AI MASTER - Artificial Intelligence Masteringr Processor

[ztakram]

AI MASTER is a new mastering processor made by Exonic UK.
It looks like the simplest mastering plugin ever, it has only two buttons, but make no mistake, this thing is a beast!
There is no place for personal taste here, the machine decides how your mastering will sound, though I must to admit that most of the time I was really(!) impressed by the results.
Leave the skepticism aside and try the trial version.

https://www.exonicuk.com/product-page/ai-master

[garfield78]

Hi , i have try , it's not bad , but little bit expensive at about 80 euros..... With covid , not too much money for this .
the hornet mastertool is more cheap and have more option for loudness ( https://www.hornetplugins.com/plugins/h ... astertool/ ) .

The author of Ai master , should to do a intro price ...it's my mind .

[ztakram]

I checked Hornet Mastertool. It's not bad but I think AI Master sounds better while requiring no user input at all.

[plexuss]

Here's a track of mine using AI Master instead of my mastering chain:

https://soundcloud.com/musicofplexus/sl ... zAUnMLQnnW



Here it with my mastering chain:

https://soundcloud.com/musicofplexus/slow-boat-to-hell


I don't feel there is "one" version of a master that is "perfect" - there are different flavours and colours, if you will. I don't think AIM did a bad job - it has a nice smoothness to it dynamically. For this track it's a bit too dark. But I could see people liking it. I'll stick to my own mastering though but it was interesting to try out. For those not interested in doing their own manual mastering this might be a good option.

Here is the track with no processing on the mastering chain, loudness matched to the above:

https://soundcloud.com/musicofplexus/sl ... vBaPUA4Bz0

[ztakram]

Your version is wider and sharper (though I would cut some highs), while AIM's version took it to more balanced place. It may be interesting to hear the pre-master version to see the impact of the plug.
Nice track btw

[Guy ExonicUK]

Sounds good.

[Tj Shredder]

Marketing bots?

[datroof]

I've been playing around with it. You can get different results by altering input and output (eq before and after not a bad idea). It reacts to what you give it. You kinda have to use reverse psychology with it. Here's the first tune I used it on - sorry, I don't have an alternate mix to compare with at the moment:

https://soundcloud.com/jeffvolkman/patambalacunde

I agree, it tends to sound dark, sometimes boomy. It's an interesting tool - I hope to see updates.

[Guy ExonicUK]

Marketing bots?

Mastering bots.

[Tj Shredder]

I don‘t get the use of that. If the mix is bad the result will be bad, if the mix is good, mastering is trivial and has to be done with my own ears anyway...

But how would it tame a mediocre live recording? Would it find the resonances and filter them? There could be a potential...
For tests you need to feed it with problematic material... And then compare...

[Guy ExonicUK]

I don‘t get the use of that. If the mix is bad the result will be bad, if the mix is good, mastering is trivial and has to be done with my own ears anyway...

But how would it tame a mediocre live recording? Would it find the resonances and filter them? There could be a potential...
For tests you need to feed it with problematic material... And then compare...

AI MASTER (or indeed a human mastering engineer) will perform two main tasks:

1. General "housekeeping".
This includes mundane things such as ensuring that the output doesn't clip and the material does not contain any DC or excessive rumble.

2. Corrective treatment.
These are the more interesting (and more complicated) things such as ensuring that a specific frequency range does not overpower the mix, maintaining/enforcing a coherent stereo image, and conforming to a dynamic and spectral response standards that translate well to multiple playback systems.

So in short, if your mix sounds good, AI MASTER will not have to work as hard to produce a good sounding master.
If your mix has issues, AI MASTER will strive to correct these issues in order to still be able to produce a good sounding master.

Hope that helps.

[dblock]

I don‘t get the use of that. If the mix is bad the result will be bad, if the mix is good, mastering is trivial and has to be done with my own ears anyway...

But how would it tame a mediocre live recording? Would it find the resonances and filter them? There could be a potential...
For tests you need to feed it with problematic material... And then compare...

AI MASTER (or indeed a human mastering engineer) will perform two main tasks:

1. General "housekeeping".
This includes mundane things such as ensuring that the output doesn't clip and the material does not contain any DC or excessive rumble.

2. Corrective treatment.
These are the more interesting (and more complicated) things such as ensuring that a specific frequency range does not overpower the mix, maintaining/enforcing a coherent stereo image, and conforming to a dynamic and spectral response standards that translate well to multiple playback systems.

So in short, if your mix sounds good, AI MASTER will not have to work as hard to produce a good sounding master.
If your mix has issues, AI MASTER will strive to correct these issues in order to still be able to produce a good sounding master.

Hope that helps.

This has a lot of potential. Do you plan on updating and developing this software further?

[Guy ExonicUK]

This has a lot of potential. Do you plan on updating and developing this software further?

Absolutely.

[Krakatau]

This has a lot of potential. Do you plan on updating and developing this software further?

Absolutely.

Exciting new, ...this !

[Krakatau]

This has a lot of potential. Do you plan on updating and developing this software further?

Absolutely.

I'd say even more : exciting new, ...this !