KVR MIX CHALLENGE - MC03 August 2014 - Voting period has ended, Winners announced (pg 17)

[solidtrax]

Thanks Eric for closing the Mix Challenge submission period.


Let me highlight the main reminder:

Please make sure that all your MP3s and WAVs are available for download and that you update your mix documentaries until the voting process takes off in this same thread.

If everything goes well - the voting process will start in this very thread around 27-08-2014.

Compy, how do you compress those WAVs so well? This barely got 80% compression.

The strength of the compression has something to do with how much content is written into the file itself. The STEMs could be compressed down to a fraction of it's original size due to the fact that half of the WAV tracks were not loaded with information from start to finish.

The less information, the higher the compression.

Speaking of which:
The source files were 44/24. Could you please provide a suitable WAV file according to the Guidelines?
(as it's written there: be reasonable -- 48/24 max)

Personally I mixed at 44/24 - no oversampling. 96/36 is a bit excessive. Else I need to SRC and Dither it over here with Wavelab during the preparations for the voting package and you have to live with the results.




Also... in browsing through the thread and reading some documentaries, it looks like a lot of people (mostly the newcomers) already did some pre-mastering (multiband compression, limiting, "adding fairy dust", etc on the summing bus). I recommend those people to also read the guidelines again and revert from that if you happen to join the next Mix Challenge.

I understand that this is probably your daily routine. But this challenge is about mixing - not (pre)mastering. (pre)mastering can mask a lot of issues during the mix. So the learning factor is massively reduced. The aim of the Mix Challenge is to learn how to mix without heavily utilizing the summing bus and having a certain loudness to boot with. Hence the in-depth description with reference levels.

Those tracks will still be pulled down to a global level with the Loudness Normalization process for a better objective judgement. So please keep that in mind for the future.

More in a couple of days.

I don't know if you are talking about my submitted track, but as a newcomer in the mixing challenge, it feels as it is partly directed to me. I don't think I did anything that could be considered as (pre-)mastering. I always mix with a compressor on the mix buss, that's how I mix and it has nothing to do with mastering, and I didn't use a limiter to make the mix louder or even to catch some digital overs, as there are no digital overs in my mix.

If I could re-upload my track I would do go with less compression on the mix buss though.

[Grant S]

I just learned about the competition, last week and was told that I had to have my submission in by Sunday. Posted my 2 day mix and was scolded by compyfox about the rules about my mix. Then he tells me he didn't and won't listen until after the competition. Not sure how he made the assessment that I cheated without listening.....I've since read nothing but snide childish remarks about everything to everyone. I really dislike the forum hall monitor types and if I would have known about the restrictive nature of these mix competitions, I would not have been interested anyway.

I told Uncle E last Friday that I didn't expect to win and working with her voice would be reward enough. Looking at the prizes, I need more VST's like I need a hole in the head. So at this time I formally withdraw and will not be participating in any future mixes that comyfox is involved in.

I won't be voting, I don't trust this normalization process and would only vote on what was submitted in which case my vote would bepsycho43142

Time to take my reward and go....

Thanks Uncle E it was still worth it all considering

I'll get me coat Admin's feel free to delete my account.

[Uncle E]

I've since read nothing but snide childish remarks about everything to everyone.

I'm really sorry that it's come across like that. I can definitely see where you're coming from. It's tough because we want to make this competition as equal as possible and any mastering that occurs makes that difficult. In the future, we may try out a Remix Challenge instead of Mix Challenge and then I think the sky will be the limit, we'll probably just suspend all rules at that point and let everyone turn in all the -8dB RMS mixes they want.

I told Uncle E last Friday that I didn't expect to win and working with her voice would be reward enough.

That's very nice of you. I'm glad you enjoyed mixing her vocals and I told her all the amazing things you said about your vocals. She was very happy.

I won't be voting, I don't trust this normalization process and would only vote on what was submitted in which case my vote would bepsycho43142

The normalization process is actually quite good! Basically, Compyfox measures the average RMS's of all the tracks and then normalizes to that RMS. That way, a mix that isn't mastered will be brought up to a similar level to one that was mastered. The added benefit is we get to hear the impacts of mastering on our mixes in a very equal setting. The goal of the Mix Challenge has always been for all of us to learn and grow as engineers. Personally, I've gained a lot of insights in the last 3 months that we've been doing this and I've already added some of my newly gained techniques into my regular mixing workflow.

