M@
Sorry; couldn't help myself posting that.
Whole issue feels like Adobe: don't pay attention while your installing and suddenly you've got some antivirus software on your PC.....antivirus software is a good thing for most people...so hey!

I think that is the best comparison summarizing most complains here. It CAN BE useful for someone, but it is BIG and NETWORK ORIENTED component put into the primary Sonar package and enabled by default.
 
Sonar is OFFLINE program to work with music and it looks like many people agree that making it call yet another ONLINE vst host with a bunch of unknown plug-ins is a bad idea (from the story with Reaper and the reply from developers, it is clear that LANDR is specialized VST host with network connectivity and several chains of plug-ins).
 
Note that this position is not about "usability" (promoted by Craig) and it is not about "smartness" (promoted by Noel) of LANDR. It is about how Cakewalk deliver it.
 
And remembering the story with questions about subscription and following "membership" model, users start to worry either that is the first attempt to find the reaction on Sonar "cloudification".
 
About LANDR itself. Sorry Craig, but answers like "it shows my clients what is mastering" following by "mastering with (m) can be done automatically" and "no, it is impossible to make ready to use preliminary mastering chains for Sonar" are mutual exclusive for me. If LANDR can do it, why Sonar can not? Why not discuss possible implementations for "pre-analizing" material, conditional FX chains, sophisticated parameter grouping from different plug-ins, farm rendering FOR SONAR (in case the luck of such features is the show stopper to do some "auto-mastering" for n00bs)?
 
EDIT: I have added missing statements and some spelling, sorry

MacFurse

irvin
LANDR is so 'good', resident salesman Anderton felt the need to clarify he does not use it on his own songs and would not use on anyone else's...lol...

The only laughs are on you, at continually making such foolish statements. If you can't understand the context of that statement, which has been explained to you over and over, then you understand nothing about the entire subject.

 
thank God i'm not looking for popularity...
 
The statements are not foolish: Anderton will not use it because he knows what he is doing. LANDR is for those who don't know what they are doing, even though it can't do the job for them. That part is pretty obvious - perhaps not to you, but that's all there's to it.


 
What I find most revealing (perhaps not to you) is that Anderton went out of his way to separate himself from LANDER by clarifying (without anyone prompting him) that he does not and would not use it on his own material or anyone else's. That tells any smart reader (your own mileage may vary) all that is needed to know what he truly thinks of LANDR - but that won't stop him from offering its 'benefits' to unsuspecting customers.
 
I must give credit to him, though: he does know his audience, as your post clearly demonstrates.
 
Happy 'mastering', with an apology to your 'clients'...lol...(makes me seem foolish...I know...)
 
 
 
 

anotherpaul
I am not going to bag or praise LANDR mostly because I can't find / use it.
It is there as an option in the export area, it is also in the utilities, but if i try to use it I get (Tool not found:'C;\Program Files (x86)\LANDR Audio\LANDR\Landr.exe'
I understand that it is most likely I am doing something wrong but if someone could point me in the right direction that would be great 

Were you online when you did all of that ? and have you set up an account w them yet ?
IIRC, that has to be done even for the free use of LANDR if you want them to convert so you can access the  30 second preview mode .
 
Kenny

Paul P

jbow
PLEASE do this. I am going to wait on this update. I want the option to not install Landr. I don't need it and I don't want to uninstall something that leaves behind bits and pieces. Please, give the option to update Sonar and add Landr is we want it.

You can do this now.  Just download the update yourself from your account, run the installer in windows not the CCC, and uncheck LANDR during install.  Note that I haven't done it yet, but others have.  I'm still waiting for the dust to settle.
 

Thank you Paul. I've always used CCC before and frankly this Landr may well be something I want but I'm not sure yet. I'd like to let it lay for a month or two and see how it goes with those who use it. I don't need it at the moment but when I do well, maybe it will have value for me. I'm just not sure. I am leaning toward it being a plus but IDK, I just feel like I want to wait just a little.
Thanks again, I'll DL through My Account.
 
