2024-APR-11 Info: Check out our current running games Mix Challenge 097 and Songwriting Competition 080.

MIX CHALLENGE - MC32 May 2017 - Winners announced

Join the Mix Challenge - recurrence: February, April, June, August, October, December
FixInTheMix
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 20:13 CEST

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC32 May 2017 - Mix Round 1 in evaluation

#51

Post by FixInTheMix »

Thanks for the feedback el-bo! I aprecciate you took the time to make comments on every entry and with enough detail to understand the mistakes.

I must admit I went too much into experimental ground and missed the overall point of this challenge so your critique it´s understandable.
I am really confused to what happened with the brass tracks tho, I must have lowered the fader by accident or something cause they are almost completely gone and I realized after the deadline so there was nothing I could do :(

I hope you submit more tracks in future challenges, it was a lot of fun.
User avatar
Mister Fox
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3107
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 16:15 CEST
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC32 May 2017 - Mix Round 2 until 31-05-2017 11:59pm GMT+1/CEST

#52

Post by Mister Fox »

Thank you for handling the evaluation, el-bo.

Let us kick off Mix Round 2, which will end on Wednesday, 31-MAY-2017 11:59pm GMT+1/CEST (check Berlin / DE on the forum world clock)



The following 8 participants go into Round 2 (alphabetical order)

davemcisaac
erictracks
HerbFelho
Mork
Nonlinear
OctopusOnFire
Photonic
SergioITASCO (wild-card!)


el-bo wrote:
Fri May 26, 2017 13:38 CEST
I also sent an email to MF this morning, to ask what he thought about the idea of a WildCard. By this, I mean selecting an entrant who was not very close, but where there was some potential. Or even, taking someone really far off, and seeing how well they receive the further critique/instruction.
Got the mail and already answered this afternoon. I like the idea and give green lights for a wild-card entry - I'm curious to see how this goes.

Please announce that special entry ASAP.


el-bo wrote:
Fri May 26, 2017 13:38 CEST
One last thing:

I’m not sure if it was missed, or if it’s never been discussed, but there needs to be a convention for the naming of tracks. It took me a while to edit these; In some cases, having to re-click links in entrants’ posts where they hadn’t included their own name on the track.

This is what I used, though I am sure this is something that can be debated further:

MC0032_ContestanttName_ArtistName_TrankName

E.g MC0032_MisterFox_el-bo_FunkThat!!
This is already declared in the Rules and Guidelines, however this could indeed be redefined for MC33 and up. Thanks for your feedback.




Other than that - a thank you to everyone, and good luck for Round 2
el-bo

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC32 May 2017 - Mix Round 2 until 31-05-2017 11:59pm GMT+1/CEST

#53

Post by el-bo »

Ok, I 've chosen a WildCard!

I didn't want any bias to creep in, so I entered the names of the three guys who have commented so far into a random number generator. I clicked the 'generate' button a few times, while looking away from the screen, and the result was no:2

FixInTheMix
SergioITASCO
small ocean

So! Sergio, you're up! :smile:

Of course, you might not be that interested in giving it another go. If so, let me know as soon as possible so I can follow the same process with the remaining two names :tu:
User avatar
Mister Fox
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3107
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 16:15 CEST
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC32 May 2017 - Mix Round 2 until 31-05-2017 11:59pm GMT+1/CEST

#54

Post by Mister Fox »

I updated the announcement post with the "wild-card". The same rules apply as for everyone else for Mix Round 2.
Good luck.



Regarding the "summing bus treatment discussion", I kicked off a dedicated thread. You can find that one (for the time being) here:
http://www.mix-challenge.com/forum/view ... p=151#p151

Newsletter No #004 will be sent out within the next hours.
OctopusOnFire

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC32 May 2017 - Mix Round 2 until 31-05-2017 11:59pm GMT+1/CEST

#55

Post by OctopusOnFire »

Glad to know you liked my entry el-bo! Thanks for the clear and precise feedback, I really appreciate that :D

Reading your feedback I feel that the mix is almost there and now there are some rough edges that need polishing. This really makes me happy about most of the decisions I made. I'll address the issues you pointed out and hopefully make it even better now that I have fresh ears.