[blind]

The rules weren't too hard to follow, but IMO, a mix/bus compressor is a blurry line for pre-mastering, I don't normally use anything on the master, but the kramer master tape helped glue the mix a bit since it's open and airy.

Anyway, I enjoyed working on this one. Thanks for the opportunity!

[Uncle E]

The rules weren't too hard to follow, but IMO, a mix/bus compressor is a blurry line for pre-mastering, I don't normally use anything on the master, but the kramer master tape helped glue the mix a bit since it's open and airy.

Yes, we're still figuring it out as we go. Given how well Compyfox's normalization technique solves the fairness issue, I personally wouldn't mind allowing mastering, if only because it would remove the one major layer of complexity that seems to catch a lot of people. We want this to be fun for everyone and I completely get that this one rule makes it much less fun, even after all the mixes have been submitted.

[blind]

The rules weren't too hard to follow, but IMO, a mix/bus compressor is a blurry line for pre-mastering, I don't normally use anything on the master, but the kramer master tape helped glue the mix a bit since it's open and airy.

Yes, we're still figuring it out as we go. Given how well Compyfox's normalization technique solves the fairness issue, I personally wouldn't mind allowing mastering, if only because it would remove the one major layer of complexity that seems to catch a lot of people. We want this to be fun for everyone and I completely get that this one rule makes it much less fun, even after all the mixes have been submitted.

Makes sense, I suppose as long as the final result of a master channel plugin isn't too drastic of a change its probably negligible. If I bypass it the difference was pretty subtle and nobody would really know if I hadn't mentioned it. I think what makes more sense is that -8db rms mastered sound versus a raw export from the sequencer

[Compyfox]

Posted my 2 day mix and was scolded by compyfox about the rules about my mix. Then he tells me he didn't and won't listen until after the competition.

Eric already answered the technical aspects regarding non destructive "Loudness Normalization" (pulling the volume down, not up). But I have to comment on this remark.


I did not scold you, I merely informed you of the rules.

The rules are not hard to follow (thanks bLind), and they're not really restrictive either. I've seen worse rules where your rights are cut in and you can be happy to even get any form of feedback. The KVR Mix Challenge goes the opposite way - rules are there to adapt, work within certain boundaries, focus on common ground and then expand on it.


I also said that I won't listen until after the competition - which is my personal way of not being affected by others. I have my own style, I want to find my own solution to a particular mix.


Yet I can read - so regarding "judging mixes without even listening to them" - this is why we ask for some sort of documentation. If I read "used a compressor on the master bus, then some EQ and finally a limiter" - this gives me the indication that there were pre-mastering techniques used. If I then drag the WAV file over into Wavelab and I hit the Y button to spawn the global analysis, and it then gives me a readout beyond -14dBFS RMS while still only reaching -3dBFS digital peak... then pre-mastering was definitely involved.

While this might be your mixing style, it's not a concept of this challenge. We want to see/hear what you can do without (pre)mastering, within given restrictions. So basically what you render out of your host, not who is the loudest.

Which is why we also introduced the Loudness Normalization scheme with MC02 - to objectively judge each track at a common loudness.



So... no scolding, no childish remarks.
I'm an audio engineer at heart, I want people to improve, learn new things, think different.

This is why this challenge is existing in the first place, why we have these rules and why we recommend to stick to them.

[solidtrax]

I don't think it's fair to say that a mix bus compressor on the mix bus is mastering or pre-mastering. It can also be a part of mixing and has been for many many famous mixing engineers for many decades already. It's another tool for a mixer engineer to reach a certain sound.

In my humble opinion, it's a bit weird that all submitted tracks have to be normalized. Because some mixer engineers are capable of making mixes that sound practically finished already, that are loud, but still have lots of dynamics left and have not seen a limiter on the mix bus at all. That's also a mixing skill. Some people have a lot of trouble getting a mix loud without a limiter, some people have no problem with that at all. I think, with the normalization that is going to happen, it's not possible to judge on that aspect anymore. But, I might be wrong so I have to wait for the voting round to find out if my concerns are valid or not.

