Mix Challenge

takafinir wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 20, 2022 02:28 CEST

Realy great song.... dificult to not do lot and keep it simple i tried to keep it simple play with compressors and little reverb and saturation



https://drive.google.com/file/d/1A-YbdT ... sp=sharing

Don't have access to the file, I had to send you a request... Please change the permissions next time

Jorgeelalto wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 23, 2022 16:42 CEST

delicate wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 18:54 CEST

One more awesome contribution from the artist. I also loved the original mix. It felt better than the references.

My mix →

I established the general balance, and started my processing top-down, with the mixbus and sub-groups. On the mixbus, I had a couple of tape emulators, an SSL-style compressor with 2db GR, and an EQ. The mixbus EQ did most of the tone shaping, which is unusual to me. Most notably, it had a 4+ db shelf boost from 600hz. Alternatively, I tried to get the same tone from group EQing, but preferred the move on the mixbus, it felt more coherent.

On the individual tracks, most of the processing was slight EQing and saturation, rarely compression to add a bit of movement. Quite a few things had inserted reverbs. For example, I pushed a few percussive elements back in the room.

Hey delicate, I'm unable to download this file Edit: I couldn't with Safari but I managed to download it with Firefox

Oh... glad it worked. I will consider changing the cloud drive.

delicate wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 23, 2022 22:29 CEST

Jorgeelalto wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 23, 2022 16:42 CEST

delicate wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 14, 2022 18:54 CEST

One more awesome contribution from the artist. I also loved the original mix. It felt better than the references.

My mix →

I established the general balance, and started my processing top-down, with the mixbus and sub-groups. On the mixbus, I had a couple of tape emulators, an SSL-style compressor with 2db GR, and an EQ. The mixbus EQ did most of the tone shaping, which is unusual to me. Most notably, it had a 4+ db shelf boost from 600hz. Alternatively, I tried to get the same tone from group EQing, but preferred the move on the mixbus, it felt more coherent.

On the individual tracks, most of the processing was slight EQing and saturation, rarely compression to add a bit of movement. Quite a few things had inserted reverbs. For example, I pushed a few percussive elements back in the room.

Hey delicate, I'm unable to download this file Edit: I couldn't with Safari but I managed to download it with Firefox

Oh... glad it worked. I will consider changing the cloud drive.

No worries, Safari is usually not compatible with stuff. Most people use Chromium/Firefox anyways

The "Overview of Submissions" PDFs have been uploaded.
You can check them through the upper post (post #56).



The data sheet is used to give an overview of all entries, and whether or not they are within given parameters (loudness, sampling rate, bitrate). This is adding to the overall learning process of the "Mix(ing) Challenge". Please take note that creating this sheet is not a fully automated process. I am using Wavelab 10's "Batch Analysis" tool (EBU R-128 specs / equivalent to ITU-R BS.1770-4), but the overall layout and highlighting issues/mishaps, is time consuming. If you do not find yourself on this list, please let me know.

Please keep in mind, your mix being "tagged disqualified", does not automatically mean "you're out of the game" (exceptions do apply). For more information on the Statistic Sheet and the "Wild Card" Mechanic, please consult the following addendum thread:

Mix Challenge - Addendum: Statistic Sheet and Wild Card Mechanic



We have a disqualification rate of 13,95% for June 2022 (43 entries, 6 disqualifications, 0 "Out of Competition" submissions).

In comparison to previous months (detailed in spoiler tags): On average (20 months), we currently have a disqualification rate of 25,25% (compared to last month's 26,03% avg), the rate is on a decline. The disqualification rate over the course of the last 12 games (April 2021 to June 2022) is about 21,43%, and also on the decline.

EDIT 2022-AUG-25: after completely redoing the calculation, I noticed a lot of errors creeping up throughout the months. This has now been fixed. Apologies for the inconvenience.




A commentary on this month's entries:

Another welcome to all new participants that joined this June. And once more a "welcome back" to old users, that tried something new compared to our regular games. I hope you all had fun, and could learn something in the process.

