2020-MAR-01 Info: Please help spread the word about the Songwriting Competition and help it reach 15 participants per month on average

Mix Challenge - General Gossip Thread

Ask us a question, give feedback, make suggesions
White Punk OD
Posts: 146
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2018 23:58 CEST

Re: Mix Challenge - General Gossip Thread

#161

Post by White Punk OD »

Thanks Mister Fox for answering.

I stand corrected in several points. However, Apple says the following:

https://www.apple.com/au/itunes/mastere ... itunes.pdf
<< An ideal master will have 24-bit 96kHz resolution. These files contain more detail from which our encoders can create more accurate encodes. However, any resolution above 16-bit 44.1kHz, including sample rates of 48kHz, 88.2kHz, 96kHz, and 192kHz, will benefit from our encoding process.Don’t upsample files to a higher resolution than their original format. Upsampling won’t recover or add information to an audio file. Don’t provide files that have been downsampled and dithered for a CD. >>

Eventually, this is what I know and support. Obviously, they would not tell this, if there were not a difference in quality by sample rate, but there are diminishing returns if we go 96 and beyond.
Whatever they are delivering for their player, they recommend to go a bit higher in the delivery format, when it is possible with the technicalities of the project.

Here, ephemerally, I found a Spotify user who finds the on-the-fly conversion in his audio interface not good, and receives the confirmation that both sample rates, 44.1 and 48, may be used. He eventually wants to set the audio interface to the sample rate in which the original material was provided.
https://community.spotify.com/t5/Deskto ... d-p/528508
So how should this be an unwanted information.
There is no mention of "or higher" - this has been removed since last Q4/2019. The second paragraph does not mean "you can submit at a higher sampling rate".
Thanks for pointing this out, as I am not re-reading rules that I have already read and memorized. Unfortunately I was not aware of this particular change. My bad.
Sure I will consider the invest of a participation on the ground of the particular requirements and specs.


Regarding your statement
This is a mixing competition. Not a mixing and mastering or straight up mastering competition. Completely different areas and ground rules. Please stop mixing that up - which you continue to do.
I protest decidedly and ask you to explain how I have done that.
My mixes are not brickwalled, and they may be softly compressed not for loudness but only for some density.
I am never pushing loudness or habits of overcompressing, and I don't defend comrades that have brickwalled, which happened a couple of times also in the current contest.

I hope that more participants will discuss the songs, mixes and issues.

User avatar
Mister Fox
Site Admin
Posts: 1594
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 16:15 CEST
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Mix Challenge - General Gossip Thread

#162

Post by Mister Fox »

GaryRegnier wrote:
Fri Mar 27, 2020 01:00 CET
There should be no doubt and or discussion threads about it
Mister Fox fix it now before the next challenge
Thank you
On it.



White Punk OD wrote:
Fri Mar 27, 2020 01:37 CET
I stand corrected in several points. However, Apple says the following:
Apple and Spotify talk about "files to submit for Mastered for iTunes".
They want the highest(!) quality possible to then down-sample and dither with their own proprietary code. The end format will(!) usually be 44/16 for the majority of releases. But again... this is about mastering.

You still confuse the topic with plain mixing.


:arrow: So I'll say it again - for one final time:
The Mix Challenge (abbreviated MC<nr>) is a mixing competition - the focus is on purely mixing - not mixing and mastering.


White Punk OD wrote:
Fri Mar 27, 2020 01:37 CET
Thanks for pointing this out, as I am not re-reading rules that I have already read and memorized. Unfortunately I was not aware of this particular change. My bad.
Honestly - there is zero excuse for this as:
  1. I've always announced rule book changes in the email newsletters
  2. I've always announced rule book changes in the corresponding threads (first post)
  3. if it's a drastic change of the Rules and Guidelines (think complete overhaul)
  4. recent changes have been discussed in the corresponding "Gossip Threads"
The community constantly evolves, each game has an own set of cornerstones/specific parameters. If people don't keep up with that, there is literally no case to make as an excuse.