Anyway, it's the first time I competed in the mixing contest, it's a nice track with an awesome vocal and I enjoyed it, although I couldn't mix it in our studio unfortunately and had to use headphones instead. I can't wait for our studio to be ready again and to compete again in a future mix challenge, that time without the silly headphone excuse.

Thanks Compyfox and Uncle E for making this mixing challenge possible!

[Uncle E]

In my humble opinion, it's a bit weird that all submitted tracks have to be normalized. Because some mixer engineers are capable of making mixes that sound practically finished already, that are loud, but still have lots of dynamics left and have not seen a limiter on the mix bus at all. That's also a mixing skill. Some people have a lot of trouble getting a mix loud without a limiter, some people have no problem with that at all. I think, with the normalization that is going to happen, it's not possible to judge on that aspect anymore.

Yes, this is true. I'm pretty good at getting loud mixes (I have a track on Beatport that clips their audio player ) but I've actually found it very liberating to NOT be concerned with loudness. It allows me to make decisions purely for artistic purposes. As a result, all the mixes I've submitted have been very different from what I normally do and I'm discovering things that I like much more than what I normally do. I hope that other people here are having similar experiences.

I can't wait for our studio to be ready again and to compete again in a future mix challenge, that time without the silly headphone excuse.

Yeah, me, too. We just installed a Studer 962 console and I'm going to do the next Mix Challenge with it.

Thanks Compyfox and Uncle E for making this mixing challenge possible!

Thank YOU! And thank satYatunes, as well, he's our equal member in this and we absolutely could not have been able to do it without him!

[Compyfox]

I don't think it's fair to say that a mix bus compressor on the mix bus is mastering or pre-mastering. It can also be a part of mixing and has been for many many famous mixing engineers for many decades already. It's another tool for a mixer engineer to reach a certain sound.

We're not ruling out the old "SSL record button" trick (meaning a compressor on the sum that does 2-3dB gain reduction) or overdriving a console emulation (mix bus plugin), maybe even driving a slightly hot (+2dB) tape machine.

What we have as concern is the over-usage of compressors, EQ's for "fairy dust" and then limiting to push the production towards a certain level.

In my humble opinion, it's a bit weird that all submitted tracks have to be normalized. Because some mixer engineers are capable of making mixes that sound practically finished already, that are loud, but still have lots of dynamics left and have not seen a limiter on the mix bus at all. That's also a mixing skill.

That is why we recommend to use a reference level.
In my case (read: my mix), I use -18dBFS = 0VU as reference. The average signal strength of my current entry is about -15dBFS (+3,5VU even), the max peak is about -4,2dBFS IIRC. My MC02 entry also reached -15dBFS avg and -3,2dBFS.

While this is not "hot" directly side by side to a mastered production from the last 5 years (higher RMS values), it's a full dynamic and hot mix ready for suitable mastering. That also barely needed any further brush ups.

Yes - loud mixes can be achieved during plain mixing and suitable reference levels. But there is absolutely no(!) need to use heavy compression, summing bus EQ or even limiting. This is what we try to aim at with this challenge. Focus on plain mixing.

Some people have a lot of trouble getting a mix loud without a limiter, some people have no problem with that at all.

Again, we don't want to see loud mixes - we would like to see balanced mixes. The best you can tickle out of your gear with the knowledge you have.

I think, with the normalization that is going to happen, it's not possible to judge on that aspect anymore. But, I might be wrong so I have to wait for the voting round to find out if my concerns are valid or not.

Your concerns are unadjusted IMO.
The "Loudness Normalization" that I will be doing is actually fairly simple.


Wikipedia writes this about this topic:
"Another type of normalization is based on a measure of loudness, wherein the gain is changed to bring the average amplitude to a target level. This average can be a simple measurement of average power, such as the RMS value, or it can be a measure of human-perceived loudness, such as that offered by ReplayGain and EBU R128."

And a blog linked from Wikipedia writes this:
"Normalizing can mean a few other things. In the context of mastering an album, engineers often normalize the album’s tracks to the same level. This refers to the perceived level, though, as judged by the mastering engineer, and bears no relationship to the peak level of each track."


So the focus of the "normalization" is the average signal strength. For more simplicity, this will be judged with the ITU-R BS.1770-x (read: EBU R-128) specifications. Loud mixes will be pulled down to a level like -18LUFS SLk (max), though I tend to go higher this time around. (maybe my K-System v2 concept)

Another example:
My MC02 entry had a rough statistic of -15dBFS avg, -3,4dBFS digital peak and about -18,3LUFS SLk (max).
After the Loudness Normalization, my track got adjusted by +0,3LUFS to reach -18LUFS SLk (max) - the digital max peak then reached -3,1dBFS.


