|
|
Post by ben on Nov 8, 2014 21:39:20 GMT -6
Check out this site that claims to "Master Tracks Instantly": www.landr.comFor $19 a month you can submit as many songs as you want, and the site will automatically master your songs. Just another site sucking the art out of everything we do, and empowering the ignorant! |
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Nov 9, 2014 5:25:05 GMT -6
Hah - It must be legit, after all, "there’s also a lot of science behind it, as our resident astrophysicist can attest."
Any astrophysicists here?? There's not much in the way of explaining what the service actually does on the technical end that I can find. Regardless, and even if it did do a decent job, I've always been of the opinion that losing jobs to technology is part of a natural evolution. Remember when the first synths started playing what would normally be string parts. Everyone was worried that violinists would starve - and to a certain degree this became true. The algorithms for reproducing string and other sections get better and better, yet - somehow, there are still string and horn players.
The goal is for all of us to be empowered and ignorant. What a wonderful world this would be.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2014 6:31:53 GMT -6
Oh wow.
Artificial intelligence and astrophysicists.
That's always a warranty for audio hi-tech.
Btw. - it could be even more elaborated, if they would have had quantum physicists supervising it and astrologists reading tea leaves as part of the algorithm development.
I am highly excited. I should offer my expertise for the future development process. I have a good basic understanding of quantum physics and - tadaaa - i am german (ultimate quality skill for everything hi-tech and audio).
|
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Nov 9, 2014 6:43:17 GMT -6
Amazing...
The sad part of this is some unsuspecting sap will actually use this site.
Edit...
Ok, I'll go before the firing squad here...
I put a work file in there of a mix I just sent to someone to add some parts to. It honestly didn't sound bad. At ALL. I know what a mastered track sounds like and I got to say this was pretty impressive. I checked the levels and it put the mastered file slightly into single digit DR but nothing hostile, about -9. Eq and compression/limiting sounded good.
So, what says the group other than the obvious "real mastering is better". Which we all know.
|
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Nov 9, 2014 7:13:32 GMT -6
Amazing... The sad part of this is some unsuspecting sap will actually use this site. I think the reality is that most of the people who use the site will get their money's worth, if not good value. How well could you master just one of my songs for a super-sized Quarter Pounder Meal and a tin of Roll-Aids? ..or do it for free if all I want is an MP3. Heck, I don't get my music professionally mastered. I do the best I can with what I've got, which is more than the iPad app that most people make their demos on. I listen to a fair amount of amateur recordings on-line, and I have to say a free EQ Wash (I'm assuming) and a Limit Squash wouldn't hurt most of them. |
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Nov 9, 2014 15:24:15 GMT -6
In my mind
its not mastering.
Mastering isn't that.
Mastering is something else.
This is an automated attempt at one facet.
Did I say its not mastering?....
8)
Wasn't there some sort of program years back that did this sort of stuff....cant remember its name.
cheers
Wiz
|
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Nov 9, 2014 15:35:48 GMT -6
I just gave it a try. Mind you, I'm a total amateur with these things, but I found the EQing choices to be pretty good, especially on the vocal - a bit overdone for my tastes, but better frequency choices than with my Master. I thought the amount of limiting made for a better overall sound than my mix, but there were a few artifacts that made it unusable - like a cut off vocal entrance, the result of an attack that I think was too fast or perhaps a release that was too slow?? and some pumping in one or two places on the piano in the lower register.. Generally speaking I would characterize the algorithm as being pretty aggressive, which surprises me, but I suppose most users want something that is clearly different so they think/know they're getting some bang for their buck.
I say the resulting mix was unusable, but only because of it not working for me in one or two places. I'm think about using the site in the future if only to create a reference mix.
|
|
|
|
Post by ionian on Nov 10, 2014 3:38:09 GMT -6
This sounds like that old software...AAMS. Remember that? The auto audio mastering system? The one that would let you use a recording as a reference and master your song to match the reference? www.curioza.com/1JN/index.php/en/It sounds like that, but online. |
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,940 
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Nov 10, 2014 7:43:21 GMT -6
Their is always a rush to the bottom, the world we know was built on the concept of "but how can we do it cheaper?"