Julien

irvin

MacFurse

irvin
LANDR is so 'good', resident salesman Anderton felt the need to clarify he does not use it on his own songs and would not use on anyone else's...lol...

The only laughs are on you, at continually making such foolish statements. If you can't understand the context of that statement, which has been explained to you over and over, then you understand nothing about the entire subject.

 
thank God i'm not looking for popularity...
 
The statements are not foolish: Anderton will not use it because he knows what he is doing. LANDR is for those who don't know what they are doing, even though it can't do the job for them. That part is pretty obvious - perhaps not to you, but that's all there's to it.


 
What I find most revealing (perhaps not to you) is that Anderton went out of his way to separate himself from LANDER by clarifying (without anyone prompting him) that he does not and would not use it on his own material or anyone else's. That tells any smart reader (your own mileage may vary) all that is needed to know what he truly thinks of LANDR - but that won't stop him from offering its 'benefits' to unsuspecting customers.
 
I must give credit to him, though: he does know his audience, as your post clearly demonstrates.
 
Happy 'mastering', with an apology to your 'clients'...lol...(makes me seem foolish...I know...)
 
 
 
 

My post demonstrates nothing other than my diminishing ability to suffer such fools, probably due to my long 'mileage'. Once again the only thing you demonstrate, is your lack of ability to understand what people have been saying to you over and over again. Nobody suggests this as a method to master anything. How much clearer do you need this stated? I would not use this method to master any of my own work, or anyone else's work either. But that's not to say I wouldn't suggest it to someone wishing to enhance their go-pro video, or someone wishing to show me how they would like their work to sound finished (mastered). If some don't think they have the expertise to output a file from SONAR good enough for a demo perhaps, then LANDR could well be the answer for them too. Who are you to say otherwise? This is not mastering. Never will be. Which is why I wouldn't use it to do so. Or Craig. Or anyone else who actually does master material. Do you understand the difference?
 
No one resents your opinion on the subject, just your continual personal attacks based on your narrow focused view of what is being presented to you. Be the smart reader you claim to be. You just might learn something.
 
FWIW - I don't think this should have been included in Newburyport, just offered. But everyone is entitled to their opinion without having to defend it, let alone the intent of their opinion. Grow up.
 
 
 

kennywtelejazz
OK , I just got done upgrading my version of SPlat to Newburyport on one Win 10 laptop ..my test dummy ...
This was  a CCC install (non verbose )
Of course the first thing I wanted to do was try out LANDR  ...
I have a mix of a song that I have been working on ...(one I wasn't 100% happy with BTW )
My levels were conservative , I hadn't done any pre mastering or any major EQ work other than as per track ...
There was no master buss  mastering type of chain going on or even a master buss compressor to bump up my levels ...
This mix was exported as a LANDR wave ...
At first LANDR was not very intuitive for me , So I opened up the Ezine  PDF and read the instructions this time while using SONAR ...
I guess it's one thing to read the Ezine while having morning coffee , and  whole other thing all together to just dive in .
I'm gonna keep my impressions of LANDR strictly as a tool ...meaning not how it wound up on my machine or the politics or any other number of side issues that have people on the forum concerned .  
 
For me personally I'm happy LANDR was included in this months upgrade ..
A week ago I wasn't expecting it and now I have it sitting on my machine ...
Already I can see and hear that it is gonna save me a lot of time and aggravation ...
My typical workflow "MO" has been to work in SONAR for all the elements of my song creation and mixing .
When I'm in the ball park I like to export a mix out of SONAR and place it in a 3 rd party audio editing DAW and do a lot of refinements while there ...
What that means is I like to keep my SONAR project at a point where it is a least moving forwards and never backwards ...meaning my SONAR project is saved at least at a point where I am somewhat happy ....
As a result of doing things that way I may have one song with 10 or 20 orphan projects floating around ...
 
Already I can see and hear the benefit of using LANDR to preview my song while it is still in SONAR ..
That alone may save me from all those extra orphan mix's and files of my songs during various stages of development and listening ...
 
