June/July Mix Competition - THE RESULTS!

[Skol303]

Is anybody here having trouble accessing the SoundCloud link in the original post of this thread - the link to download the mix stems?

I've just tried it and am getting the [i]"Oops, looks like we can't find that page!"[/i] message in response. Very odd. My own SoundCloud page and others seem to be working fine.

If anyone has time, please test the link and let me know if you get the same error. I've never had any trouble with SoundCloud before, but there's a first time for everything Worst case I'll have to set it up again later tonight...

[Skol303]

Panic over! The SoundCloud link is working again.

As you were. Nothing to see here, people. Move along. Move along now please...

[lurksalot]

I do have the odd issue with uploading and signing in occasionally , don't panic

[Twigman]

is there a stem for that keyboard line?

[MiltyG565]

[quote name='Twigman' timestamp='1372110526' post='2121875']
is there a stem for that keyboard line?
[/quote]

What keyboard line? ....

[Twigman]

my mistake

I was hearing a guitar....

[Skol303]

[quote name='Twigman' timestamp='1372110526' post='2121875']is there a stem for that keyboard line?[/quote]

...I think xgsjx mentioned that there were some additional tracks added to the 'finished' MP3 copy, but I don't think he has them (G - please confirm this).

If anybody wants to add additional instrumentation of their own then I see no reason why not. Again, provided it's fairly subtle and not too far removed from what's already there. Banjos are certainly out of the question, before anybody asks

[xgsjx]

I used a vst to add a marimba playing the guitar melody for the first couple of bars & a sample of a siren at the end (instead of the guitar playing the siren).
They was never stems, just done in Reaper.

The singer/guitarist also plays banjo, but never in Frigorifico (thankfully).

[MiltyG565]

Great! Can I put in a...


[quote name='Skol303' timestamp='1372115215' post='2121949']
Banjos are certainly out of the question, before anybody asks
[/quote]

Oh...

[MiltyG565]

What key is this song in? I would work it out, but I can't reach my guitar My instinct tells me AMaj, but it's been very wrong before!

[ras52]

Hello! I'm late to this particular party but will be on the lookout next time around, as practising my mixing would be A Good Thing. My question now relates to this K-14 business... at the moment I have a very primitive setup with Pro Tools SE, which AFAIK doesn't allow the use of any external plugins. Could I work around this by e.g. normalising the mix in Audacity? (I do plan on getting "Proper" Pro Tools at some point...)

[MiltyG565]

[quote name='ras52' timestamp='1372864732' post='2130889']
Hello! I'm late to this particular party but will be on the lookout next time around, as practising my mixing would be A Good Thing. My question now relates to this K-14 business... at the moment I have a very primitive setup with Pro Tools SE, which AFAIK doesn't allow the use of any external plugins. Could I work around this by e.g. normalising the mix in Audacity? (I do plan on getting "Proper" Pro Tools at some point...)
[/quote]

Don't know about your query there mate, but it most certainly is not too late to get involved in this one! There's still plenty of time to do something with this mix, so long as you can find a few free hours (an hour a day would likely be enough by the time the competition closes) you could do a mix for it!

[Skol303]

[quote name='ras52' timestamp='1372864732' post='2130889']My question now relates to this K-14 business... at the moment I have a very primitive setup with Pro Tools SE, which AFAIK doesn't allow the use of any external plugins. Could I work around this by e.g. normalising the mix in Audacity?[/quote]

K-14 metering and normalising are very different things. K-14 is a way of standardising the perceived loudness of a track:

[i]"The K-system is an audio level measuring technique proposed by mastering engineer Bob Katz... It proposes a studio monitor calibration system and a set of meter ballistics to help engineers produce consistent sounding music while preserving appropriate dynamic range."[/i]

We use K-metering during these mix challenges so that everyone's finished mixes are of the same (or very similar) perceived loudness, which results in a much more fair comparison when it comes to voting - rather than it becoming a battle over who can produce the loudest mix.

