Public Mix Contest #5

  • Thread starter Thread starter giles117
  • Start date Start date
I have an idea. Could you split the entries into two categories, like Newbie's and Veteran Engineers?

We rookies feel that we don't even stand a chance against folks who have been mixing for years.

One more question. Should we submit the song mastered or un-mastered? In other words, what will you be judging on? Just the mix, or the final shine?

I ask because my last mix (contest #4) was not mastered. I don't own any mastering software yet. This may explain why it scored so low. Later I learned they were judging on things like Air, imaging, and overall sound quality. Those sound like things that are polished up in the mastering not the initial mix. I must have mistakenly thought it was a "Mix" contest.

...Or am I way off base and out of line here?
 
Please do not master it. A good mix has a solid polish on it and good depth. most mastering squashes dynamic range which messes with depth of the mix. Imaging is not as affected. Imaging is seen in the mix phase. Definition is a mix thing as well. Image quality to me and definition go hand in hand.
 
Ok I am reposting the files on my server. :)

Man I love this Apple Remote Dekstop Software. I never have to physically touch that thing again. Which is what has been causing me problems in the past :)
 
RawDepth said:
Later I learned they were judging on things like Air, imaging, and overall sound quality. Those sound like things that are polished up in the mastering not the initial mix. I must have mistakenly thought it was a "Mix" contest.

...Or am I way off base and out of line here?
Click to expand...
Way off base, I'm afraid... air, depth, imaging and overall sound quality are absolutely part of the mixing process. As a matter of fact, they're critical.

Mastering is like polishing fine wood, if the wood is really plywood, no amount of polish will bring out the grain, but if it's a well-sanded/stained piece of Brazilian rosewood, then adding polish draws out the wood grain/definition even more.

If a track sounds like shit after mixing, it's going to sound like shiny shit after mastering.
 
I will be hosting individual files. Not the entire archive. Please be kind to your fellow downloader. Monitor your downloads. i think the other guys will be hosting the entire archive
 
Blue Bear Sound said:
If a track sounds like shit after mixing, it's going to sound like shiny shit after mastering.
Click to expand...

Never more truer words spoken.
 
I'll have to see if my friend with cable internet can DL for me...
He gets something like 5 MB/s compared to my 5 KB/s
 
Blue Bear Sound said:
Way off base, I'm afraid... air, depth, imaging and overall sound quality are absolutely part of the mixing process. As a matter of fact, they're critical.
Click to expand...

Okay then, where would a young lad go to learn how to improve upon those things? I mean, I could practice for a thousand years, but if I don't understand what I'm doing wrong, how will I ever improve?
 
Space. Most people misuse reverbs. Reverb can be an effect or it can help you create dimension. Decide what you need and then use the approptiate reverb. I tend to use a lot fo small to medium spaces. You never hear them but they add depth and dimension to the sound filed. When need be for effect purposes I use halls. chambers and plates.

Plates used correctly add dimension o rwhat I like to call charater unattainable any other way.

Mono rooms and stereo rooms both play a part in spacing elemsnts in the stereo field.

Phasing, choruses, used gingerly when dimension is needed, and aggressively when effect is needed also add to your sense of spaciousness. There are som many facotrs. fter this contest, if you tell me what/how you mixed, what you used. (take screenshots) i'll be glad to disect your mix piece by piece and help give you direction. To the best of my ability.
 
All good :) These contests are for learning. and i remember when I had ZERO clue. So i am glad to offer advice and basic direction. The rest is on you :)
 
RawDepth said:
Okay then, where would a young lad go to learn how to improve upon those things? I mean, I could practice for a thousand years, but if I don't understand what I'm doing wrong, how will I ever improve?
Click to expand...
Did you check out my article on the subject? (Mixing 101)
 
This may be something very stupid, but I downloaded a few of the files, and when I try to import them with SONAR, sonar tells me that the audio file is incompatible with the curent projet.
My settings on sound card and sonar is : 16 bits, 48000hz
When I try it with other programs (like adobe audition) the program just shuts down...
Is there something I missed?

thx guys
 
Interesting. Simple wave file 48k 16 bit. Not sure about sonar. has anyone else had similar issues with the new files? As I am a non pro-tools mac user.......

And Let me know what programs beside Sonar and Audition...... PC's Gotta Love em. LOL.
 
giles117 said:
Please do not master it. A good mix has a solid polish on it and good depth. most mastering squashes dynamic range which messes with depth of the mix. Imaging is not as affected. Imaging is seen in the mix phase. Definition is a mix thing as well. Image quality to me and definition go hand in hand.
Click to expand...

i totally agree that a good mix should sound great without mastering, but if the judges do not match the volume of the mixes, a mastered mix will give a better first impression.

just look at the wave form of last contest's winner, -10db RMS and 0db negative and positive peaks (obviously a limiter and multiband compresssor was used on the final mix cause the mix has a lot more highs than there were on the raw tracks), compare that with an unmastered mix and most people would choose the louder-brighter one as the best.

i'm not saying badchi mix is bad (which is not), i'm just trying to point out that
without listening to all the mixes at equal volumes you're comparing apples to oranges.

i think you should make it clear in the contest's rules that all the entries must be "unmastered" (without loudness maximisers, exiters, etc,).

regards, Charly
 
Somebody with a really fast connection, pm me, I uploaded the file, but I'm not sure it worked. I want to test it first. Also, you must be aqble to pull the files into your DAW asap, and let me know they are good.

Thanks.
 
And I think I judged his correcting for the mastering. :) Basically if it is loud, i turn my volume down and relisten. I listend to all the mixes at about 74-78dbA

NL tell me your findings. I zipped, then uzipped a file and improted it to verify it was readable here. But then I am on a Mac. LOL (No mac vs. PC wars. LOL just my sarcasm)

Also test one of the smaller files 1st.
 
Nevermind, I can just DL it myself. I am worried something happened on the upload, Like I told you, I am "under construction", and I knocked the cable connection out, and had to re-boot and restart the upload. It Uploaded at 3Mbps - took 20min instead of 3/12 hours. So, I'm not sure what happened. I'm D/L and checking now, should know in about 15 min.
 
stone_eufemia said:
just look at the wave form of last contest's winner, -10db RMS and 0db negative and positive peaks (obviously a limiter and multiband compresssor was used on the final mix cause the mix has a lot more highs than there were on the raw tracks), compare that with an unmastered mix and most people would choose the louder-brighter one as the best.

i'm not saying badchi mix is bad (which is not), i'm just trying to point out that
without listening to all the mixes at equal volumes you're comparing apples to oranges.
Click to expand...

I agree also, now convert to an MP3 and your mix sounds like ASS, but........I just can't help myself. Maybe there's a 12 step program for limiter abuse. Anyway, if the judges compensate for volume, which I believe they all did, the advantage should go to the more dynamic mix.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top