2024-DEC-10 Info: Did you check out MC101? Want to write a "Space" themed song with SWC088? Or do you want to provide samples for "Community Scramble 2025"?

MIX CHALLENGE - MC41 March 2018 - Winners announced

Join the Mix Challenge - recurrence: February, April, June, August, October, December
User avatar
Dodgingrain
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2017 03:16 CEST
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC41 March 2018 - Mix Round 1 in evaluation

#51

Post by Dodgingrain »

I think somehow we have to get a requirement for comments on others mixes into the process. I miss that. At Berklee it was required that we comment on others mixes before we could get our grade. There was a lot of value to that.
Mixing, Mastering, Remixing Services
Two Cat Audio Labs, llc
https://www.twocataudiolabs.com
https://www.instagram.com/twocataudiolabs/
User avatar
Henrik Hjortnaes
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 22:03 CET
Location: Dynaudio City, Skanderborg

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC41 March 2018 - Mix Round 1 in evaluation

#52

Post by Henrik Hjortnaes »

Dodgingrain wrote:
Tue Mar 27, 2018 19:54 CEST
I think somehow we have to get a requirement for comments on others mixes into the process. I miss that. At Berklee it was required that we comment on others mixes before we could get our grade. There was a lot of value to that.
What is preventing you from giving feedback here in MC41? A missing requirement?
User avatar
Dodgingrain
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2017 03:16 CEST
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC41 March 2018 - Mix Round 1 in evaluation

#53

Post by Dodgingrain »

Nothing prevents it, my point is nothing requires it. Generally if something isn't required it doesn't get done.
Mixing, Mastering, Remixing Services
Two Cat Audio Labs, llc
https://www.twocataudiolabs.com
https://www.instagram.com/twocataudiolabs/
kevin gobin

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC41 March 2018 - Mix Round 1 in evaluation

#54

Post by kevin gobin »

What prevents me from giving feedback right now is my wife. She asked for another profil picture and it took a lot of time.
User avatar
Henrik Hjortnaes
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 22:03 CET
Location: Dynaudio City, Skanderborg

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC41 March 2018 - Mix Round 1 in evaluation

#55

Post by Henrik Hjortnaes »

kevin gobin wrote:
Wed Mar 28, 2018 09:19 CEST
What prevents me from giving feedback right now is my wife. She asked for another profil picture and it took a lot of time.
Image Nice shirt!
kevin gobin

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC41 March 2018 - Mix Round 1 in evaluation

#56

Post by kevin gobin »

lol Henrik Hjortnaes

You confirm it was worth it!
User avatar
Dodgingrain
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2017 03:16 CEST
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC41 March 2018 - Mix Round 1 in evaluation

#57

Post by Dodgingrain »

Yes, if the vote is based on the quality of the avatar shirt we know who wins.
Mixing, Mastering, Remixing Services
Two Cat Audio Labs, llc
https://www.twocataudiolabs.com
https://www.instagram.com/twocataudiolabs/
kevin gobin

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC41 March 2018 - Mix Round 1 in evaluation

#58

Post by kevin gobin »

LOL Dodgingrain, a first shirt prize can be won only if you show it...
dego

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC41 March 2018 - Mix Round 1 in evaluation

#59

Post by dego »

Hey guys. Thank you once again for your effort and taking the time to enter.
I've had some monitor issues recently so I've had to listen to a few of the tracks on my headphones which is not ideal.

I have provided some feedback on all of the entries. Fell free to ask more questions.

OctoOnFire
Nice lead in on the intro.
Delay added an urgency to the intro guitar.
Choir impact lost in mix at start.
Drums sit nice in the mix
Guitar stab nicely emphasised.
Good balance of parts.
Choir impact lost in key change.

Nonlinear
Nice subdued strings and guitar that add a really nice mood that was not already there.
Impact lost on the buid into the main section.
I do like the use of the choir.
Very laid back mix.
Love the phaser effect at the end. Adds a nice touch.

Photonic
Volume automation on strings gives them a real feel.
Choir barely audible.
Good balance of parts in part one.
Good balance of parts in key change.
Good balance overall

Jarouse
Nicely blanced.
All the parts enjoy equal space.
Nothing extraordinary but easy on the ears and close to the original.

ColedEar
Nice haunting delay on the strings in the intro.
Choir is barely audible.
Main section is a bit flat.
Strings and choir nicely blended in the key change but I'm not looking for a blend. Both should be heard.

DodgingRain
Nice fade on the guitar on the intro to give the strings space. Makes for a nice atmosphere.
Choir is subdued but it works in the context.
Interesting use of delay on the guitar in the main section.

VasDim
Nice balance of the parts in the intro.
Nicely balance in main section.
Good balance overall.

Kevin Gobin
Could be a little louder.
Strings are panned too hard in the intro and lose impact.
Choir should have more impact in intro.
Main section is a bit flat.
Strings are panned too hard in the key change.
Overall the mix is a bit flat.

satYatunes
Mix sounds a bit dull with little impact in the parts that should have.
Snare drums sounds really nice.

parnellij
Bass has lot its impact in the intro and main section.
Other parts well balanced.

Crownoise
Strange distorion on the guitar sound in the intro that puts me off a bit.
The mix is a bit muddy when the bass comes in in the intro.
I'm not keen on the overall sound as it seems to have an edge and lost its clean sound.

Kevin White
Too much tail on the crash and bells.
High string lost in the intro. Otherwise nicely balanced with good separation.
Nice choirs.
A little bit flat.

Arthur Labus
Nice chorus on intro guitar.
Nicely balanced intro.
No impact on build after intro.
Nice snare reverb.
Nice effect at the end of the key change.

olli-h
Nice delay on intro guitar.
Intro is balanced and everything sits nicely.
Snare needs more presence.

HerbFelho
Nice fade in.
Choir needs more attention.
Bass needs more presence.
Kick drum needs a bit more presence.
Snare drum sits nicely in the mix.
Delay on guitar stab during the middle section is cluttering the mix a bit.
Kick drum is not right in the key change.
Snare is wrong in the second part and hitting on the wrong beat.

Wizzo
Nicely balanced intro.
Bass needs more impact to balance the mix.
Choir is nicely mixed.
Drums sit nicely in the mix.
Guitar stabs are emphasised.

FixInTheMix
A little flat.
Drums have little impact.

Kolyev
Don't like the grit on the guitar in the intro.
Strings & choir lost their impact in the intro.
Nice effect the the end of the key change.
Drums sits nice in the mix.

Alberto Fabián Velasco
Could be louder.
Choir seems to have got most of the attention.
No impact from the drums.

Henrik Hjortnaes
Bass impact lost in the intro.
Nice build ups. Really adds to the track.
Bass lost in the mix.
Drums sit nicely in the mix.

Dave McIsaac
Could be louder.
A little flat.
No dynamics.
Good separation of the parts.
Choir impact lost in mix.



EDIT (from later post on 09-APR-2018):
Choosing a top eight was not as easy as I thought it was going to be but here they are.

OctoOnFire
Nonlinear
Photonic
Jarouse
DodgingRain
VasDim
Arthur Labus
Henrik Hjortnaes

Thanks again to everyone else that submitted a mix. I hope you found my feedback helpful.

dego
User avatar
Mister Fox
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 16:15 CEST
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC41 March 2018 - Mix Round 1 in evaluation

#60

Post by Mister Fox »

dego wrote:
Tue Apr 03, 2018 23:14 CEST
I have provided some feedback on all of the entries. Fell free to ask more questions.
First and foremost, thank you for the feedback, dego.
However, we can't kick off Round 2 yet since we're still lacking the announcement who will go that route.


:idea: To all participants of this mix round:
I already reached out to the client via mail. Still waiting for a response. I'll keep you updated.
Post Reply