Mix Challenge

Jerze wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 24, 2020 19:44 CET

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

To me, there has been no rule broken. You realized that there is a possible problem with your mix. You don't use a limiter on the sum to "master" in this case, you took care of rogue peaks by just "clipping them away" with a safety limiter. This has barely any audible impact considering the dynamic range of your production. Plus, you will address this with your chance to go into Mix Round 2.

TomImmon wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 24, 2020 11:13 CET

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).

White Punk OD wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 24, 2020 18:08 CET

...

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.

This will be a topic for me throughout January (aka: refining the Rule Books a bit or writing a new/overhauling an Addendum), as this is a recurring topic.


To be fair... "limiters" are not just made for "mastering". Take the Teletronix LA2A for instance, technically that is an opto-element compressor (aka "Opto" compressor) and can both run in "compression" and "limiter" mode. The difference here, is a shifted threshold and compression ratio. But it's not "brick-walling" an instantaneous compressor with a ratio of inf:1 would do, or a straight up signal clipper. It is a signal limiter which was originally made to handle voices. Same goes for the even older Telefunken U73b.

Sonnox Inflator for example is not a compressor/limiter, but it can act like one if pushed (it's basically a multi-band harmonic distortion device). I've actually used Inflator myself a couple of times on acoustic guitars, to make them more "compact" and prominent. Not many tools around that actually do it this way (as in, this very simply form). Sure is a handy tool, but handle with care.


But to clear the question "am I allowed to use mastering tools"?
Then the answer is a "depends on how you use them in your mix"

There have been names brought up like Sonnox Inflator, SPL Vitalizer MK2-T, SoundTheory Gullfoss, Vertigo VSM-3, VOS ThrillseekerXTC or TDL NOVA, etc. Heck, even T-Racks ONE. the These are all strangely declared "mastering tools", but what holds you off using them for general sound design purposes as well? Like, why should we only be allowed to use transient designers and sub-frequency creators for drums, but we're not allowed to use vintage "limiters" or the Dolby A Encoder trick (which is basically just the a multi-band compression array of this device, but not the "decoder"/Expander array as well) on vocals - or whatever sound comes to mind where you think "this might need an uplift"? This doesn't make sense, right?

You're still focusing on the mix, on individual channels or instrument groups, and here the sky is the limit.
Within reason, of course.


Summing Bus processing on the other hand, is a bit of a tricky topic. Does a summing bus compressor and/or a tape machine to "glue" things together already sound as what people call "mastering"? What about a chain of mix console > compressor > tape (a typical summing array back in the days)? This is why the Rule Addendum on Summing Bus Treatment exists, and to go full circle: also needs a drastic overhaul at this point...




My personal stance on the whole topic is:

Whatever gets the job done per individual channels/instrument groups, while the summed mix shall be mostly treated "musically" (glueing). The focus of the Mix(ing) Challenge is exactly that - create a mix that can stand on it's own already, while the mastering process really only is checking for integrity (phase, bass frequency response), "fairy dust" and setting the material up for final distribution (loudness increase/decrease, proper limiting, DDP and/or MP3/AAC export)

Whether or not you overdid it during mixing, that is a different topic altogether.



I hope this is a bit more clear and puts your mind off of things

I'm not against any of these tools,
just when the graphics look like shown, I smell a problem and throw it on the table,
and it turned out an issue, there was just something unintended going on,
by human happenstance during hard and complex work. Eventually, it was corrected.
Case solved.

javiramallo wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 23, 2020 19:20 CET

FEEDBACKS:

@Christoph_K, thank for your mix. Really cool one. It is a winner one.
My grain of sand is: I would like some more automation in the snare because, very often is even over the voice.
Something subtle, maybe 1 or 2 dbs donw in some places. Only take care of the volume of it agains the voice plane please.
The overall felling is a little rumble, Maybe 1 or 1,5db less of low end could help to get a more natural feeling.
Amazing mix."

Hey Javiramallo,

thanks for your feedback and for voting my mix into the 2nd round!

CHANGES IN ROUND 2

As I genuinely was quite happy with the mix I didn’t change a lot.

Tracks:
• Bass: 0,5db boost around 300hz on the bass track, automation certain notes when the bass is playing in higher register (Verse 2)
• Automated Snare and Leadvocals for better balance
• Copied one more missing snare hit in the beginning of the 2nd chorus - couldn’t resist
• added a mono aux for the guitar fill in the chorus, because in mono it would almost disappear

Mixbus:
• Lowered the bass lift @60hz
• Lowpass the sides above 80hz
• drove the mixbus a little harder to gain a couple db without exceeding -16 LUFS (-16.1 LUFS-I, 11.7 TrueDyn-I and -3.1 TruePeak according to the puremix LUFS Analyser now)

Happy Holidays everybody and stay safe <3

Download:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/a3kvyrc5f0rlz ... 2.wav?dl=0

Christoph_K wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 25, 2020 20:21 CET

• Lowpass the sides above 80hz

I meant highpass

Gracias todos for being whom you are. Feliz Navidad (whatever it means to you).

javiramallo wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 23, 2020 19:20 CET

@Manii, Thanks for your mix. I liked it. My grain of sand is: I would try works some more the drum. I am meaning not the sound because I think it is right. Maybe it a volume issue. Why don't you try bring at front 1 or 1.5 dBs in order to get a more open and with air mix?
Maybe less compression feeling in the SNARE or OOHH or where the snare is coming from could help.
The objetive could be try to get a not so diffuse drum sound but in the same plane tha actual.
Excellent. Good Job!"

Thank you for selecting my mix for round2 ! I hope I got everything that you tried to explain. Basically I increased the volume of drums which is also something I noticed was too quiet after several listenings. I reworked the snare sound: I removed a limiter that was on it, reduced the reverb sends and replaced a "Fresh Air" plugin I had on it with "Sugar".