White Punk OD wrote:
Fri Mar 27, 2020 01:37 CET
I protest decidedly and ask you to explain how I have done that.
You constantly bring up mastering this, mastering that, iTunes this, final release that, mass distribution here, "modern sound" there, "better processing this, etc. I think we get it at this point. Quite honestly... I start to feel like you're arguing for the sake of argument. And I'm at my limits with this. Hence me also cutting things as short as possible.

You either agree to the given rule set, or you don't. I have made my points more than clear. The clients/song providers also agreed to these terms. And unless I have to step in because of <reasons> (like catching possible cheaters red-handed), they have the final word based upon the established Rules and Guidelines.

End of story.

Please don't push things any further - thank you.

tumewor
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2020 10:46 CET

Re: Mix Challenge - General Gossip Thread

#163

Post by tumewor »

Hello Mister Fox
Mister Fox wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 23:57 CET
:arrow: Else, it is simple: export in the sampling rate and bitrate the material was provided (bar minimum 24bit)

Unless otherwise stated (if people actually read the "rule additions" in the second post): If the source material was in 44/16 - provide in 44/24. If the source material was in 44/24, provide in 44/24. If the source material was 48/24, provide in 48/24. If the song provider asks for 48/24 mixes, but provides the material in 96/24 - then provide in 48/24. Else - absolutely no dithering down to 44/16.

Since MP3s are also not a must anymore (Logic Pro X for example does an auto sample rate conversion and bitrate truncation to 44/16), that negative side effect has been eliminated. If you provide in the wrong sampling rate/bitrate - you're out of the game.

I have to think about higher bitrates and whether or not they should be a disqualifier.
That will lead us to another episode of misconception

If the material was provide in 96khz/24bit what would happen to participant submitting their final mix into 44khz/24bit or 48khz/24bit ?
Or if the material was provide in 32khz/8bit, which will be quite challenging to mix with this kind of format, but i 'm pretty sure that everyone here can find their way to make it work and it will result in amazing sounding mix. If that the case, what will happen to participant submitting their final mix into 44khz/24bit or 48khz/24bit ?

To me its better to rephrase those paragraph and make it simple, as simple as "Song provider must declare whats the final target format does he want it to be."

Correct me if i'm wrong, This is a mixing community not a mathematical or IT community eh?

Peace Out,

CeZar
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 17:52 CEST
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: Mix Challenge - General Gossip Thread

#164

Post by CeZar »

tumewor wrote:
Fri Mar 27, 2020 15:49 CET
Hello Mister Fox
Mister Fox wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 23:57 CET
:arrow: Else, it is simple: export in the sampling rate and bitrate the material was provided (bar minimum 24bit)

Unless otherwise stated (if people actually read the "rule additions" in the second post): If the source material was in 44/16 - provide in 44/24. If the source material was in 44/24, provide in 44/24. If the source material was 48/24, provide in 48/24. If the song provider asks for 48/24 mixes, but provides the material in 96/24 - then provide in 48/24. Else - absolutely no dithering down to 44/16.

Since MP3s are also not a must anymore (Logic Pro X for example does an auto sample rate conversion and bitrate truncation to 44/16), that negative side effect has been eliminated. If you provide in the wrong sampling rate/bitrate - you're out of the game.

I have to think about higher bitrates and whether or not they should be a disqualifier.
That will lead us to another episode of misconception

If the material was provide in 96khz/24bit what would happen to participant submitting their final mix into 44khz/24bit or 48khz/24bit ?
Or if the material was provide in 32khz/8bit, which will be quite challenging to mix with this kind of format, but i 'm pretty sure that everyone here can find their way to make it work and it will result in amazing sounding mix. If that the case, what will happen to participant submitting their final mix into 44khz/24bit or 48khz/24bit ?

To me its better to rephrase those paragraph and make it simple, as simple as "Song provider must declare whats the final target format does he want it to be."

Correct me if i'm wrong, This is a mixing community not a mathematical or IT community eh?

