REAPER Contest - February 2017 (RESULTS)

[REAmix]

Originally Posted by Andy Hamm

Were you missing the LKFS? See the blue button next to CBS? There is one right before ITU that was invisible until I hovered over it, changed it to Red as Karbo did and it works.

Maybe that's it. I'm not going to bother trouble shooting it though. The other one is easy, it doesn't have audio device conflict with reaper for me, so I can easily make adjustments and check them again, and it analyzes it almost just as quickly on render.

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by REAmix

Maybe that's it. I'm not going to bother trouble shooting it though. The other one is easy, it doesn't have audio device conflict with reaper for me, so I can easily make adjustments and check them again, and it analyzes it almost just as quickly on render.

Just an FYI, I don't even use the audio device stuff in Orban (I have it set up) but I don't really use it, I just use the analysis tab where I can drag/drop files into that. Also, LKFS is just as synonym for LUFS.

[DaveKeehl]

Guys, that's partly my fault, let me explain.

When I dragged your submissions in the reaper project, they were all correctly limited to -0.2 dB, but in the chorus the loudness was very different. What I did was to loop the chorus section and try to balance the tracks using Youlean as reference. The loudest submissions in that section should still be peaking at -0.2 (which means that the fader was set to unity gain).

Hope I was clear enough and sorry about that. If you find it difficult, download the zip folder and do your balace.

By the way, I'm not even sure how to handle this because I had hoped that giving a common loudness unit could be a good thing, but it's not helping that much...

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by DaveKeehl

By the way, I'm not even sure how to handle this because I had hoped that giving a common loudness unit could be a good thing, but it's not helping that much...

I think it is fine (well not sure for you LOL) but I've seen roughly the same thing in each contest, which is new contestants getting up to speed on doing the measurement properly. But I think that is a good thing because we can all use what we learned in the future beyond the contest.

That's also why I introduced orban again because a proper measurement is critical to the entire content length of the song, thusly you can't just grab some section of the song and trust that measurement because the entire song needs to be part of the calculations AFAIK.

[Bass6]

Originally Posted by Andy Hamm

Incidentally, is it just me, or could anyone else not figure out what she is singing in the first line of the first verse?

Isn't it obvious? It's...

Bitter me, you check ahead up a cup a shootsee
Apart of all the parpa kissin...yeah.

Do you not speak Venusian? I think that's where women are from...

[Andy Hamm]

That's actually pretty close to what I heard!

Originally Posted by Bass6

Isn't it obvious? It's...

Bitter me, you check ahead up a cup a shootsee
Apart of all the parpa kissin...yeah.

Do you not speak Venusian? I think that's where women are from...

[REAmix]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

Just an FYI, I don't even use the audio device stuff in Orban (I have it set up) but I don't really use it, I just use the analysis tab where I can drag/drop files into that. Also, LKFS is just as synonym for LUFS.

Oh I see. Maybe I could disable it then. Ya, I figured it was a synonym, It's just the interface doesn't look the same for me. I didn't have any vertical columns or anything like that. It's not a big deal though. Like I said, the render time for a track is almost just as fast as the analysis in orban. I didn't time it, but they seemed very close to me, maybe a bit faster for orban.

[REAmix]

Originally Posted by DaveKeehl

Guys, that's partly my fault, let me explain.

When I dragged your submissions in the reaper project, they were all correctly limited to -0.2 dB, but in the chorus the loudness was very different. What I did was to loop the chorus section and try to balance the tracks using Youlean as reference. The loudest submissions in that section should still be peaking at -0.2 (which means that the fader was set to unity gain).

Hope I was clear enough and sorry about that. If you find it difficult, download the zip folder and do your balace.

By the way, I'm not even sure how to handle this because I had hoped that giving a common loudness unit could be a good thing, but it's not helping that much...

I think if everybody mastered their tracks to -0.2 peaks, and -14.0 LUFS, that would be the best. Then you could just put all the renders straight into a project, lower the master slightly, and save it, and you don't even have to listen to them at that point.

But, if people don't follow that correctly, then it's moot.

I would personally prefer that we used LUFS average over the whole song. My understanding is that this is the way the industry will be regulated.

