• SONAR
  • SONAR Newburyport now available (p.17)
2016/02/25 02:43:23
charlyg
How come when I do a select all, export audio, I seemingly get a good if not great .wav every time? This can't be an accident.....I'm guessing there must be some auto mastering going on. Maybe not much, but some?
 
It is more than possible my standards aren't up to snuff yet, but regular folks seem to like what they hear so far.
2016/02/25 03:03:14
Larry Jones
charlyg
How come when I do a select all, export audio, I seemingly get a good if not great .wav every time? This can't be an accident.....I'm guessing there must be some auto mastering going on. Maybe not much, but some?
 
It is more than possible my standards aren't up to snuff yet, but regular folks seem to like what they hear so far.


Charly - You're probably "mixing as you go," tweaking the balance, EQ, reverb and other settings during playback, so when you break for the day and export a rough mix, it's actually a pretty good mix. However, when you are ready to produce output for sale or to post on a band website, YouTube, or anyplace where you want the public to hear it, you might discover that your pretty good mix is not competitive out there in the bad world. That's when you might want to look into mastering. Not saying LANDR is the answer for you, but certainly Craig Anderton believes in it, which definitely counts for something.
2016/02/25 03:20:57
Anderton
ampfixer
Some people like it and some don't. Fair enough. I can't figure out why Craig and the Bakers are giving it such a hard sell. 



Because I've mastered hundreds of tracks, and know the difference between people who spend thousands of dollars for what I call mastering with a capital M - mission critical projects that will affect someone's career - and mastering with a small m, those who simply want something to sound better and don't have the knowledge to master it themselves, or the money to pay an engineer. So, what are their options?
 
Well, they can try any of the existing online mastering services, of which there are dozens, if not hundreds. But I don't know of any that give instant previews. To answer cparmarlee's question, which is valid - "What does one do when their process doesn't work?" - the answer is simple: use someone else. It hasn't cost you a cent, or more than a couple minutes. A lot of my clients came to me because they weren't satisfied with what they got from a pro mastering engineer, in one case a Grammy award winner. If someone can be not satisfied with a Grammy award winning mastering engineer, they can certainly be not satisfied with an online automated mastering service. There's no crime in getting a second opinion, or taking your business elsewhere. 
 
I've already explained that as a pro mastering engineer, LANDR would be tremendously helpful when working with clients, for multiple reasons - primarily in terms of saving me time and saving them money be cutting down on the back-and-forth, and helping clients give me better mixes that I don't have to send back to them with instructions on needed changes. I'm not going to go through describing it all over again. the short form is in the eZine. So I guess if you want to ascribe dark motives, okay...I would indeed benefit from working with  a client who has access to LANDR.
 
My job is helping people make better music. That's what I do at Harmony Central, that's what I do with the Tip of the Week, that's what I do with articles for Gibson.com, and especially, when someone entrusts me with their mixes to enhance their talent and help them express their vision. Helping musicians is why I put all my circuits in the public domain instead of patenting them. That's why Peavey, Steinberg, Electro-Harmonix, TASCAM, Line 6, Kurzweil, and many others have used my designs without my asking, or wanting, anything in return. I get nothing from the content I'm generating for Cakewalk, including projects for which they charge money, like the Gibson Bass Collection. The reward is when I get a PM from someone saying they did a shootout of virtual basses, and they liked mine best. I helped them make better music. Mission accomplished.
 
So now there's a tool that could be genuinely helpful to people - how many threads have you seen in this forum about mastering and/or getting a better sound? - and Cakewalk thinks people would appreciate having it available as part of SONAR so a file can be exported to LANDR as easily as it can be exported to FLAC. And they're accused of forcing things down peoples' throats, disseminating bloatware, partnering with a company that "preys on the ignorant," etc. Even people who've never tried LANDR feel eminently qualified to say it's crap.
 
You want to put LANDR out of business? Here's how: start a web site, and tell people you'll master anything they send you for $9 (you want to compete with LANDR, so charge a buck less for a WAV file one-off). You'll give them three versions within a couple minutes at any time of the day or night, and if they don't like the results, they don't have to pay anything. Oh, and make sure you give better results than what LANDR gives, or there's no point in trying to compete.
 
