Mix Challenge

Hi @Arnwyn , thanks for taking the time to give a feedback, and thanks for giving us the opportunity to mix your song!

Hi everyone,

Here is (hopefully!) the last of the feedback from round 1. We think we've managed to reply to everybody now but if we missed you, please let us know.

Update on round 2 to follow shortly.

Thanks again to everyone who took the time to work on this mix.

Rebecca & Dave


@alanvaldez
Nice reverb on the snare. Drums much too far forward, especially tom fills and snare. Drum balance needs looking at. Vocals too far behind instruments. Quite a toppy reverb making the mix sound a bit “jangly”. Piano being lost and can't be heard (listen to the humming section- the piano seems to disappear). It sound quite “in your face” and is lacking warmth. Too much de-esser.

@Rockincher
Clear vocal sound. Lead vocal is quite far forward and sounds dry. Need more backing vocals in this mix. Nice bass sound. Instruments not separated enough. Reverb? Can't hear reverb.

@jordibakes
Too middly. Needs more separation of instruments. There is a strange ringing frequency which seems to be coming from the piano-perhaps adjust EQ? Cool delay on robot babies at end.

@juhu
Toppy! Sounds like it's in a big, bright bathroom. Harsh sound overall. Can't hear the acoustic guitar.

@White Punk OD
Harsh vocal sound. Mix bassy and boomy overall with lots of bottom end. It feels somehow “sluggish”.

@tipa
Sounds really “in your face”. Hard lead vocal sound. Can't easily hear the piano but could be because the whole mix sounds quite middly overall and all the instruments are blending together too much. Was there an effect on some of the vocals? Final robot baby lead vocals are sitting too far forward. Did you use all of the backing vocal tracks? It sounds like the backing vocals are separated too much and not singing together as a block, supporting the lead vocal.

@yoruhitp
Boomy bass. Thin vocal sounds with lispy sounding vocals- de-esser? When you say you carefully adjusted the timing of the vocals, do you mean you lined them up perfectly? If so, that is an odd thing to do with a doubled vocal because you lose the doubling effect. Out of tune vocals, most noticeable from 2:45 onwards. Some of those robot babies are way out of tune.

@alavault
Backing vocals missing.
(We were unable to go back and add more feedback for this mix as the file was no longer available to listen or download).

@mikeka
Quite a “warm” tone to this mix. Didn't like the change to vocal arrangement- left out all the backing vocals at the beginning! Added extra notes an octave above in humming section. Cymbals have a nice sound.

@PistolPete
Very toppy mix. Harsh guitar sound sounds quite crunchy. Lead vocal sounds out of tune in places- did you use an auto tune? Vocals are sitting too far back in the mix and kit is very forward. This mix sounds pretty harsh and “raw”. Needs softening and re-balancing.

@Eclipse
Bass disappearing in some places. Nice clear vocal sound but the lead vocals sounds like it fades away occasionally, such as 0:40 on the “while you were scared” line and in the robot babies. It is fading into the backing vocals. Kit is sitting quite far back and the toms sound flat- perhaps adjust EQ and reverb to give them a bit of “life”.

@Necaster
Bass guitar is being lost. Lead vocal sounds a little random in terms of levels. Some of the lower notes like the “robot baby” words are poking through too much and sound suddenly loud. A similar thing is happening with the piano- some chords sound very loud (listen to the “sudden” chord at around 1:24). Piano seems to disappear when the backing vocals come in. Volume levels need smoothing out. Could do with more backing vocals in this mix. Liked the reverb you chose for vocals but would like to hear slightly more reverb on kit. Kick drum is lacking “body” , too toppy? Cymbals are a bit splashy. Needs more hi hat.

@Vongluck
Sounds LOUD. We had to turn the volume right down to listen to this mix. Odd background bass rumble. Too “in your face”.

@E.Rueda
Drum kit sounds good. Vocals are lispy- de-esser? Harsh lead vocal in this mix but could be just because it's quite far forward. It sounds like the lead vocal is swamping everything. Delay was a little bit distracting on lead vocal, perhaps overused slightly. We thought this effect might sound good on the others sections with more vocals, such as the lullabies. Vocals completely dropped away at the end. The backing vocals sound a little bit thin- did you use all the tracks?