Anyway here's what I did ,
I took an export out of SONAR and uploaded that VIA LANDR , then I dialed up a Mix of the same song that I thought I was happy with and placed it on my desktop ...
that mix BTW was the best that I could do given my current situation over here .I had received crits and feedback of that mix online in various places ...
OK while listening in LANDR I had the choice to preview my song unaffected , low setting , middle setting and high setting ...Plus I had the mix I was somewhat happy with on my desktop ....
I listened to all 5 mix's ...w fresh ears ....
OK here's what happened ,
The mix I had exported out of SONAR was the one I liked the least ..remember this was a non mastered song that was still being created ,it wasn't fully prepped and it topped out at about - 12 Db ...
The song  Mix that I had posted online VIA social media turned out to be my second least liked mix  ...
BTW I had a very strong idea of what need to be done to improve the sound of that mix ...VIA folks online trying to offer constructive criticism plus my ears and my gut .... i put the song on the shelf because some of the things I need to do I still have to learn how to do ....
Now comes LANDR ...
I was actually pleasantly surprised with what LANDR had done with my song file .
The low setting was very nice and the EQ curve went to places I was afraid to go ...some frequency's were enhanced and I found it very interesting to hear with my own ears how my song would sound if I had more chops production wise and a better listening environment to mix at ....
The medium setting was actually the setting I liked the best for this song ...that in itself did surprise me at first .
the nature of the song originally was very dynamic ...it had plenty of head room before converted - 12 Db and nothing got squashed ...
I didn't even bother with the high setting ...after  10 seconds worth ...
an interesting side note .....some of the crtits and feedback I had gotten to improve the song were things LANDR did to my file ...it didn't go 100 % it hit about 70 % ...
I honestly found that interesting and because of that I'm probably end up doing a lot of free previews ...
 
I'll take all the help I can get at this point , even if it's from a Robot
 
Kenny       
 
 
 

OK, I think I understand from this that the whole idea is to have Landr inside of Sonar for ease of use. Right?
 
So, question. If I choose to DL the Sonar update VIA My Account without downloading or installing Landr, will Landr still be available to me in a couple of months if I should choose to get it? If I go that way will it install inside Sonar like it would if I were to DL it now along with the update?
 
Thanks.
J

MacFurse

irvin

MacFurse

irvin
LANDR is so 'good', resident salesman Anderton felt the need to clarify he does not use it on his own songs and would not use on anyone else's...lol...

The only laughs are on you, at continually making such foolish statements. If you can't understand the context of that statement, which has been explained to you over and over, then you understand nothing about the entire subject.

 
thank God i'm not looking for popularity...
 
The statements are not foolish: Anderton will not use it because he knows what he is doing. LANDR is for those who don't know what they are doing, even though it can't do the job for them. That part is pretty obvious - perhaps not to you, but that's all there's to it.


 
What I find most revealing (perhaps not to you) is that Anderton went out of his way to separate himself from LANDER by clarifying (without anyone prompting him) that he does not and would not use it on his own material or anyone else's. That tells any smart reader (your own mileage may vary) all that is needed to know what he truly thinks of LANDR - but that won't stop him from offering its 'benefits' to unsuspecting customers.
 
I must give credit to him, though: he does know his audience, as your post clearly demonstrates.
 
Happy 'mastering', with an apology to your 'clients'...lol...(makes me seem foolish...I know...)
 
 
 
 

My post demonstrates nothing other than my diminishing ability to suffer such fools, probably due to my long 'mileage'. Once again the only thing you demonstrate, is your lack of ability to understand what people have been saying to you over and over again. Nobody suggests this as a method to master anything. How much clearer do you need this stated? I would not use this method to master any of my own work, or anyone else's work either. But that's not to say I wouldn't suggest it to someone wishing to enhance their go-pro video, or someone wishing to show me how they would like their work to sound finished (mastered). If some don't think they have the expertise to output a file from SONAR good enough for a demo perhaps, then LANDR could well be the answer for them too. Who are you to say otherwise? This is not mastering. Never will be. Which is why I wouldn't use it to do so. Or Craig. Or anyone else who actually does master material. Do you understand the difference?
 