Cheers!
Nonlinear

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC32 May 2017 - Mix Round 1 in evaluation

#56

Post by Nonlinear »

el-bo wrote:
Fri May 26, 2017 13:38 CEST
9 - Nonlinear

Kit - Swamped in ‘verb, so is pushed too far back, and has lost any power.

Bass - Also a bit loud

Vibes/piano - really expose how much ‘verb you are using, but I don’t mind it as much on these sounds. Leaving the piano late on the second ‘intro’ is not something I’m getting used to, despite multiple listens.

Organ - I do quite like the sound, but it is a little too big

Brass - Nice balance, and does a good job of really elevating that last section. Also, that unison roar (Before the fill), could do with a little toning down

Speaking to your creative editing: While I can see the exact effect you are going for, and how it is perfectly suited to this kind of performance, I don’t feel it works here. To give the drummer his little solo, the other players would need alterations to their arrangements. As it is, everything is arranged around a certain expectation, and removing elements just leaves a really obvious hole.

Furthermore, in this case, it seems such a wasted sentiment. Had I your idea in the recording stages, I would have come up with something worthy of the space. Alas, as it is, all you’ve done is make room for this drummer’s lame, pedestrian fills.

Perhaps, one day I might fool around with those fills, and get all Buddy Rich up in that shit :) Thanks for the idea!
Thank you for the feedback and critique. I did not know that pulling down faders constituted "editing" but, trust me, I would have liked to do a lot more!

For example:

This entire composition sounds like it was recorded on the fly using a MIDI keyboard/instruments. The dead giveaway are the drum tracks which have perfect isolation (no bleed) between tracks. Not possible with a real drum kit, especially on overheads/cymbal mics. The "Brass" sounds like it's from a 1980's Casio. Not convincing, especially for an acoustic tune like this.

You say this song has complex Jazz key signatures but it sounds to me like the drummer is stumbling through it. You used quantization to "clean it up" but now it sounds mechanical. Does not flow. It's not just the drum fills that are "pedestrian" - the drums are weak throughout the song. My touch of room 'verb (definitely not "swamped") did not create that problem.

The piano solo - and the entire song itself - does not have an ending. It sounds like they didn't know what else to do so they just stopped playing. Finish writing the song before you record it. If your musicians aren't good at improvising keep recording until they can play a full part or have enough material that a part can be comp'd.

The piano and vibes play a nice melody during the verses - but with the same notes in the same register. They are stepping on each other. I pulled the piano out ("edited") most of the second verse to create some clarity but re-arrangement is the right way to do this.

This is a good set of tracks to practice EQ and moderate balancing - to sound like your mix. If that's what this contest is about then I will make the requested changes. But if you want this to sound like a RECORD then a lot more needs to be done. The song writing needs to be finished; it needs to be rehearsed and recorded with accomplished musicians using real instruments in a good room with good microphones - THEN sent out for mixing.
el-bo

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC32 May 2017 - Mix Round 1 in evaluation

#57

Post by el-bo »

Nonlinear wrote:
Sat May 27, 2017 16:33 CEST
el-bo wrote:
Fri May 26, 2017 13:38 CEST
9 - Nonlinear

Kit - Swamped in ‘verb, so is pushed too far back, and has lost any power.

Bass - Also a bit loud

Vibes/piano - really expose how much ‘verb you are using, but I don’t mind it as much on these sounds. Leaving the piano late on the second ‘intro’ is not something I’m getting used to, despite multiple listens.

Organ - I do quite like the sound, but it is a little too big

Brass - Nice balance, and does a good job of really elevating that last section. Also, that unison roar (Before the fill), could do with a little toning down

Speaking to your creative editing: While I can see the exact effect you are going for, and how it is perfectly suited to this kind of performance, I don’t feel it works here. To give the drummer his little solo, the other players would need alterations to their arrangements. As it is, everything is arranged around a certain expectation, and removing elements just leaves a really obvious hole.

Furthermore, in this case, it seems such a wasted sentiment. Had I your idea in the recording stages, I would have come up with something worthy of the space. Alas, as it is, all you’ve done is make room for this drummer’s lame, pedestrian fills.

Perhaps, one day I might fool around with those fills, and get all Buddy Rich up in that shit :) Thanks for the idea!
Thank you for the feedback and critique. I did not know that pulling down faders constituted "editing" but, trust me, I would have liked to do a lot more!

