Automatic Audio Mastering System software
 

I found some interesting software that automatically masters your recordings. There's a freeware version and a pro version. The free version downloads onto your computer and you can enter in a sound file and it will automatically master your recording. I tried it out a few of my test recordings and most of them sounded much better. The free version adds 50 band EQ, 4 band Compression and Loudness control.... the pro version uses a 100 point EQ, 8 band compression.., and you have a choice of hundreds of reference settings from various styles of music. You can watch the video's and get started right away mastering your files on your computer. You can find out more info at their website here....

http://www.curioza.com/

I was surprised by how much better my recordings sounded. I burned a few cd's to listen on my truck's sound system and was very impressed. I did a bunch of A/B tests and the mastered versions came out on top every time.

The pro version costs about $70 or 65 euros which ain't bad for what you get. But the free version will cover many needs.

I never heard of it before today, but it does indeed seem to work nicely. In the pro version, you set it for automatic, semi-automatic or manual mastering.


Here's a quick sound sample of a mastered sound test...

http://www.soundclick.com/player/sin...&q=hi&newref=1


Here's the original file before mastering....

http://www.soundclick.com/player/sin...&q=hi&newref=1

Here's another sample of a mastered track of a friend and me jamming on a blues tune....

http://www.soundclick.com/player/sin...&q=hi&newref=1

Compare clips at equal volume. Use the exact same recording in the before and after. These are two separate recordings.

That's the problem I'm having. I put together tracks and the volume levels are all over the place. One track will be at one level, and the others will be at another. I've already been called out for releasing quiet tracks. I have tried to equalize the levels here and the mastered tracks just sound better because they've been properly EQ'ed, compressed and levels set. I'm getting way more volume that I could get on my own without distortion. Apparently a skill I haven't mastered yet. I'm loving what this software is doing to my tracks !!! It really is cleaning up my tracks. It's also boosted some of my weak guitar playing so it isn't so noticeable.

I ordered the professional version already. May not get the KeyCode for a day or two.

Yes they are two separate recordings. One before and one after processing with this software. Major difference. Comparing the two shows what the software does to the file.

The volume levels are not even in the same universe. The volume of the first recording was 35 or so decibels lower than the second recording. The volume of the first recording was so low that probably useful data was lost at recording time that could not be recovered.
Ninety five percent of what these automatic software mastering gizmos do is volume boosting. Maybe a set low pass filter is in there. Other frequency equalization is too subjective to be used well. Hopefully the compression, if used, is minimal and functioning more like a limiter.

I know the volume levels are way different, that's what I want !!!!! I crank up the volume in my DAW software and it distorts. Clips like crazy, but still doesn't have the volume of other tracks by other people...now I'm in the same ballpark.

In the freeware software I used, the EQ is a 50 point EQ, the Compression is 4 band, I have no idea about what else the software is doing, but I think I read about a brickwall limiter, leveling and who knows what else.

The pro version has a 100 point EQ, 8 band compression, and lots of reference points to chose from.

If that is the case, something is wrong with your gear or how you are using it. Time to work on those problems. Over and out.

Well this AAMS software seems to fix up my files right up. It's just what I needed. It gives me the results I was looking for. I was also looking at Ozone by Izotope, but it looked like the same basic stuff I already have in Sonar and Audition CS6.

This software is a no-brainer for me. After hearing the end result, I'm sold.

I'm not sure what the problem is. I mix and put the levels right below maximum on the meters and it's still a quiet track when I upload it into SoundClick. Other people's tracks are much louder than mine. But I'm gun shy about cranking them up for fear of distorting the track. With this software, I get the desired sound level with no distortion. Perfect. It sets the proper levels for me.... just what I needed.

I got the Key Code for the Pro Version just a while ago. So now I have the fully registered version on my computer. This gives me a 100 band EQ, 8 band compressor, Brick Wall Limiter... 200 mastering samples, and a bunch of other goodies. Lot's of charts, and manual options..

It appears that you're making in general audio mistakes and then relying on software to correct them? :) A fundamental understanding of unity gain, the difference between input sensitivity, gain, bus levels, output and volume (and most importantly where to get volume) would help with your woes. Also a firm grasp of the dBfs meter and the difference between peak and RMS levels would help insure some consistency track to track and project to project.

Finally mastering is a skill not a preset. If output volume is what you're looking for Sonar has the tools to do that and you needn't buy more software. Mastering is above all reactionary. It is the act of interpreting specific problematic sonics and correcting them. Anything you may choose by way of a successful mastering pre-set would be serendipitous at best. As an audio person there really is no substitute for getting the basics of gain structure firmly under control.

Well love it or hate it I think it's a pretty cool piece of software I haven't seen before. To be fair, yes you're right that a skilled audio engineer would do a better job than a machine, as evidenced by some of the experiments I did last night didn't turn out perfect. I had issues with some of my tracks not sounding better. But some tracks did. Either or, it's an interesting software technology which I chose to support. I like to idea of mastering on my computer and not having to send it out. Getting one good mix and the software pays for itself. I've already got that, so I can't complain. I'm really intrigued by this software, there's lot's of stuff to explore, and the pro version is just loaded with data and options.

Here's an interesting experiment with a 12 string guitar going thru the mastering program.....

http://www.soundclick.com/player/sin...&q=hi&newref=1

Sounds really, really, bad.

I know. But none the less it's an interesting experiment. The guitar playing is bad, the recording is way over processed...just an experiment. Like I said, some of my test recordings didn't come out well. A couple were really bad. I must have done about 25 test mixes last night.

