Two answer some questions and concerns:
TomImmon wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2020 08:58 CET
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
While you do not need to "fill out" the full 24bit dynamic range with your edit, a drop in signal strength can lead to a loss of bits (see canese, dadomachado, eladnaimi, etc). As White Punk OD explained, various tools give various readouts. I barely used Bitter, and I don't know of MusicScope. But "realtime readout" compared to "offline analysis" can be a night and day situation. Wavelab is also very picky (always has been).
It is just a warning that something might be wrong. That your loudness dropped off, that you didn't utilize the full dynamic range at your disposal (if you want to go that route), that there is another underlying issue (offsets, etc). Don't worry too much about it. Anything between 22bit and 24bit is what we can still consider "fine". However, if you're exporting in 24bit and the read-out bitrate is capped at 20bit, then there is something wrong.
On the other end of the spectrum... if you read "25bit", then that means you've overloaded the dynamic range (aka clipping).
Mikael wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2020 10:56 CET
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.
Apologies, but this is clearly explained in the
Rules and Guidelines.
Rules and Guidelines for Participants wrote:
the final mixdown / export must not undershoot -23 LUFS ILk (Integrated), neither exceed -16 LUFS ILk (Integrated), while the maximum digital signal strength must not exceed -1.0 dBTP (True Peak) - NO (Pre)MASTERING. Recommended measurement specifications are ITU-R BS.1770-2+ (ideally ITU-R BS.1770-4) or EBU R-128
Please also read the follow-up bullet points of this particular Rule Book. If it isn't explicitly mentioned in the statistics PDF again, this doesn't mean there is specific rule existing.
Mikael wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2020 10:56 CET
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!
We have well established rules to create a fair and common ground for every participant. There is nothing to argue here - neither what value counts to "mixing" and what to "mastering". It also does not matter if the demo mix was at -15 LUFS or even -9 LUFS -- it is a demo mix after all.
Your task is to "create a mix within certain given parameters/boundaries". If you ignore that, because "mastering engineer can turn down level", then you've basically ignored your task. And since this game also simulates a "client to business" scenario, this is a surefire way to run into trouble.
Sam V wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2020 14:05 CET
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.
Sorry,
but no. We have to set a common ground for everyone to adhere to with the
Rules and Guidelines. Saying "the client can fix this himself" or "the focus should only be on mixing", is barking up the wrong tree.
This game is not only about "learning by doing" (including learning how to properly document your edit, for a possible session recall months down the line!), but it also acts as simulation for a "Client to Business" scenario (through the form of a "Mass Engineer Shootout"). If the client says
"I have this multi-track in 48/24, and I need a 96/24 version, that must not exceed -16LUFS - because it goes on the fictional platform 'Super-Ultra-HD-Releases' ", you can't just work as you seem fit, and then release in 44/16 at -9,5LUFS.
Two things will happen in this case:
One - the client gets in trouble because he forwarded a mix that he commissioned a mix for, and it is out of spec. Which can in turn result in penalty fees (this is a huge topic in the broadcast realm!). Two - the material will ultimately be pulled down to the target loudness. And since it's now lacking transients and definition (because everything is compressed to a square wave), it has zero change to competitive productions. Maybe even on the own album.
Sam V wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2020 14:05 CET
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 ...
While it is nice that you tried to fix your shortcomings, including properly naming the file, your resubmission is still:
Code: Select all
44100 kHz, but 24 bit this time around
Loudness (ILk): -14,4 LUFS
dBTP: -0,267 L / -0,095 R
Please take this as learning experience and improve on that for your next entry.
