I’ve had so many people asking me what I thought of the new LANDR automated online mastering service, that I decided I just had to check it out !
LANDR offers “Professional Audio Mastering”, saying you can “Sound like a pro. Instant results at a fraction of the cost of studio mastering.”
But is it any good ?
The system uses “artificial intelligence”, according to the About page:
MixGenius incubated and refined algorithms developed over eight years of university research, testing and tweaking based on feedback from trained audio experts. 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.
All of which sounds impressive – but the bottom line is that they’re saying they can replace a bespoke, skilled process, undertaken by an experienced, empathetic engineer, with a drag-and-drop robotic algorithm.
Bold claims ! They also mention their “resident astrophysicist” several times, in reply to which I have to reply:
Mastering isn’t rocket science atrosphysics
But how does it sound ?
In this video I compare a song I mastered myself with the results LANDR gives, including testing their different “intensity” settings (that’s “loudness”, to the rest of us).
I found the results surprising, interesting, impressive, disappointing and down-right worrying !
Take a listen to hear the comparison yourself, and make your own mind up whether LANDR is worth trying.
And please tell me what you think in the comments !
Featured song: “Choices” by Project DIVIDE
Great review! I agree with you about the low intensity. THE HUMAN TOUCH MAKES THE DIFFERENCE. BTW… I believe it is pronounced “L and R”. I was pronouncing it the same way you were until I went to the website. Then it made sense… oh! L… and… R… like in stereo. lol. Thanks for you review!
Ian, you sure are a generous and gracious critic. Thank you for this video as it gives us all a stronger argument for professional mastering.
This song sample was hardly fair to you, as you gave LANDR a song that was mixed properly. As you know, there are times when it is necessary to ask the producer to go back to his mix and adjust something. How does LANDR handle that?
Since I use the same Wavelab program, I find the true peak meter to be indispensable and feel that LANDR failed by not programming this into their algorithm. This alone, makes every master unacceptable.
Mastering, in my opinion, makes the song more of what it already is, meaning it’s designed to bring out ‘everything’, flaws and all. With a Mastering engineer, these flaws can be addressed and corrected in the mastering process. With LANDR, you get to hear them loud, louder or even louder.
Great video.
Albert
Toronto Canada
Hi,Ian! Busta Speeker from Bear Bones Productions across the pond in Idahodia here. I just felt compelled to tell you how much I agree with your assessment of “Robo-Mastering”. I feel that your master SMOKES even the low-intensity LANDR version, and the other two are incredibly laughable. The difference in the kick drum was the first thing I noticed: yours has definition w/ the perfect amount of beater slap/click/whatever you wanna call it, and the low end is big and round w/o being corpulent in the least. I call that combo the “slap the wet pillow effect”. The kick in even the LANDR low-intensity version is just rotund, sloppy and distracting. Then the distortion rears its ugly, yet apparently de riguer pointy little head. I give LANDR a huge failing grade. While the low-intensity choice is somewhat usable, it has no emotional impact, something yours has in spades (the same smiley-face EQ that ruins electric guitar tones too, mebbe?). That is precisely why a competent human is still the only option, in my opinion, also. Unfortunately, the Reverbnation punkass-types that “know everything already” are gonna flock to it, to their cookie-cutter detriment. Great job for making the differences glaringly obvious. I will save this and play it for any of my sitting-on-the-fence clients in the future. THANX! Busta @ bearbonesproductions.net
Just been testing it out on several songs – in the preview they sounded ok, but the downloaded version was pretty bad when listened to all the way through – pretty dead and lifeless.
all very ‘meh’
Thanks all, glad you liked it !
@Javier – “L and R” – oops ! Thanks 🙂
Haven’t got to the full vid yet, But what about those of us with little mastering skill and zero budget?
Would this service dramatically improve no master at all at very low cost?
Just a remark, but was your dither engaged (wavelab has been quite a while for me) during the test session?
