KVR MIX CHALLENGE - MC16 November 2015 - Winners announced

[No_Use]

Damn, I had only seen this MC and the track a few hours ago and noticed it's quite up my alley.

So this was several hours mixing-marathon until now, phew.

Here's my entry:

mp3
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/120 ... No_Use.mp3

wav
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/120 ... No_Use.wav

As for what I did regarding the mix:

I tried to focus on clarity, which I didn't find an easy task as sometimes quite a few sounds play at once. So I tried to set front - back priorities with partly quite radical EQ cuts and tried adding depth with reverb.

Some sounds are also (slightly) sidechained.

Nearly everything is (sub-)grouped, drums are (slightly) bus-compressed.
I also tried to make the drums as punchy as I could as I'm quite into Breakbeats stuff. Gotta admit I have no idea about 'Demo scene' as it was mentioned and didn't have time to listen to some related tracks, so let's see how this works out.

[davemcisaac]

A few minutes late - A LOT going on then difficulty getting SoundCloud to cooperate...

https://soundcloud.com/dr-audio-labs/an ... o-labs-mp3
https://soundcloud.com/dr-audio-labs/an ... o-labs-wav

I'll post details later

[Compyfox]

Ladies and gentlemen, the first mix round has officially ended.
The submitted mixes are now in evaluation. Please stay tuned.

I intentionally posted late, since I thought that the one or another mix will still sneak in. But it looks like we're down to an all-time low with 7 entries, all submitted in the last hours even. Which I find a bit... sad. And I'd love to know the reason for it to be honest.

Lack of promotion? Time Zone issues (a time zone tool is in the second post with every challenge)? Wrong genre?
Please give us feedback. Ideally through the Gossip Thread




But on to the questions/concerns:

So, I mixed and mastered the track, and then I read about the loudness levels, NO premastering, -18LU etc.. I think the master channel makes at least 50% of the sound in this genre, it needs the compressed sound, so the unmastered mix doesn't make much sense to me.

Sorry, but I can't agree on the notion that "mastering makes 50% of the sound for this genre". This is IMO just another excuse for "louder = better". I've been there myself, and I still see it every time I jump over to Youtube, Vimeo, SoundCloud, you name it.

WIth "no premastering" written in the rules, it it meant to create a good mix to boot with right from the start. Something that a possible future mastering engineer can work with, and build upon. It's not how to "mask things" to ultimately be better than everyone else - it's to show how well you can mix (to me, that is also a point of rating on a real mass engineer shootout - does he/she/the team mask things, or is it something that I can use for years to come?).

Additional to that, the industry is currently changing. As of the AES Convention #139, there is a new White Paper on "Loudness Normalization for Streaming Services" that focuses on Normalizing signals "on the fly" during playback. In case of iTunes, that is a "hard coded" process and called "Mastering for iTunes", and in case of Youtube it's already happening on the fly - clocks in between -16LUFS SLk to -12LUFS SLk (ITU-R BS.1770-x specs).

If you upload a track to one of these streaming services, while the track has a value of -8dB RMS and a max digital peak of -0,2dBFS digital, it will be pulled down to -16LUFS (SLk). So your so carefully mastered "impact track" (read: Louder = Better) will be reduced to -16LUFS (during playback), while the dynamic range stays the same: it will be a squashed, lifeless sound not moving at all loudness range wise, all around -16LUFS SLk, with a maximum digital peak up to -8dBTP (True Peak). Loudness movement gone, transients gone, unpleasant listening experience. In short: you ultimately lost this battle.


Which ultimately brings me back to the rules of the Mix Challenge:
Mix it as well as you can, as good as you can. If a possible mastering engineer only has to raise the loudness by 2-4dB and add a safety limiter, then it's a good mix.

And this is what we try to teach here with the "try not to premaster the track".

Anyway, so I removed everything from the master channel, saturation, limiter, etc. and reduced levels to come out below -3LUFS. I hope I did that right and I hope that I understood the rules right because it really sounds strange to me.

The rules don't necessarily state "absolutely no plugins on the master/summing bus". People in recent challenges used a quick wide-band EQ fix and a tape machine, or the infamous SSL-Bus Compressor trick on the sum. Other re-create a mix console with whatever console emu is out there (so there is a plugin on the summing bus regardless).

Still they aimed for -18dB RMS realtime/0VU (-18dBFS reference) on average signal strength.
This way they can shoot up to -15dB RMS on forte fortissimo passages and the digital peaks still won't exceed -3dBFS digital. A heaven for any future engineer and possible listener.

But I understand your confusion.
And an overhaul of the rules to make things even more clear, is in the making. The "Loudness Normalization" was from early days - and we (the hosts) handled that. Now you can do all this yourself (Loudness Normalization/Check - see my KVR Marks), and we expect our clients/song provider to do that during the evaluation process.