That means it would be normal under that system that a beethoven song will have some very quiet parts, and some very loud passages as well, whereas a pop song will have a more consistent volume in between both.

So, for us, that means it could very well be possible to follow all of those specifications, and have some songs with a louder chorus than others, and that would be fine. Still even playing field, and fair comparison of tracks. But different choices by the engineers. As long as they are all -0.2 peaks, and -14 LUFS, that's all that should matter. So, if you could drag them all into Orban, and see the values, you wouldn't even need to listen to them. You'd know they are fine.

The only real way anyone could get around that, is to leave a very faint white noise for some time at the end of the song or something, to make their average better, but I don't think anyone here would intentionally do anything like that.


The thing with LUFS though is I think it would need to be sort of enforced if we used it. You'd need to go through every track, and check them all to make sure they meet the requirements, which is more work for you. Then, if any don't meet them, you'd have to disqualify them or something I guess. Either that, or give them an opportunity to fix them, but that would be more work for you again.

I don't know if we really want to do that, but I think if we decide to use LUFS, we really kind of need to.

So, for me, I think I would just set a peak limit, and be done with it.

That would carry the same issues the loudness wars have, and I would prefer it less because I think it would be cool to experiment with the LUFS aspect, and see how that affects different songs and different mixes, but we might have a hard time with making sure every track follows the specifications.

So, for me, it really comes down to either use the LUFS song average, check that they comply, if they do, keep them, if they don't; either drop them or let the engineer re-submit something fitting the specs.

OR

Set a peak limit, and then let people do whatever they want loudness-wise. This will likely result in louder mixes though, and some of the downsides of loudness wars.

That's really the choice as I see it. Like I said, I would prefer that all tracks meet the requirements with LUFS, but idk if that's a realistic expectation. Idk if I want people to get eliminated for not meeting them, either. Going through them to make sure they qualify would be more work for sure, and so would letting people re-submit if they don't but that would all be completely up to you, really.

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


As far as the lyrics of the first verse go, this is what I got;

"Better me, would check ahead at the couples she'd see. Part of all the prob'lly kissing. Better me didn't need a man to feel completed. Clued me handle what was missing. Bigger me would think these flowers gwo your way of screaming. You got me lyin here believin,..."

[karbomusic]

That means it would be normal under that system that a beethoven song will have some very quiet parts, and some very loud passages as well, whereas a pop song will have a more consistent volume in between both

And to add, as mentioned, the algorithm ignores the bottom 10% and top 5% volume wise, so things like silent or very soft and/or very loud parts, won't screw up the calculations, because it sort of accounts for all of this (along with a number of other criteria). If we only were going to measure subsections of songs, we could just use something like DR Meter.

[REAmix]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

And to add, as mentioned, the algorithm ignores the bottom 10% and top 5% volume wise, so things like silent or very soft and/or very loud parts, won't screw up the calculations, because it sort of accounts for all of this (along with a number of other criteria). If we only were going to measure subsections of songs, we could just use something like DR Meter.

Oh, I didn't know that, thx. So much for my evil plan to add some quiet white noise at the end of the song. I guess that might be why they did that. That way, everything that is part of the average, is audible. No cheating!

[DaveKeehl]

Originally Posted by REAmix

I think if everybody mastered their tracks to -0.2 peaks, and -14.0 LUFS, that would be the best. Then you could just put all the renders straight into a project, lower the master slightly, and save it, and you don't even have to listen to them at that point.

But, if people don't follow that correctly, then it's moot.

I would personally prefer that we used LUFS average over the whole song. My understanding is that this is the way the industry will be regulated.

That means it would be normal under that system that a beethoven song will have some very quiet parts, and some very loud passages as well, whereas a pop song will have a more consistent volume in between both.

So, for us, that means it could very well be possible to follow all of those specifications, and have some songs with a louder chorus than others, and that would be fine. Still even playing field, and fair comparison of tracks. But different choices by the engineers. As long as they are all -0.2 peaks, and -14 LUFS, that's all that should matter. So, if you could drag them all into Orban, and see the values, you wouldn't even need to listen to them. You'd know they are fine.

