Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Automatic mastering program

Oxborg

Oxborg

Member
Hey!

I'm one of those that hates mastering a track and I am not particularly good at it, though I do recognize that it is needed. I went on to try the mastering tool that Soundcloud had to offer (the one created by Dolby, I believe). I was very happy with the results and even though it is perhaps not as good as a professional, it is still good enough.

I'm wondering if there are any similair mastering programs that you can buy without having to pay Soundcloud everytime you want to master a mix. I would be happy to pay a one-time-fee if I could just master my tracks whenever I feel like it without spending a fortune on it.

Does these type of mastering tools exist?
Click to read more...
 
Lots of online tools had come over the last month/years but what scares me off that they nearly all are subscription based :sad:
 
The only fully automatic mastering plugin I've come across is this...
www.exonicuk.com

AI MASTER | Exonic UK

Fully Automatic Mastering Processor
www.exonicuk.com www.exonicuk.com
Initial feedback on the Gearspace (formerly Gearslutz) site seemed to be pretty positive. I did try it out but, personally, I prefer more control over my masters and do it myself. I'm no expert by any means but with a few top notch plugins, I can get consistently good results.
 
I would like to know what the programs do with the AI. Not only hear it marketed that it sounds good, but a more comprehensive explanation of tech used and its effects. Can we trust them, that they really analyse? To some degree, but what else is happening? Shouldnt we be asking this.

Ozone does mastering too. I put in a Landr mastered track in Ozone and Ozone cut it at the same dynamic EQ areas as it seems to always cut. Maybe they have programmed it to always cut in same place. Has ayone tried to put an Ozone mastered track back in Ozone, and seeif it keeps throwing dynamic eq on it again.

Maybe try one day.
 
Oxborg said:
Does these type of mastering tools exist?
Click to expand...
Ozone does the mastering. Also, there was one european software you could buy for this, oh, forgot the name.

But you know, the engineer takes about 50-120 'EUR, and Landr does it for 7EUR. The engineer is not happy when you throw in a new version and ask price, but the AI does not have emotions, which is good. Wouldnt call that 7-9 EUR expensive, but wish there was more transparency what the AI actually does.

Have you checked if online masterings have yearly subsriptions, some of them probably have.
 
PeterN said:
Ozone does the mastering. Also, there was one european software you could buy for this, oh, forgot the name.

But you know, the engineer takes about 50-120 'EUR, and Landr does it for 7EUR. The engineer is not happy when you throw in a new version and ask price, but the AI does not have emotions, which is good. Wouldnt call that 7-9 EUR expensive, but wish there was more transparency what the AI actually does.

Have you checked if online masterings have yearly subsriptions, some of them probably have.
Click to expand...
Have you tried Ozone? Is it any good to look into and is it expensive?The only one I have looked into is the one from Soundcloud/Dolby but it has a fee everytime you use it. If you have a subscription it is cheaper but still cost. However, the mastering was well made. It masters your track 4 times in different ways nad you pick one of these that suits the tracks the best.
 
Oxborg said:
Have you tried Ozone? Is it any good to look into and is it expensive?The only one I have looked into is the one from Soundcloud/Dolby but it has a fee everytime you use it. If you have a subscription it is cheaper but still cost. However, the mastering was well made. It masters your track 4 times in different ways nad you pick one of these that suits the tracks the best.
Click to expand...
Yea, I got Ozone 8. Standard I think its called, one prior Advanced, cost was on sale around 120 USD. Or something like that.

If you make music, say EDM, that keeps a similar style, I assume its ok. It analyses a few seconds and make all choices on that. Theres cheaper versions of it too, and they often do sales. Its a decent investment for EDMetc. style music.

If you make music with plenty dynamic range etc, I dont know. I dont trust this stuff completely, until theres more transparency, when I was young I worked as a chef. We could sell cod as snapper and have wrong sauce too. Everything went smooth. When you see businesses from inside, you get more suspicious.

I might try Soundcloud. Currently using Landr, after I dished the mastering engineer, its pretty ok. Mr.Landr is all cool when I send new version.

Is Soundcloud transparent on what its mastering does? I doubt it, but will check. Hope they are. That would be something.
 
I t
Oxborg said:
Have you tried Ozone? Is it any good to look into and is it expensive?The only one I have looked into is the one from Soundcloud/Dolby but it has a fee everytime you use it. If you have a subscription it is cheaper but still cost. However, the mastering was well made. It masters your track 4 times in different ways nad you pick one of these that suits the tracks the best.
Click to expand...
I tied the Soundcloud one. Hey, that sounded good. I suspect its better than what Ozone can do. Maybe change from Landr mastering to Soundcloud.

Would be great to hear other peoples experiences.
 
Ozone is pretty standard. You’ll find that a lot of people hear use that. Me included.

It does the job, theres an AI called mastering assistant which will suggest EQ, compression and limiting levels. Which you then can adjust to taste. As well as a couple of other useful plugins. I would definitely recommend it.
 
PeterN said:
I t

I tied the Soundcloud one. Hey, that sounded good. I suspect its better than what Ozone can do. Maybe change from Landr mastering to Soundcloud.