Peace Out,
I really don't understand why you guys are being so picky on the sample rate thing. When I've submitted a few mixes on other challenges I've always respected the original sample rate, even if it meant to change the clock on 2 different units and a restart to the system, but I've done it because I understood from the very beginning that you're supposed to do it like that.
As in, if needs be, convert them all into your working sample rate while mixing (ex 44.1 to 48), but please export/bounce the mix in the same sample rate the original files!
Remember that it's a time consuming job to evaluate, it took me about 4 hours as it was, converting each 48khz file into 44.1khz would have taken A LOT more, provided I would have figured out why Cubase didn't convert them by itself because I DID CHECK THE BOX WHEN IMPORTING THE FILES into the project.

Come on guys, have some common sense here!

User avatar
Mister Fox
Site Admin
Posts: 1594
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 16:15 CEST
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Mix Challenge - General Gossip Thread

#165

Post by Mister Fox »

tumewor wrote:
Fri Mar 27, 2020 15:49 CET
To me its better to rephrase those paragraph and make it simple, as simple as "Song provider must declare whats the final target format does he want it to be."
If anything, this is a rule for Song Providers, not Mix(ing) Participants.


tumewor wrote:
Fri Mar 27, 2020 15:49 CET
That will lead us to another episode of misconception

If the material was provide in 96khz/24bit what would happen to participant submitting their final mix into 44khz/24bit or 48khz/24bit ?
There is honestly nothing to misunderstand.

In fact, I also start to see where this constantly results in any misunderstanding. The Rules and Guidelines clearly state:
export in the sampling rate and bitrate the material was provided. Bar minimum in 24bit however. e.g. Source Material provided in 16bit, please provide a 24bit mix. If source material was provided in 24bit, please submit a 24bit mix, etc
If a multitrack package is provided in 44/24 - mix and export in 44/24.
If a multitrack package is provided in 44/16 - mix and export (in accordance with the rules) in 44/24
If a multitrack package is provided in 44/24 and the endresult shall be delivered 48/24 (which happened with a Mix Challenge in recent year, and made clear right from the start) - mix and export in 48/24.

This one paragraph clearly covers this.


So I really don't understand what the fuzz is all about with the constant "but what if" scenarios. If Cockos Reaper or Avid ProTools exports in a higher Bitrate than the one that the project was originally provided, then this is a setup error and ultimately an oversight of the participants.


My problem for the community is the following:
if I write too much regarding rules, then people complain "nobody joins because - too many rules and additions". If I don't write enough, then people complain "this hasn't been made clear" (which isn't true at all), and then there is also the fraction that is like "these rules do not make any sense, this is too restrictive - in the real world is ABC...".

To me this whole recurring conversation looks like straight up pushing the blame. Not to mention that some of the wording like "shall ideally not <do this/exceed that>" are interpreted as "but I can still do...". This can be easily addressed and reworded into "must not" (as in: forbidden to do) for the rule set - and I think I will do that until the next Mix(ing) Challenge arrives. Everything else is definitely not a "The Matrix" type situation. As in "Some Of These Rules Can Be Bent, Others Can Be Broken". Sorry - but you're sadly mistaken.




:arrow: I will close this out with the following:
  • The Rules and Guidelines for participants for the Mix(ing) Challenge will be overhauled
  • I will remove or reword the paragraph on the topic "be reasonable with your release (Sampling Rate)" as this seems to be a constant point of debate
  • I will reword the paragraph on signal levels on export and turn the "shall ideally not exceed" into "must not exceed".
These changes will be announced in an upcoming newsletter, in an upcoming news post (that I'm currently writing, because there are some new features to this forum) and I will also mention this in the first post of the next game.

If this topic then pops up again, I will not comment on it any further. I apologize for this, but the constant debate is starting to cut a bit too much into my sparetime, and is really taxing on my patience and sanity. I'd rather invest my energy into other things resolving around the community that are just as important.

