looking at our failures and why they happened we can fix them.

Peace be with all

White Punk OD wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 25, 2020 09:29 CET

PMFJI
some analyzers have a result parameter that does not talk about the data format selected for rendering the mix, but do checks for effective use of all bits within the format.

this might be the case here, and in certain DAW systems, having concurring level boosts (compressors etc.) and drops (gain plugins) on the stereo bus might have just that effect, e.g. if it is not a floating point math system. but if it is the last bit only, (look up its dB value,) it is unlikely someone ever would complain about audio quality for that reason.
just my 2 cents how I would look into that issue.

Thank you for your explanation. that makes perfect sense. However, I don't even know how I can guarantee to reach the 24bit. I ran my file through two analyzers (bitter and MusicScope, both of which output bit depth) and compared it with other files. In fact, I found little difference. Do you check your master files for the bit depth? If so, with what?