Well I'm installing Landr just to try it out.

If there are any concerns abiut it I'm sure the team that creates it will develop it further and imorove it as any sensibile and resoonsible business would do.

My only question is this.. does landr automatically detect the style of music. Since different styles have different mixing expectations i.e. Classical, rock or electronic music.

Hi Craig,
 
I hear your points.
 

cparmerlee
3) Some people are concerned that, unlike Soundcloud, it appears there is a revenue sharing model at work here.  I think this is a more serious issue, more akin to selling a person's private information without permission.  It would have been a lot better for Cakewalk to be up front about that, as in: "Cakewalk and Landr are partnering to bring a new mastering option to Sonar users ..."

 
Like this? :-) 
Seriously we were as careful as we could be to word our press release and the release notes to be as objective as possible, about Landr and its suggested use. People will read what they choose to read or not read. 
 
5) But mostly the storm is caused by what comes across as a hard sell for a service that seems hyped beyond its actual capabilities.
 
I can honestly say that we're not "hard selling" this any more than we do for any export choice. Most people who don't read about this release may not even find Landr unless they look at the export menu.
 
The real bottom line is that any paid service that is controversial like Landr is going to have this reaction from some, no matter what we do or how we say it. The download choice was explained in other threads so I wont go into it again. 
 

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]

cparmerlee
3) Some people are concerned that, unlike Soundcloud, it appears there is a revenue sharing model at work here.  I think this is a more serious issue, more akin to selling a person's private information without permission.  It would have been a lot better for Cakewalk to be up front about that, as in: "Cakewalk and Landr are partnering to bring a new mastering option to Sonar users ..."

 
Like this? :-) 

Yes.  I did not see that, and that tone seemed to have been lost in the discussions early in this thread.
 

I think someone mentioned in this thread, or was it the other? that Studio One already had LandR, that is incorrect, it does not.
 
It was also either this thread or the other that someone said something like "get used to it, Studio One and Bitwig are next" meaning next to get LandR. Well that may well be so, but I wouldn't be to sure about that just yet. PreSonus approached the situation somewhat different that Cakewalk, who by all accounts stealthily slid LandR under the back door, PreSonus on the other hand let the possible intentions be known in advance and there was quite an uproar about it both publicly and privately via emails, no one wanted it, well the vast majority of those vocal on the subject wanted nothing to do with it. The latest 'official' word that I heard was that after the uproar it was being 're-evaluated' so yes it may come to Studio One, then again it may not. I for one would rather it be left out and if someone wants to use it they can do that without having it as part of the DAW or having it thrust on them. I have gave it a fair trial and to be honest I can get magnitudes better results myself. If I was still a Sonar user I would also be pi$$ed off as many are here, even more so considering how it was slipped under the back door. There is enough 'dumbing down' of things already.
 
Style Dials - Music Tools For Morons
LandR - Mastering For Morons
Just one more needed for the 'Moron Trifecta" (mind you the add track button as a major feature came close lol)

Orphaned at Birth
PreSonus approached the situation somewhat different that Cakewalk,

StudioOne has a very clear line of separation between mixing and mastering.  They view mixing as something one does on a single song ans mastering is something ne does on a album-wide basis.  So they have distinctly different "song" and "project" modes.  I haven't used that, so I can't comment intelligently.  But if it is done well, I can see some value in separating these two modes.
 
Of course, they might soon offer Landr as a feature of the project window.

irvin
Well, Anderton, of course the results are going to be different because....get this...get this...get this...LANDR is using different plugins with different settings! lol...I can't believe this is your best attempt at a refutation!

 
I was going to include a pre-emptive comment in case you said that, but I thought no, you really wouldn't blow your own argument out of the water by admitting that LANDR is changing parameter settings and perhaps even using different plug-ins, as determined by the needs of the music. So actually, by acknowledging that LANDR is using different plugins and different settings, and changing settings automatically, you've finally admitted that LANDR is doing things that the standard plug-ins you reference can't do. Thank you for that.

To conduct a valid test, why don't you tell everyone what plugins (including settings) and DAW Lander is using nowadays? We know it was Reaper back then when they had the major fiasco right before release. That is a fact not even a full-time salesman like you can dispute.

How did you come to the brilliant conclusion that this 'test' would prove something?