I've gotten into trouble with professional mastering engineers by telling people it's not a black art, and if you have great ears, good acoustics, accurate monitors, and know how signal processing and waveform editing works, you can do mastering. You'll suck at first, but the  more you do it, the better you'll get. It took me 20 years to reach a skill level to where I was worth being paid thousands of dollars to master peoples' music, but I got there. People who consider themselves "great" mastering engineers don't like my attitude that anyone can do it if they work hard enough. They want people to think it's a black art (well it is for vinyl, but that's a whole other story, and that's how they got that black art reputation).
 
Now I'm getting into trouble for recommending that people try something with the potential to make their music sound better. But, that's not why I'm being persistent. I don't want people who could truly benefit from this to be swayed by people with closed minds and hateful attitudes. All we hear from the haters is "LANDR won't do what a great human mastering engineer can do."
 
The irony, of course, is that they are unknowingly repeating what LANDR itself says on their site**, and even in their press release. What the haters aren't saying is what LANDR does do, probably because they don't know. It's frustrating to have spent hours checking it out, testing it, doing evals, discussing it with others, then distilling that experience into 25 minutes of writing a quick read in the eZine to give people a head start on understanding what it can and cannot do...and then realizing that work was for nothing. Those with open minds will try it out and figure out what's useful about it and what isn't, so they don't need to have it explained to them because they're smart and will figure it out anyway. Those with a "don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up" attitude won't read it.
 
So, that also means there's no point in continuing this dialog because I've said everything I need to say. If people want to limit their options, then vaya con dios. Go learn how to master, you'll learn a lot in the process.
 
 
**"The polish and balance achieved through the subtle adjustments of a skilled mastering engineer is not something we would ever diminish. There are some very talented engineers out there with exceptional ears, capable of brilliant work. It’s a beautiful art form, but there’s also a lot of science behind it, as our resident astrophysicist can attest. What we've designed is a tool that’s so easy and affordable to use, it just makes sense to try LANDR out first. If you’re unsure of the results, and can afford to invest more time, effort and money, then pro mastering may well be worth your while. Having a LANDR file as a reference can be a useful tool; along with your feedback it will guide a mastering engineer in the right direction." - LANDR FAQ
2016/02/25 05:08:40
M@
Beepster:
"..Anyway... point is, although this LANDR thing may be useful for some it's not really what I think folks had in mind when they request more mastering oriented tools..."
+1
 
2016/02/25 05:32:46
JoeHans
How do you find the stability in Newburyport? I had a couple of strange crashes last night so simply interested to hear how things are working for others.
2016/02/25 06:19:04
M@
Anderton
M@
[Quarterly updates would be fine for me.

 
Then update once a quarter.

 
 
That's not the same. By quarterly I meant something like (example):
1.Q - Mix recall + Loop content
2.Q - Vocalsync + .....
3.Q - Drum Replacer + Anderton FX
4.Q - Patchpoints + ....TH3?
 
Then there's more room & time for fixes, implementing user desired workflow improvements and testing (in house & with dedicated beta-testers) during the year and leaves: Start-screen, Synth recording, Style Dials, Upsample, Rapture Session for the next year.
(Again order and appearance of features & content just by example)
2016/02/25 06:24:04
coolbass
rcklln
I think it would be best to have the LANDR installation/integration listed as a separate install item in C3.


X 1000
2016/02/25 06:56:48
Snehankur
Isn't there anything in SPALT-N other that LANDR?
 
2016/02/25 06:59:48
THambrecht
The most problem of LANDR is, that you don't know what LANDR is doing with this song.
I cannot imagine that they have rebuild an expensive Equalizer from Manley, or a Compressor from Fairchild. I can also not imagine that they have rebuild iZotope Ozone.
The components from LANDR are soulless unknown plugins without any character.
LANDR does not even describe which components are used.
Normally a mastering engineer chooses very specific expansive devices or plugins to give the song a special coloring.
By LANDR there is not even the chance to look at the parameters and change some options or devices.
A hobby amateur musician needs usually no mastering - or can get iZotope Ozone for 250$ with ready-to-go presets.
LANDR is only a nice gimmick. But "Mastering" must be absolute perfect, otherwise it is no "Mastering".
 
2016/02/25 07:12:09
Bristol_Jonesey
coolbass
rcklln
I think it would be best to have the LANDR installation/integration listed as a separate install item in C3.


X 1000


Why?
 
In order to save approx 500ms in download time?
© 2026 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1

Use My Existing Forum Account

Use My Social Media Account