Mix Challenge

I've just took a dive at TomImmon's documentation, and he does not mention any brickwall limiting. In fact, he only uses a compressor for "glueing" and some M/S trickery to control the stereo field on the summing bus (if he has been true with us with his documentation).

What "sounds" brickwalled here, are the drums that have been pushed in the back with reverb and heavy parallel compression. But the loudness lists -16,5 LUFS, while the max signal strength was -6,34 dBTP. Technically, his mix has a PLR (Peak to Loudness Ratio) of 10,1. So the culprit for this particular impression is the overall sound of the mix. The bitrate drops is due to the fact that the full dynamic range of 24bit is not used - but this is nothing to be worried about.



One entry where I heavily suspect "clipping control" with a brickwall limiter (really only clipping away peaks as safety mechanism), is Jerze's entry.

His dBTP max value is -2,00 on the dot, with an loudness value of -16,9 LUFS. That is a PLR (Peak to Loudness Ratio) of 14,9 - so I think he tried to catch rogue peaks from the drums due to his more aggressive treatment (heavy gating and strong compression - making the drums sound a bit thin IMO). But other than that, he is also in the green.

cpsmusic wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 24, 2020 07:20 CET

I raised a similar issue a while back. I guess it depends on whether the mix is viewed as a "final" thing or alternatively, as a step in the production process with more to follow ( i.e. mastering).

This has been a recurring topic indeed, also "behind the scenes" via mail recently.

I can already say that I'm working on something. On one hand, a possible addendum (new and/or overhaul), and I think some slight adjustments to the Rule Books are also mandatory in this case. Plenty of things to do until MC073 / February 2021.

Isn't this an objective matter, whatever it sounds like?
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OEqvpt ... sp=sharing
I mean, literally..

Jerze has his peaks all over the place, nothing is limited or clipped. Each different. There is somewhere a salvage limiter around -2.5, which was hit perhaps 10 times, works quite loose. (quick look)

Hello,
@White Punk OD , you are actually right, but I'll get to that later. First a couple of explanations: I rarely use limiters in the classic sense, and certainly not clipper or brickwall. Exception: Wall of Guitars. Otherwise there is a bit of limiting with vocals and extreme acoustic instruments such as vibraphone or picking style guitar. But I often compress the drums very strongly and use some saturation, which in combination can produce similar effects. It's not about loudness, but about sound. Loundness interests me only in terms of assertiveness of individual sounds in the overall structure (I used to do radio jingles in the past).

Even with this mix and your reaction to it, my first reaction was: What nonsense, how did this guy come to say something like that. However, this time I worked a little differently: My DAW was bogging around with a high CPU load, I had already frozen a few tracks, but there were still dropouts and distortions with all tracks. So I bounced the mix on the master bus without any FX / dynamics and then fine-tuned just the master bus in a new session. Here I used the Townhill Compressor (0.5-2.5db) for the Glue and Millennia NSEQ for a little distribution of treble and bass to M and S, and send everything below 90hz to mono. But I also played around a little here to see which of my newly acquired tools would work well on the master bus. So I tried various other compressors for the Glue and also tested a little with the Vitalizer and Inflator. I didn't like either (and it would actually cross the line to mastering). But that's actually how I do it with every challenge, I try out a new technology or a new device every time, even if it often doesn't find its way into the final mix. It probably happened to me this time, I accidentally still had the inflator on in the published version (it doesn't belong in the mixbus for such a challenge, although it is not a limiter in the classic sense).

I'll post a screenshot (https://www.dropbox.com/s/atx9t1a6u54rc ... 1.png?dl=0) here that shows the version with and without the inflator in Expose (here I check whether I keep the specified levels). As you can see, there is hardly any difference in the envelope curve, but you can also see how the dbTP changes. Expose is therefore not suitable for visual assessment. From the listening impression I have to, however, the version without inflator even sounds much better and is not much quieter. I have therefore linked this mix here (https://www.dropbox.com/s/i6bhd07slogxl ... f.wav?dl=0). So there is really no pros for the inflator at this point. Mr. Fox hit the nail on the head with his audiophile interpretation. My mix doesn't sound like it is because of clipping, but because the drums are already very compressed (and that's just a matter of taste, it has nothing to do with the benefit of volume)
Now it is safe to debate whether a mix that uses a mastering tool like Vitalizer, VitaminX, VSM-3, Ozone, Gullfoss, etc. should be disqualified even though it is still within the limits. I couldn't decide that question, but the fact is that the jury here are often musicians. So not everyone hears the mixes with the ears of a mastering engineer. I have made the experience that it is important for me to mix with a basic setting in the masterbus (glue, basic Eq) so that I can judge how it can sound later in the master. But I give the musicians a HIFI-optimized and somewhat louder mix to listen to at home, while the mastering gets two normal versions ( without Mixbus Fx/dyn and one with).