The only real way anyone could get around that, is to leave a very faint white noise for some time at the end of the song or something, to make their average better, but I don't think anyone here would intentionally do anything like that.


The thing with LUFS though is I think it would need to be sort of enforced if we used it. You'd need to go through every track, and check them all to make sure they meet the requirements, which is more work for you. Then, if any don't meet them, you'd have to disqualify them or something I guess. Either that, or give them an opportunity to fix them, but that would be more work for you again.

I don't know if we really want to do that, but I think if we decide to use LUFS, we really kind of need to.

So, for me, I think I would just set a peak limit, and be done with it.

That would carry the same issues the loudness wars have, and I would prefer it less because I think it would be cool to experiment with the LUFS aspect, and see how that affects different songs and different mixes, but we might have a hard time with making sure every track follows the specifications.

So, for me, it really comes down to either use the LUFS song average, check that they comply, if they do, keep them, if they don't; either drop them or let the engineer re-submit something fitting the specs.

OR

Set a peak limit, and then let people do whatever they want loudness-wise. This will likely result in louder mixes though, and some of the downsides of loudness wars.

That's really the choice as I see it. Like I said, I would prefer that all tracks meet the requirements with LUFS, but idk if that's a realistic expectation. Idk if I want people to get eliminated for not meeting them, either. Going through them to make sure they qualify would be more work for sure, and so would letting people re-submit if they don't but that would all be completely up to you, really.

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


As far as the lyrics of the first verse go, this is what I got;

good point dude

[DaveKeehl]

It looks like someone is stable on 2nd place

1st and 3rd place can still easily change though vote vote vote!!!

[Andy Hamm]

Looking at some of the previous results, second place should be first place, othwise first place is only determined by the few people who don't vote for themselves

[Bass6]

I thought we weren't allowed to vote for ourselves?
Kinda spoils the whole point doesn't it?

[DaveKeehl]

Originally Posted by Bass6

I thought we weren't allowed to vote for ourselves?
Kinda spoils the whole point doesn't it?

you shouldn't indeed!

[REAmix]

Originally Posted by Andy Hamm

Looking at some of the previous results, second place should be first place, othwise first place is only determined by the few people who don't vote for themselves

I think the actual way to figure it out would be to award pts for placement. So, 1st place gets 3 pts, 2nd place gets 2 pts, and 3rd place gets 1 pt. that would be the simple way. People that vote themselves first will get 3 pts off the bat still though, so you'd need something more rigorous, or, if you really care that much just vote for yourself.

Or actually, you could give first place 5pts, second place 4pts, and third place 3pts. That way for someone that votes themselves first just because it is themself, they are still giving away a sum of pts greater than the pts they have given themselves. So, someone that gets a 2nd and a 3rd place vote will have more pts than someone that gets one first. It really depends how you want to do it.

Some sort of pts system is really what you want though I think. I thought it was that way, and actually maybe it is. I mean, if Person A gets 2 first place, and person B gets 1, and person A gets 0 second place, and person B gets 5 second place, then the award for first place, I think should go to person B. They had a mix that more people thought was top 2. Especially if people can vote for themselves, that's what you'd want. In this example, if person A voted for themselves, and person B didn't, then that would be a no brainer that person B should get 1st.

I don't know how easy that would be able to implement in the system though, or how it currently works, and it technically isn't such a big deal who wins. It's just a friendly competition, so it's ok if it's not perfect.

Originally Posted by Bass6

I thought we weren't allowed to vote for ourselves?
Kinda spoils the whole point doesn't it?

I personally think it's better if we don't, but there is no way to police it, so technically you can, and most likely some people will. I didn't last time nor this time though, and I don't plan on starting.

[DaveKeehl]

I think that most of the time is quite simple to spot your own mix, but voting for yourself is just the opposite of the competition. Ok, I get it, maybe you REALLY think your mix is the best one sometimes, and that's ok. But I would suggest to vote other people's mixes.

The points system I'm using is 3 points for 1st place, 2 for 2nd and 1 for 3rd.

[trevlyns]

Just a thought... As you only get one vote, could there not be a provision on the voting form for your Reaper username? Maybe with the stipulation that if the winning song has been voted for by you as # 1, it is disqualified?