No one resents your opinion on the subject, just your continual personal attacks based on your narrow focused view of what is being presented to you. Be the smart reader you claim to be. You just might learn something.
 
FWIW - I don't think this should have been included in Newburyport, just offered. But everyone is entitled to their opinion without having to defend it, let alone the intent of their opinion. Grow up.
  
 

(Bold mine). Um, if you go to the Landr website THEY say "Master Tracks Instantly".
"Professional Audio Mastering".
"Sound like a pro. Instant results at a fraction of the cost of studio mastering.
Try it for free, or Sign Up Now"
 
https://www.landr.com/en?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=BrandSearchEN&utm_content=lp_quality&gclid=CNe2wLPvlcsCFcgjgQodJMQK5g
 
I have no opinion about the quality of the product but they DO market it as Professional Mastering.
 
So, it is here (maybe). Some like it some don't. IDK. I'm confused.
 
J
 

MacFurse
Once again the only thing you demonstrate, is your lack of ability to understand what people have been saying to you over and over again. Nobody suggests this as a method to master anything. How much clearer do you need this stated?

Not to argue, but just in the interest of balance, this is the first sentence of the LANDR part of Cakewalk's "official release" statement for the Newburyport update :
 
"LANDR is integrated directly into SONAR allowing you to master your tracks instantly. LANDR uses highly developed and tested A.I. technology to profile and deliver you the most accurate master for your style and genre."

There's mastering for a demo and there's MASTERING for a particular medium. 

jbow

kennywtelejazz
OK , I just got done upgrading my version of SPlat to Newburyport on one Win 10 laptop ..my test dummy ...
This was  a CCC install (non verbose )
Of course the first thing I wanted to do was try out LANDR  ...
I have a mix of a song that I have been working on ...(one I wasn't 100% happy with BTW )
My levels were conservative , I hadn't done any pre mastering or any major EQ work other than as per track ...
There was no master buss  mastering type of chain going on or even a master buss compressor to bump up my levels ...
This mix was exported as a LANDR wave ...
At first LANDR was not very intuitive for me , So I opened up the Ezine  PDF and read the instructions this time while using SONAR ...
I guess it's one thing to read the Ezine while having morning coffee , and  whole other thing all together to just dive in .
I'm gonna keep my impressions of LANDR strictly as a tool ...meaning not how it wound up on my machine or the politics or any other number of side issues that have people on the forum concerned .  
 
For me personally I'm happy LANDR was included in this months upgrade ..
A week ago I wasn't expecting it and now I have it sitting on my machine ...
Already I can see and hear that it is gonna save me a lot of time and aggravation ...
My typical workflow "MO" has been to work in SONAR for all the elements of my song creation and mixing .
When I'm in the ball park I like to export a mix out of SONAR and place it in a 3 rd party audio editing DAW and do a lot of refinements while there ...
What that means is I like to keep my SONAR project at a point where it is a least moving forwards and never backwards ...meaning my SONAR project is saved at least at a point where I am somewhat happy ....
As a result of doing things that way I may have one song with 10 or 20 orphan projects floating around ...
 
Already I can see and hear the benefit of using LANDR to preview my song while it is still in SONAR ..
That alone may save me from all those extra orphan mix's and files of my songs during various stages of development and listening ...
 