While the disqualification rate is the lowest we've had in 2 years, we sadly still see the usual mishaps regarding paying attention. For example, @takafinir didn't set file rights properly - so that entry couldn't be accessed and is therefore out of the game. The rest are careless mistakes regarding the sampling rate, loudness specs, and lack of documentation. And every single mixing game, I tend do see the same names as well.

Aside from the topic of "filename template exists, yet filename was still off", the Song Provider (@Jorgeelalto) and I are happy with the participation. It could have been more than 50 (considering the more limited nature of the games this year). But we can't pick and choose to always(!) have pop/rock in the Mix(ing) Challenge. Still, thank you for stepping out of your shadows.
.


Important to point out (for all new participants): :

Unless your file couldn't be downloaded, has been re-uploaded/re-posted during the course of the main submission round, or can not be associated with your user account, having your entry being tagged as "disqualified" does not mean that you're completely out of the game (yet). Should you be selected for Mix Round 2 by this month's "client" (Song Provider), you have the option to advance through the use of the Wild Card Mechanic.

Please don't be frustrated but rather learn from the experience, find out what went wrong, and use your possible chance to fix this in a follow-up round. This is why the concept of the "Statistics Sheet" and "Wild Card mechanic" exists. It offers you an additional learning factor. Something you usually do not have the chance to outside of this community's monthly competition.
.




I now (re-)open the field for everyone to give each other feedback (highly encouraged). This will be independent to the client feedback however. Though please note - criticism on the rule set and angry posts will be deleted without further notice.


Please watch this spot for the client feedback and Mix Round 2 participant announcement.
This will ideally happen sometime within the next 14 days (starting tomorrow).

shroom feverish wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 21, 2022 14:06 CEST

Hi

Shroom Feverish mix
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SJVRH6 ... sp=sharing

Intention was to bring out elements that create atmospheric mix with techno influences.
Bass region with thinner/shorter kick and perceptible presence of sub bass.
Synth sounds more forward in mix.
Fx sounds with added delays and reverbs.
Hats got mostly eq cuts and boosts
Percussions went through FabFilter Saturn, eq and different reverbs and delays.

Master bus – dynamic eq, spectral compression, smile eq, clipper.

This is a well controlled, clean but still powerfull mix. Good work!

Hi all,
My feedback for most of the mixes I've listened to is that I thought the timpani sound "13 Perc Drum" and also 33 Background Noise" were too loud? In one or two cases I thought actually, they are loud, but on this one, somehow it rocks and it's great. However mostly I was a bit thrown that nearly everyone did this apart from me and when this happens I am forced to reassess what I did with it, as I do respect this community. I see that tracks like these two can give the music a lot more character by bringing them forward and perhaps this is why it happened. In my case I loved that background noise track and wanted to make more of a feature of it, but found it a bit grainy when turned up loud and I have a bit of an aversion to that bitcrushed distortion sound. The Perc Drum sound I also thought it gave the kicks an interesting twist with the way the tail of the sound lasts between two, but I didn't like it big instinctively it seemed to easily jump out and become too distracting a part of the beat for what it is. Of course there is no right or wrong answer.

Anyway, as I said previously I thought everyone's mixes were great and there was always something amazing about it in there, no matter what direction had been taken. I felt nearly everyone was more daring than mine and I may even make a second mix for myself based on inspiration from you all.

Cheers

Hi all,

Here I come with the feedback and winners of the first round. I used a (subjective ) score system to assign points to the tracks, then chose the top 15 highest scores. Things I took into account when evaluating were:

1. Loudness: How loud the mix is perceived, and how much potential it has of getting louder if properly mastered. This is NOT the absolute loudness measurement.
2. Punchiness: How punchy the mix is, and whether it sacrifices other elements to reach its level.
3. Drum balance: Do all drums and percussion elements share the same focus, does the drum section sound like one element, or are they in different "spaces" (volume and reverb)?
4. Frequency balance: Whether the mix has a good balance between low, mid and high frequencies in all elements.
5. Lows: Quality of the low frequencies -- definition, volume, interaction between elements (kick and sub, for example).
6. Highs: Same as Lows but with high frequencies, in this case it's mostly whether there's a good balance.
7. Arrangement: Whether the original arrangement is there (you didn't remove or add anything), and how the mix affects it (track volumes).
8. Dub delay: Is there a dub delay applied to the requested elements, and if so, how cool is it?