@VolTheProducer
This mix had a very noticeable hiss all the way through which was quite distracting. Not keen on the vocal de-esser. The final robot babies sound like they get louder and louder. Sounds like in some places the piano is being swamped by everything else. Wooly bottom end and quite a harsh “in your face” mix.

@rvalle
“S” sounds are weird. Vocal balance is uneven- lead vocal is too hard and forward. The backing vocals are too far away. Harsh cymbal sound. Guitar too quiet. Kit too far forward and can't easily hear the piano. Sounds like an opera singer jumping in at 2:23!!

@MemphisB
Removed instruments to make a totally new arrangement. We can see how this would make the song build, but the bass and most of the kit is totally missing at the beginning. We recorded those there because we wanted those there, so they really do need to be there. Strange vocal sound- vocals are pumping- possibly compressor or is this an effect?? (particularly noticeable at 1:27 and also on the end robot babies).

@Gunnar
Massively out of tune! Sounds like pitch correction has put this mix WAY out of tune, maybe because we tuned to 432hz and the pitch correct tried to tune it to 440hz. It just doesn't sound right at all- the bass sounds like it is playing the wrong notes and it's not holding it all together as it should. The vocals sound like an amateur choir (listen at 2:07 and again at 2:46 onwards!! Ouch!). Rely on your ears for tuning. Sadly, the pitch correction ruined this whole mix.
Regarding time correction, there were no timing issues that we felt needed attention, otherwise we would have done another take during the recording session. We try not to “fix it in the mix” and prefer to get a good take. It didn't need any editing.

@againstpower
Kit very far forward in the mix. Sounds like lots of top end on the kick drum. Splashy cymbals. Kit needs re-balancing to make it more coherent and make it sound like an actual drum kit. Delay on drums at 2:15 changes drum pattern too much. Quiet lead vocal and backing vocals too far back. Needs more acoustic guitar. Interesting use of effects but too harsh in this instance.

quaint twang wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 29, 2024 19:30 CEST

I'm curious what your listening setup was for evaluation.
Thanks for the feedback.

Hiya,

Our setup for monitoring is a Peavy RQ (reference quality) 200 mini console into a Harrison Xi 150 power amp (these are temporarily replacing our normal Yamaha EMX 5000/12 powered desk) and finally into a pair of Bang and Olufsen Beovox S45 speakers (also reference quality) which are very old but an amazing sound.

It's Over!

We knew, at the start of this challenge, that it would not be easy. We did not, however, realise just how difficult it would be. Not only from the perspective of having to listen to our own composition over and over again in different mix forms, but also from the position of having to whine like a petulant school-kid because it was too loud, too quiet, too toppy, too bassy, too compressed, not compressed enough and of course it was sometimes too "just right"! At the end of the day, we had to choose something for a good reason and our reasoning - as I'm sure is the norm with most song contributors - was that we wanted to hear something approaching what we would do ourselves. This is an impossible task, certainly without being in the control room with the engineer; i.e. You!

The specifics of our top 3 choices are irrelevant here and have already been addressed as feedback (below); we won't actually be using any of the mixes that we've heard and never really thought of that as a possibility. We treated this as a learning opportunity rather than trying to end up with a mix to release. The final three are all good general mixes but all have issues that could be tweaked. However, to try to go to round three and fix these issues would be pointless because there will always be something to criticise. We are used to mixing and producing our own music and so there will always be a need to push or pull a fader or fiddle with the reverb at the last minute etc. And, of course, it can all come crashing down when the mastering process starts and then you may have to start from scratch.

Everyone who has participated in this project - competitors, song providers and the organisers - has given a lot of time and effort in an attempt to achieve a collective goal. It's been encouraging for us to see so many people supporting each other with knowledge, experience and opinions with a view to improving the skills required to improve the quality of what we listen to and enhance the writing and composition aspects of musical artists. We are both thankful to have taken part in this event and wish everyone involved the very best with their future projects. And don't forget - No De-Etherth pleath!