That said mastering is all about the skills of the guy doing it,
|
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Nov 10, 2014 17:20:39 GMT -6
Was it Harball?
|
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Nov 10, 2014 19:53:08 GMT -6
Magic Alex?
|
|
|
|
Post by LesC on Nov 10, 2014 23:18:38 GMT -6
If this is successful, maybe they'll next come up with write-songs-instantly, record-songs-instantly, and mix-songs-instantly. Finally, just to make the set completely, they'll do get-screwed-by-spotify-instantly.
|
|
|
|
Post by mjheck on Nov 10, 2014 23:27:04 GMT -6
I played around with this a bit today -
I am impressed - an excellent substitute to the sort of pseudo mastering I am sure many of us feel compelled to do in order to share works in progress.
It is pretty much in line with what is described in the FAQ's, with a proper nod to ME's and an understanding of the state of things industry wise.
I think it's hella cool, and way easy to use, for whatever that is worth.
MJH
|
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Nov 11, 2014 10:14:54 GMT -6
It probably one of those inventions where the founder thinks computers will rule the world one day anyway.
I still want to speak to a human mastering engineer.
|
|
|
|
Post by scumbum on Nov 13, 2014 15:17:17 GMT -6
It says you can just send in individual tracks , like a vocal or drum track . I wonder if you could send in stems of a song , get them EQed and compressed , then mix them together . I wonder how a song processed like that would turn out . I'm gonna try it some time .
|
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Nov 13, 2014 18:46:58 GMT -6
It says you can just send in individual tracks , like a vocal or drum track . I wonder if you could send in stems of a song , get them EQed and compressed , then mix them together . I wonder how a song processed like that would turn out . I'm gonna try it some time . All mp3s? - sounds a little scary to me. I'm assuming you're not going to pay the 9 bucks ..or whatever the entry fee is. |
|
|
|
Post by scumbum on Nov 13, 2014 21:35:52 GMT -6
It says you can just send in individual tracks , like a vocal or drum track . I wonder if you could send in stems of a song , get them EQed and compressed , then mix them together . I wonder how a song processed like that would turn out . I'm gonna try it some time . All mp3s? - sounds a little scary to me. I'm assuming you're not going to pay the 9 bucks ..or whatever the entry fee is. When I finish a couple more songs I'm gonna pay the $19 and get the unlimited one month version . Send in stems of a song , then get the stem mix mastered . Then also do a regular mix version and also get that mastered too , then compare the outcome . If R2D2 (robot) sucks at mastering I'm only out $19 . Last comparison would be to get the same songs Mastered by a real guy . |
|
|
|
Post by lpedrum on Nov 13, 2014 22:47:11 GMT -6
I played around with this a bit today - I am impressed - an excellent substitute to the sort of pseudo mastering I am sure many of us feel compelled to do in order to share works in progress. It is pretty much in line with what is described in the FAQ's, with a proper nod to ME's and an understanding of the state of things industry wise. I think it's hella cool, and way easy to use, for whatever that is worth. MJH It's cool that you gave it a try. But by using an uncolored software limiter it's really easy to "pseudo master" tracks in progress, and it won't set you back $228 a year. For those folks that really feel they need to master their own tracks there's a sale on right now for Ozone 6 for $199. I LOVE new and exciting audio ideas, but online mastering? Sorta smells funny…. |
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Nov 14, 2014 6:07:01 GMT -6
I was looking at the Ozone 6 product. Advanced is more like $999. It has a ton o' plugs, And though I understand how most of them work and they're pre-placed in the "correct" positions in the chain, the sheer number of knobs and dials to twiddle is staggering, and I doubt that I would be able to use it effectively. So short of paying to have my little 'vanity' recordings professionally mastered, Are there products around that are of very good quality, but simpler/more automated - especially on the EQ end. You know, kind of like how you can get very musical result with just two knobs on an LA-2A compressor?
