Wrong Thread

I know I'm just learning my craft, and the cheeseburger analogy with the Seinfeld/Kramer reference that I made in an earlier post was probably lost on evryone.
 
But I will say this.  Everything I read about mastering says that a good master is dependent on a good mix.  Also. everything I read about a good mix says that mixing is "subjective."  I have also heard it said that mastering is subjective.  Then, folks keep talking about using reference mixes, and folks who master say that they like it when an artist tells them which CD, or other artist, they would like to sound like.  Then Jimmy alludes that LANDR is genre dependent So what in the heck are we talking about?
 
So, I'm not averse to LANDR. I do want to be able to install it or not, which Bapu has shown there are ways to avoid installing it in CCC.  If people want to use it, and they get a good result, fine.  If a pro uses it for a down and dirty rough master, fine.  Will it ever replace a pro mastering engineer, maybe in the future, but robots will eventually replace everyone.  I remember Bit saying that a plugin will never replace good old hands on wave editing, and where the technology is right now, I have to agree with him.
 
For me, I choose to practice mixing and mastering, and to get better at it using my ears.  But it's all subjective right?
 
LANDR is not good or bad in essence, at least in my opinion.   So there, I'm done...another use of bandwidth in the cacophony of the LANDR thread.
 
Jesse Q. Screed
 
"nature does not hurry, yet all is accomplished"

Laura (skinnybones lampshade),
Pedal Faster is a fantastic song in so many ways. If LANDR aided the final product, I'm sold. Thank you for sharing.

It doesn't matter what was what.   What matters if LANDR sounds good or not and LANDR sounds good. I use it all the time and have used all settings at one time or another and it sounds better than some mastering engineers I have used for 10x the cost.

Thank you very much, Scott, Jerry and Ludlow for your kind words and for your encouragement. You really made my day!
LJ

JoseC.

jb101
Don't worry, Steve, he is back again, with yet another alternate login.

He'll pop in here soon, no doubt.

At first I had read "He'll poop in here soon"...

Seems to describe the contributions so far.

Wow stxx, you went all out.

I must say, I've been enjoying the ease of Landr. It is a little habit forming.

Here's an example of one of my original songs that I have done a LANDR conversion on ...
 
FWIW, I'm very happy with the LANDR conversion that took place on my song . I used the same mix for both files.
( a 24 bit undithered wave / mix )
 
The non LANDR version of my song was uploaded as an MP3 at 192 a number of years ago .
 
All seems fair right ?
 
LANDR low MP3 at 192
 
https://soundcloud.com/gu...friend-to-me-landr-low
 
non LANDR
 
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page_songInfo.cfm?bandID=427899&songID=3313414
 
all the best ,
 
Kenny

Anderton

Paul P

gswitz
I must say, I've been enjoying the ease of Landr. It is a little habit forming.

Too easy maybe ?  Aren't we running the risk of homogenizing everything ?  It's a bit like sample libraries.  If everyone uses the same samples, we all end up sounding the same.

I too have recognized the sound of Reason drum patterns in car commercials . However I'm not sure mastering is the same thing, because samples are recognizable, whereas a particular approach to mastering probably isn't. 
 
Then again, it's only because there has been a certain "standardization" of sound that something like LANDR is even possible. There are standards for dynamic range, so presumably, LANDR abides by those standards. As to EQ, the "smile" curve has been a fact of life for decades, and it probably isn't going to go away any time soon.
 
It's really interesting to play original CDs from the 80s, the 90s, and today. The "style" of mastering has changed a lot over the years. It's almost like Low = 80s, Medium = 90s, High = 2000s.

paul I hear what your saying. for many years ive had debates with other musicians about sample librarys and are they actual musicians or armchair producers <<<--that one seems to blow up a lot of smoke and get people going   truth is, yes they are musicians.
but I agree with Craig where a sample and a mixing application are really 2 different things.
ive saved my thoughts on Landr because I don't think its worth adding to the discussions here as it seems to be a very sensitive one at that.
all I can say is i think some are getting a little carried away. (i love the passion don't get me wrong)
but if i need a pro master, i will still pay an engineer to master it for me.
but with that also being said, i think Landr does a pretty good job for what it does.
heres the thing/ = its another option.
and we could all use more options in sonar, in life...in general.
some of us will make the choice to use it, some of us wont.
either way, its all good. we are still musicians

kennywtelejazz
Here's an example of one of my original songs that I have done a LANDR conversion on ...
 
FWIW, I'm very happy with the LANDR conversion that took place on my song . I used the same mix for both files.
( a 24 bit undithered wave / mix )
 
The non LANDR version of my song was uploaded as an MP3 at 192 a number of years ago .
 
All seems fair right ?
 
LANDR low MP3 at 192
 
https://soundcloud.com/gu...friend-to-me-landr-low
 
non LANDR
 
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page_songInfo.cfm?bandID=427899&songID=3313414
 
all the best ,
 
Kenny

Hey Kenny, maybe you could further the debate on this topic. 
 
There are several Mastering Templates in the Sonar Start Screen.  I think they were set up by Dan Gonzales?  I have tried them, and they are very interesting. 
 
