Automatic Audio Mastering Systems...

Not open for further replies.
How does LANDR work?
LANDR learns more with each new track it masters. And since launching in 2014, we’ve mastered over 2 million tracks for our worldwide community of passionate musicians.
Every time you upload a track, LANDR creates a custom ‘digital fingerprint’ of your track, cross referencing our database to identify your tracks genre and production styles.
Then, based on the needs of your track, LANDR applies a custom set of adaptive tools like multi-band compression, EQ, stereo enhancement, limiting and aural excitation.
LANDR makes subtle, intelligent frame-by-frame adjustments based on the unique properties of your track. LANDR is subtle and dynamic. There are no presets or simple limited masters here.
I think if you are going to keep pimping what a great job the LANDR process does, you should at least post both BEFORE and AFTER versions of your songs for comparison, otherwise it looks like you're just spamming.

BTW...I listened to the first the 3 tracks on your page...the fist two with all those synth patches, and the "Riot" one...and I have to say, I could not listen to more than 30 seconds of each because of the high-end harshness and distortion.

That's why I think posting a comparison would be best...because if you are claiming the LANDR process made such a big improvement...I can't imagine how worse the mixes sounded before it...???
Are you sure your monitoring is good...?,,,because the high-end distortion is just unbearable to listen to.
Maybe that's just the SoundClick conversion...which again, is why I say you should just post them directly here to the forum as MP3 BEFORE & AFTER files.
No, I'm not going to bother. I'm not trying to "pimp" or "spam" anything. I just wanted to give you guys a heads up about it. There seems to be a very big backlash against any mastering software, not only on this forum, but others as well. On other forums the gripe seems to be that the mastered file is louder than the original. I've been asked to volume match the two which defeats the purpose of the demo. Of course the mastered version will be louder. You've already mention you dislike my songs, so we'll just leave it at that. I'm not going to force anybody to listen to my music.
No...I never said I "disliked your songs"...I said that the LANDR versions have a very nasty, distorted high-end and it's difficult listening to the mixes.

Since you came here to give us a "heads up"...then it only makes sense to show the BEFORE & AFTER versions so that people can really hear the "improvement" you are claiming that LANDR makes....but you won't do that for some reason...?
It's not about "forcing" people to listen to your music, it's about backing up what it is you came here to claim...that LANDR did a great job on your mixes.

So...put up, or shut up. :) ;)
Well if you want to hear before and after examples, might I suggest you go to the LANDR website and master your own files. The first two songs are free. What have you got to lose ?? It doesn't take long to master a song... try it for yourself !!
Well if you want to hear before and after examples, might I suggest you go to the LANDR website and master your own files. The first two songs are free. What have you got to lose ?? It doesn't take long to master a song... try it for yourself !!

:) and LANDR is not very new, though maybe it is to you.
So I don't need to go to check it out because I already know it just hypes up your mixes, and you walk away thinking it's doing something good.
Like someone said earlier...just compress the shit out of it, boost the highs and lows, and then crank it up....and there's LANDR. were the one that started the thread to tell us how great it is...not me....but I guess there's a reason you don't want anyone to hear the BEFORE and AFTER versions.

Look...people here are just trying to tell you that it's more hype, smoke-n-mirrors...but if you want to use it, and you don't mind that nasty, distorted high-end...then use it. I mean, it's not going to have any effect on me if you do or don't. ;)
The reason people would ask you to volume match the files is because it makes it easier to hear the tonal difference between the two. Loudness is easy, it's appropriate tone shaping that would actually impress.
And the reason I won't do volume matching is because it defeats the purpose of showing the results of the mastered track. I'm more concerned with final results than comparing raw tracks with mastered tracks.
But.... NOT volume matching defeats the purpose. Something that is louder will sound 'better' just by virtue of being louder. The only way to compare if something 'actually':sounds better is by having the volumes the same when comparing.
Look, you guys have already trashed LANDR enough, I get the message, you don't like it. If you want to hear a fair comparison, go to the LANDR website, upload YOUR track then compare it to your original. It only takes a few minutes and you can get an idea of what you're looking for. Even at a low volume, my tracks still sound good enough for me.
Chill out. I never trashed ANYTHING.