I also cut some low mids on the background vocals and enhanced the stereo field of the return effects bus. I hope you will enjoy the result:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ve5hcsap453gv ... 2.wav?dl=0

javiramallo wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 23, 2020 19:20 CET

@harryc1344, thank you for your mix. Sound Amazing. My grain of sand is , Could you help the snare to fit better in the DRUM sound? For moments it appears to be too loud, maybe some automation could help.
Amazing mix."

Thanks for your feedback, Javier. I have used a few techniques to create a more steady snare level.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/gsqcdkzio59oe ... 2.wav?dl=0

Firstly, I used the Melda drum leveller on the snare top mic in order to get a more consistent snare level. I then drew in a lot of snare volume automation in order to push up the occasional quiet hit and bring down some of the louder fills. These two techniques helped a lot, but I was still struggling with certain snare hits sticking out of the mix. I decided to use 'selection based processing' in order to EQ out some of the rim-shot type ringing that occurred on some of the louder snare hits. I've only recently been introduced to Logic's 'selection based processing', I think it has worked really well here and I can see a lot of uses for it in the future!

Good luck to all the Round 2 participants, all the mixes that I've listened to sound great!

*edited to include the correct dropbox link, thanks White Punk OD!

Here is my upload for round 2!

Wav: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lSaE22 ... sp=sharing

As requested, i adjusted the volume of the vocals during the intro and i've tried to make the kick more in tune with the song. I changed the equalising and replaced the compressor of the kick drum to clean it up and make more subtle. To me the kick sounds more "round" now rather than "square" as before and it seems to blend more into the song?

@javiramallo "@ObaOzai, Thanks for your mix. I invite you to listen carefully some of the other mixes in order to start to understand the foundations of the mix comparing with yours. This help you a lot of, I am sure."


Thanks for your replay/comment, however this does not say much to me. Maybe if you state what was that you particularly did not like about the mix I made that would have helped me improve. Sounds to me like "man, that was a lame mix you did"; and yes, it probably is to some. Seems very subjective to me what is that some call a good mix vs not so good mix. Maybe it was that you felt we did not put much interest in doing your mix, if that is the case I would say you are wrong on that. Your tracks where not the best recordings I seen, just doing gain stage there was a pain. I actually feel proud of the art work I did, even do it might seem lame to the few well seasoned pros here. While it did take a significant chunk off effort from any part, it was not done in the spirit of competition. It was a work of love, and offered with the same thoughts.

Great music, great theme. Thanks for providing the tracks.


Best regards,
Oba Ozai

Oba Ozai wrote: ↑

Sun Dec 27, 2020 15:53 CET

@javiramallo "@ObaOzai, Thanks for your mix. I invite you to listen carefully some of the other mixes in order to start to understand the foundations of the mix comparing with yours. This help you a lot of, I am sure."


Thanks for your replay/comment, however this does not say much to me. Maybe if you state what was that you particularly did not like about the mix I made that would have helped me improve. Sounds to me like "man, that was a lame mix you did"; and yes, it probably is to some. Seems very subjective to me what is that some call a good mix vs not so good mix. Maybe it was that you felt we did not put much interest in doing your mix, if that is the case I would say you are wrong on that. Your tracks where not the best recordings I seen, just doing gain stage there was a pain. I actually feel proud of the art work I did, even do it might seem lame to the few well seasoned pros here. While it did take a significant chunk off effort from any part, it was not done in the spirit of competition. It was a work of love, and offered with the same thoughts.

Great music, great theme. Thanks for providing the tracks.


Best regards,
Oba Ozai

Hi @oba Ozai. I am sorry that my comment has given you that feeling you are commenting on. Nothing is further from my intention to say that your mix has not implied work or something like that. I'm pretty sure it took a lot of work and I appreciate your effort.

I hope you can understand that giving a rating of almost 80 mixes is hard, very hard work. But in any case, I decided to do that extra work and at least give an assessment of my initial impressions in case someone might be interested or help in any way. nothing more.
When I offer any of my mixesIt is something that I appreciate very much .

That said, I have to say that, some mixes like yours, required so much to tell that it seemed more appropriate to invite you to compare for yourself the differences that existed between your mix and other mixed. This is because sometimes telling what happens to a mix is so complicated that it is better to draw conclusions for yourself with your mix session open in front of you.

I know you put a lot of interest in making your mix. I am dedicated to making mixes and I've been doing it for 25 years, and therefore I know how much effort is put into making any of them. So YES! You can be proud of the work you did, for sure! But I assure you that you will feel more proud when you stop to analyze your mix comparing it with other ones and you discover that next time you will do it better.

About the comment: "Your tracks where not the best recordings I seen, just doing gain stage there was a pain". Never ask for advices by attacking! althought if you feel Better..... strake on!

Now, please, listen other tracks (don't be in a hurry):

>>>Listen
>>>Listen
>>>Listen
>>>Listen
>>>Listen

And now listen to yours.

>>>listen your mix.

Do not stay only at the beginning, browse the song. For exmple, go to the verse and then to the chorus.
Did you do this exercise yet?
What do you feel?
What are the differences??
It's hard, right?

So, please, try to get you onw conclusions.
Sometimes, it can't be given to you all the work done, and you are who must give to the head to improve.

My only advice is: humility, perseverance and, compare to ask, but in a logical way and not in a so super generic form that your questions have no answers.

And finally.
Because I am working hard this Christmas and I don't have time, I call on the community to help tell @Oba Ozai how he could improve his mix.

Please, let's help him together.
as reminder here you can listen his mix: >>>listen his mix.

Good afternoon.