Anyway, that's what I like about the 'idea' of the site, if not the site itself. Right now, you upload a recording and you get three buttons (low, med, high) Audition then pick one. Obviously, three's not enough, a knob would be better.
I'm really curious how EQing decisions are made. It's not just compression going on. Any insights into what's going on there?
|
|
|
|
Post by mjheck on Nov 14, 2014 8:12:11 GMT -6
Good Morning LPedrum,
Thank you for the heads up - I'm not sure if its clear from this thread, but the site is actually free (for MP3's).
The fee based stuff starts when you want high resolution files - If I recall, its something like $9 monthly for a limited number of high res files, and $29 for an unlimited number.
And after digging around for some info on the company, they seem to be encouraging the use of their free option to get an idea of how mastering will impact a mix, whether you do they final master with them or not.
You are correct, that would be a lot of coin to throw down for works in progress - thankfully, its an option for the low, low price of free.
MJH
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Nov 14, 2014 8:25:31 GMT -6
It'd also be interesting to see if you can throw it a curve. Have multiple versions of the same song, one with lots of low bass, one with normal, and one with thin bass and see what it does with each. If it comes back all pumpy and strange, it's probably just a hard limiter happening. If the heavy bass comes back with lower bass and somewhat even balance, then it's compression and eq, etc.
If you can figure out what's happening, I'm sure it could be used to the advantage of the person using it.
|
|
|
|
Post by lpedrum on Nov 14, 2014 9:11:11 GMT -6
I guess what I'm not grasping here is when and why this sort of thing would be useful. I can see if someone's just demoing songs in Garage Band on a lap top (and has no desire to understand even the basics of audio engineering), that online mastering could be a way to kick things up a notch. But for an actual release vanity or otherwise? If someone just needs to punch up rough mixes or present a mix at more of a CD volume, using something like the Invisible Limiter would do the trick. (or if you want FREE try this limiter--this guy creates some very nice software. vladgsound.wordpress.com/plugins/limiter6/ ) If EQ is needed, very basic moves on the stereo mix are putting a hi pass filter on the low end, maybe dipping down the low mids if things are bit muddy and possibly adding a touch of highs. If someone has ears enough to play and record they can quickly learn to do this sort of thing. But for actual released records I always turn to a seasoned mastering engineer--its a deep art and from my own experience very hard to do well. |
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Nov 14, 2014 10:25:33 GMT -6
I guess what I'm not grasping here is when and why this sort of thing would be useful. I think that while the jury is still out - and assuming that there is more than just simple limiting at play, there are a few contenders that have been mentioned: The quick down and dirty rough mix for the client. If a product like this is using 3 or 4 plugins and has a decent algorithm for analysis and adjustment for each - there's a LOT of time being saved. For those learning (or teaching themselves how to master) - as a reference. For amateurs who just want to track and post.. (there are many musicians who have little to no interest in engineering ..and little to no money). The processor you just linked to has a couple dozen knobs and buttons. There are a lot of musicians out there who either don't understand or can't be bothered when they see more than 5 or 6. Yes, on the high end - mastering is an art, but for the common musician - a good highly automated solution could be the ticket. |
|
|
|
Post by lpedrum on Nov 14, 2014 17:13:49 GMT -6
I guess what I'm not grasping here is when and why this sort of thing would be useful. I think that while the jury is still out - and assuming that there is more than just simple limiting at play, there are a few contenders that have been mentioned: The quick down and dirty rough mix for the client. If a product like this is using 3 or 4 plugins and has a decent algorithm for analysis and adjustment for each - there's a LOT of time being saved. I'm not sure why all the emphasis on saving time? Especially if we're referring to folks that do music for a hobby or part time. Any decent engineer can whip off quick and dirty roughs with a little limiting for a client. It's like this new software company is trying to invent a reason why it's product should exist.