I feel like this selection of features/aspects of the mixes did correctly represent how I felt about each one. Each one scores between 0 and 10 points, and the total score is the sum of each one.

The winners in this round, in no particular order, are:

- Alexvanmixland
- delicate
- DodgingRain
- evandollar
- JanLefr
- jules666
- maxovrdrive
- MellowBrowne
- PauPeu
- Ronson79
- ShroomFeverish
- spafles
- SuC76
- tomearwaker
- Vanilla_Puff

Congrats! You can check your individual scores here (and your mix feedback if you won this round https://drive.google.com/file/d/16ug6k0 ... sp=sharing

Overall, great participations, all mixes were interesting in their own right. I could definitely see the experience of some people influencing mixing decisions, especially those of you who come from mixing rock/pop with acoustic drums it's cool to analyse.

See you around and thanks all of you for working with my stuff, I hope it was at least interesting for you to hear the inner workings of the track Cheers!

Congrats to the people that made it and thanks again to Jorgeelalto for the track and all the time you've spent reviewing everything.

I wasn't expecting a score for loudness, I thought that everything got loudness matched for comparison? I also noticed a bunch of competitors putting their mix on exactly -16LUFS and -1.0 peak, which I purposely stayed away from, thinking this was supposed to be an upper limit.

Once I'm down for loudness, as we all know the lows will not be as apparent, which I also receive a small score on.
Then punchiness, if it's not as loud it won't seem as punchy. Punchiness was pretty much the only thing I tried to make sure of, so a bit disappointing.

Good luck to all from here and sorry for being a bad loser!

Before there are endless debates on the "rules", I think with "(Perceived) Loudness", @Jorgeelalto doesn't mean the "absolute loudness" of the whole mix measured in LUFS in this case. In combination with the "Punchiness", I think he talks about the "density" and what felt "impact" this has to the listener.

If instruments are clogged together, then you might have a more consistent loudness overall, but no dynamic and everything just feels lifeless and less impactful. If the instruments drift too far apart, then things start to to feel imbalanced. Finding a middle-ground is not that easy.


I will start Mix Round 2 in a moment...

Thank you for handling the evaluation, @Jorgeelalto .

Ladies and gentlemen, let us kick off Mix Round 2, which will end on Monday, 18-JUL-2022 23:59 UTC+2/CEST

As of this moment, that is 5 days (plus the hours since @Jorgeelalto's announcement, and I've updated the post). All Mix Round 2 participants will be sent a reminder via mail shortly.


There is a GLOBAL COUNTDOWN available to check for deadlines.
Just follow this link: Global Countdown (on homepage)



The following 15 participants go into Round 2 (alphabetical order), with "wild-cards" being pointed out (if present this month).
(all Mix Round 2 participants should have been pinged)

@Alex Van mixland
@delicate
@Dodgingrain
@evandollar
@JanLefr
@jules666
@maxovrdrive
@Mellow Browne
@PauPeu
@Ronson79
@shroom feverish
@_spafles_
@SuC76
@tomearwaker
@Vanilla Puff
.

!	Bonus Info
	Please read more about the "wild card" game mechanic here Mix Challenge - Addendum: Statistic Sheet and Wild Card Mechanic Info: No wild cards present for MC086 / July 2022

The feedback to the productions can be found here:
viewtopic.php?p=13037#p13037 (check the PDF!)



If you are unsure what to do exactly with your mix, reach out to the song provider and engage in a conversation here on the forum.
And please keep the Rules and Guidelines (post #6) in mind regarding submitting your entry.