For example:

This entire composition sounds like it was recorded on the fly using a MIDI keyboard/instruments. The dead giveaway are the drum tracks which have perfect isolation (no bleed) between tracks. Not possible with a real drum kit, especially on overheads/cymbal mics. The "Brass" sounds like it's from a 1980's Casio. Not convincing, especially for an acoustic tune like this.

You say this song has complex Jazz key signatures but it sounds to me like the drummer is stumbling through it. You used quantization to "clean it up" but now it sounds mechanical. Does not flow. It's not just the drum fills that are "pedestrian" - the drums are weak throughout the song. My touch of room 'verb (definitely not "swamped") did not create that problem.

The piano solo - and the entire song itself - does not have an ending. It sounds like they didn't know what else to do so they just stopped playing. Finish writing the song before you record it. If your musicians aren't good at improvising keep recording until they can play a full part or have enough material that a part can be comp'd.

The piano and vibes play a nice melody during the verses - but with the same notes in the same register. They are stepping on each other. I pulled the piano out ("edited") most of the second verse to create some clarity but re-arrangement is the right way to do this.

This is a good set of tracks to practice EQ and moderate balancing - to sound like your mix. If that's what this contest is about then I will make the requested changes. But if you want this to sound like a RECORD then a lot more needs to be done. The song writing needs to be finished; it needs to be rehearsed and recorded with accomplished musicians using real instruments in a good room with good microphones - THEN sent out for mixing.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I did not know that pulling down faders constituted "editing"
"Editing" speaks to the result, not the process. You modified the source material. How you did it is not important.
This entire composition sounds like it was recorded on the fly using a MIDI keyboard/instruments
I recorded the midi using a Korg Mircokontrol, and drum midi with a mod'ed Akai MPD16. I would have loved to have a higher calibre of virtual instruments, but alas…

Either way, for the purposes of this project I was pretty happy with the sound.
The dead giveaway are the drum tracks which have perfect isolation (no bleed) between tracks. Not possible with a real drum kit, especially on overheads/cymbal mics
I agree! Unfortunately, I made some silly workflow decisions from the start (Mainly due to not knowing my way around Kontakt), that went on to plague me throughout the whole editing process. In the end, it was just simpler to make things more isolated than the opposite.
The "Brass" sounds like it's from a 1980's Casio. Not convincing, especially for an acoustic tune like this
The brass is a combination of sounds from Logic's EXS, and IKM Philharmonik. Clearly, I don't have access to 'first-call' horns, so I did the best I could with what I had.
You say this song has complex Jazz key signatures but it sounds to me like the drummer is stumbling through it.
I don't know where I said that, but I do believe complexity is relative. Dream theatre, it ain't. But it does deviate from a more straight performance.

As for the drummer's performance: I am definitely not the best finger-drummer, but I am improving :tu:
You used quantization to "clean it up" but now it sounds mechanical. Does not flow.
Actually, I didn't. Nor did I claim I did in any of the provided material. What I did say was that I did end up quantising some of the tracks (Originally, only the Bass was quantised). However, with regard to the drums, (and I quote), "all of the drum tracks are still derived from those first live performances, albeit heavily edited".

Mister Fox can testify to the amount of time/effort I put into editing the drums, dragging midi all over the place. It was one of those cases where pulling one part would result in too many issues with other parts, and that process just became a real nightmare. In hindsight it would have been much easier to quantise the lot, and then put effort into humanising the performance.

Either way, I guarantee I have more issues with the result than you do, but if I stand back to look at the bigger picture, I still feel it works. You don't, and that's fine.
It's not just the drum fills that are "pedestrian" - the drums are weak throughout the song.
I wouldn't call them weak. However, I am not a drummer, and have no formal training as a drummer. I am also not a Jazz aficionado.