For those learning (or teaching themselves how to master) - as a reference. I personally would never use an automated master for reference. I think someone is much better off listening to the greats. A one size fits all automated master could lead you down the wrong path such as "I pressed Rock Master so I guess that's how it's supposed to sound." For amateurs who just want to track and post.. (there are many musicians who have little to no interest in engineering ..and little to no money). I totally agree here. If music is a hobby then by all means they should have fun with whatever software is out there.The processor you just linked to has a couple dozen knobs and buttons. There are a lot of musicians out there who either don't understand or can't be bothered when they see more than 5 or 6. Most limiters including the one I linked to have presets. I start there and then learn to tweak as I go. I know it can look intimidating and sometimes it is. But I don't know if anyone can make really good music looking for easy quick solutions at every turn. LET it intimidate you a bit and you'll find the knowledge you gain truly inspiring. It's a lot more meaningful to cook a great meal for someone than to heat up a frozen pizza. Yes, on the high end - mastering is an art, but for the common musician - a good highly automated solution could be the ticket. I would disagree with your statement that mastering is only for "high end". I make a living producing independent records--some for small labels and others for self release by the artist. I'm not sure you would refer to that as high end or not, but I would never dream of leaving mastering to automation, any more than I would suggest an artist use songwriting software. Real mastering is not simply adding compression and EQ--there's a deep artistry to it. Why would we want to dismiss or ignore that fact? If by "common musician" you mean "amateur musician," then by all means they should have fun with Garage Band on an iPad and use automated mastering to their hearts content. I listened to your songs m57 -- I think you have talent and a really good voice. And I can understand the desire to keep the technical side of recording uber-easy so you can focus on singing and writing. But the longer I make music for a living the more I realize how holistic it is--the poetic inspiration, the musical influence, the inspired choice of guitar strings, the creative use of gear, mic choice etc. etc. all combine to make music that moves people. By all means have fun with automated mastering, and if you learn something in the process that's great. I think I'm coming off a bit preachy here and I don't want to be. I guess I'm just asking you and others to take a little deeper look at this topic and not be so taken in by the "save time and money" ethos. The irony is that I'm NOT a mastering engineer! |
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Nov 15, 2014 4:56:34 GMT -6
Yes, on the high end - mastering is an art, but for the common musician - a good highly automated solution could be the ticket.
I didn't mean to say that mastering is 'only' for the high end - I'm acknowledging that the high-end of mastering is an art. Giving it more thought, and taking the idea to its logical conclusion, I'd say it is implied that ALL mastering requires that at least some artistic decisions be made. In the amateur circles I fly in, very few ever have their work professionally mastered. Most probably just slap a limiter on the thing and turn the dial to taste - or use a preset as you mentioned. When I try doing much more, I feel like I'm making things worse - or I question that I'm doing anything of value, so most of the time I do my best to make the recording as good as possible going in and limit to taste. If something is off-color, rather than put an EQ on the buss, I'm more tempted to go back into the mix and find an offending track and tweak the crap out of it first, which just shows you guys how much of a hack I am. I'm only mildly ashamed to admit this because I feel like I'm in the majority. Clearly many if not most that post here are professional musicians/engineers, and your standards are much higher - and so it is that I say 'high-end.' You guys are the 1%.
Thanks man, I probably should just be lurking and not posting because I'm sure I'm just putting my foot in my mouth half the time, but I'm here to learn with the intent of making my own recordings better. I just hope I'm man enough to admit when I'm wrong because I can be one stubborn old fart. There are already a few people who contribute to these threads that live somewhat near me that have reached out, and I am looking forward to getting my new studio in order and ..well, doing more things right.
|
|