Our chosen top 3 mixes are:

1. Michael_K
2. Christoph_K
3. WrightAudio


Thanks again to everyone for mixing this track and congratulations to the winners!

Dave & Rebecca.




Feedback for Round 2 mixes below:


@Michael_K
This is a great mix. The bass guitar is coming through nicely, the backing vocals sound fuller this time round. It's a good balance of vocals, good balance for instruments. Thanks for removing the de-esser. It sounds better now. The guitar is slightly disappearing in a few places and there is a middle frequency that is slightly too prominent all the way through. This could benefit from removing a little bit of top from the whole track and perhaps turn the bass guitar down a notch too. Still, this is a good mix. Everything is there.


@Christoph_K
The side stick is sitting much better in the mix now. We thought the drums could benefit from a little more reverb. The balance of instruments sounds clearer overall. The vocals definitely sound less lispy this second time round. Bass riffs can't easily be heard each time- it's sounds like the bass disappears on some of those top end riffs. There are a couple of places where the volume changes are still too sudden (listen to the piano at 2:57).


@WrightAudio
Good balance between piano and guitar. Bass sits nicely in the mix. Still a good feel to the mix this time round. Lead vocal still sounds too loud but mainly on the “robot baby” lines (the higher pitch lead vocal lines sound OK). Having said that, the vocal balance at the end is good and the lead vocal “robot baby” sits well there. Would like to hear more reverb on voices- it sounds like quite a short reverb.

@asiohead
Nice and clear and has lots of space in this mix. Lead vocal still not sitting quite right- still far forward throughout but the end vocals it sounds too far back now. Kit sounds better this second time round. Bass riffs being lost.


@BenjiRage
Top end “janglyness” is less but is still there slightly. Bass guitar could be heard more- the sound of the bass guitar is quite nasaly at the top end. Nice to hear more of the kit. It sits better in this mix. Vocal reverb on humming sounds good. Guitar didn't really come through until the quieter sections.


@bluesation
Sounds quite toppy overall- could possibly be a reverb with a toppy edge? Guitar has a crunchy sound to it. Would still like to hear more definition of bass guitar and more stereo separation of the drum kit. Snare sounded like it was quite separate to the rest of the kit. Backing vocals too far back. They need to be more present and blended with the lead vocal to hear the harmonies.


@filipandrei
Bass is now more audible at both ends but very far forward and dominating the mix. The drums vanished behind the bass. Lead vocal is still too prominent and poking through too much, particularly the final “robot babies”, which still sounded like that lead vocal was too forward in the mix. Vocals needs re-balancing in this mix.


@JanLefr
Good cymbals. Stereo panning is much better on the kit but we think the kit itself is perhaps too far back in the mix and unbalanced as a kit- too much kick, not enough toms, kick sounds pretty toppy and is slightly “in your face”. Bass guitar has nice sound at bass end but still sounds quacky/nasaly at the top. Dynamics are definitely more subtle this time round and the vocal balance between lead and backing vocals is much better.


@MFTWC
0:18 something sounds “bubbly” or breaking up? Possibly the bass? Cymbals are better. Side stick and kick are sounding too loud. Acoustic guitar is coming through on quieter section but seems to be competing with the vocals. Lead vocal is quite far forward.


@MilkMonster
Still not keen on the de-esser. The stick is sitting better this time. The drums sound good in the quieter sections but they're not quite coming through in the louder sections, perhaps because the drums need more definition. The bass frequencies sound like they are all blending together and sound wooly. The bass guitar is still being lost on those low notes. We'd like the backing vocals to be “featured” a bit more rather than sitting far in the background.


@O'MIX
Vocal effects sound better this time and are more subtle. The track also doesn't sound as washy at the bass end this time. It sounds like the male backing vocal is quite forward compared to the rest (e.g. at 1:22 it sounds very forward) and the other harmonies are being lost. The acoustic guitar sounds thinner in this mix and isn't quite coming through like it was before. The guitar can be heard on the quieter sections but it's not quite coming through on the louder/fuller sections, such as at the beginning. Could that be because of the EQ on the master bus?