Anyway here's what I did ,
I took an export out of SONAR and uploaded that VIA LANDR , then I dialed up a Mix of the same song that I thought I was happy with and placed it on my desktop ...
that mix BTW was the best that I could do given my current situation over here .I had received crits and feedback of that mix online in various places ...
OK while listening in LANDR I had the choice to preview my song unaffected , low setting , middle setting and high setting ...Plus I had the mix I was somewhat happy with on my desktop ....
I listened to all 5 mix's ...w fresh ears ....
OK here's what happened ,
The mix I had exported out of SONAR was the one I liked the least ..remember this was a non mastered song that was still being created ,it wasn't fully prepped and it topped out at about - 12 Db ...
The song  Mix that I had posted online VIA social media turned out to be my second least liked mix  ...
BTW I had a very strong idea of what need to be done to improve the sound of that mix ...VIA folks online trying to offer constructive criticism plus my ears and my gut .... i put the song on the shelf because some of the things I need to do I still have to learn how to do ....
Now comes LANDR ...
I was actually pleasantly surprised with what LANDR had done with my song file .
The low setting was very nice and the EQ curve went to places I was afraid to go ...some frequency's were enhanced and I found it very interesting to hear with my own ears how my song would sound if I had more chops production wise and a better listening environment to mix at ....
The medium setting was actually the setting I liked the best for this song ...that in itself did surprise me at first .
the nature of the song originally was very dynamic ...it had plenty of head room before converted - 12 Db and nothing got squashed ...
I didn't even bother with the high setting ...after  10 seconds worth ...
an interesting side note .....some of the crtits and feedback I had gotten to improve the song were things LANDR did to my file ...it didn't go 100 % it hit about 70 % ...
I honestly found that interesting and because of that I'm probably end up doing a lot of free previews ...
 
I'll take all the help I can get at this point , even if it's from a Robot
 
Kenny       
 
 
 

OK, I think I understand from this that the whole idea is to have Landr inside of Sonar for ease of use. Right?
 
So, question. If I choose to DL the Sonar update VIA My Account without downloading or installing Landr, will Landr still be available to me in a couple of months if I should choose to get it? If I go that way will it install inside Sonar like it would if I were to DL it now along with the update?
 
Thanks.
J

J ,
I installed LANDR VIA the CCC and now that I have been using it a little bit to experiment  around ....
Here's my take on some of its use ...it is definitely helping understand what I'm doing wrong in my mix's ...
I'm finding out how to prep  them better....also learning how to adjust them after getting a preview of what may be out of whack ...
for the sake of full disclosure , Yeah when I first put LANDR on my computer I exported out of SONAR as a LANDR Wave ...
What made that convenient was I was still inside of SONAR , I know where my file was going and I could make mix adjustments after listening to the 30second previews ...on the fly ...
 
Then I tried the standalone LANDR that got installed , that was interesting because I could pull my music files from anywhere ...regardless of point of origin ...and have LANDR import them and create a preview for my consideration .
A couple of posts back I took a song that I had on Soundcloud ,I  found the mix I had posted originally and threw that Mix into LANDR ...
LANDR set it to high ..I left it there ( for better or worse )  the thing is I like that file better than my original  yet the flaws that I should have fixed back when I was working on the tune are still there ...
On the positive side some sections and phrases of the song have surprised  me in a good way ...at the bare min 
I feel more motivated to do something about it  ...that means LANDR did its job
 
I look at it more along the lines of using LANDR as a way of feeling out what a makeover in music would look and sound like ...
 
Lets make believe somebody said to me hey K...we are gonna do a make over . so I stand there in my underwear and they do a scan of me  and then 10 min's later  I come back in the room w my street cloths on , the same exact person I was before I took them off ..then I'm sitting there and on a large screen I get to see what I would look like in different cloths , or if I got a hair cut or lost 10 pounds ...
the value in that IMHO is a person may get a burst of motivation if they had the opportunity to get an idea of what an end result would look like ....once they were able to see it in tangible form ...
Now changing the example from a visual to a musical process LANDR is giving me a chance to hear what a possible end  result could sound like with out having to spend 20 hours of doing micro edits and all the other Jazz folks do to dial in a song ...
the easy part is I don't have to over tweak my music on the front end to hear what is wrong with the back end ...
either way the flaws will still be there and the work will still have to be done , the main diff is I can see already that this app can save me a lot of time and frustration ...it is no accident that I posted a song that had major flaws and that I was stuck on ....
I have heard sections that LANDR has done that has inspired me in spite of all the flaws ...
 
Last but not least , this part may interest you the most ...
I could be wrong with what I'm about to say ...
I don't think you even have to install LANDR on your computer , you can go to the website and use it as a web based app , you may still have to sign up to be able to convert and hear your previews ...
I'm not sure about the pricing , meaning how much or if its the same a a SONAR user ...
I went the way I did , I'm happy to have gone there ...
 
Kenny