Anderton
Let's get real: a professional DAW costs a few hundred dollars. It is within the range of everyone; SONAR Artist costs $99.

But that is exactly why some people object to this offering.  The value that you get for the $99 Sonar Artist is unbelievable.  Are you going to try to tell me that Sonar Artist is the same value as downloading a handful of hi res files processed by LANDR?  I don't think so.
 
I understand the argument that maybe Landr is doing what a not-very-experienced mastering engineer would charge 10x or 20x as much for.  And on that basis, maybe it is good value.  But when you compare it with what one gets for $100 these days, it sure seems to me like the pricing is out of line -- so far out of line that it starts to feel sleazy.
 
Maybe that's not fair, but most of us have some kind of budget for our studios.  I have a long list of VSTs I'd like to buy one of these days.  Most of them cost about what 10-20 processed files would cost from LANDR.  If LANDR was a truly superior product that we couldn't live without and for which there were no good alternatives, then they (and their partner Cakewalk) would be free to charge whatever they wanted.  But for me, the offering is not fairly priced, so I am more likely to put my money on tools that seem to be a better value.
 
And while this debate is raging what we DIDN'T get were fixes for the most vexing problems and weaknesses within Sonar.
 
I have paid my subscription for 2016 already, so it isn't like I am a Sonar hater, but we do seem to have a marketplace where the various DAW vendors are making choices to specialize.  Ableton has always concentrated on the live performance.  Protools has always concentrated on the professional studio environment.  The other DAWs were mostly jack-of-all-trades products.  We now seem to be seeing a separation where some DAWs are chasing after the ProTools space (concentration on the recording/mixing/mastering world) and other DAWs are more friendly to composers (having better MIDI editing, music notation, and arranging features.)  The features and fixes delivered since the SOnar subscription process began are very heavily loaded to the recording/production side rather than the composition/creative side.  That's just the way it is and eventually people most interested in the creative side may have to go elsewhere.

@Javahut....  no professional or semi-professional or even serious sound hobbyist cares anything about LANDR
 
You know what? This is an offensive statement. You don't know what other people value or like or what may be a help to other people. It is an insult to Kenny, Craig, and others IMO. I am going to give it a try and I'm going to do it with a GOOD attitude.
It reminds me of when I got Progressive bifocals with my glasses. I was told that a lot of people didn't like progressive lenses and I might not like them. I decided before I got them that I was going to like them. I DID like them and I have never looked back. I've said it before and I'll say it again... you can roll with technology or technology will roll over you. This may not be the "end all" but it is a start. I think I can say with confidence that in 5 more years this technology will be awesome and commonly used. That is the way with technology, it starts out "iffy" with a lot of people questioning it but in a few years it develops into something great... that is where this tech is headed. Best to get on board now, IMO.
 
I don't think that you intended to offend anyone but with the way you said this I think it could certainly be offensive to several accomplished people though they would never say so and like I said, I really don't think you meant for that to happen.
 
Peace!
 
J

cparmerlee

Anderton
Let's get real: a professional DAW costs a few hundred dollars. It is within the range of everyone; SONAR Artist costs $99.

 
But that is exactly why some people object to this offering.  The value that you get for the $99 Sonar Artist is unbelievable.  Are you going to try to tell me that Sonar Artist is the same value as downloading a handful of hi res files processed by LANDR?  I don't think so.

 
Really, I can't believe you seized on that as the point of what I put a lot of effort into explaining. But so be it.
 
Anyway to answer your question, YES, some people WILL find almost whatever it costs well worth it when they have 10 recorded presentations from a convention that need to go online in 24 hours. Others will find the value totally out of proportion to what they think it should be. 
 
The solution is those who think it's worth using should use it, and those who don't think it's worth using shouldn't use it.
 

I understand the argument that maybe Landr is doing what a not-very-experienced mastering engineer would charge 10x or 20x as much for.  And on that basis, maybe it is good value.  But when you compare it with what one gets for $100 these days, it sure seems to me like the pricing is out of line -- so far out of line that it starts to feel sleazy.

 
FWIW the lowest amount I charge for mastering a short song that doesn't require any restoration is $100. It's well worth it to some people to pay me that. It's not worth it to others. I'm not going to change my price because some people get bent out of shape that I charge $100, that's what I have to charge to make it worth my while.
 

