Mastering 2.0: the real or perceived threat of DIY mastering and automated mastering systems

Steve Collins*, Adrian Renzo, Sarah Keith, Alex Mesker

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

This article explores mastering–the final stage of the music production process, which until recently has proven resistant to the democratizing characteristics of “Music 2.0.” Musicians are now able to forgo the services of professional engineers in favor of plug-ins such as iZotope’s Ozone and online automated services such as LANDR. This article draws on survey responses from mastering engineers to address the nature and extent of disruption to the mastering profession. The engineers surveyed here suggest that certain parts of the mastering process may eventually be replaced by automated algorithms but argue that there are distinct advantages to having an objective “set of ears” assess the final recording.
Original languageEnglish
Number of pages16
JournalPopular Music and Society
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 3 Dec 2019

Keywords

  • Automated mastering services
  • disruption
  • disruptive innovation
  • Mastering
  • popular music
  • production

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Mastering 2.0: the real or perceived threat of DIY mastering and automated mastering systems'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this