Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Matt_G]

May I suggest for everyone to review the submissions in 2 different ways...

1. Comparing each submission as they are reveals the loudest submissions, overall energy & impact (or lack there of) that each submission achieved . I think this is important because it shows the trade off of level vs impact/punch & which entries achieved both goals successfully.  

2. RMS normalizing all the submissions to -18db to match the original mix. - this puts all masters at the same volume level. (I batch converted all the submissions to -18db RMS & then threw them into a session to A/B) This reveals the sonic differences much easier & clearly shows the damage that going too far with level can do to the quality, punch & impact of the track.

Remember achieving 'the loudest' entry status should never be the ultimate goal. Sure we have to make competitive masters, but not to the detriment of the overall presentation & sonic impact of the track. I say round up the top 5 loudest entries & compare them all for impact, punch & overall sonic quality. This will narrow down the best entries convincingly.

Due to the varying degrees of RMS levels & the large number of entries, I would also suggest comparing masters in groups of similar RMS levels.

I've analyzed each entry's RMS level & put them in groups of 4 from loudest to quietest so you can compare them fairly.

1. Luke F -8.4db RMS (loudest entry)
2. dguidry -8.5db RMS
3. Matt_G (MGM) -8.7db RMS
4. ATOR -9.1db RMS
5. Leo B -9.1db RMS

6. Ed_Littman -9.4db RMS
7. Eric Jensen -9.5db RMS
8. Sberson -9.6db RMS
9. MT Groove -10db RMS

10. GSchmitt -10.3db RMS
11. present -10.6db RMS
12. Gbacklin -10.9db RMS
13. Aivoryuk -11.6db RMS

14. Trillium -11.9db RMS
15. patrick_t -12db RMS
16. Aaron Hall -12.6db RMS
17. BSLOBADIAN -12.8db RMS

18. sondod (DD) -14.9db RMS (quietest entry)

[Matt_G]

lucidwaves wrote on Fri, 20 July 2007 12:05

Looks like mine is the quietest again.  I just cant bring myself to smash it unless its stressed  to me to do so... I just really like to hear the dynamics.

Actually yours is the third lowest in RMS level see the chart above.

Matt

[lucidwaves]

Oops, somehow I missed downloading the 2 that are quieter than mine.  Downloading now.

[sondod]

Wow!!  A loudness war    My mama always told me I was a bit of a pacifist.

First thanks for hooking this up.  I really appreciated the exercise.  I mean as much as this track had going on it was mixed pretty much perfectly.  I was amazed at how a little fine tuning in the EQ brought things forward.

I'll admit my first reaction after reading the client was requests was to say send it back to the mixing engineer then.  And by example I think I got the vocals to a nice place but would have loved to take it back to the mix to cut some of the simbilence in the vocals, because in bringing out the cymbals.... blah blah blah.

But overall I'm pretty pleased with how mine turned out.  I could have cranked it more but I think I got it pretty loud and didn't sacrifice anything.  At this stage if the only complaint was that it's not loud enough I'd push it.

At any rate my internet has gone to crap but soon as I get these downloaded I'll post comments on others.

[duckhunter]

I dispute that I am 2nd loudest. I knew I should have drug that slider down an inch or two more.  I wish to appeal.    Please reanalyze the first 30 seconds and I'm clearly the loudest. I can't have my credentials read "Runner-up of the World Wide Prosound Mastering Competition: Loudness Category". Anyway, did  anyone notice how nicely the drum ambiance sounded?  The original mix was pretty flat in that regard.

I would be willing to bet that if one did a blind test and had the band or producer pick the best mix he would point to one of the loudest, maybe mine, in spite of what we know are artifacts.  Most if not all consumers don't know what an artifact sounds like.  Its what the target audience is used too and they know what's best for them.

The next thing I'm going to do is visit everyone's website to see what gear they are using too see if their mixes are worth their respective investments is hardware.  I'd be pissed if my chain had included a Manely or Weiss or Prism and I hadn't made the top 5. I'd be interested in hearing the -18db comparisons.  Maybe that's where I'll find out my loud mix ain't all that good after all...but  right now, I don't hear much of a difference.

[bblackwood]

dguidry, to make the point once again - this isn't a competition. Instead of taking time to search other people's gear lists, why not take the time to make constructive criticisms of each entry?

This isn't a steak-swinging contest...

[Matt_G]

dguidry wrote on Fri, 20 July 2007 14:30

I dispute that I am 2nd loudest. I knew I should have drug that slider down an inch or two more.  I wish to appeal.    Please reanalyze the first 30 seconds and I'm clearly the loudest. I can't have my credentials read "Runner-up of the World Wide Prosound Mastering Competition: Loudness Category". Anyway, did  anyone notice how nicely the drum ambiance sounded?  The original mix was pretty flat in that regard.

As Brad has stated this isn't a competition, Wump is a good way to learn things from observing other ME's takes on the same song & to hear how people perceive your own entry in terms of it's strengths & weaknesses. It's important not to take any negative comments on your track personally, it's often more then just your ears or experience that can be at fault, Wumps often reveal whether there is a problem in your monitoring, use of poor technique/s or simply a problem with the processing you use.