That could also explain the peaks, but i’m unsure that it was on.
Alex
Hi Ian – thanks for your video, there simply is NO comparison! Your master ROCKS in all aspects: energy; loudness; dynamic range; clarity; warmth and overall heart and soul compared to any of the LANDR masters.
The LANDR masters kinda reminded me of the old hardware mastering ‘aii in one’ type processors from the 90’s (like The Finaliser) set on a basic Mastering preset.
Sausage factory type mastering.
I guess it would be interesting to try various types of material with LANDR as maybe it does a reasonable job on certain types of music?
That said I dont think pro mastering engineers need feel threatened for quite a while:-)
Cheers.
@ Brendan, That depends entirely on the original mix. In this case for example, personally I would prefer the original mix with a gentle lift over the LANDR versions. But other, more “challenged” mixes might benefit. I would say it stands a fair chance of making some improvement, not a dramatic one, based on the songs I’ve tried.
@ Alexander, yes dither was on, I always use it. It couldn’t cause ISPs that large though, either on or off.
@ Bruce, Glad you liked it 🙂 I’ve had similar results in pretty much every genre I’ve tried, so far…
#1, thanks for those who have complimented the song and the mix. I really appreciate that as the mixing engineer, and 1/2 of the band. It’s very flattering, as I look at this mix as an advancement in my abilities. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for that.
#2, before Ian had the track I ran it through LANDR. I couldn’t stand listening to it. It sounded too hard, with no subtleties. It was ear fatiguing. The dynamics that I put into the mix had been destroyed. I hated it. While Ian didn’t do the master on the commercial release, the fact that Ian took it upon himself to do a master on his own of one of my mixes was flattering enough. To have it stacked against the LANDR masters was very eye opening.
I think this service would be good for 1 thing or another. For example, if you just need to put a polish on a youtube video of a live performance on an acoustic guitar, and you just would rather upload it and move on to other tasks while it does its thing. In that scenario, I could see using this. But in anything that I’m going to actually release commercially, LANDR doesn’t compete with a person. Hands down.
Really great video.
Do you think with added customization that in time LANDR might get ‘closer’ to the human mastering experience, it will never be as good but it could add significant improvements?
I think their main strength is the price point as most new/up and coming musicians simply can’t afford to ‘master’ all their tracks professionally and this offers a much cheaper ‘auto correct’ alternative but with a sacrifice in quality. Its certainly a useful tool when preparing demos for labels or e.g soundcloud.
I imagine it also responds much better to a good mixdown whereas mastering engineers can troubleshoot bad mixdowns with much more flexibility than machines.
Thanks for the video and for your website. I learned something about myself. I liked LANDR’s low intensity version of that song, until you compared it to your master! I see now that I need to bring up the midrange just a little to lift the vocals in my masters. I’m teaching myself how mix and master music. I will be taking your Home Mastering Course the next time it becomes available. Human touch is the only way to go! Keep up the good fight!! Take Care.
Well, I tried out for free LANDR, because I was so curious what can a machine do instead of me. Uploaded a track I know very well. The result surprised me, but in the other way: even 10 years ago using T-Racks I did better masters. My master I did on this track with Izotope 5 is way better. Somebody compared it with Finalizer, well Finalizer gives at least life to the sound, but this is clear digital sound. No space, no loudness (tapping to Ian’s sensitive point 😀 unfortunately, I work for an environment where loudness is a big MUST). LANDR does not let me to create an account, email field is not working… and without letting me to its settings I will not subscribe. So, first (and free) impressions are disappointing.
Tech and profit vs art? Ha! Seeing high quality musicians perform clarifies that there is no contest – art comes first, tech supports and enables it, money is irrelevant.
http://www.techrepublic.com/article/artificial-intelligence-invades-music-embracing-the-tech-and-staying-human/?tag=nl.e101&s_cid=e101&ttag=e101&ftag=TRE684d531
If you’re just a hobbyist, and really don’t plan on doing anything “commercial” with your music, the LANDR process is fine.