@PauPeu
This second mix does have a brighter tone compared to the first one. Acoustic guitar isn't coming through enough. The bass sound is really good but the track heavy on bass, drums and vocals. The piano and guitar sound almost secondary in this mix. We felt the vocals at the end were still too quiet- they were recorded separately but they are still meant to form the end of the lead vocal and then additional backing vocals around it. It sounds like they are all “extra” backing vocals when they are mixed lower like this.


@Ronson79
What we meant about the guitar being “out of balance” with the piano is that the piano was dominating too much and the guitar wasn't coming through enough. As this is something that could be adjusted with levels, panning, EQ and even reverb & effects, or a combination of any/all of these, it would be entirely your choice about how to address the balance of the instruments.
This mix sounds more “open”, with more space to breathe. There is more guitar this time and the vocals sound clearer with less lisping in the vocals. Vocals at the end sound like they've mixed as a backing vocals rather than having the lead vocal slightly in front.

Thanks Dave & Rebecca for your words and final decision! I highly appreciate the time and effort you two put into giving feedback to every single participant - that is not a given!
I agree with the kick being too upfront in my mix - I noticed that too but only after submitting. Well :)

Thanks again and congrats to the winners!

Thanks for the second place And congrats to the other two winners!

I may add a few words I had on my mind while reading your final statement and give back some feedback to you as provider (just in case you consider going through this madness again). First of all I want to say thank you. Providing tracks and spending time on reviewing the mixes keep the mix challenge alive, I cannot honor this enough. But then again why telling us that no mix is good enough for a release (which I highly doubt btw.)? Why not say "thank you" - over and out? Why this lecturing attitude? I even don't want to mention this cringe lengthy (and embarrassing) rant from one of you guys in the first round. I know it's hard work to listen to all this mixes and find good reasons for building a hierarchy. I have gone through this task twice already (and btw.: your comments on my R2 mix don't align well to your comments to the R1 mix, and I almost did not touch it. Consistency in the feedback process is important for the contestants to improve mixing skills). I also honestly think that you're way too much into perfectionism with your track and suspect you may already have lost perspective. That happens to all of us and is also a common issue when artists do mixes of their own music. So why not finish and call it a day and move forward? Just my two cents

Good luck with the release though and thanks again for the efforts!

Peace
- C

First and foremost, congratulations to the winners!
We are ending the game here, there will be no Mix Round 3.


The winners podium consists of:

1. @Michael_K .....(entries: Mix Round 1, Mix Round 2)
2. @Christoph_K .....(entries: Mix Round 1, Mix Round 2)
3. @WrightAudio .....(entries: Mix Round 1, Mix Round 2)

For learning purposes:
Here are the Statistic Sheets for Mix Round 2
Mix Round 2 - Overview of Submissions (PDF - updated: 25-JUL-2024 08:40 UTC+2/CEST, full sheet)



We perform with the usual - in order of the winners podium, please select one license out of the pool and mention it in this thread, then (important) get in touch with me via PM with your full name, email address and your plugin selection. If one company has been selected, it is not available for the rest of the podium anymore.

I'll update the "winners podium" thread shortly.

⚠	Moderation Message from Mister Fox
	Important Information: As part of a new collaboration with Hornet Plugins, you are allowed to select either 2 plugins at a maximum value of 20 EUR MSRP for both, or one individual plugin of choice from the whole available plugin range (bundles are exempt). Due to time constraints, I could not make a bigger announcement about this yet. Apologies for the inconvenience.

Thanks again for your participation. You can leave the thread alive if you want to exchange tips/tricks, edits, etc.
And thank you @Arnwyn for the final words of feedback and encouragement.


Please check out Songwriting Competition 084 -- this month's theme is a "Picture Theme" and the genre is "free to select" (01 entry so far, 19 days left on the clock). And of course the ongoing Mix Challenge 099 (08 entries so far, 16 days left on the clock)

See you on the flipside.