Would be great to hear other peoples experiences.
Click to expand...
vaguely transparent I would call it, but I am actually really satisfied with Soundcloud, I just wish that I could master tracks without paying for it every time. My tracks here is mastered by Soundcloud, I believe i picked the 'second' option for all of them.

I might try Landr to see how they work it out.
 
I thought this blind shootout of different services was interesting.


They all had soundcloud at the bottom, human at the top. They all had Landr at the top of the ai list more or less. Ozone wasn't much above Soundcloud. It's all subjective, but interesting that all 3 had landr toward the top and everyone had Soundcloud near the bottom.

I use Ozone and some 3rd party plugins on my chain but I think I'll compare my results to soundcloud for kicks.
 
Heres just a summary after checking Landr compared to Soundcloud.

Soundcloud puts in a lot more bass and theres more high end enhancement with Soundcloud. Also more compression. Maybe its more "pro sound", but that bass almost crosses the line. Maybe on Soundclopud something like Gullfoss there too, which means you probably want to be careful with it when mixing. Vote goes for Souncloud mastering, but that bass almost gets a minus.
 
Macrawn said:
I thought this blind shootout of different services was interesting.


They all had soundcloud at the bottom, human at the top. They all had Landr at the top of the ai list more or less. Ozone wasn't much above Soundcloud. It's all subjective, but interesting that all 3 had landr toward the top and everyone had Soundcloud near the bottom.

I use Ozone and some 3rd party plugins on my chain but I think I'll compare my results to soundcloud for kicks.
Click to expand...

The mastering engineers have a business interest against AI. I watched Streaky say on youtube, the AI doesnt really compete with him - oh man, it sure does. You bet it does affect your business. Saying that it doesnt is part of the camouflage. That being said, hope the AI dont throw engineers out of business.
 
There is always the question of what the individual understands by "mastering".
For most people it means "making it as loud and fat as possible". When it comes to correcting mix errors, correcting stereo things, "cleaning up" somewhere specific, etc. then many tools and online services are no longer so good. Then the genre also plays a role. If I have a classical solo singer accompanied by harpsichord mastered through OZONE, you can tell that Ozone wasn't designed for that kind of stuff. It looks better with pop and rock. Here and there the dynamic EQ intervenes, minimally a compressor is set, an EQ balances a bit the frequencies it seems to be missing... But above all it is always louder after those auto-mastering tools - and louder is always better...;).
I would favor those tools and online services where you can at least specify the genre or enter a master track that the tool then follows.

So if you want to have your track mastered "automatically", then it is certainly worthwhile to let different tools do it. Finally you have at least the choice to take that result, which is most sympathetic to you.

There are also some videos on YouTube about such experiments "Autom. against Humanmastering", or "automastering comparisons".

Beat
 
Of course the mastering engineers will say AI sucks. We need to see vids from consumers, not only engineers. They have a hell a lot to protect here, ie their work and investment.
 
Last edited:
I looked into Ozone and it looks like exactly what I'm looking for. Can you guys tell me which version you recommend? Elements, Standard or Advanced?
 
Oxborg said:
I looked into Ozone and it looks like exactly what I'm looking for. Can you guys tell me which version you recommend? Elements, Standard or Advanced?
Click to expand...
Elements is pretty stripped down. I went straight to Advanced from Elements because I got a good deal. Standard probably would be enough for me.
Here is a comparison table: https://www.izotope.com/en/products/ozone/features.html

You're a little too late. Last month they were giving away elements for free.
 
PeterN said:
Of course the mastering engineers will say AI sucks. We need to see vids from consumers, not only engineers. They have a hell a lot to protect here, ie their work and investment. Probably wife too.
Click to expand...
Well, I'm not a mastering engineer but I'm critical of all automatic audio effects to begin with. That's why I just gave it a try. I always record a "hall recording" with my sound recordings. There you can hear especially well how hall modes sound, which frequencies a hall prefers from the music. These frequencies do not have to be particularly visible in the analyzer. But for our hearing it sounds like in a pot or just in a certain room. To anticipate: Ozone was not able to find these frequencies at all...

Listen: Original_Ozone_Kaufmann
My version seems to be missing something (at first). In fact, it is the pot sound around 120-150 Hz. If you filter it out, the recording suddenly seems more transparent, brighter.

For me, mastering starts with an analysis of levels L/R, frequencies, bass, stereo stuff, transparency, overemphasis, audibility of what's important, etc. The goal is to get the most out of the mix so that the music sounds good on as many listens as possible.
This is followed by working through the list with the negativ points and then followed by comparing the piece with references if possible and finally setting the right volume.

As I said, mastering is not the same for everyone...
 
Last edited:
Beat Kaufmann said:
mastering starts with an analysis of levels L/R, frequencies, bass, stereo stuff, transparency, overemphasis, audibility of what's important, etc. The goal is to get the most out of the mix so that the music sounds good on as many listens as possible.
Click to expand...
This x 10000. This is exactly what mastering is about, and it's something you can't get with the automated software. Especially the more complex your material is or the more it has something else than pre-mixed samples from the latest superprocessed loop library.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom