Mastering Shootout: LANDR, Mastering Box, AAMS vs Real People

RedStone

Member
I've always been interested in Mastering and the Auto Mastering online services got my attention. The wave of opinions and such on automated mastering seems to range from "amazing!" to "terrible!". So, I figured I would do a little shoot out using a song I had mastered by a professional Mastering engineer.

I wanted things to be as real world as possible, but I also wanted the test to be highly accessible. So, I decided on using High Quality Mp3s encoded at 320kbps using the extreme encoding settings in Reaper. I encoded the files from the original wave file masters using Reaper 5 and the lame mp3 encoder.

In no particular order, the tracks were mastered using the following:
  • Advanced Auto Mastering System
  • LANDR
  • Mastering Box
  • A ground up self re-master of the song, which I did using reaper plugins as well as Melda Production Plugins.
  • A Professional Mastering Engineer - John from Massive Mastering

I created a Zip of the various audio files along with a Reaper project and put them into google drive. You can access the files here

I also put a little poll on my website at https://sites.google.com/a/levityproject.com/levity-project/home-mastering/mastering/audio-mastering-shootout

Or here's a direct link to the poll:

I've got this going here and the Reaper forums. I was trying to put the poll up here, but couldn't figure it out.

Once there is a good number of responses, I'll reveal which master is which!
 
Last edited:
I can totally tell you which one I like the most (and I sure as hell hope it's mine), but -- and I really hope you don't take this the wrong way -- I can't really remember it (although it sounds somewhat familiar). Was this recent?
 
Last edited:
I can totally tell you which one I like the most (and I sure as hell hope it's mine), but -- and I really hope you don't take this the wrong way -- I can't really remember it (although it sounds somewhat familiar). Was this recent?

Ha ha! Brilliant.

Cool project tho! Thank you for posting this.

Are we allowed to post snarky comments prior to the reveal? :D
 
OK here we go ... reaper forum got way more responses so I wanted to put this to rest.

Master #4 was definitely the most popular, and this was also the professonal mastering job. It was done in 2009 by John. This was also my top choice, as it translates extremely well across playback systems. I've had 8 years to test it out ;)

The big suprise was master #2. It got some notable love. This was masteringbox.com
The thing about mastering box though is no matter what you put into it, it all seems to come out the other end sounding the same. Heavily Scooped/Hyped. Also, there is an extreme amount of bass distortion. There are options for controlling EQ in the pro version, which would be interesting to play with.

#1 was the self master. It was a quickish master done on cans and not referenced properly. But I think it was still better than landr and aams. I should have spent some more time on it to avoid silly mistakes. I accidentally left a bunch of saturation on in the melda EQ, which smeared the mix, which in turn caused me to add too much 5k(ish) presence. Oops.

#3 was LANDR. I tried low, medium and high intensity settings. My thought was that all of the LANDR masters sounded close to the original mix, which lacked clarity. But LANDR also scooped out mids in all the wrong places, albeit gently.

#5 was AAMS. Just terrible! I tried a bunch of settings, and they all sounded worse than the original mix.
 
So I guess this proves the point in a blind test. We can lay to rest all the aurrguing in previous threads about 'auto mastering'; programs being good. (or acceptable)

The best results are done by a human being who knows what he is doing with a good room and good equipment.

Case closed. End of story. Long live the Mastering Engineer!:D
 
I liked #2 as well, though the very low end wasn't as tamed as #4. My clue came from my sub woofer. It is ported and sits under my desk. When it is thumpin, it blows air across my leg. #4 was controlled all the way down to the bottom and I didn't feel the sub woofin away. #2 was blowin out of control. lol. There were differences with hard consonants as well. Although I would think those are addressed inthe mix, I thought the consonants were smoother in #4 than in #2. But maybe that could be psycho-acoustics.

I'll admit, I don't have great ears, but my legs are awesome. badda-bump-tish.
 
So I guess this proves the point in a blind test. We can lay to rest all the aurrguing in previous threads about 'auto mastering'; programs being good. (or acceptable)

The best results are done by a human being who knows what he is doing with a good room and good equipment.