Well, thank you for at least admitting it was a brilliant conclusion, but that's only because I know how to test things and unlike you, I address what people ask. To refresh your memory:
 
You said: "If you have VERIFIABLE information as to how the whole thing works"
 
LANDR claims it works by making decisions of what processing to apply, based on the material to be processed. The test reveals that this statement is in fact true. HOW they do it is of course a trade secret, however...
 
You said: "...I'll change my mind about it being anything more than Reaper (or some other DAW) plus a couple of plugins (what LANDR is doing is EASILY achieved by a combination of dynamic EQ and Limiter on the master channel)."
 
The tests prove conclusively that the results could not be "EASILY achieved by a combination of dynamic EQ and Limiter on the master channel," because they will not change their settings by themselves to accommodate different pieces of music.
 
You can prove it to yourself by running the three detailed tests I provided.
 
HOWEVER, having thought about it, there is another possible explanation. LANDR could be outsourcing its services to China, and have 100 Chinese audio engineers chained to desks, who are sitting in front of a computer that has Reaper, an EQ, and a multiband limiter; they are told they will be fired if they don't analyze and apply mastering to anything that comes in within 1 minute and 30 seconds. To support this argument, when I was last in Shenzhen, there was a large building being built that said "LAND ROVER." Any idiot can see that's a deliberate attempt to fool everyone while they complete their diabolical plot to have inexperienced people obtain better sound; after their nefarious deeds are done, they will no doubt remove OVER, slide the R over next to LAND, and reveal their new corporate headquarters to the world.
 

cparmerlee

Orphaned at Birth
PreSonus approached the situation somewhat different that Cakewalk,

StudioOne has a very clear line of separation between mixing and mastering.  They view mixing as something one does on a single song ans mastering is something ne does on a album-wide basis.  So they have distinctly different "song" and "project" modes.  I haven't used that, so I can't comment intelligently.  But if it is done well, I can see some value in separating these two modes.

Actually it's done very well, and Studio One is the only program that has taken this approach. I do consider the mastering page more of an "album assembly" page because you can't do anything on a waveform level, although there are useful, mastering-oriented processing tools as well. Unfortunately, though, it's designed more for albums and since Studio One was designed, we're in more of a "singles world." Furthermore, you still need mastering chops to use Studio One's mastering options, which leaves out a lot of people.

ampfixer
And how many alternate identities do you have FanCake? 

FanCake uses the same anonymizer located in Norway that's also blocklisted for hackers, spyware, botnets, etc., and currently has eight spam hosts.
 
Orphaned at Birth is almost certainly the same guy who created Fair is Fair, TruthBTold2, and several other alts as they share the same ISP and even the same servers. Unlike the Norway anonymizer person, who could still be the same (all these trolls look alike...), they are using servers that have from 19 to 34 spam hosts.
 
As creating Alts is against the terms of service, they will be removed.
 
FWIW in defense of Irvin, he is NOT one of these people. I do think he may be the drummer guy who hates me too, but I'm not sure. 
 
What's most unfortunate isn't their attacking me; I have a track record and I stand by it. What's really unfortunate is that people who are actually intelligent and want to engage in a dialog, like cparmerlee, are being drowned out by a bunch of attention whores who clearly have nothing better to do with their lives than do what is basically a low-grade denial of service attack.

irvin
At least, that's what Anderton says, flatly contradicting his bosses at Cakewalk, their own press releases and even the LANDR people themselves.

 
Wrong thing #1: Cakewalk are not my bosses. I'm not even on their payroll. 
Wrong thing #2: LANDR's own press releases and promotional materials say they are not about replacing professional mastering engineers, but complementing them.
 
Try this site for additional assistance.

Orphaned at Birth
It was also either this thread or the other that someone said something like "get used to it, Studio One and Bitwig are next" meaning next to get LandR.

I was the one who said that, based on this quote from MusicRadar about LANDR:
 
"There's a further bonus for users of Studio One 3 and Bitwig Studio: these DAWs will integrate with LANDR (supposedly seamlessly) for instant mastering of finished tracks. Integration with INgrooves, TuneCore and CD Baby is also on the agenda."
 
Here's a link to the story. I couldn't find anything to the contrary that's more recent, but it's very possible there is updated information.