Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
CONTEST (Vote the mix)
#1
Hello everyone

Recently, with a community of sound engineers, we made a small contest anonymously.

We chose this multitrack and each participant had to make his mix.

In this post you will find six mixes.

Rate your favorite mix by following the classic parameters:

- Balance of the instruments
- General Mix Equalization
- Beauty of single sounds

All the mix are normalized to -25 [LUFS] and -1 [dBFS] listen to them at the same volume.

Any comments beyond the vote are welcome !!


.mp3    a.mp3 --  (Download: 15.58 MB)


.mp3    b.mp3 --  (Download: 15.59 MB)


.mp3    c.mp3 --  (Download: 15.86 MB)


.mp3    d.mp3 --  (Download: 15.27 MB)


.mp3    e.mp3 --  (Download: 15.82 MB)


.mp3    f.mp3 --  (Download: 15.57 MB)


Reply
#2
My Choices (Not sure this is what we are supposed to do - I couldn't see a "poll" anywhere in the thread to enable voting).

1. a - Lovely definition and ambience. Beautifully presented high end. Depth of field captured well. Nicely featured solos. Could have a touch more low end for my taste. Snare slapback ambience is occasionally a little too noticeable and slightly distracting. Would prefer the piano to be a little more defined in the stereo field, less "omnipresent". Overall, sounds pro.

2. d - This is almost level-pegging for me with "a". Has a more modern sound with a fuller low end - me likey!. The overall sound is fairly dry and upfront. I like that, but would prefer just a touch more depth. The piano sounds gorgeous in this mix! The drums are great sounding, just a little too compressed and "contained" for my preference in this genre. The drums could use a little more impact IMO. Again, a pro-sounding mix - sweet!

3. c - I like the transient punch of the drums in this mix, however there are some EQ and level imbalances happening. The kick has a LOT of sub low end it - a little too much and not controlled enough for this genre IMO. Both the featured instruments, as well as the accompanying instruments need more automation to emphasise the "give-and-take" of the performance. There is some slight muddiness in the mix building up around 200hz. It would be nice to have a little more "depth of field" in the stereo soundstage- this arrangement has some nice space to allow for tasteful use of ambience.

4. b - This one is pretty over-compressed to my ear. Drums are lacking in transient excitement, and the bass seems to dominate the mix balance. The basic sounds are reasonably good, but the mix needs more automation to feature the soloists adequately. Eq wise, there is a slight sense of muddiness that might be being emphasised by some over-zealous mix buss compression. The mix "pumps" audibly in some spots

5 e - This mix is a bit murky sounding to my ears. The instruments need a little more eq treatment to present them in their best light - mostly just strategic cuts to take away some of the boxiness and muddiness that can build up. The ambience is a refreshing attempt to give some space to the instruments, but it is a little compromised by the eq choices, and tends to make everything sound a little distant, rather than having a feasible sense of depth. On the plus side, the ebb and flow of the soloists seems to have been handled better here. In the interest of separation and definition, a little better use of the stereo field would probably be my preference.

6 f - I like the full use of the stereo field here. The strong points I hear are the stereo placement and automation of the featured elements. However, the mix is really being compromised by over-compression. Everything is "flattened" and the excitement is compromised. I'm guessing there may have also been some over-zealous use of saturation/tape sim plugins here. There is also an overriding sense of boxiness about the eq choice in the mix IMO.
All 10 FytaKyte Multi-Tracks available for you to mix with purchase of Album here: https://fytakyte.bandcamp.com/releases
Reply