Opinions on band labs free mastering

[johnpeeee]

Hi,

for the last couple of years I’ve been using cloudbounce to master my tracks after I first mix them to give 

me an idea of how they translate etc. last week I put a couple of tracks through band labs free mastering service and was impressed.

anyone else got any thoughts?

[mgustavo]

Hi johnpeeee, I've seen some users on CbB forum which liked BandLab free mastering service!
I remember trying it but I didn't like it too much - at first sight it reminded me those EQ presets from hi-fi micro-systems (which have their value!).
I don't know if BandLab has improved it but I'm going to give it another try. BandLad is a nice online DAW and sometimes I use it on my smartphone. However I don't have audio interface for Android / Samsung phone, so I don't use it too much.

Also Cakewalk brought the opportunity for users to get a free account of LANDR on Sonar days, and I used it many times!
Unfortunately it seems they have changed their politics about free and paid subscriptions, so one won't have 2 free low resolution MP3 mastering per month anymore. ?

Also thanks for indicating Cloudbounce, I'm going to give it a try!

Best regards

Edited December 17, 2021 by mgustavo

[FYūZN]

I think BandLab's Mastering is a useful tool, especially for development when you're trying to hear how different mixes will process via their 4 selectable algorithms. It may not be suitable for fine tuning a masterpiece, but it gets frequencies boosted for the old 'car radio' test.

I'd like to see Cakewalk include a built-in 'Mastering Module' or something within the GUI (like in the 'Mix' workspace dropdown section) that hooks directly into (BandLab's) mastering options. And further, I recommend that BandLab's four mastering categories (Fire, Tape, etc) be applied variably by sliders, so user can set their own preference for strength of each effect. This DAW unique new mastering interface could really spoil producers with some recommended metering info and visual publishing platform compatibility checks too (Spotify vs YouTube vs etc.. ) It's gotta be turnkey with mix-master-publish.. 

[johnpeeee]

Hi MediaScraper,

yes I totally agree with all your thoughts - it really would be good to see a dedicated mastering module etc.

[Clovis Ramsay]

@johnpeeee  My experience using BandLab’s mastering service over the last couple of years has been either less than ideal or has introduced aliasing and artifacts to the top end of the mix.  
 

I assume my expectations are probably just unrealistic for what their mastering is designed to do, which is totally fine except that they give no technical details that would inform me on the most ideal mix to submit.  The only info I was able to obtain from their blog was that -4.4 and lower was optimal headroom.  I also would like to know if they are applying dither, if they lower the ceiling for encoding mp3..etc, but I have yet to see any mention of it.

 

So I only recommend using their mastering as a sort of reference check for a mix and a loudness target and wouldn’t use it for releasing music commercially.  It’s also worth noting that music created and mixed strictly within the BandLab mix editor has better results with the mastering than uploading a mixdown from a DAW.  I natural assume the mastering was designed to compliment the mixeditor and the sonic quality of the provided instruments.  
 

If interested in trying out other free online mastering, Plugin Alliance now offers their own 

https://www.mastering.studio