Maybe that's not fair, but most of us have some kind of budget for our studios.  I have a long list of VSTs I'd like to buy one of these days.  Most of them cost about what 10-20 processed files would cost from LANDR.  If LANDR was a truly superior product that we couldn't live without and for which there were no good alternatives, then they (and their partner Cakewalk) would be free to charge whatever they wanted.  But for me, the offering is not fairly priced, so I am more likely to put my money on tools that seem to be a better value.

 
I think everybody prioritizes their spending on what will give them the most return. For you, it's a VST. For someone else, it's getting 10 presentations online in time to meet a deadline.
 

And while this debate is raging what we DIDN'T get were fixes for the most vexing problems and weaknesses within Sonar.

 
As I said in another thread, I think there are some extremely short memories around here...read this post if you want that statement addressed in full.
 

I have paid my subscription for 2016 already, so it isn't like I am a Sonar hater, but we do seem to have a marketplace where the various DAW vendors are making choices to specialize.  Ableton has always concentrated on the live performance.  Protools has always concentrated on the professional studio environment.  The other DAWs were mostly jack-of-all-trades products.  We now seem to be seeing a separation where some DAWs are chasing after the ProTools space (concentration on the recording/mixing/mastering world) and other DAWs are more friendly to composers (having better MIDI editing, music notation, and arranging features.)  The features and fixes delivered since the SOnar subscription process began are very heavily loaded to the recording/production side rather than the composition/creative side.  That's just the way it is and eventually people most interested in the creative side may have to go elsewhere.

 
It is 100% true that different programs cater to different needs. This is why I use Ableton Live for live performance, and SONAR for recording and composition. It's important to find the tool that works best for you. I used another very popular and I must say, excellent program before finding that SONAR was a much better tool for what I needed to do. So I switched. But it never bothered me that the other program didn't develop the way I wanted. I was just happy I had a choice.
 

Thanks Craig for hanging in there with grace. Funny, 30 years ago this would not be a discussion. Wait we wouldn't even be on line talking like this. It has been nice to 'hang' with you from way back, even if it is only in words. But you (and I) have been around the block a time or two. Musicians.......gotta luv em🙌

jbow
@Javahut....  no professional or semi-professional or even serious sound hobbyist cares anything about LANDR
 
You know what? This is an offensive statement. You don't know what other people value or like or what may be a help to other people. It is an insult to Kenny, Craig, and others IMO.

 
I'm not offended. I'm sure he has no idea why I care about LANDR. There are really only four reasons I can think of why that would be: either he doesn't understand what I've written, hasn't read what I've written, I haven't communicated with sufficient clairty, or - and I hope this is not the reason - he has no sympathy for people getting started in this world who need education.
 
I know how to master, I don't need LANDR to do that. But I do need it to help me educate clients, and help me to understand what they want. If someone is truly opposed to those goals, then I can certainly understand why that person would find my philosophy offensive because I disagree 100% with his/her attitude.

MArwood

cparmerlee

kennywtelejazz
I'm gonna contribute something along the same lines once I run down a couple of disclaimers

That's a lovely song.  Nothing to feel insecure about.
 
I do think it illustrates a fundamental dilemma.  While LANDR did some good things to the recording, it seems to have perked up the hi frequencies that exaggerate the finger noise.  That is very much a matter of artistic taste.  Some people might see that as an improvement.  Others might think that is a step backwards.  And there is nothing you can do about it.  One either accepts the LANDR results or else you throw the whole thing away.  That isn't a proposition that appeals to me.
 
I very much like the idea of software helping me to make better judgments.  I hate the ide of software putting me into a box.

You could always re-Eq the guitar fret noise and send back to LANDR.  If you paid someone you might then be actually stuck with the mastered version. (I think this is the best reason for LANDR test you audio) At least with LANDR you have the chance to redo the mastered version as many times as you like.  
Then you could choose to go with LANRD
or send to someone like:
Hank Williams
Bob Katz 
Glenn Meadows
John Vestman
Eddie Shreyer
Jay Frigoletto
Ted Jensen
Doug Sax 
Brad Blackwood
 