Dave & Rebecca, thanks for the intense work and diligent commenting!
It was an interesting experience to try out various techniques and balances.

Congrats to the winners!

Regarding Dave in #235, many important comments came after the fact, when everyone already had posted their initial version.
To me it seems especially true for most song providers in this forum, that their style and work needs the mixing engineer in direct contact with the artist/band before the mixing starts, and for detailed revision again.

So to me, this seems a competition in telepathy more than in engineering.
That's why I don't even reckon with hall of fame chances, and so I only create mixes that sound good to me, not considering any goals by the artist. I still look up their other songs,if easy to find, so to understand better, what I have in my hands.
I am thankful for a set of tracks, that gives me just another opportunity to experiment.

For the comrades who listened to my first entry, I changed the bass and a lot more, as a final conclusion to all the entries that I listened to, and reacting on some remarks:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Aln7pf ... sp=sharing

Everyone, please keep the following in mind:

The Mix Challenge at it's core is a mixing competition, with the educational bonus element of "learning by doing". This game can only simulate so much in terms of a "Business-to-Client" scenario, or rather, a "mass mix engineer shootout". Unlike other mixing competitions where you might not even get any feedback - just a "you made it" or "you didn't make it, better luck next time" - the Mix Challenge takes things further with a 2nd or even 3rd mix round and actual client feedback.

This is unique in the audio realm, and I'm more than happy that this worked out for 10 years at this point (and almost 100 mixes to work on). There are only so many things that can be done in this scenario.



I think the conversation boils down to this:

We did have some clients that can go all out and exactly tell you what to address, how much decibels, which frequency, what tool you should use, etc. On the other hand, we will also always have clients that are not skilled in this realm and just want to hear a new take, then say "maybe change this, adjust that". And we will also have clients again that will barely write anything and you have to go by absolute gut instinct.

This is why I try to gather as much information for the Multi-Track Mix Pack as possible before I even start a game. Doesn't always work out, but I'm trying. Participants reading the bundled TXTs in the first place, is a different topic, of course.


However - if you want to see more interaction, then I guess the only way is to reach out to the song provider, start a conversation on the forum, ask how much you're allowed to "bend the rules" before you provide your mix. This option is already there in terms of the game mechanics.

Overall - your task (both with our games and in the real world) will always be to find a good balance between a "demo mix" and your own mixing style -- while also keep the overall game mechanics in mind (being a competition "at heart" and all, there is reason behind the madness). If you caught the interest of the "client" after you submitted your mix and you're getting a spot offered for "Mix Round 2", then ask questions how to push things further, or make valuable arguments as to why you think that ABC might not work. Then edit further based upon that limited information.


I can not offer more, I'm afraid.
Anything else would be a completely different thing.


So please keep this in mind with follow-up posts.
Thank you.

Christoph_K wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 06, 2024 15:40 CEST

Thanks for the second place And congrats to the other two winners!

I may add a few words I had on my mind while reading your final statement and give back some feedback to you as provider (just in case you consider going through this madness again). First of all I want to say thank you. Providing tracks and spending time on reviewing the mixes keep the mix challenge alive, I cannot honor this enough. But then again why telling us that no mix is good enough for a release (which I highly doubt btw.)? Why not say "thank you" - over and out? Why this lecturing attitude? I even don't want to mention this cringe lengthy (and embarrassing) rant from one of you guys in the first round. I know it's hard work to listen to all this mixes and find good reasons for building a hierarchy. I have gone through this task twice already (and btw.: your comments on my R2 mix don't align well to your comments to the R1 mix, and I almost did not touch it. Consistency in the feedback process is important for the contestants to improve mixing skills). I also honestly think that you're way too much into perfectionism with your track and suspect you may already have lost perspective. That happens to all of us and is also a common issue when artists do mixes of their own music. So why not finish and call it a day and move forward? Just my two cents

Good luck with the release though and thanks again for the efforts!

Peace
- C