What I have performed and presented, here, is a culmination of all the above factors, and the best I could do at the time. :shrug:

It does however strike me as somewhat odd, given how weak you feel the drums to be, that you would go to the 'effort' to highlight/showcase them :shrug:
My touch of room 'verb (definitely not "swamped") did not create that problem.
I know. Not sure I said it did.
The piano solo - and the entire song itself - does not have an ending.
There are two issues here. Firstly, the original competition (KvR Music Cafe Monthly) imposed a strict time limit of 3 minutes. The tempo of the original piece was slower, and so my piece ended up with seconds to spare. However, I also have zero music theory or composition knowledge. I have yet to conceive of a more definite ending that I think will work. I’m sure someone else would be able to help, in this regard

Despite the above, I have actually grown to like how it tails out at the end, so am not desperate to change it.
Finish writing the song before you record it
I did! I am sure I would be able to come up with changes, but it was as finished as it was going to get at the time of submission.
If your musicians aren't good at improvising keep recording until they can play a full part or have enough material that a part can be comp'd.
That's exactly what I did :shrug: The musician(s) in question is me, and I have no formal keyboard/piano training. I fumble around till I get something close to what feels right. The result is the best that I could manage, at that time.
The piano and vibes play a nice melody during the verses - but with the same notes in the same register.
A 'creative' decision.
They are stepping on each other. I pulled the piano out ("edited") most of the second verse to create some clarity but re-arrangement is the right way to do this.
It's not something that ever stood out to me, but I will look into it. Perhaps, I found the edit more jarring due to non familiarity. Maybe it's something I would get used to.

Either way, I had imagined part of the mixing process to involve making a clear distinction between these sounds, nay, all the sounds, so that nothing is clashing.
The song writing needs to be finished; it needs to be rehearsed and recorded with accomplished musicians using real instruments in a good room with good microphones - THEN sent out for mixing.
It's as finished as I envision it being, at least for the moment. Who knows? Perhaps I will return to it at some point in the future, when I have the chops to do it more justice.

As for real musicians and instruments, good rooms, and good mic's: While I would love access to some higher-quality libraries, it is currently not possible. However, I suspect that wouldn't serve your position either.

Ultimately, I am just a bedroom hobbyist with no access to the kind of budget you are talking about. I know how it could be a lot better, so I don't think we disagree on all of your critique. However, despite my distinct lack of musical/compositional training, my lacking keyboard skills, and my access to, evidently?, lacking sample libraries, I am vey happy with what I have been able to accomplish, here :shrug:

-------------------------------------------------------

Given your reservations regarding the source material, perhaps consider offering up your position to someone else. I have no issue, either way, but if you decide to bow out, then please let me know as soon as possible.

Thanks.
User avatar
Mister Fox
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3107
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 16:15 CEST
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC32 May 2017 - Mix Round 1 in evaluation

#58

Post by Mister Fox »

el-bo wrote:
Sat May 27, 2017 18:07 CEST
Given your reservations regarding the source material, perhaps consider offering up your position to someone else. I have no issue, either way, but if you decide to bow out, then please let me know as soon as possible.

Thanks.
Once participants for Round 2 have been announced, and any one of the selected people in question does bow out, it's unfortunate - but there won't be a budge up of contestants.

8 people have been selected. If one or two people drop out due to time, disinterest or something, it's completely their choice. We still have enough people to participate in Round 2 that want to put the effort into alterations of their edit.


...just to make that clear.
el-bo

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC32 May 2017 - Mix Round 1 in evaluation

#59

Post by el-bo »

Mister Fox wrote:
Sat May 27, 2017 21:23 CEST
el-bo wrote:
Sat May 27, 2017 18:07 CEST
Given your reservations regarding the source material, perhaps consider offering up your position to someone else. I have no issue, either way, but if you decide to bow out, then please let me know as soon as possible.

Thanks.
Once participants for Round 2 have been announced, and any one of the selected people in question does bow out, it's unfortunate - but there won't be a budge up of contestants.

8 people have been selected. If one or two people drop out due to time, disinterest or something, it's completely their choice. We still have enough people to participate in Round 2 that want to put the effort into alterations of their edit.


...just to make that clear.
Understood! Thanks!
davemcisaac
Posts: 82
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 10:59 CEST
Location: Pocatello, Idaho USA
Contact:

Re: MIX CHALLENGE - MC32 May 2017 - Mix Round 1 in evaluation

#60

Post by davemcisaac »

el-bo wrote:
Fri May 26, 2017 13:38 CEST
9 - Nonlinear...
My compliments to el-bo for handling this barrage with grace and dignity! :tu:

Also - thanks for the very detailed critiques. That really helps. :grin:
Post Reply