[DaveKeehl]

Originally Posted by trevlyns

Just a thought... As you only get one vote, could there not be a provision on the voting form for your Reaper username? Maybe with the stipulation that if the winning song has been voted for by you as # 1, it is disqualified?

I don't know man... I know that it would be fair but there are cases where maybe you might think that you have really mixed the song better than anybody else (and maybe the other people think the same and vote your mix).

[REAmix]

Maybe we could just suggest not to vote your own mix on the first post in the thread, and leave it at that. With the point system the way it is, I don't think it's that big of a deal if it is ignored by a few people.

I personally pretend my own mix isn't part of the contest, whether I think it is top 3 or not makes no difference for my voting. I think it is better that way, but there are points for both views.

[DaveKeehl]

Originally Posted by REAmix

Maybe we could just suggest not to vote your own mix on the first post in the thread, and leave it at that. With the point system the way it is, I don't think it's that big of a deal if it is ignored by a few people.

I personally pretend my own mix isn't part of the contest, whether I think it is top 3 or not makes no difference for my voting. I think it is better that way, but there are points for both views.

good idea, thanks

[martinmadero]

i did some time today
so, here is again!

[DaveKeehl]

Originally Posted by martinmadero

i did some time today
so, here is again!

ok but, you know, we're already midway in the voting phase? xD

[martinmadero]

Originally Posted by DaveKeehl

ok but, you know, we're already midway in the voting phase? xD

upssss, well... it dont care..
i see the thread (mixing) and i put..
sorry about it!

[DaveKeehl]

Originally Posted by martinmadero

upssss, well... it dont care..
i see the thread (mixing) and i put..
sorry about it!

sorry, I should've updated the title, but all the info are in the first post as always! Don't worry though, I'll add your submission but keep in mind that I'm not going to shuffle the ID numbers again.

[martinmadero]

Originally Posted by DaveKeehl

sorry, I should've updated the title, but all the info are in the first post as always! Don't worry though, I'll add your submission but keep in mind that I'm not going to shuffle the ID numbers again.

ok, sorry for the inconvenience!
and thanks, always is great to join the contest

[DaveKeehl]

You can still vote until tomorrow at 6 PM (GMT Standard Time), then the survey is going to close automatically.

[DaveKeehl]

Could you please write as much as possible in a single post? Just to keep everything more organized

[VinodXAgent]

Here we go again
Hello from Hamburg
Have some time til the start of the Oscars(Midnight here). So here are some observations from me about the mixes. I use the Submissions.rpp.
Id1: Distracting noises at the start. There are mouth noises or maybe a failing mic. Also on the intro guitar. Maybe static or strings touching the PU on palm mutes. The shaker is far too loud, like an Dinosaur Egg Shaker. Vocals a tad too soft.
ID2:
No Bass? Mouthnoises like ID 1.Count in doesn't belong in a mix
ID3
Don't drink and mix
ID4
Drum Replacement?The Kick spoils it for me.
ID5
Well, not my kind of frequency distribution. A bit metalic.
ID6
Noises at the start again. A bit muddy.
ID8
Do you guys don't hear that noises (Pop noises). Vocals in the verse too soft. Best work this far
ID9
Technically okay. A bit dull.
ID10
Vocals a bit Telephone like. That shaker kills me.

Résumé:
Another song from Mike Seniors cemetery of broken rockstar dreams. This song was dead (like dead in Dead Parrot) from the beginning. Wrong production decisions from the start. Any of us had a chance to rescue this recording.
Would like to hear your comments. I'll be back next weekend.
Greetings from Hamburg and Chapeau to all that took part. Kudos to Dave for setting this up.
Vinod
P.S.
I am very interested to hear about your monitor setup. What speakers/amp? Treated room? Headphones?
And I am a nice guy. Don't intended to offend anyone. We are family

[Lawrence]

Just wanted to pop in and say how much I really like that song.

I'll probably a do an R&B remix of it, tossing most if not all of the rock guitars, just for fun. Knock it up with some violins and keys and other stuff, and change the beat.

Nice song. I like her voice a lot.