Another MC02 entry had a statistic of (fictional) -10dBFS avg, -1,0dBFS digital peak and about -12,3LUFS SLk
So in order to reach -18LUFS SLk max (normalized), the track needs to be pulled down by 5,7LU - the digital max peak then reached -6,7dBFS.

The end result is that both tracks played back side by side had the same perceived loudness, but it clearly showed which track was pushed to it's limits (read: lack of transients, squashed production due to pre-mastering attempts, etc), and which wasn't. This makes it actually easier to objectively judge a production!

And this is all we're doing in this case.

Just take a listen to the MC02 voting process (link)

Anyway, it's the first time I competed in the mixing contest, it's a nice track with an awesome vocal and I enjoyed it, although I couldn't mix it in our studio unfortunately and had to use headphones instead. I can't wait for our studio to be ready again and to compete again in a future mix challenge, that time without the silly headphone excuse.

Glad you enjoyed the challenge.
I'm sure the next one won't disappoint either.

Thanks Compyfox and Uncle E for making this mixing challenge possible!

Another thank you also goes out to satYatunes - the third collumn of the challenge staff.

[Uncle E]

Long Reverb Buss - Valhalla Room Reverb
Vocal Buss - Nectar Elements (Pop-Luch pop preset with some adjustment)

Is the reverb on the lead vocal from the Valhalla or from Nectar Elements? The vocals are quite loud but the reverb level is exactly right, I think if you'll have a 100% professional sounding mix if you lower the vocals but leave the reverb exactly where it's at. You dialed the reverb in perfectly - it almost sounds like another pad - and I'm dying to hear how you did it.

[satYatunes]

Thanks for the feedback Uncle E. I used both the reverbs for vocal. Long reverb send is very minimal.

I just listened to a few tracks and there are some excellent "Remixes" there..

[Uncle E]

Thanks for the feedback Uncle E. I used both the reverbs for vocal. Long reverb send is very minimal.

I think it's the Valhalla I'm hearing there. It's very low but very good. How did you set it?

[Compyfox]

A couple of things before I start the statistics (which I wanted to do within the next 2-3 hours)

I will ignore that there are no MP3 versions for some participants available.


I will also ignore (though I'm not fitting that shoe!) that user Grant S pulled his mix and blamed the withdrawal on to me (too harsh rules, assumed nitpicking at him). The rules were clear. If he doesn't agree with this or what's happening post submission (the loudness normalization and statistics come to mind) - so be it.

Though I give Grant S the chance to contact me within the next 24 hours to get this sorted and back in the voting pool. After that - self-disqualification for MC03.



The following entrants please need to do the following - else I'll analyze what's available and also provide the tracks "as is" but extracted to WAV for the voting package.

- Shere Kaan: no WAV file available, please provide one
- camsr: provide a file mirror please (IE stops at 130kb filesize, Firefox doesn't end the file, Download Manager doesn't work)
- lunarchris1: provide a file mirror please (IE stops at 130kb filesize, Firefox doesn't end the file, Download Manager doesn't work)

EDIT:
I could download the files by camsr and lunarchris - but I needed a separate browser



Another gentle reminder is to update your posts with a mix documentation



And since I encountered download issues once more with this challenge, and also encountering downloading of MP3s while expecting WAV and the other way around - I'll address this to the staff (internal) and I think we will cast a new rule on submissions for MC04.

Also... please avert from using download sites that ask for captcha codes and then only offer 120kb/s (with no chance to resume a cut off download), while the download is locked to one file per server and a download restriction within the next two hours. I am on DSL 16MBit, but that doesn't mean that the file provider is crapping out on me.

[Grant S]

Well, the problem with me being in the contest is I would have to believe in this normalizing process and vote only from what I heard from the normalized tracks? Sorry it not a matter of choice for me to put my doubts aside on this one. If they were all mastered I could vote with a good conscious but as far as the normalizing, I have a volume control and am capable of listening to them at the same relative volume anything beyond that would be destructive and shenanigans IMO



Uncle E If I Gmix

wave