My new HS8 monitors are coming today. I'm looking forward to hearing my test recordings on them.

Interesting discovery regarding my levels...after poking around in Sonar's mixer, I found an output buss that was set low...it wasn't the main output, but still inline, I'm not sure why it's there....once I raised the level to a normal setting, I had plenty of volume....the new monitors make Sonar sound great !!! Very easy to spot problems....:D

An output bus to what?

To the output....I double checked the routing in Sonar's mixer and there's about 4-5 buss controls that effect the output's level. When you click on one, a different level meter pops up on the other side of the screen with different levels, causing all kinds of confusion. It's like playing a shell game. I didn't put all these busses in there, I don't know why they are there. It's funny, when you adjust on level on one buss, it controls other level meters as well. There seems to be a main control that goes into the ProChannel section, then slips out when you click on another level meter...very confusing.

I put the same track into Audition and checked that mixer....very simple, you just have your track meters and one main output buss...night and day difference.

With these new monitors I can troubleshoot problems right away. :)

What does the input and output structure of these busses indicate? I'd think you'd wanna get your fundamental gain structure under control before you start auditioning new monitors? :)

Well, in Sonar's mixer, I counted 8 different level meters in a mix that only had two tracks. And the weird part was, when I'd adjust one meter, the other meter would change. I'd try to delete a few of them and the whole track would disappear. It's no wonder I was having problems getting decent mixes in Sonar.

In Audition's mixer, with the same two tracks, I have two level meters and a main output. That's it, easy peasy.

I'm auditioning the new monitors with commercial cd's, sound files I have in Sonar and Audition, and some music off the internet....They are all telling me what is possible and what I should shoot for in my recordings. The recordings from Peter Gabriel's studio sound fabulous, mine in comparison mostly sound like trash except for a couple. The Neumann mics are really sounding good, the other mics, not so much. Recordings that I thought sounded good before, sound bad now. The new monitors do not lie. I must have done 50 sound checks today...I have a whole backlog of recordings I needed to check, what an eye opening experience this has been. My old speakers sound like trash compared to these new ones. Night and day difference.

Now that I have the level situation under control, I compared my files of the Neumann mics recording A/B'ed with the original vrs mastered with the AAMS software....the levels were about the same now, however the mastered track has more depth and a richer tone thru out the recordings and really shines on the last strum of the guitar. The EQ adjustments in AAMS seemed to have helped. I'm getting there.

The new monitors really show off a difference of sound quality between the mics.

I ran a vocal track thru the AAMS program and ended up with a really nice sounding vocal track. It was apparent that it added EQ and compression, in just the right amounts. It was a little bit louder. It's amazing that I can now hear these differences with the new monitors. Very apparent. I've never had speakers this accurate before. They show everything.

One thing I found out about the AAMS software is that it works better when you put in .wav files. That's what the developer recommends. I put in a few MP3 files and they didn't turn out so good. Maybe that's the problem I'm running into. Some of my recordings are mixed to MP3's. I'm going to have to pay attention to this.

The Shure SM7b sounds really good on vocals, thru the new monitors.

I got the problems in Sonar ironed out. When all I had was two mono files, the mixer had 9 level controls opened up in the mixer, which was very confusing, as they all had to be set just right. One of the other Sonar users suggested that I close the Pro Channel box, and delete the busses I didn't need. This cleaned up the mixer very well and now I should be able to export mixes at decent volumes. That was definitely a problem.

Now you've got me confused. We're throwin' around terms at random and it's making things a bit...tangled :) Generally speaking and in most every DAW you have A) "Tracks" and those tracks can be audio (mono or stereo) and in some cases instrument tracks which are consolidated midi tracks B) "midi tracks" C) "Aux returns" which can serve a variety of functions most commonly used as FX returns or sub-master groups D) A primary "Master Output".

Busses aren't tracks. They represent interconnectivity routing feeds. Where most busses are labeled as such and primarily refer to "software" routing some tracks may contain a device known as an insert which is in short a hardware buss.

Meters can't be adjusted. They reacte to gain changes but nothing in and of themselves is adjustable unless of course you're adjusting scales. Deleting a meter (if that's even possible) wouldn't delete a track.

As mentioned here before a fundamental understanding of input sensitivity, gain structures, output levels, where and when to adjust, where and when not to adjust, any outboard hardware including pre-amps on the front end and powered speakers on the back end and metering (particularly as it pertains to digital scale) are all audio 101 necessities and although VERY easy to manage it seems wholely absent here.

Leaving those issues unmanaged and instead throwing mastering software at the resulting problems seems a really odd route to good audio.

Just trying to help and only my 2 cents.

Well yes you're right, all levels in the audio chain are important. I'm haphazardly setting my Focusrite 18i8's levels controls so it doesn't produce hum and still gives a clean strong signal. This level seems to change with each test I do and different mics.

The problem in Sonar is that it's default mixer settings have many different level meters. They route the tracks into various busses to add effects to your whole mix. They have a preview buss, a metronome buss, ProChannel busses, Master buss and main output buss. All this baloney needs to be dealt with, either set all the meters, or delete the unneeded busses and you have a simple mixer. This is all set up by default, and is Sonar trying too hard to be everything to everybody. Clearing all these busses cleans it up nicely, problem is you have to do that with every new session. Having 8-9 busses all in your recording chain, just confuses everything and delivers countless mixing problems. I don't have these problems in Audition CS6.