On topic, I did grab the tracks even though I didn't participate and my two observations were...

- No big deal here with our fine host doing all of this in his spare time and doing a damn good job of finding and distributing good materal and otherwise herding us cats, big props. More an observation of how annoyong that can be in other real world cases, to get a bunch of "dual mono" stems.

Again, it has no direct context - at all - to this adventure, but it mostly annoys me how lazy some musical artists are when I get stems like that for real work. Then you have to manually inspect them all to see what's really stereo and what's not, before bouncing a bunch of them to mono.

It got to be so annoying that I started training some clients how to render stems in whatever software they were using.

- The kick drum. Either I'm hearing things or it clips in a few places?

Otherwise, nice tracks. Great job Dave.

[VinodXAgent]

Hi Lawrence,
Same here, liked her vocal Performance but not the cartoonish rock guitar arrangement.Maybe you can spot my mix. Hint: String section

[DaveKeehl]

Originally Posted by Lawrence

- The kick drum. Either I'm hearing things or it clips in a few places?

Otherwise, nice tracks. Great job Dave.

Yep, it clips without going in red, simply poor recording. Thanks by the way

[Lawrence]

Originally Posted by VinodXAgent

Hi Lawrence,
Same here, liked her vocal Performance but not the cartoonish rock guitar arrangement.Maybe you can spot my mix. Hint: String section

I'll listen to some of the mixes later I guess, but I agree, the core bass, lead vocals, and backgrounds are screaming for a different musical arrangement.

Not cheesy synth pop but maybe more a cross somewhere between "modern" R&B (driivng beat leaning towards hip-hop, think Beyonce') and pop. Think Christina Aguilera meets Blackstreet. After I move my midi keyboard up to to office rig I'll dive into it.

[DaveKeehl]

The results are already coming in 30 minutes

[DaveKeehl]

Sorry Fergler you can now feel ashamed Lol

[Bass6]

Congrats Fergler, good job as ever.
I found this one a real challenge. I don't know who engineered these tracks but I hope they're hanging their head right now. I don't have much experience of mixing at all, but 35yrs of playing behind me left me gobsmacked that these had ever been released. Unless it was put out as a test for budding mixers to see if they could fix it.
Drums - very well played, awfully recorded. Clipping on the kick and so much spill it's silly
Vocals - meh. ok performance but again poor recording, levels all over the place.
Bass - oh wow. Just terrible. I'm guessing it was played on a cheap p-bass copy by someone who should know better than to try slapping it. I dropped that section in my mix completely - thought it was unsalvageable.
Guitars - didn't like the tones.
The rest was highly average. Not a rock song at all, entirely the wrong genre and I agree with Lawrence that it should've gone down the pop road.
Still, dead chuffed with 3rd - I only had a few hours to spend on this one and spotted several mistakes after submission so I was pleased with the end result vs input.
So, what's it gonna be next month Fergler? String quartet? Thrash metal? School choir? On tenterhooks......

[Bass6]

BTW, what's the rules on replacement of instruments? I loved Vinod's take on the tune, but as far as I could tell the only original thing left was the vocals.
In the same way that you can't be a little bit pregnant, you can't really say that it's ok to replace 'some' parts, otherwise where do you draw the line. So what's the steer? Replace whatever we like, or stick to the stems we're given and do the best we can with those?
And I know this has been discussed, but no definitive answer is apparent - can you vote for yourself or not?

[DaveKeehl]

Originally Posted by Bass6

BTW, what's the rules on replacement of instruments? I loved Vinod's take on the tune, but as far as I could tell the only original thing left was the vocals.
In the same way that you can't be a little bit pregnant, you can't really say that it's ok to replace 'some' parts, otherwise where do you draw the line. So what's the steer? Replace whatever we like, or stick to the stems we're given and do the best we can with those?
And I know this has been discussed, but no definitive answer is apparent - can you vote for yourself or not?

No, you CAN'T vote for yourself. That's called cheating

[DaveKeehl]

Anyway... Congrats Fergler haha you are more than welcome to choose a song on this website. It can be the genre you prefer the most.

[trevlyns]

Yeah - nice one Fergler That was fun for a first timer like me; bring on the next one!