As far as loudness goes there is never a winner in that competition, the louder you go the more it sucks the life out of the track, everyone knows that (as BK often says "there is no such thing as a free lunch"). Monitoring everyones masters at -18db RMS will reveal this very quickly. Having said that there are good ways & bad ways to make a track loud, the mastering engineers that have honed their skills in creating an apparently 'loud' master while preserving as much of the punch & impact of the original mix (or better) is the engineer who tends to get the most commercial or label work these days imo. Any monkey can raise the threshold on a limiter or clipper to get a high RMS level, not everyone can do it without adding distortion or destroying the punch & impact of the original mix though. That's where the skill comes into it & it's really not as easy as it first seems, the devil is in the details...

Also don't worry about looking through peoples gear lists as everyone who has participated in this Wump is required to reveal exactly what they've used & how they used the gear on this particular track. This will help everyone to hopefully learn new things about what gear & techniques sound best for a partiucular style.

Matt

[escape]

I believe we are missing two entries from the sign-up list.
(Patrik was sort of grandfathered in after sign-up was over)
so we still need 2 more, I think..
(correct me if I'm wrong, I don't have time to cross-check the sign-up list right now with what's on the ftp server. So, if someone could do that and try to PM the stragglers to remind them I would appreciate it.)

Anyhow, I'm just going to go ahead and start reviewing what I've got so far and if the others show up I'll get to them later.


Just remember, this is a team effort.
I understand we're all passionate and proud of our work so it's easy to get carried away, nothing wrong with some competition, but let's try our best to help each other with constructive criticism, and of course compliment the good points, there are always some.

At the same time, when your work is being reviewed, don't take it too personal if someone is pointing out a weakness, because, really, how are you going to improve something if you don't know it needs improving to begin with?

Anyone who's pro can tell you, your people skills are just as important as the work you do in this industry. Strong communication and an understanding of group dynamics are a must to thrive in this field.


I know I'm repeating alot of things, but I'm sure we would all like what we do here to be as productive as possible.

I'll go ahead and start a technique thread.

[gbacklin]

escape wrote on Fri, 20 July 2007 01:51

...At the same time, when your work is being reviewed, don't take it too personal if someone is pointing out a weakness, because, really, how are you going to improve something if you don't know it needs improving to begin with?

Absolutely, and I will not even try to say it was my gear or tools...

I look forward to the discussions !

Take Care,
Gene

[aivoryuk]

dguidry wrote on Fri, 20 July 2007 05:30

I dispute that I am 2nd loudest. I knew I should have drug that slider down an inch or two more.  I wish to appeal.    .

please also remember that there is a difference between RMS values and actual perceived loudness


now lets all get down to some reviewing

[duckhunter]

bblackwood wrote on Thu, 19 July 2007 23:37

dguidry, to make the point once again - this isn't a competition. Instead of taking time to search other people's gear lists, why not take the time to make constructive criticisms of each entry? This isn't a steak-swinging contest...

I like my steak rare....but really, this has been a wonderful project.  It forced the better engineers to produce great work and semi-pro guys like me will be able to see where we stand in the mix.  Working on a dense project like this one made all of us better engineers.

If I were Mattg I would take the best 3 mixes of the bunch and submit them as his to the client and let them pick, but give us co-credit too if its not his...sort of like a reward for our efforts.

[lucidwaves]

dguidry wrote on Fri, 20 July 2007 06:29

If I were Mattg I would take the best 3 mixes of the bunch and submit them as his to the client and let them pick, but give us co-credit too if its not his...sort of like a reward for our efforts.

???

Eric J was the one working with this project originally.  He has already worked directly with the client to give them what they need so there is really no need for any of this.  Or am I missing what your saying?

[Patrik T]

Matt_G wrote on Fri, 20 July 2007 04:19

May I suggest for everyone to review the submissions in 2 different ways...

I would suggest (more/also) that audio CD's are being burned and played back with CD players.

Regarding the levelzzz...I think the track had passed its own loudness barrier in its unmastered version already.


BR
Patrik

[Matt_G]

Patrik T wrote on Sat, 21 July 2007 02:50

Matt_G wrote on Fri, 20 July 2007 04:19 May I suggest for everyone to review the submissions in 2 different ways... I would suggest (more/also) that audio CD's are being burned and played back with CD players. Regarding the levelzzz...I think the track had passed its own loudness barrier in its unmastered version already. BR Patrik

Nah... I beg to differ, I don't see any reason to pussy foot around with a metal track. It's meant to be loud & aggressive, as long as the track has the right feel to it, the guitars & drums are an important factor in getting the feel right.

With the original mix I didn't think it was done all that well personally. The toms are distorted as mentioned, there is a number of spots where the guitars have clipping or crackles. The drums sound almost midi or triggered & the reverb they used on the drums makes the drums feel synthetic & fake. The guitars needed more balls in the lower mids to sound tougher, as did the whole track in general. But being a drummer myself, the drum sounds really let this track down for me, especially the intro to the track where you can hear them naked.

I've been surprised by some people's comments who've stated that this was an 'excellent' mix.

Matt

[Matt_G]

lucidwaves wrote on Sat, 21 July 2007 01:17

dguidry wrote on Fri, 20 July 2007 06:29 If I were Mattg I would take the best 3 mixes of the bunch and submit them as his to the client and let them pick, but give us co-credit too if its not his...sort of like a reward for our efforts. ??? Eric J was the one working with this project originally.  He has already worked directly with the client to give them what they need so there is really no need for any of this.  Or am I missing what your saying?

Yeah I don't get dguidry's comment either, I don't know the client & have nothing to do with this project. It's Eric's call not mine...

Matt