Mix Challenge

Thank you 3ee.
I did not think any of you would say "yes please kill them all", because we are a gentlemen community.
However if I change the rules I have to ask if everybody agrees first. We could play poker with a lot of money, game is game.

I've just checked Olli H mp3 with the link he gave me and it is correctly tagged indeed. Sorry Olli H!!!
So I checked and confirmed with Reaper in "source properties": Dave McIsaac and Wizoo also tagged their mp3 correctly: sorry my friends!!!

So it leaves me with only 7 contestants who can survive the ultra severe rule selection.


I now decide, in order to move on and concentrate on the reviews, to eliminate no one because of their mp3 tagging or absence of submission UNLESS SOMEONE ASKS ME TO.

Fair enough? I hope so.

I think it is a good opportunity for all of us to learn from our mistakes, and send a correctly tagged mp3 in the next Mastering Challenges.

Amen.

kevin gobin wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 15, 2018 11:45 CEST

Dear fellows, do you want me to strictly apply the rules and disqualify everyone but you because of the mp3 tagging?

Personally, I'd say being more strict towards adhering to the rules should be a thing, not only for the learning factor. The Mastering Challenge is about paying attention to detail (also considering the bonus license pool). And the biggest details here, along with providing a good edit, are:

• are the edits within target specs (WAV at Redbook Audio 44kHz 16bit, MP3 of that at 320kbit)
• are the productions at the correct loudness target? (in this case, -14LUFS ILk)
• do the productions clip? (exceed -1dBTP)
• have the MP3 files been properly tagged?

Granted, the bar is set fairly high because of the argument "errors in the render can result in huge costs with the reproduction plant".

Although there is often no way for the client to check if the material is within specs (I can do that, since I have the tools - but we can't assume that the client of the challenge has those as well). So instead of asking for providing DDPs or CUE/WAV versions with IRSC codes (not provided in this game!!!) and PDFs, as this is the norm with properly set-for-mass-reproduction edits, a simple WAV at the Redbook Audio format is more than fine (read: 44kHz at 16bit). This one can be easily checked for clipping and proper bitrate readouts in pretty much any host out there.

The importance of a properly tagged MP3 or M4A/AAC file shouldn't be underestimated though. Music platforms are often stupid and don't provide proper ID tagging. And the worst thing to have, is your listeners to get access to your music in MP3/M4A form but the file isn't properly named. Or the songs can't be searched for since the tags are missing. Replacing compressed files is not as drastic as a misprint through a mass-reproduction plant, but still annoying to do, not to mention time consuming. Also - not every user will re-download your edits if you messed something up.

This is not a songwriting or mixing game where proper file tagging can be ignored without repercussions. This challenge is simulating the Mastering process, and it's not just about the "icing on the cake - done in 10 minutes flat", but how careful you worked. That... is the main goal here.

If there is ultimately only one winner in the end and not three, then so be it.




Some tools for ID3 Tags:
IDTE-ID3 Tag (Windows)
Winamp/AIMP (Windows)
iTunes (macOS)
Foobar2000 (Crossplatform, although I haven't checked how close they stick to standards)

Some hosts also render out ID3 tags for MP3s. I am aware of Steinberg Wavelab (although I'm not using that feature myself) and IIRC also Presonus Studio One. Personally, I triple check in a media player like AIMP (Windows) if things are not messed up and also copy the ID3v2 tags over to ID3v1. Not every ID3 tagging engine works the same, and because of backwards compatibility to old devices. That is extra manual labor, but it pays off in the long run.

kevin gobin wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 15, 2018 16:12 CEST

I've just checked Olli H mp3 with the link he gave me and it is correctly tagged indeed. Sorry Olli H!!!
So I checked and confirmed with Reaper in "source properties": Dave McIsaac and Wizoo also tagged their mp3 correctly: sorry my friends!!!

This confirms what I just wrote

But you're the client, you have the final word.

Kevin,

do what you have to. I am totally ok with the respect of the rules. Éven if did not respect it. If i am out, I would only like to read a feedback from you, about the Sound and the loudness. For the next I promise to provide a real stuff. Regards

You lucky fellows who all received my compassion with mp3 rules will also get a well deserved review of your hard labour.

I will also have to be sad news carrier for those who already see the storm coming, as well as my tears...

See you soon MOA22 and everybody.

I used mp3tag this time. Its great.

Question to fox long post. Shouldnt we tag the wav file?

I would say - i appreciate your decison Kevin !
Anyway - any other criteria should be considered.
Thanks Mr. Fox for some hints. I did it personally just file prefence under Windows.

EDIT 10:45pm: Earlier made statement on MP3 ID3 tags has been withdrawn, check for updates on page 5

mange wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 15, 2018 18:59 CEST

Question to fox long post. Shouldnt we tag the wav file?

You can, but in this case it's not necessary. Also, not every tool can read out that information. Take it as a "here, have the WAV file, forward it to the plant, they know what to do".

We're not tackling DDP and CUE/WAV creation yet. We might be doing that in the future, but I think we're still at the stage of setting/explaining ground rules.

Arthur Labus wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 15, 2018 19:03 CEST

Thanks Mr. Fox for some hints. I did it personally just file prefence under Windows.

I'd still cross-check with various media players, just to see that there are no hiccups. This is the most time consuming part of providing a "mastered/finalized" mix.



Good luck to all participants

kevin gobin wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 15, 2018 11:45 CEST

Dear fellows, do you want me to strictly apply the rules and disqualify everyone but you because of the mp3 tagging?

Mister Fox wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 15, 2018 20:25 CEST

I had PM discussion with Kevin. For this challenge, we decided that there will be no severe repercussions for improper ID3 tags. But staying within specs for both WAV/MP3 is still a thing. For other (possible future) Mastering Challenge though, we will stick to the given rules.

My personal opinion is - No one should be allowed to win a competition if they don't follow the rules. That should be obvious. If you are disqualified from the competition for not adhering to the rule set, consider it a lesson learned. Why have rules if you don't intend to enforce to them?

My personal opinion is - No one should be allowed to win a competition if they don't follow the rules. That should be obvious. If you are disqualified from the competition for not adhering to the rule set, consider it a lesson learned. Why have rules if you don't intend to enforce to them?

Hello everyone ,
You overwhelmed guys about the ID tag rules ! don't forget the real reason here it's mastering competition! did you think your client will be more happy (in real life of course) if you gave him bad master but perfect tag !! yeah the rules is important but not above the main idea which is mastering processing !

I now decide, in order to move on and concentrate on the reviews, to eliminate no one because of their mp3 tagging or absence of submission UNLESS SOMEONE ASKS ME TO.

Dave McIsaac, you totally understood and respected the rules, so you have the right to claim disqualification for all the contestants who did not.

Do you really want me to?