However, mastering is not nearly as expensive as a lot of novices seem to imagine, and if you want to be taken seriously in the industry, you’ll do what the big boys do.
Firstly I think the levels you send the original track are important so you leave enough headroom so that the masters aren’t distorting as they are in this video. It may also be more attuned to electronic music rather than this heavy rock tune..not sure. I sent a track..just a track I hadn’t mastered and it arrived back in mp3 format…free. And it sounded bloody great..and I did not work. I guess if you used landr for a while you’d know who to mix the tracks and present them for mastering…ok mastering is an artform we all either love or hate. But mastering your own work has and never will be a good idea..so for me Landr is a xmas present come early..cheers
I’ve been thinking about this service since you posted this blog and I do think there are three ways it could be useful.
The first two scenarios assume that you don’t know or don’t trust your ability to master. If you can, then you’d be an idiot to not do that. The third is just time management.
1. If you’re not a person who releases “albums” but rather uses what David Hooper calls the “drip method” of releasing material, then this could be a low-cost alternative to professional mastering (I think this is the model LandR is set up for). I’m talking about folks who are release work through Patreon and the like. Hoopers “drip method” suggests taking the best of the tracks you’ve released in the course of a year and making your “album” out of those. At that point, you’d hire someone to master it.
2. If, like me, you’re still learning how mastering effects mixes, this could be useful. Several of the comments above mentioned remixing the song first. Maybe that time-consuming and costly step can be saved by doing a “quick and dirty” master via LandR? It’s a suggestion, I don’t actually know if I’m right. But I can tell you every time I hear the mastered version of something I’ve mixed, I hear something I’d change.
3. If you’re a professional workaday studio it’s likely that your bread and butter does not come from your own projects, nor the few brilliant people who pass through your doorway. It comes from talentless jackalopes and well-funded amateurs who need to be reminded to tune between takes and never understand why you think your Gretsch drum set sounds better than their First Act one. These guys are terrible, but they keep the lights on. And they’re never going to get the subtle genius of a proper master (tho’ in their defence it is an acquired skill). So why not squish the shit out of it and make it louder? They’ll be happy, and therefore done sooner, meaning you’ll be happy too.
Again just some thoughts. Tho’ I’ve produced four CDs for myself and others, and am working on a 5th, I’m still very much a n00b.
Very fair review, Ian; I agree completely with everything you said. I have very little budget and no designs of releasing anything professionally. The low intensity version of landr I must say (and I make electronic music),is all I need to add a little polish to the stuff I put out on my youtube channel. In my opinion, it’s better than no “mastering” at all and certainly better than me fumbling with a bunch of controls that I’m probably not qualified at this time to use. Cheers.
I’m very dissapointed with the so called mastered mixes from LandR,for many reasons that you all mentioned.Luckily for me ,but not for my friend, I was about to put an album out of mastered tracks by LandR for distrubution around the various downloading bays around the world including Itunes, Amazon ect.However he told me that when he tried doing so, he was informed that he could put it out through Itunes,and in fact the whole process became really stressful for him. He , like myself,are not at all happy with the finished product.Therefore what I plan to do now, is to put the album I was planning to put out through tunecore unmastered as it actually sounds better than tha LandR mastering and the sounds are more evenly balanced than LandRs efforts.However the question that I would like to ask, is can I use a Landr mastered track to add it with the unmastered WAV tracks that I was going to put up for distribution on Tunecore,does that matter that there is a loose so called mastered track amoungst the Unmastered ones,is this likely to be a problem/
Tony, I respectfully urge you not to put unfinished work out into the public. It appears to me that you seem to think that Mastering is an option. It certainly is not. First impressions are lasting impressions.
There is a very experienced Mastering engineer that you have at your ready; his name is Ian…somebody…oh yes…Ian Shepherd. I’m sure he’ll have a better solution for you.