There is a new online mastering service, which goes by the
name of Landr and provides remote, (instant)
mastering services free of charge. That’s right “free” but only for 192 kbps
MP3s. If you want uncompressed wav files you will have to dish out $9-$19 per
month, still not a bad deal if these services are what they say. It is true
that mastering is critical to achieving that “polished” sound, but the reality
is that it can be an expensive undertaking for independent artists. Just think
about how much that an artist has already spent on production, recording and
mixing. By the time a project reaches the mastering phase the budget has been
depleted.
MixGenius claims that
more than 8 years of research went into the algorithms utilized to master the
audio. The website goes on to say, “Our team is composed of music industry
veterans - award winning mixing engineers, top-level DSP programmers,
musicians, producers and label owners - who know exactly what the mastering
process needs to deliver.” With that amount of brainpower and resources, my
expectations that this might actually work increased significantly.
I read mostly cynical and negative comments in audio forums
with a few positive remarks sprinkled in. Most of the doubt was based on the
A.I. and the fact that it was attempting to emulate human decision making on
something as subjective as music. I
decided to try the service for myself. First I tried the free service and
uploaded a song that I had mixed which was a blend of hip hop and reggae. The
initial results of the 192 kbps MP3 was less than great. The loudness it
provided does indeed compete with industry releases but the quality of the
compression at 192 was not the very good. Even with the less than ideal quality
of the mp3, it showed enough potential for me to dig further into their premium
services. I tried the $9 per month “amateur” service, which allows 4
uncompressed wav masters. The result of receiving wav files verses the 192 kbps
mp3 was night and day. The low end was tamed a bit and the premium services
gave you the option to pick the level of compression. Low, Medium, and High.
The low setting was the most musical and dynamic, but lacked the loudness to
compete with mainstream releases. The High setting was very competitive with
industry loudness standards but lacked musicality and dynamic range. My
favorite setting was the medium, which gave you a little bit of both.
In my opinion, Landr might not be the ideal mastering
situation for the independent artists, but it can work with specific genres
especially if you are trying to compete with industry “loudness.” I can see
these types of A.I. mastering services getting relatively better in the coming
years. Another application that producers and mix engineers may take advantage
of is using Landr to expose potential problems in the mix.