Also Thanks for your post Kenny
 
Max Arwood

Hi Max ,
 
Thank you for the encouragement and the nice things you said
 
Sure I like having choices ,
Yes , I actually think it is pretty nice to be able  to dive into an area of music that I have put on the shelf for a while.
Over here I have 3 areas of music that I seem to always be working on . The first is my playing , the second is my production skills , and the third is my people skills ...
In those 3 areas I'm always hoping to develop new growth and find balance .
When I posted the song I did so with the full disclosure and understanding that I was taking a know song file that was frozen in a semi purgatorial state of completion that was easily asses-able so one could make a valid comparison of what LANDR could do with that version of the song file ...
My Choice to do that was done purely for educational purposes  .
It is no accident that I chose to do that as opposed to dialing up the song in my DAW /SPlat  and doing a remix before a LANDR conversion ...
My whole intent to go there was only to provide an outlet for anyone whom may have been conflicted or on the fence to at least have the opportunity to hear an A B test of a song where they had no investment other that to slide around some of the song sections  as it played ...  
Folks , I'm gonna state the obvious here....some one who is PO'ed that LANDR is part of the CCC install is probably not gonna take the time to install the program to even see if they can use it or even find value in it ...
Then we have those folks who have strong objections to anything related to Mastering that doesn't involve The Capital M in Mastering  . I am gratified to know that I have given them more ammo and they have given me the opportunity to gain some perspective and grounding when it comes to practicing my people skills ... 
It's a win win ..........not for them but it sure is for me .....it would be for them if their light bulb turns on 
Some of the absolute best gigs I have ever gotten were given to me because I had a desire to get along with the people I was serving and working with Musically ....
Some of the best Musical opportunity's I have lost in my career I lost because I forgot that I was there to serve others  and when my Desire to be an A$$ hole overtook my desire to get along with people and serve them my phone stopped ringing  .
 
Regarding the song , the next logical step would be to do a re mix and get rid of some of the place holder parts and play some better ones ...then OH Yeah I must not  forget to EQ my guitar fret noise ...
 
Don't mind me Max , I've know you for a long while here on the forum and I feel comfortable rapping with you
 
Yeah when I'm ready I would like to work with some of the people you have mentioned ...
I know just the fact that I said that means there are gonna be a few people around here shaking their heads
Good I'm not breaking Radio Silence to tell folks who I have played with when I was getting along with people
 
all the best to you Max ,
 
Kenny
 

kennywtelejazz

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

Hi Kenny
Seems to be a registry issue on my end. There were no folders setup for LANDR on my system at all from the update, only the reference in the utilities and export which don't work.
I ended up downloading the desktop version from the landr site where I set up my account. It also fails to setup. Gives a registry issue as the fault, fixed one then it gave another which stopped me in my tracks when it couldnt open Hkey_current_user32 key which I dont have on my 64bit machine. Works no prob on my laptop though
I will keep searching  it's bound to be something I have done trying to make my machine more efficient :)
 
Update:
I had just updated to Windows 10 prior to the Newburyport update, whether that had anything to do with it who knows.
I rolled it back to win 7 and reinstalled Newburyport and everthing was how it should be. Then I updated to Win10 again and everthing is good. 
As to whether I like LANDR or not, I don't really  know. I can see how it could be useful . Will I use it? Maybe, though probably not after having a play around with it a couple of times. Do I care that it is one my system? I won't be cutting my wrists or arguing semantics about it.

musicjohnnie
Thanks Craig for hanging in there with grace. Funny, 30 years ago this would not be a discussion.

 
If only because mastering engineers would still be working with vinyl, which is effing difficult to master!  I can't tell you how many acetates we went through back in the day...but if there's ever a world acetate shortage, I would admit to feeling partially responsible.
 

I don't know what the fuss is all about. If you don't like it don't use it. If you like it use it.

Well, everything has been said: LANDR is a mastering solution for people who have no idea how to prepare a rough mix for themselves or their clients (hard to believe anyone would have clients under those circumstance, but whatever). True professionals would not touch LANDR (as Anderton so eloquently put it) as it offers no benefit to them. Once again, this is a tool for total beginners or experienced people who, for whatever the reason, have not developed the most basic of skills (like slapping an EQ and Limiter combo on the master bus).

With that said, I think the reasonable thing to do for everyone is to decide if the current trend of bundling 3rd party services to maximize income for Cakewalk and its partners is something that is worth supporting by a subscription renewal. On a personal level, my subscription expires in a about 6 months, so I will have plenty of time to decide. Right now, I would definitely not renew - but things can change if Cakewalk provides more mainstream, professional features and much-needed bug fixing instead of these 'features' that amount to nothin more that adware of the worst kind.

That's just my opinion and others will surely find things like LANDR totally good for their needs. All that is ok.

Happy mastering!