How about automatic mastering in Reason 11?

[SoundStruggler]

I'm looking into services that are offering this online, which got me thinking why can't this be added to Reason?

[djadalaide]

I think they're struggling with vst performance for the rest of the year.

[motuscott]

"automatic mastering"
How would that even work?
Either I'm misunderstanding mastering or you're mistaking mastering for what a limiter does.

[SoundStruggler]

"automatic mastering"
How would that even work?
Either I'm misunderstanding mastering or you're mistaking mastering for what a limiter does.

It exists. I used emastered.com when it was free. It uses some algorithm to tweak various tools automatically. Maybe it could be added to Reason.

[motuscott]

Soundstruggler, what a great user name.
not dissing, I'm sure these things exist...

[guitfnky]

it’s an interesting idea. I think a lot of the power behind the online mastering sites though comes from the fact that they’re constantly tweaking and improving their algorithms. I think they use the songs that are being mastered as a part of that process. if Props were to go down a similar path, there might need to be an online connection, and probably a whole new bunch of privacy concerns/legalese that users would have to deal with/agree to.

or they could build in a few static algorithms, and maybe provide more down the line for free or as paid updates. I dunno. I do think it’s an interesting idea to build something like this directly into the DAW. probably inevitable, if still a few (or several) years away.

[SoundStruggler]

It might be too much involved here to add as a Reason upgrade for now. Maybe there is some ai in it too. I would be more than willing to pay for a Propellerheads mastering service though. I'm sure a lot of people would.

[NekujaK]

There are VSTs out there that can pretty much get your tracks close to a finished master with just a few simple tweaks. Are they as good as a professional mastering engineer? No. Are they as good as online mastering algorithms? In many cases, yes.

Every year new and better "smart" plugins are introduced, and I believe someday soon, we'll be able to mix and master our tracks just by pushing a couple of buttons and a twisting a few knobs. Here are a few mastering-related plugins that can give you decent results with very little tweaking:

- Lurssen Mastering Console (IK)
- The One (IK)
- Ozone (iZotope)
- bx_masterdesk (Plugin Alliance)

The trickiest part of mastering is achieving proper frequency balance. If you can get that right, the rest of it (compression, stereo imaging, saturation, limiting) is relatively straightforward. Here are some "smart" EQ plugins that can automatically balance your tracks:

- Master Match (IK)
- SmartEQ (Sonible)
- Gullfoss (Soundtheory)
- Greg Wells MixCentric (Waves)
- CurveEQ (Voxengo)

[kuhliloach]

As strange as this post may sound it seems to me the feature is inevitable. Sites like LANDR analyze your track then give back various mastered versions, depending on how severe (loud) you want it. In the future I predict most all DAWs will be offering this type of feature to be competitive, or perhaps we'll see plug-ins that have advanced analyzing/mastering features.

That said I also think mastering is highly overrated in the modern digital world we now live in, as we're not transferring to vinyl or jumping mediums that require special treatment. At this point it's up to us to make a great mix and raise our skills on the stereo bus to the point where our mixes are finished. Pro mastering engineers won't even bother with files that are poorly mixed--they get sent back for a remixing. Now that we have all the tools needed (maybe expect for a treated listening room) it's time to dig in and finish our digital creations without the fear that they'll be lacking without someone else's attention.

[erikveach]

Couple comments:
1. I agree that it's the direction everything is going now, and should be going, to have automated mastering options included in DAW's. This is not really "professional mastering", but if you've done a good job performing, recording, mixing, editing, etc., then the results should still turn out fairly well and usable for general (i.e. non-critical) purposes.
2. I disagree that mastering engineers are unnecessary in this day and age. In fact, I'd say they're more necessary than ever since so many people these days have access to highly functional DAW's that put so much power in their hands. Just learning to mix well takes a ton of time and effort, and really years of practice on many songs, in order to get it down well. A good mastering engineer will send back a poorly done mix. BUT, a truly professional mastering engineer (i.e. professional in experience, behavior, and work ethic) will send it back with some recommendations on what it needs and then will accept what they're given in return and make something great out of it for the client...or at least help it reach its highest potential commensurate with the level the person mixing it is currently at. There are a few mastering studios out there that refuse anything except pure gold, but they're basically just trying to keep their pristine record of material. A true professional will help you no matter what level you're at. And a gifted engineer will be able to provide much needed help at every level. This is something that no automated mastering system will ever be able to provide. Well, not for a long time at least. People still need guidance, feedback, suggestions, recommendations, and really just someone who has their back. That's the human aspect. You'll find a great number of professional mastering engineers still offer this kind of human assistance, which is at least as critical as the actual technical sound results. And highly valuable in an industry that's now overflowing with self-taught music producers, many of who are likely lacking in one or more fundamental areas of understanding which used to always be learned as a matter of course before the days of "anyone can learn anything in 15 minutes on YouTube".

For those who are interested - I have been a pro mastering engineer for nearly 20 years - https://www.crazymastering.com - and I created an automated intelligent mastering system back in 2003 to help create more consistency and efficiency in my mastering work. So I have years of experience with both sides. But every track I master has always included a large portion of the mastering adjustments that are made based solely on my own experienced decisions, because I don't believe we should leave that in the hands of an automated system when it really matters. And, there's a LOT more to mastering than just raising volume levels and controlling dynamic range. Even the relatively new automated mastering systems that have come out (LANDR, emastered, etc.) are employing additional adjustments beyond simple level control these days. A real human mastering engineer has even more tools at his/her disposal to use, when needed. I provide this background to lend relevance to my comments above.