Case closed. End of story. Long live the Mastering Engineer!:D

Indeed it does !! Apparently you missed my point. With a third person, real life person, you may get better results, but be prepared to pay $50-$100 per song depending on the engineer. A 12 song cd may cost you between $600-$1,200 dollars !! Be prepared to wait for a while to get your finished product. If you're happy with that good for you !!!
 
Now there is a happy medium here. You can rustle up a few mastering plug-ins, get a great set of headphones and master your own songs.

That's what I'm doing now. I ordered a set of Sennheiser HD650 headphones which should be here next week. Between Audition CS6 and Sonar Platinum, I've got plenty of plugin options.
 
Now there is a happy medium here. You can rustle up a few mastering plug-ins, get a great set of headphones and master your own songs.

That's what I'm doing now. I ordered a set of Sennheiser HD650 headphones which should be here next week. Between Audition CS6 and Sonar Platinum, I've got plenty of plugin options.

Headphones? Ugh...

At least you are acknowledging that the result from an experienced ME is best.

Online services with presets are 'hit or miss' as to whether it works well. Better to at least attempt yourself in my opinion. But that depends a huge amount on the quality of your monitoring environment and gear. And experience with how that gear translates.

Personally, I would not even try mastering with headphones, but I do not need to. And that is because I know better. Just sayin...
 
Well quality headphones is just another reference point. I feel I have quality monitors and I want quality headphones to compliment that. The Sennheisers 650's are recommended by many people. My other headphones are cheapo's, and I wanted something better. Each one of my other headphones has their own unique sound. So they are just about impossible to get a good reference sound. So I feel I'll do better with a quality set. The opportunity came up to get an "open box" set at a very good price, so I decided to get them.

I agree that online services are hit or miss, and talked about that in previous threads. Some songs came out horrible with one, and better with the other. I'm gonna try my hand at mastering my own songs and them comparing them to the online services, and go from there.
 
Each one of my other headphones has their own unique sound. So they are just about impossible to get a good reference sound.
IME, there's still no such thing with headphones. If you want "reference" (I use Grado) you're still at the mercy of - everything. Up to and including your own hydration level (a little extra water in the morning can mean the difference between too much low end and anemic low end). Or a recent haircut. Or if the strap is a little more or less tight. Or if they're a couple millimeters forward or back from --- from wherever they were before you sneezed.

Headphones are nice for dialing in on anomalies - Other than that, they're like trying to work through a set of Bose* speakers.



* I don't necessarily mean to diss Bose -- I was just in on the tech for their new live system and it's freaking amazing. Amazing to listen to - But I don't think I could mix through it. Well, FOH mix, sure. Mix for reproduction? Probably not.
 
Well as I said, I don't want to disturb the neighbors. I do a lot of work in my studio late at night. Sometimes I pull all nighters, and must use headphones. I have to quit using my monitors about 10-11:00 PM. So if I'm up at 3:00 and trying to get some mixing in, I have to use headphones. It's a must have for me. So now after hearing how good my Yamaha HS-8's sound, I'm a bit spoiled and want headphones of a similar caliper. The Sennheiser HD650's come with many great reviews I found all over the net. The 650's are an open back headphone, which is ideal for mixing or just plain critical listening to music long term. All my other headphones are closed back, which are good for tracking.
 
Indeed it does !! Apparently you missed my point. With a third person, real life person, you may get better results, but be prepared to pay $50-$100 per song depending on the engineer. A 12 song cd may cost you between $600-$1,200 dollars !! Be prepared to wait for a while to get your finished product. If you're happy with that good for you !!!

Well yeah...that's why they call it "professional mastering" by a real "mastering engineer". :)

There are three options.

Cheap
Fast
Good

You can only have two out of three.
You obviously want cheap and fast....and that's your choice.

Anyway...glad to see that the shootout puts to bed any bloated misconceptions about auto-mastering quality.
 
Back
Top