The boundaries are therefore fluid and in case of doubt we should refrain from disqualifying if the objectively measurable values have been adhered to. I can't remember that a mix that would have attracted attention due to its particular loudness once won here. So …
As you can see, the involuntary, possible rule violation did not bring me any advantage. I didn't get into round 2, but the other version wouldn't have changed that either. Taste decided, nothing else. Nevertheless, otherwise I would have withdrawn my version now, that i know my fault.
Even if you pointed out a mistake to me here (for which I am grateful), I find the way a bit strange. You could have just asked me how I could explain your findings. We could have discussed this than openly in the forum. I find it a bit strange when I look in the forum here in the morning and already find various speculations about my mix without having had the opportunity to comment on it.

Anyway, good luck to all who reached round 2 and merry Xmas to all.
Tom

Now it is safe to debate whether a mix that uses a mastering tool like Vitalizer, VitaminX, VSM-3, Ozone, Gullfoss, etc. should be disqualified

I've used Vitalizer and VSM-3 in various places in mixes. For example, I might use Vitalizer to make sounds more diffuse to push them into the background. Sometimes I use it to brighten and widen a reverb. We're working in a time when anything can be a channel, bus, mixbus, or mastering processor. So I agree with you, that the measurable values of the final file are the only thing that can be evaluated.

Cheers!

Hi javiramallo,

Thank you so much for your feedback and for choosing my mix for the second round
And I am very happy that you like my mix as it is. Because your comment is more a mastering-Issue, than a mix-issue. So it was easy for me to react to your comments. I just put an TDR VOS SlickEQ to the Mix-Bus and reduced the lows below 80Hz about -3dB and the same with the highs above 10kHz. Using this EQ, the levels are corrected automatically and so the LUFS should quite be the same.

WAV: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7gaudbdmw5ewt ... 2.wav?dl=0

merry christmas!

cpsmusic wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 24, 2020 11:35 CET

Now it is safe to debate whether a mix that uses a mastering tool like Vitalizer, VitaminX, VSM-3, Ozone, Gullfoss, etc. should be disqualified

I've used Vitalizer and VSM-3 in various places in mixes. For example, I might use Vitalizer to make sounds more diffuse to push them into the background. Sometimes I use it to brighten and widen a reverb. We're working in a time when anything can be a channel, bus, mixbus, or mastering processor. So I agree with you, that the measurable values of the final file are the only thing that can be evaluated.

Cheers!

I was a little imprecise in my formulation, I meant the usage on the mixbus. because of course I also use everything that is helpful on individual tracks and the other buses to create the desired sound (of course without replacing the original instruments or adding samples). but also beyond that it is a difficult problem. Technologies such as rearbus and dirtbus have such a serious effect on the result that the possibilities in mastering are limited as a result, but they are still allowed according to the rules because they do not count towards mastering. So I can get a mix much louder and more prominent when I use a rearbus. without any tools are on the mixbus ;-). the boundaries are fluid ... no easy job to decide for a challenge.
There is no other option than measurable rules and the decision of the provider and Mr. Fox as the last resort when there are doubts. In any case, I believe that it is absolutely fair for all participants here. Unfortunately, this cannot be said of lot of other competitions

javiramallo wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 23, 2020 19:20 CET

@PGPMixing - Nice mix, thank you. My grain of sand is that I feel some phase issue constantly fighting in from of me when I listen it.
Particulary the voice and the Snare need a more natural treatment, maybe they are over processed.
I hope this help in anyway.
Really thanks PGP."

Thank you for your feedback, I really appreciate it.
I get your point when you talk about more natural treatment of some instruments, especially the snare. But that's just my taste (and every taste is different).

But I really can't hear any phase issues. Can you tell me more details? For example which instrument or instrument group is causing the issues that you hear. It would really help me a lot and improve my way of listening to my own mixes!

To all participants that made it to round 2: good luck to all of you. Your mixes are great.

Cheers,
PGPMixing

TomImmon wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 24, 2020 11:13 CET

Hello,
@White Punk OD , you are actually right, but I'll get to that later.

Hello Tom,
at first, merry Christmas to you and everyone,
sorry if it came across a bit rude, but I hope you give me credit that I waited until after the decision, so it cannot have a hurtful impact.

Thanks for your detailed description, this part might be the interesting outcome to everyone else, brought by our exchange.

In short, if I understood this right, you experimented with various bus tools, and by error left the Inflator button in, when you printed your competition entry.
(It happens to me all the time, something was bypassed when it shouldn't be, or the other way.)

