Finally, AI Mastering That Doesn’t Suck! (Wez Clarke AI)

[@spinlightstudios]

Hey Legends! Use the code BF25 and get 25% off the Unlimited Pro tier. masterchannel.ai/wezclarke

[@alemarrena8792]

From what I hear, the Wez Clarke curve is darker and more suited to styles that fit the darker genre. Which is not normally the case of rock based / guitar based songs. This style needs the high mids of the guitars, otherwise you kill the song energy. But the songs that fit his mastering style really get a big shine. He should release other versions of this service for different styles. One algorithm fits all will never ever work for mastering.

[@spinlightstudios]

I feel what you are saying. I think the mastering on the first song suited it the best, as it was a bit more of a vibey track. Overall it’s decent if you want a master that will thicken up your mix. If you want bright and crisp, might not be right for it.

[@alemarrena8792]

i tested the service on a song. Then I imported the song to the DAW (both the mastered one and the source) and applied Ozone on the source and compared both. The mastered version is virtually identical to the source version mastered with Ozone with the Pop preset. It might be a coincidence, it might be they are using Ozone's curve as inspiration. It also might be they are effectively using Ozone, maybe with a few other tools. But the important thing is you can achieve virtually the same results with Ozone and calibrating it a bit. In a research (blind test) done recently with many professional mastering engineers Ozone beat every mastering AI service in the engineers' opinions. But it lost to all versions mastered by professional mastering engineers.

[@rome8180]

There's such a weird and fraught conversation around AI. I honestly don't know where I stand. On the one hand, if big mastering engineers feed their skills through AI, aren't they putting the budget mastering engineers out of work? On the other hand, anyone who uses an AI mastering engineer probably wasn't willing to pay much for mastering in the first place. But beginning mastering engineers still need to get their foot in the door somehow. And if AI can supposedly replicate a "Grammy winning mastering engineer," a lot of pay are going to just use that rather than pay a relatively inexperienced mastering engineer $50 a song. As a songwriter first and foremost, I do appreciate anything that will help other songwriters without a big budget put out a product. However, if those people are mixing their own work, I really think they'd be served by learning how to master as well. It really gives you a new perspective on mixing, imo. There are certain objective things like overall tonal balance and transient control that, if you bake them into your mix early, can make mastering a very minimal process. Anyway, I try not to have a kneejerk reaction to new tech. I think the only time I dislike it is when it cuts into human expression or limits creativity. I see that sometimes with people's over-reliance on tuning, quantizing, and samples, for example. Everything can be used well in the right circumstances though.

[@spinlightstudios]

Yeah it is a tricky subject - I look at this way, the people who want to use online mastering were probably never going to pay for a professional mastering engineer so it probably doesn’t effect the work mastering engineers are receiving. People who spend money to record at a studio and use a mixing engineer probably won’t cut corners and master their track on a web based mastering service. They’ll pay for a pro. Online mastering has been around for a long time, there is just more option now, and it’s improving. I don’t think it’s going to put too many people out of business yet. But I agree budding engineers/producers should be learning to master tracks too, they’ll only get back by expanding their skills.

[@FreerunnerDave]

This original is gonna be huge!!! Been waiting for the album for far too long!!!

[@spinlightstudios]

Oh man.. thanks! I need to just release this album! Haha there is one song I wanted to fix the mix on… but I also don’t want to look at it cause I got so over it 🤣

[@chukarec]

this sounds even better that what ozone would do lol

[@spinlightstudios]

It like the opposite, ozone 11 makes Everything really crispy, this smooths and warmth’s things up. I suppose it depends what the track needs though!

[@chukarec]

@ problem ive been having with ozone 11 is that it still makes the song loud enough that sounds really good, but, if i upload it to a streaming platform it will lose at least from 4 to 6 db :/

[@garethde-witt6433]

😂😂😂 had to check out the artists that you mentioned, not surprisingly I have heard of non of them or Wez. Nothing special with the mixes or the artists, just the usual suspects. Obviously winning a Grammy is not that special if that’s the standard. Which doesn’t say much the Ai algorithm, like most Ai things they just don’t seem to cut it. To be honest I don’t hear much of a difference between the mix and the master with the level matching, I still wouldn’t waste money on it. But I don’t get my music mixed or and mastered to send to streaming services, I still get CD’s it’s just better quality and I can actually make some money selling them at gigs.

[@spinlightstudios]

There are so many artists out there… I haven’t heard of most either. But I’m also not listening to main stream music often these days 😝 Out of a bunch of online mastering ive tested though I think this one sounds decent. It’s obviously not for everyone, but I’m sure plenty of people will find use for it.

[@garethde-witt6433]

@@spinlightstudiosI might have a look out curiosity but I don’t think it’s something I would spent money on.

[@MatthiasLindemann-hp2zr]

It sounds reasonable for the money you pay, but it will never be as good as if a real person did it. With A.I. Mastering it always sounds a bit flat and artificial and sometimes a bit harsh, it lacks the magic, that famous something, and only a real person can do that.