Got further Q's, my PM box is open.

[ZentralmassivSound]

To me "no pre-mastering" sounded like there shouldn't be anything on the master channel. To say "no mastering" would be more appropriate, I guess. Anyway, as I said sum compression is very important for this genre, and you can't really argue that. Maximum loudness is not, but compression is.

PS: reason why I chipped in so late: I just didn't see the thread up before. It seems it hasn't been up much, needs more discussion maybe.

[Compyfox]

Again, I understand your thinking and (possible) frustration. Technically "pre-mastering" is the step where you finalize the material for the plant. "Mastering" in itself, is the infamous "Glass-Master". The lines thinned throughout the years.


Regarding "not seeing the thread":
a) the challenges are pinned (if you want a dedicated challenge sub forum, raise your voice here: http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 2&t=413299 )
b) I bump regularly (all Mix Challenge related threads! Even did cross promotion in the OSC and the in the "Everything Else (Music)" pinned "Challenges" thread)
c) We have a Twitter account and are getting retweeted by BPB, Rekkerd and KVRAudio themselves


Looks like we're on the wrong social media platforms, because else I just don't understand why the participation is at a constant low.

[Bigerax]

Maybe expand the social media side to include facebook as it seems to be the other standard platform. It looks like a few KVR members also post on youtube, may be worthwhile to ask them to help advertise the MC. I'm not terribly well versed in social media but I'll ask a few friends who are in to that sort of thing.

[davemcisaac]

A site that recently closed down that held mixing contests was Crowd Audio. The last couple contests I participated in had 200+ entrants. It was impossible to judge. Simply giving that many mixes a fair listening to is impossible. So I actually prefer something a bit more intimate.
But they were offering actual paid mixing prizes (many times not for just the single song, but the opportunity to mix the artist's EP or full CD.)

[Compyfox]

Maybe expand the social media side to include facebook as it seems to be the other standard platform.

If we can do this WITHOUT extra work, then yes. But I find it absolutely STUPID to post on several media platforms just to get the message out to the masses.

We're a pinned challenge! If something would improve, then a "focus on KVR Challenges" and a dedicated board. But so far, the CEO of KVR didn't listen. Raise your voice!
http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 2&t=413299

I'm not terribly well versed in social media but I'll ask a few friends who are in to that sort of thing.

The question is still - what else should we do?
We're heavily reliant on help from the outside. Meaning: people that provide songs. People that talk about us. We can nothing more than make promotion. On KVR, Twitter, contact people directly, involve companies.

If we don't get ANYTHING back (which is currently the case)... then the advertisement is a waste of time.
So opening even a Youtube channel wouldn't help that!


But I talked about this in-depth on these two posts already:
http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 0#p6288640
http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 5#p6299165

Along with the question "should we start a Mailing List? Do you use that?! Would that be a better case to stay informed?!"

We and especially I can only do SO MUCH, you know...

A site that recently closed down that held mixing contests was Crowd Audio. The last couple contests I participated in had 200+ entrants. It was impossible to judge. Simply giving that many mixes a fair listening to is impossible. So I actually prefer something a bit more intimate.
But they were offering actual paid mixing prizes (many times not for just the single song, but the opportunity to mix the artist's EP or full CD.)

We could offer that as well - actually, the OSC does offer that. (a professional mix to the winner)
Yet they also only have 15-20 participants, depending on the used synth. But they are a very limited challenge.

In our case - no limits (you can use what you want, within reason). Yet we barely even scratch 10 participants! And please don't tell me again "because this is mainly an instrument board" - because this is just a nonsense excuse, considering all the rage in the "hosts" and "effects" sections sometimes.



But please, continue the feedback in the Gossip Thread.
Thanks.

[animehaus]

First of all, I'd like to thank everyone who took their time to mix "Talisman": it's a really interesting exercise to listen to so many different mixing ideas regarding a track of mine.

Here are some few words about each mix:


Photonic - Overall, good balance between drums and instruments. Glitch FX used efficiently and in unexpected areas, which is nice. Middle section is the best one overall. Mix sounds a little too bassy for me. Abrupt end, not sure what might have happened here.


Bigerax - Although I appreciate boldness in mixing, I think you went a little overboard, specially from the middle section on. Last section practically have no perceivable drums, too noisy for my taste. 1st section works better overall, but I feel the drums are too loud when compared to instruments, which is the exact opposite of what happens later in the track.


Kolyev - Drums too loud compared to the instruments in the 1st half and near the end. Enjoyed the filter slowly opening in the middle section. Sidechain in the arps in the 2nd half, a little strange to my ears. Best use of glitch FX among all entries, imho.


