Mix Challenge

A huge commendment for your time and effort compiling the stats @Mister Fox, thank you! I'm sorry I added to the number of users exceeding the loudness specs, but I fully accept the disqualification.

My reason was, even though I had read through all the info on the rules and guidelines thread (https://mix-challenge.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=2), being a newbie I didn't realise at the time of submission that the loudness threshold was a disqualifiable limit, I think because it is listed under a heading "Mixing and Editing Guidelines" so I initially saw it as just guidance and thought "ahh close enough" when I did my mixdown.

It took my reading some of the threads and stats sheets from previous months to realise I was wrong. I now know better for next time

Hi all,
I wonder if the influx of new Mix Challengers is anything to do with the recent shut down of metapop.com? I know that was a different concept but was a large community and surely some people looking for a new place to go?
Anyway great to see loads of new players, all we need now is some material for the song pool, so please have a look around everyone.

Mister Fox wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 22, 2023 23:59 CEST

Folks, there is no need to accuse each other of using "samples". This doesn't lead to nowhere. This is why I've reached out in private for more clarification.

Maybe the wording could have been better. However, 'poking the bear like that', did lead to a nice discussion about the use of transient shapers. We wouldn't have this insight without the provocative question.

All concerned reacted in a very professional way and the person who raised the original concern has staded he "stands corrected"

So I have to dissagree with the statement "this doesn't lead to nowhere". It sparked an interesting discussion.

As long as we all react as smart adults, I see no problem with tought provoking statements and accusations. For a "shouting match" as often seen on forums, you need at least two persons, so as long as both parties react correct, I seen no problem. If people start overreacting, Mister Fox can hit the delete and ban buttons.

regards,

Philippe

d8bflup wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 25, 2023 10:07 CEST

Mister Fox wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 22, 2023 23:59 CEST

Folks, there is no need to accuse each other of using "samples". This doesn't lead to nowhere. This is why I've reached out in private for more clarification.

Maybe the wording could have been better. However, 'poking the bear like that', did lead to a nice discussion about the use of transient shapers. We wouldn't have this insight without the provocative question.

All concerned reacted in a very professional way and the person who raised the original concern has staded he "stands corrected"

So I have to dissagree with the statement "this doesn't lead to nowhere". It sparked an interesting discussion.

As long as we all react as smart adults, I see no problem with tought provoking statements and accusations. For a "shouting match" as often seen on forums, you need at least two persons, so as long as both parties react correct, I seen no problem. If people start overreacting, Mister Fox can hit the delete and ban buttons.

regards,

Philippe

It worked out well this time.
Transient design - with much respect to Mr Fox, he's been suggesting this to everyone certainly since I found this site and I personally pursued it because of this. He said it so often he clearly had it working as he wanted, so if something is possible.

It helps to have clean signals. Being blind to a check box I must have looked at thousands of times, I only recently discovered clip volume editing. Simply used - one snare hit 2x as loud as the others and messing with your desired processing? Turn it down. Taken to extremes, use it to manually gate all the spill between hits and even more extreme, but worth it (ha-ha) dip the hi-hats out of every drum tail - when the tail looks smooth, you won't hear them. Then after all that just use the close mic tracks for body to give the overheads and room mics more punch. I'd say limit the overall clip volume to repairs and gating, but leave the relative volumes of all the hits and flams and rolls alone because the idea is NOT to turn it into a drum machine.

Then you listen harder and the now nicely clip volume cleaned up kick has other ringing drums and cymbals in the tails? You want the tails, you want the hard punch but those kick tails can be shorter the higher their frequency content. You could use multi-band compression, transient design (I expect) or volume envelopes triggered by the actual hits. The volume envelope to me seems by far more reliable and cleaner volume control for these duties but then I have struggled with gates, compressors and transient design for this where others succeed.

So for me transient design is soooo last year. And so are compressors for anything that needs fast clean multi-band action.

As a (prof.) drummer I recorded and mixed myself a lot over the past years. I also mixed and mastered some other stuff semi-professional.

With this background I found out that the drum recording itself is the absolute key. And I experimented over years to preserve the natural sound I'm still improving, with all the details of the sound (head choice, tuning, microphone choice, ...) and the performance (e.g. ghostnotes, dynamics in general), also to deal with bleed and crosstalk in a reasonable way, but polish and mix it 'big' and 'better than reality' at the same time. You can hear examples on my channel (link below).

The head choice, tuning, microphone selection, the performance (!), the room ... this is what really shapes the drums sound. I mention this although I sometimes enhance my recordings with own samples (recorded directly before the final takes) beacause here is no sample enhancement allowed.