TomImmon
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 18:03 CEST
Location: near Berlin

Re: Mix Challenge - General Gossip Thread

#166

Post by TomImmon »

Hi Mr. Fox
why so many rules that each need an interpretation by the participants? Unfortunately, as we know, it never works, every time there are time-consuming discussions after the deadline.
Why not simply summarize the technical conditions for the mix file as you see beneath (with specific requirements, only the name of the participant is a placeholder, nothing else).
And so that it can be seen that the participant has read and accepted it, he must first copy the section into the post with which he is participating.
Regards

#####################################################
Technical rules for MC064
######################################################
Mix file: .wav 44.1khz, 24bit
Naming: MC064_TinaArtist_MyCoolSong_<Your account name>.wav
LUFS: -16 ILK
Peak: -1dB (True peak)

#####################################################

Copy this Rules section as the first part into the post with which you participate. Posts without this section will not be recognized as a participation.

User avatar
Mister Fox
Site Admin
Posts: 1594
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 16:15 CEST
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Mix Challenge - General Gossip Thread

#167

Post by Mister Fox »

TomImmon wrote:
Sun Mar 29, 2020 13:21 CEST
Why not simply summarize the technical conditions for the mix file as you see beneath (with specific requirements, only the name of the participant is a placeholder, nothing else).
Because it is already summarized.


TomImmon wrote:
Sun Mar 29, 2020 13:21 CEST
Copy this Rules section as the first part into the post with which you participate. Posts without this section will not be recognized as a participation.
Doesn't need to be copied/readdressed - because it has already been addressed.

Maybe you only go by what is written in the game thread, not the actual Rules and Guidelines (which really covers all that)

TomImmon
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 18:03 CEST
Location: near Berlin

Re: Mix Challenge - General Gossip Thread

#168

Post by TomImmon »

Mister Fox wrote:
Sun Mar 29, 2020 18:26 CEST
TomImmon wrote:
Sun Mar 29, 2020 13:21 CEST
Why not simply summarize the technical conditions for the mix file as you see beneath (with specific requirements, only the name of the participant is a placeholder, nothing else).
Because it is already summarized.


TomImmon wrote:
Sun Mar 29, 2020 13:21 CEST
Copy this Rules section as the first part into the post with which you participate. Posts without this section will not be recognized as a participation.
Doesn't need to be copied/readdressed - because it has already been addressed.

Maybe you only go by what is written in the game thread, not the actual Rules and Guidelines (which really covers all that)
Of course I know the detailed set of rules, which is abstract (because it must be generally applicable) and in many places works with placeholders or the abstract / concrete interpretation by the participant. If there would be a checklist for each new challenge with specific values that apply to this particular challenge, then one could save a lot of discussion. These concrete values are nothing other than the detailed rules applied, but they could just be named very clearly for each challenge in the opening post.
Name of the file and resolution / sampling frequency, file format.
Sorry if that came across incorrectly - English is not my first language

User avatar
Mister Fox
Site Admin
Posts: 1594
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 16:15 CEST
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Mix Challenge - General Gossip Thread

#169

Post by Mister Fox »

Then I summarize again:

- if I write up everything again that is already written in the Rules and Guidelines, then I'm not only repeating what has already been established, but the game threads will also turn absolutely chaotic and unclear
- this in turn results in yet another debate of "too many split sections, too many bits and pieces of rules", which was the very reason why I've overhauled the threads for MC063 and SWC031


As I've pointed out several times a this point, I will overhaul the rule set, this will happen over the course of the next 2-3 days (I hope to be done by 30th, because my day-job is also fairly time-consuming). I will re-address the "technical rules" - which have already been established. But again - maybe the "should ideally not be" needs to be turned into "must not exceed" after all.

I still fail to see a reason where this constantly needs to be debated?

User avatar
bluesation
Posts: 31
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2018 09:38 CEST

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC063 March 2020 - Mix Round 2 until 30-03-2020 11:59pm GMT+2/CEST

#170

Post by bluesation »

CeZar wrote:
Fri Mar 27, 2020 21:02 CET


I'm sorry man, how exactly do you expect me to give 100 feedbacks? How willing will you be to listen to a song you've written 100 times from start to end?
Yes, this we expect from a song provider, feedback. We spent several hours with your song, helping you to get a better sound it has. Former song providers had no problem with that.

CeZar wrote:
Fri Mar 27, 2020 21:02 CET
A: Correct the problem;
The rules say, that there is no correction (changing the source material) allowed, especially quantize and pitch correction.

Post Reply