Practically, this is what I saw, the impact by a tool that is in many cases used for "brickwalling" or as part of that,
-- and this funny notion came to life in the whole business because people looked at the classic wave display, since the big digital CD production era in the later 80ies.
(Spanish music topic, there are well-known stories about the production of that "Vida Loca" (Ricky Martin) smash hit, Charles Dye talked about it on Gearslutz, how he squashed everything to make it the loudest, his first full in-the-box mix, which earned him a Grammy record of the year nomination. He was very self-critical about that.)

So that's about the graphics only, they look like a brick, now we know it is the sum of a number of your techniques you applied,
and I did not intend to bring in any isssue on guilt or bad motivation, sorry again.
It is rather that the fact happened, and my motivation is to talk about the next step in a production,
and I believe that a mastering engineer might find this an issue to talk about (and recognize the Inflator by its influence), whatever the reason was, and probably ask for a version without the Inflator.
Though it sounds very good, and you found your great way to get it loud enough without sounding squashed (which Mister Fox honored, and decided it was a legit entry),
my question is, do I see this correctly, this is a case where we would likely have another round trip sending out the files, or at least an exchange of messages about this.

I just did not want this point pass by, undisclosed and forgotten, because I think this is part of our game, to make the experience of such things.
(I'm just a rude tech guy from the province, we make rock music here, but we aren't known to be very sensitive in communication.)


addendum
To be constructive, as a passionate trouble-shooter, now thanks to your upload I can show how drastic the difference actually is:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/11YcE6Q ... EfIK7/view nobrick
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OEqvpt ... oTjgd/view brick
(display in RX7 is the same, just different colors and lot more stuff cluttering up the screen. "Expose" probably shows RMS. Tools of the Inflator type try to maintain RMS but reduce peak.)
- and this I saw, and it is what has lead to your discovery of the unwanted plugin. You confirmed that it sounds better without that, and this is our goal.
Detect anything that stands between the good song and the good sound at the site of the end-listeners.

Mister Fox wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 24, 2020 07:45 CET

One entry where I heavily suspect "clipping control" with a brickwall limiter (really only clipping away peaks as safety mechanism), is Jerze's entry.

His dBTP max value is -2,00 on the dot, with an loudness value of -16,9 LUFS. That is a PLR (Peak to Loudness Ratio) of 14,9 - so I think he tried to catch rogue peaks from the drums due to his more aggressive treatment (heavy gating and strong compression - making the drums sound a bit thin IMO). But other than that, he is also in the green.

White Punk OD wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 24, 2020 08:46 CET

Jerze has his peaks all over the place, nothing is limited or clipped. Each different. There is somewhere a salvage limiter around -2.5, which was hit perhaps 10 times, works quite loose. (quick look)

Hello all,
I see my name came up so I gathered some info from my session to answer this question. I did use a limiter to correct some rogue peaks as Mister fox mention. It was not used for anything but that. I figured if I got to the 2nd round I would go back and figure out what was going on.

Here is what I found. In addition, a teaching moment.

I do not always mix into a compressor on my Master buss, but for this song, I decide to. I put the waves SSl comp on this time for glue. I set it to get a few db of movement and went about my mix checked every so often.

So, After going back into the session, Thinking out loud Maybe I should be checking more what kind of peaks I’m getting though out the mix with the SSl off. Better yet would be to keep an eye on my individual tracks better. I need to look at this .Anyways

Here are some numbers and where the problem started.
Youlean Loudness Meter used

No SSl comp
17.0 lufs
7.5 lu
1.3 Tpm

When I set the SSl up I didn’t set the makeup gain a 0 I had it set to 1.7 which started to push my rogue peaks at the last sections of the song. I think there are 3 of them.

SSl comp with wrong setting make up gain at (1.7) and what I should have set it at 0.

1.7 makeup numbers

18.8 Lufs
5.4Lu
1.6Ppm

0.0 makeup number which it should of been set at but wasnt

17.7Lufs
5.5Lu
2.3Tpm

So, this is where the limiter came in by having the SSl make set at( 1.7) and where Mr. fox came up with is numbers and correct assessment and my mistake not paying attention to details.
16.8 Lufs
2.0 tpm

I hope this clears some things up and will plan on putting my R-2 mix in ,but If Mr fox or any of you fellow mixers feel I broke any of the rules (which I can see by not documenting the limiter in my post) let me know

Thanks Jerze
Happy Holidays to all

odistdan wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 22, 2020 04:10 CET

SDB_12 wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 21, 2020 21:39 CET

Hi all,

Thanks for the song this month, it was fun!

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ermzzef13190r ... 2.wav?dl=0

Clean and controlled. Learning what I could have done with my mix.

Thank you for the comments! I had fun, always learn a lot, and enjoy this forum. I wasn't selected for round 2, too much low end which I know I can be guilty of...I think I try to make everything sound like a pop record down there! Anyways, thanks again!