Do you suppose you could run your file through one of those?   I would bet you might find one just as good as LANDR.
 
I think everybody should try them out.  I mean if you're going to try LANDR, why not try what's already included, and it's FREE, plus, you can actually make a few tweaks yourself.
 
Scroll to page 10 in the ezine
 
http://static.cakewalk.com/cakewalk/products/sonar/release_notes/Welcome_to_the_SONAR_Hokpinton_Update.pdf
 
Jesse Q. Screed
 

tenfoot

Jesse Screed
 
There are several Mastering Templates in the Sonar Start Screen.  I think they were set up by Dan Gonzales?  I have tried them, and they are very interesting. 
 
Do you suppose you could run your file through one of those?   I would bet you might find one just as good as LANDR.

Hey Jesse.  I think this test is essentially flawed.  Finding a preset that sounds as good as Landr after the event is a bit like saying you could invent the hovercar if only you had one to copy from.  The point is that LANDR made it sound good without reference.  
 
A more significant test would be to do your own master in the Sonar presets first,  then send the original file to Landr for mastering and see which sounds better. 

Quite possibly, but I'm not sure.
 
If you have a mix you like.  Render it to a 2 track .wav file, and import it back into Sonar using one of the Mastering Templates. 
 
Have you tried it?
 
Jesse Q. Screed

Jesse Screed

kennywtelejazz
Here's an example of one of my original songs that I have done a LANDR conversion on ...
 
FWIW, I'm very happy with the LANDR conversion that took place on my song . I used the same mix for both files.
( a 24 bit undithered wave / mix )
 
The non LANDR version of my song was uploaded as an MP3 at 192 a number of years ago .
 
All seems fair right ?
 
LANDR low MP3 at 192
 
https://soundcloud.com/gu...friend-to-me-landr-low
 
non LANDR
 
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page_songInfo.cfm?bandID=427899&songID=3313414
 
all the best ,
 
Kenny

Hey Kenny, maybe you could further the debate on this topic. 
 
There are several Mastering Templates in the Sonar Start Screen.  I think they were set up by Dan Gonzales?  I have tried them, and they are very interesting. 
 
Do you suppose you could run your file through one of those?   I would bet you might find one just as good as LANDR.
 
I think everybody should try them out.  I mean if you're going to try LANDR, why not try what's already included, and it's FREE, plus, you can actually make a few tweaks yourself.
 
Scroll to page 10 in the ezine
 
http://static.cakewalk.com/cakewalk/products/sonar/release_notes/Welcome_to_the_SONAR_Hokpinton_Update.pdf
 
Jesse Q. Screed
 

Hello Jesse ,
This may actually come as a surprise to a few folks around here ,  
I'm not here to debate .  I'm here to be happy .
My song was posted as a courtesy ...
How did that come to be ?
Earlier today I had received a new mix on a Jazz song that I had played on as an E Session Guitarist ... 
While I was hunting around on an external HD I happened to find my song .
It occurred to me that my song would be a nice song to try LANDR on . I'm glad I did  
Basically since there was the same mix (pre LANDR ) floating around on Soundclick , I thought it would be a good idea to give anyone who can " tolerate " my music lol , & my guitar playing the opportunity to come to their own conclusions ...
As mentioned before  ...... I posted my song in this thread only as a courtesy ...
 
It may interest you to know that I happen to think very highly of the mastering templates that come with SONAR SPlat .  I have used them on tunes that I have been working on ....
I have also created my own Mastering Effects chains w Cakewalk Plugs only and with 3 rd party plugs ...
I haven't posted any music with them online as of yet . The Music I'm working on currently is not even close to being ready for prime time ...
 
I'm gonna have to pass for now on getting volunteered ...I'm sure someone here with a lot more mixing and Mastering credibility will eventually step up  to the plate .
The only claim to anything musical that I'm proud of is my guitar playing . 
 
all the best ,
 
Kenny
 
 
 

stxx
Also, I get to do them over and over if I choose where as once I pay the small fortune to the mastering engineer and I decide on a change later... its another large expense. 

A non-LANDR comment...my policy was always that the job wasn't finished until the customer was happy with the results. There were no extra charges for changes. Most of the time they were happy with the results, quite a few times I needed to go back and forth a couple times, and there were some rare instances where it took 6 or 7 tries before they had what they wanted. I've known other mastering engineers who took a similar approach.
 
The reason why is as I've said before, there's more than one way to master a recording, and it often comes down to personal taste. You can think you know an artist's vision, and even be right most of the time, but you won't be right all the time.
 
 

I agree with that philosophy and I work on the mix normally until my client is happy (within reason of course) but sometimes when you're using a third party mastering person, you only get 2 maybe 3 iterations at most and usually must be within a reasonable time period to when the service was initially secured.   I can't, say 2 weeks from now,  go back and say, "Hey, I decided to change the mix, can you master it again for me?"   That would be additional cost for sure even though as the recording / mix engineer I WOULD make the change likely for free for my client if they decided after some maybe slightly unreasonable  period of time something was really bugging them