Mix Challenge

I think "Franz", as a frenchman , did something great to these vocals. Not too sharp or bright, and a very nice room around, that is very much alive with all kinds of subtle effects.
Many vocals to me sounded too sharp or bright, regarding other mixes.
OTOH, kudos to a few mixes that also sound good and balanced on tablet speakers! These are not too bright either.

hey thanks so much fcamp, that's fantastic feedback, I'll put your suggestions into action on my next mix. To be honest I already think like this, but perhaps not being nearly aggressive enough with each of the EQs. The verb in mono I've never done before, so I'll give that a go too.
Cheers mate

I think that Christoph_K and Michael_K, both guys did a great job on this track. Maybe too clear and analytical for this kind of genre but everything plays just like a song on the radio, when timing and spectrum is right and everything goes its way.

As a wise man once said: if you take out your cellos and c bass from your mix and can’t feel the change, then my little friend…….

Plus note the sibilance in the voice: some tracks feel like you took out the tongue off the singer while others are hurtin with brighter stuff

Coiled_Ear wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 23, 2022 19:54 CEST

I think that Christoph_K and Michael_K, both guys did a great job on this track. Maybe too clear and analytical for this kind of genre but everything plays just like a song on the radio, when timing and spectrum is right and everything goes its way.

Those both sounded nice.

i have not listened to all yet, but I also made a note that MFTWC's track sounded good, too.

Overall, a lot of interesting, varied mixes.

The "Overview of Submissions" PDFs have been uploaded.
You can check them through the upper post (post #87).



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 25,42% for April 2022 (59 entries, 15 disqualifications, 0 "Out of Competition" submissions).

In comparison to previous months (detailed in spoiler tags): On average (19 months), we currently have a disqualification rate of 26,03% (compared to last month's 26,23% avg), the rate is on a decline. The disqualification rate over the course of the last year (April 2021 to April 2022) is about 22,24§, and also on the decline.




A commentary on this month's entries:

Another welcome to all new participants that joined this April. So many new faces and names. I hope you enjoy your stay and you will learn something from this experience. Also a very warm "welcome back" to our long-time users that haven't participated in a while. Nice to see you again.

Aside from one entry that was impossible to download (@ggibson1988, asked for a login at Google Drive), I sadly had to pull two participants out of the game due to username association issues (@turnpark used DropBox Beta, and aside from having a hard time finding the download link, the filename was not the provided template, it dropped everything and resulted in something alphanumeric // and @AskAndy had a "careless mistake" - the filename was okay, but it missed the username association - sorry). The rest of the entries are the usual "slight mishaps" with wrong sampling rate and bitrate (source material was 48/24) or being louder than the allowed specs (one entry actually went into the "allowed tolerances" area). I do however notice long-time users running into this a lot as of late (@maxovrdrive, @AskAndy, @kevin gobin) - which is a shame. Please do pay attention to detail.

Surprisingly enough, almost everyone provided documentation this month. A bit heavy focus on summing bus processing - but as long as it is "artistic" and within the rules, that is okay. I've also been lenient with certain file naming, but did provide a warning. In fact, two changes for the Statistics Sheets. The first being a simplification of the "things to look out" section (light grey background - if your signal was a bit too low and your bitrate dropped as a result to that), and there is also now a mention of the forum post ID for an easier entry finding (most relevant to Song Providers, this is a test-run).

Overall, I am happy with the participation -- even though I expected more than 65 entries yet again, considering the more limited nature of the games this year (we need more material - please reach out).
.


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).

While frustrating to miss the cut because of a bad link, I enjoyed the challenge and will participate regularly.

am i understanding it correctly that the use of a wild card is something only the song provider can give you? Or do I need to activate that option myself somewhere (so that I still make a change of going to the next round)? and if so....where and how, that wasn't clear to me after reading the instructions.

no action from your side required! cheers, dirk.

a warm hello from the song providers!

first of all: a big "thank you" for all your mixes! we hope you enjoyed working on the tracks. tom and myself will listen to every mix from start to end in a loudness-compensated blind-test (using the corresponding plugin by HOFA). we agreed, that we will both list our TOP15 independently, with our own approach on doing this. we also agreed, that those mixes appearing on both lists will go directly to round 2. the remaining slots will be discussed in detail. the fact, that there are 2 song providers in this game may slow down things slightly, but we will do our best to come up with a fair rating ASAP!

as all of you have access to all mixes: why not try to make up your own list of favorites? you will realize, that judging 56 mixes is really not that easy - especially, when it comes to this song: very very different parts, that all sound somewhat unique (and HAVE to!). in other words: a great intro does not make for a great chorus and vice versa. as a general feedback to all participants: mr. fox highlighted in his initial post the need for intense work on vocals in terms of sound / sibilence / formants / tuning - and what can i say... ?!

the second issue seems to be the MID/SIDE relation. there are just a few mixes that REALLY got this right! a lot of otherwise great mixes simply did not "kick in", to open up the chorus and the synth-arpeggio "after-chorus".

if you just listen to the energy distribution of MID and SIDE, you will find most of the mixes being weak in one or the other. some SIDE's nasal and flat, some MID's overpowered - and vice versa.

so, an "overall" rating ist really really hard. we will do our best. keep on mixing & stay tuned, dirk.