Normalising a track simply increases the amplitude/volume of the signal so that the loudest peaks are at 0db (i.e. the loudest possible volume on a digital signal).

To set up a K-meter, see the instuctions in the first post on this thread (it's thankfully very easy to do!). if you can't run VSTs in Pro Tools SE then I recommend using Reaper for this purpose - the trial version is free to download [url="http://www.reaper.fm/"]here[/url].

... and welcome aboard! if you need help with anything else, just ask

Edited July 3, 2013 by Skol303

[moonbass]

I've just had a read of Bob Katz's original paper proposing K-metering. If you've got a spare 20 minutes it's an interesting read (although a bit 'techy' at times:
http://www.aes.org/technical/documentDownloads.cfm?docID=65
It's good to appreciate the difference between VU meters (which you see bobbling around on pro mixing desks) and the peak level meters you get on DAWs, and the effect this has on the finished product/music.
My new puzzle with the system is that if its all about average levels, and a larger dynamic range being better, why do all the mixes we produce seem to have a peak level of -6 or more (ie end up sounding ridiculously quiet)? Katz does mention about the need for compression on home systems using K-20, but I reckon it won't gain widespread usage as its just so different from the material from the past 20 years now! Why are our peak levels so low? Do we really need to compress the final (and he does include mastered) material so much less?!

[Twigman]

[quote name='Skol303' timestamp='1372867106' post='2130944']
Normalising a track simply increases the amplitude/volume of the signal so that the loudest peaks are at [s]0db (i.e. the loudest possible volume on a digital signal).[/s]whatever level you tell Audacity to normalise to be it, 0dB, -3dB,-6dB, -14dB etc etc the choices are endless


[/quote]

Corrected for you.
I suggest normalising to -12dB or so (what are K-14 peak levels?) would likely give similar result to K14 metering.

Edited July 3, 2013 by Twigman

[Skol303]

[quote name='Twigman' timestamp='1372869274' post='2130977']
Corrected for you.
I suggest normalising to -12dB or so (what are K-14 peak levels?) would likely give similar result to K14 metering.
[/quote]

^ Good point. Indeed a track can be 'normalised' to any given volume - maybe this is what Ras meant in his post? If so, apologies Ras!

I think the default level for normalising in Audacity (and pretty much everything else) is 0db, hence my reply. As for K14... I'm guessing, but I think the peak levels are -14db. It always seems to turn out around that level when I use a K-meter on these mixes, but I'm sure someone else here can clarify.

[51m0n]

[quote name='Twigman' timestamp='1372869274' post='2130977']


Corrected for you.
I suggest normalising to -12dB or so (what are K-14 peak levels?) would likely give similar result to K14 metering.
[/quote]

No.

Normalizing means finding the highest volume samplease in the entire piece of music and calculating the difference between that level and the desired normalised level. Then applying that difference to every sample in the track.

This is very different from getting the same average level the same for all the tracks.

If I brickwall limit my track and you don't and we normalised them both mine wwould average as much as 10bB louder than your track

Edited July 3, 2013 by 51m0n

[Dad3353]

...or, to put it another way, take the 'WAV' file to be a cup of tea (Earl Grey, for example, although most teas would do...), and the peaks to be the milk (or cream, although personally I take neither in Earl Grey...). Now, if adding sugar, one should aim to have the proportion of milk (or cream...) to be in adequation with the amount of tea. The more milk (or cream...), the less sugar, naturally. Stirring will help in evening out discrepancies, to make an average (there..! do you see the analogy shining out to you now..?), so that the final 'mix' is neither too sweet, too milky nor too strong. One wouldn't want too strong a cup of Earl Grey, would one..? I'll leaf the delicate subject of the lemon (a squeeze, or a thin slice, or both..?) for another time, so as not to confuse the issue, which I feel is already a little strained.
I hope that's cleared things up somewhat; I know the subject can be baffling for some, hence my simple demonstration. No, no applause, please; I'm off now for a nice refreshing cup of... tea!