Davias - Drums a tiny bit too loud when compared to instruments, but I enjoy the overall feeling. Middle section sounds really good, with drums and arps really well balanced. Transition from middle to final section could have been stronger. Kinda missed at least some glitch FX.


Zentralmassiv - Mix sounds a little empty and unbalanced - maybe "unglued" is the right word. I pratically only listen to kick and snare most of the time, with the majority of sounds buried in the back. I don't think that this would be down to multi-band compression on the summing bus. Middle section works better overall, with more balance. Transitions could have more power, they're a little abrupt as well.


No Use - The best balance between drums and instruments among all tracks: you really felt the music and what the mix actually needed. Transitions could have been better, a little abrupt to my taste, although the super reverb near the end worked pretty well. Just a quick glitch near the end, wish you have used more of those FX on other areas.


DR Audio Labs - Didn't love the huge amount of FX on instruments (reverbs, etc) on 1st and 3rd sections, it sounds kinda messy. Enjoyed the personal touches you added on the middle section. And although a little extreme, the super glitch near the end pleased me as well.


I choose the following ones for the 2nd round, in no particular order:

-No Use
-Davias
-Kolyev
-Photonic

[ZentralmassivSound]

Zentralmassiv - Mix sounds a little empty and unbalanced - maybe "unglued" is the right word. I pratically only listen to kick and snare most of the time, with the majority of sounds buried in the back. I don't think that this would be down to multi-band compression on the summing bus. Middle section works better overall, with more balance. Transitions could have more power, they're a little abrupt as well.

It IS totally unglued. I apparently understood the contest rules wrong, it said "no pre-mastering", so after I had a full mixed and mastered track I removed all compression and limiting from the master bus. The mix sounded much better with compression of course, e.g. the bassdrum is kind of mixed into the limiter. If you are interested I can give you the full mix I made just for your interest.

[No_Use]

No Use - The best balance between drums and instruments among all tracks: you really felt the music and what the mix actually needed.

Thanks, appreciated.

Just a quick glitch near the end, wish you have used more of those FX on other areas.

Yeah, I probably would have used more glitch FX if I had time, as said in my entry post, this was a 'last minute participation' so to say (I know it's only me to blame not having checked in here earlier ).

Transitions could have been better, a little abrupt to my taste, although the super reverb near the end worked pretty well.

I'm unclear about this to be honest. Ok, I've added this super reverb as a transition, but this was more as an 'intuitive idea', in general wouldn't 'making transitions' fall more in the category 'production work' (in other words, be a task of you, the producer) as we have a mixing challenge here (which as I understand it, actually doesn't involve any 'production' work) ?

Or you mean strictly mixing-wise the transitions could have been better ?

(Not want to start an argument or something, just like to clear this up )

edit:
Trying to be more clear, by 'production work' I mean something like 'making significant changes to the original material', like (in this case) adding transition FX.

[Compyfox]

We're kicking off Mix Round 2!
The new deadline for submissions is Saturday, 28th November 2015 at 11:59pm CET/GMT+1.


The Round 2 participants are:

in no particular order:

-No Use
-Davias
-Kolyev
-Photonic

Good luck.

[Kolyev]

Thanks for choosing my mix for the second round I'm glad you like the glitch FX. That took me some time to get it to sound like that.

[Kolyev]

and as promised some notes on my mixing process:

I did not do a lot of processing on the drums, some EQ, reverb and panning here and there and some parallel compression. Nothing fancy.

There is also not much processing on the synths. Some EQ adjustments, reverb and ping pong delay. Oh and the sidechaining, that I may have to remove

The main bass required the most work. For better control I split the main bass into sub and mid bass and processed them differently.

The mid bass was treated with a chorus effect for more width and some multiband distortion was applied on the high end for more presence. Subtle multiband distortion was also used on a couple of other elements.

The other attack basses were EQed, panned and treated with delay and reverb. Same goes for the several FX Sounds.

A pretty steep lowcut at around 60 to 70 Hz was applied to the bassline in the 4 to the floor part in order to make room for the kick as this kind of bassline in combination with a heavy kick does not require a super deep low end.

Oh and the glitch FX is a combination of ízotope stutter edit and sugar bytes turnado with 4 to 6 effects combined.

[photonic]

... Photonic - Overall, good balance between drums and instruments. Glitch FX used efficiently and in unexpected areas, which is nice. Middle section is the best one overall. Mix sounds a little too bassy for me. Abrupt end, not sure what might have happened here.
...

I choose the following ones for the 2nd round, in no particular order:

-No Use
-Davias
-Kolyev
-Photonic

Oh, great! I am glad to make it to the second round.
I will follow your comments and try to fix those issues in the mix.