I only use transient designers to flatten the transients and simulate analogue sound (e.g. tape), e.g. to make the cymbals sound a bit creamier and less obtrusive. I'm primarily a rock drummer and I'm hitting very hard if the setting demands. And I found out that overcompression can destroy this natural impact. I also read this in interviews with masters like CLA or Andy Wallace. Although they have very different approaches relating to the use of compression (while CLA compresses heavily, Wallace compresses less, doesn't use parallel compression at all and rides the faders a lot).

I think this drum recording is problematic not only because of the timing issues, which should exclude to mix them very upfront or loud (especially the kick) in my opinion, if you don't correct the timing.Also because of the recording itself. I should've done way more processing to reach a sound that fits my taste. But I decided mix them with my usual approach and find out how it sounds this way.

m_tree wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 25, 2023 16:23 CEST

The head choice, tuning, microphone selection, the performance (!), the room ... this is what really shapes the drums sound.

Hi Marius,

Greetings from a fellow producer and drummer!

I couldn't agree more with your statement above, get it right at the source and it's always going to sound the best it can. Everything you do mix-wise afterwards simply builds on it. Better foundations = better castle!

I actually thought the SilverStoned drums were alright, the playing was quite loose but I think that had a charm in itself and the overall recording quality was quite good compared to some tracks I've had to work with over the years! Just that spill made it more difficult to work with.

I've just had a look at your YouTube channel, great drumming and recording! The toms in the "Fast Shuffle" video that came up first sound so good!!

All the best

Ben

Hi Ben,

thanks for your compliment! I tune my toms in intervals (since a couple of years). It should be a perfect fifth (7 semitones) per four inch difference in diameter. Thinner resonant heads, tuned distinctly higher than the batter heads.
In the mixdown I didn't use multiband compression, transient designers (apart from subtle taming on the hi-hat and ride). Also no parallel compression, no dynamic EQs ... mixed fairly oldschool at all.

Sure, the SilverStoned drums are okay. But I think kick and snare are a bit problematic here - e.g. the lack of presence / attack (and bottom end) of the kick and the ringy overtone near 300 Hz on the snare. And the spill, of course.
I find it very interesting to apply my usual mix approach for drums on other recordings. It clearifies every time how important the drum recording is.

I had fun mixing this track! After I've heard some other mixes after my submission I would've mixed the guitars wider and the drums with more "weight", maybe.
Looking forward to the announcement and feedback.

Cheers and good luck to everyone!

m_tree wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 25, 2023 18:46 CEST

I tune my toms in intervals (since a couple of years). It should be a perfect fifth (7 semitones) per four inch difference in diameter. Thinner resonant heads, tuned distinctly higher than the batter heads.

Very interesting, I might have to give this a go, it clearly works well! I've always tuned mine the opposite with the resonants barely finger tight and the batters roughly at the fundamental of the shell - partly because even after 20 years of playing I still own the same entry-level Tama Swingstar kit I bought when I started, I really should upgrade!

m_tree wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 25, 2023 18:46 CEST

But I think kick and snare are a bit problematic here - e.g. the lack of presence / attack (and bottom end) of the kick

Yeah the kick was definitely lacking bottom end. This is the plugin I used to correct it on that front - https://mhsecure.com/metric_halo/produc ... thump.html - It's fantastic for adding kick low-end that's missing, basically sidechains off the kick drum audio and generates sub-harmonic content that can be tweaked inside the plugin. I'd recommend it to anyone and even better it's free

BenjiRage wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 23, 2023 22:36 CEST

nebukatnessar wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 23, 2023 22:15 CEST

I don't seem to be allowed to open the PDF's. So I'm not sure if I'm still in the game?

Don't worry, I don't think they've been finished and published yet!

I did manage to get disqualified in the dummest way possible. Not using the correct filename template. But I had fun. I'll try again the next challenge.

nebukatnessar wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 25, 2023 19:56 CEST

BenjiRage wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 23, 2023 22:36 CEST

nebukatnessar wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 23, 2023 22:15 CEST

I don't seem to be allowed to open the PDF's. So I'm not sure if I'm still in the game?

Don't worry, I don't think they've been finished and published yet!

I did manage to get disqualified in the dummest way possible. Not using the correct filename template. But I had fun. I'll try again the next challenge.

I am confused, I thought that with a filename problem (and usernameproblem) you can still be able to use the wildcard mechanics if you are chosen for round 2. I see other people with aparently the same mistakes that are not 'tagged out'. @MisterFox ....is that right?