[ras52]

Hi all, thanks for the tips. I meant "something like" normalising, as I knew Audicity has a long list of effects (I just use it for topping/tailing and, er, normalising...). But it doesn't include K-14 :-( However I've grabbed Reaper and may just be able to tame it enough for that final step!

I've been away from here for a while as I've been writing more than bassing, but this has led to demo-ing, and that led me to remember these competitions... I'm looking at this one as an opportunity to practise rather than to trounce you all in a competition!

[ras52]

PS email notificaiton doesn't seem to work :-(

[51m0n]

Audacity is free and thats great but it truly is not up to the job of mixing in any meaningful way.

Rule 1 when mixing is ignore the rules (actually its better put that Rule 1 is to learn when and where and how to break the rules, and dont be afraid to if it sounds better)

Rule 2 is listen to the mix as you change something to hear the sweet spot - Audacity has a solo preview of an FX being applied over the first few seconds of the entire track, and the you apply it and then you hear it in the mix, you cant sweep an eq point whilst hearing how the change interacts with the mix, you simply cant mix 'properly' with it. It is for making destructive edits to wavs that Audacity has any use at all IMO, and these days I dont even use it for that!

Get into Reaper, its not hard to learn the basics, it will take years to get fully to grips with (any full featured DAW), so enjoy the experience.

[Twigman]

I just use Audacity to normalise (if I ever find myself needing to) and to check the mix after mixdown on some software that allows me to see the wave form.
I have Audacity routed through a different soundcard (SonarX2 through the RME HDSP9632 to KRK monitors, Audacity/WMP/etc through m-audio2496 and Cambridge amp and Eltax speakers) so I can check on another system without leaving my chair.

[51m0n]

Normalising is just changing the volume of the entire track by the difference between the loudest single sample in the track to the desired normallisation point.

It doesnt take into account the average volume at all. Compression and limiting raise the average level compared to the peak level of a signal. Hence two normalised tracks, one compressed and the other not (or just buy a different amount), will sound very different in terms of final volume after normalisation.

The entire point of using the K-meter for these mixes is that there are specific prescirbed rules in the K-meter algorithm regarding how it detects level (ie what it is measuring, the specific time it rms signal over to get its level) and how it displays it (the 'ballistics of the meter' or how fast it tends to accelerate in any direction based upon the current detected change in level).

These add up to a meter that is pretty much identical across a wide range of systems (assuming it is set to the same K meter level, arbitrarily 14 in this case). So if everyone ensures that the level of their mix never goes over 0 on a K-meter set to K14 they should all sound pretty much exactly the same level, or very close. This is completely different from normalising all the different mixes to -12dBfs, where all the mixes will then be at different levels dependant on the amount of compression used on individual parts, groups and busses etc etc.

The idea being to try (vainly so far it seems) to as near as damn it remove level discrepency between mixes as a variable, since it is a hard fact that the human ear hears louder as better always.

[MiltyG565]

So normalising, Does it bring the level of the main body of the song up to the level of the peaks of the song?

[Skol303]

[quote name='MiltyG565' timestamp='1372953477' post='2132096']So normalising, Does it bring the level of the main body of the song up to the level of the peaks of the song?[/quote]

No. To put it another way, it raises the volume of the peaks to 0db (or whatever level you set it to) and raises the volume of everything else proportionally by the same out. So it's still the same waveform at the end of the process - it's just louder (or 'taller' in appearance).

The process you're describing is what a compressor does - although a compressor works by reducing the difference in volume between the loudest and quietest signals by reducing ('compressing') the peaks. This is why most compressors have a 'make up gain' dial to compensate for the drop in overall volume when the peaks get squashed.

PS: don't worry mate... It took me a while to get my head around all this too

Edited July 4, 2013 by Skol303