I think the point is this, you are promoting and sharing something YOU believe in.
( that others are skeptical about)

You were asked to show the before and after to give people a chance to hear for themselves if it's worthy or not. (Reduce skepticism)

Your response is to refuse and tell us to try it. To go on the site and sign up and whatever and try the service.
(Beefs up skepticism)

That's a flat out no. I for one will not give any info to a site that I, as of now, don't know or trust. Much less upload (give) them my music. I will not be a guinea pig.

If you dig it, then cool. If you want to share it, give people more to gain some confidence. Like posting a before and after.
I'm not promoting anything...just basically mentioning it. I don't make a nickel on this whether you buy into or not. I don't care if you ever use it. I was just mentioning it for your own benefit. I do trust the site because it's partnered with Cakewalk and is included in the Sonar package. It's not just some fly by night operation. The deal I bought into is dirt cheap. $40 bucks for a year, unlimited masters. This is very time saving for me, and the quality is better than the AAMS program I started out with. I really like the idea of mastering my songs with this program because, it's cheap, it's easy, and I get a finished product in just a few minutes. It's good enough for my needs.

I'm not going to post volume matched files because of the attitude I'm getting here. It seems you're just looking for more ammo to trash the program. I'm not gonna waste my time with it. I see no point in posting files if you have already made up your mind not to use the program. Go try it for yourself and see.
I listened to your tracks on your You Tube channel, Very nice !!

Thanks...though the only music on those videos that is actually mine, are the guitar leads.
Like I noted on the videos, the backing tracks came from
Just some jamming...that's all.
That's basically what we did with this track. I put together the rhythm guitar, bass and drums, while a friend of mine put down the lead guitar. We live about 60 miles away from each other and put together the track thru e-mails....

MP3 Player SoundClick

There's lyrics to this song, it was originally called "Give Me A Jail Cell." About a homeless man who felt he'd be better off in jail.
Glad it is working for you Martin Maniac. That in the end is all that is important.

For many of us here and those who have posted in this thread, know by years of experience what it takes to do a proper 'mastering' of a project. It is not likely that they (nor I) will ever find a way for a automatic mastering service to actually 'hear' and make personal decisions as to what any given project needs. There are way too many variables and it in the end is basically absolutely impossible for any 'program' to make that happen.

That cannot be denied or argued. For similar reasons robot girlfriends are not available yet... Not the kind that don't agree with everything you say and don't make decisions based on their personal experience, in an optimum listening environment, with high end gear/room treatment and knowledge of how it works with your material based upon what is best for the project as a whole. And even then, that is why different mastering engineers work in different fields. They adapt for the media given them. A program cannot do this. It cannot decide what is best because it does not have the means to make a personal/educated decision on the way something sounds.

Sorry ME's, did not mean to combine the bad robot girlfriends with what you do in the same sentence. lol! Forgive me. :)

Any mastering 'preset' or 'automatic' online service may work for your particular project/s or song/s, and that is fine. But it is not much more than what you can do yourself with some understanding of what is being done.

In my personal opinion: If you want it done right, send it and pay for someone (a person) that gives a personal shit. I do for every project that I record in my studio that isn't just a one off demo.

Best to you and enjoy Martin. :D
Well by no means do I consider myself a mastering engineer. I have a basic understanding of mastering effects, and when I use them I usually use the presets contained in the plug-ins. I'll go thru the various presets and pick the best sounding ones. The LANDR program seems to do the same, so it's not far off from what I do myself. Sending my songs out to get professionally mastered is simply not an option, can't afford it. It's a miracle I have a studio in which to work in at all. Most of my friends are barely getting by, having a home studio is a definite luxury. I can't afford any $1,000 pre-amps, tube compressors, etc....I have to get by with what I can afford, and LANDR is just about it. I recently bought a few mics and HS8 studio monitors and I'm tapped out.
Another thing to consider is what am I going to do with my tracks ?? At this time, upload them to Tunecore then iTunes. Keep in mind, iTunes has 26 million songs posted, the likelihood of me recouping my investment in songs is highly unlikely with that much competition. I may sell a few downloads or streams, but probably won't add up to much. So I have to look at this more as a hobby than a business. Spending $50-$100 per song for mastering just doesn't make any sense to me.
Not open for further replies.