AI Mastering Put to the Test: Benn Jordan Challenges Man vs. Machine – But Who Wins?
Can Artificial Intelligence Replace the Professional?
4,0 / 5,0 | 
AI Mastering Put to the Test: Benn Jordan challenges man versus machine-but who wins? · Source: Benn Jordan / YouTube
In his YouTube video, Benn Jordan presents a comprehensive study he conducted on the quality of AI mastering compared to human mastering engineers. His conclusion: although AI methods are much more affordable, human mastering engineers still deliver the best results. What do you think about AI mastering vs. real mastering?
All About the Human vs. AI Mastering Shootout
Artificial Intelligence vs. Human: Benn Jordan’s AI Mastering Experiment
For the test, Jordan sent his track “Starlight” through various AI plug-ins, online mastering platforms and, of course, to real human mastering engineers. In the ensuing blind study of 472 participants, the various AI mastering tools performed differently, but two human engineers, Max Hosinger and Ed the Soundman, took the top two spots. That was to be expected, wasn’t it?
In his video, Benn Jordan also explains how important mastering is for the final quality of a track. And he is definitely right. Through comparative listening, the participants evaluated various mastering approaches in terms of clarity, presence and depth. But first check out the video before we discuss and vote below.
Can Artificial Intelligence Replace a Professional?
Despite advanced AI mastering techniques and platforms such as iZotope Ozone 11 or Kits.ai, the results showed that human mastering engineers consistently produced more accurate and detailed sonic images – with more of a “human feel”. Particularly surprising was the disqualification of LANDR, a very popular online mastering platform, which did not meet Jordan’s requirements because (subjectively speaking) every master produced poor results. He also removed the online mastering results from Bandlab, Waves, Virtu and Mixea.
Over the course of the experiment, the original twelve mastering approaches were narrowed down to seven acceptable ones so as not to overwhelm listeners. In the end, the evaluation of the finalists showed that while advanced AI mastering technologies such as Compound Audio Stereo Mastering and Matchering 2.0 can deliver solid results, they are inferior to human experts like Hosinger and Ed the Soundman when it comes to the nuanced presentation of music.
The mastering duel – save money or go for quality?
Jordan also pointed out the cost of professional mastering engineers, which can run into thousands of dollars per album. However, AI mastering platforms offer a cost-effective alternative that can improve the sound to a satisfactory level for the average user if the demands are not too high.
As criteria for comparison, Benn Jordan mentioned aspects such as sound density, depth and musical presence. While some AI mastering tools delivered creative and fast results, he found that the real mixing and mastering experts produced the most coherent and technically convincing results.
Conclusion and your verdict
And that concludes the Top 7 of this mastering study:
- Max Hosinger
- Ed the Soundman
- a) Ozone & Neutron / b) Matchering 2.0
- Compound Audio stereo mastering
- Kits.ai
- iZotope Ozone 11
How would you decide? Do you use AI mastering for your finished songs or do you prefer a real second opinion and expertise?
Learn more about artificial intelligence
This might also interest you
4 responses to “AI Mastering Put to the Test: Benn Jordan Challenges Man vs. Machine – But Who Wins?”
Great video from Benn Jordan, someone I didn’t know before. Throughout this contest he provides lots of useful tips and references in SW and HW. Ideal for me as I’m planning to finally start mastering my tracks.
Yes, self-taught, I do a lot of mastering, and it’s a skill that 50% technical and 50% aesthetic. Every recording is different, and the VU meters may indicate that an instrument is at the perfect level, but your ears tell you differently. If I’m rocking along with a tune I’ve mastered, not noticing anything but the music itself, then it’s a good mastering job done. With a few tools and a lot of practice, you can make a very flat recording come to life, but it needs a human with a love of the tune to persevere long enough to get it. A computer is only ever as good as the person who programs it, even with AI. Some tasks in mastering, such as cutting down resonant frequencies could be assisted by AI, but the job overall is far better done by a music loving human. A final thought; everyone who does mastering has to learn it themselves, there is no manual. You just look at how others do it and then work your own best way, not something AI will ever be able to do.
Cheap-ish mastering tools
1) Sound Forge
2) Fabfilter Limiter
3) MTM Mixroom
60% of mastering is in the EQ, we’d estimate. You probably can’t afford a £100k outboard mastering EQ or mastering compressor. But you can get fairly cheap plugins that will do the job, if not quite with the same level of finesse. Sound Forge is still the best wave editor for myriad tasks, although RX does a lot more, it’s quite expensive. Fabfilter Limiter is one of the best cheap limiters, it sounds great. MTM Mixroom is a really good ‘matching’ EQ, very transparent, that will get your track to a good starting point. You then need a good mastering EQ plugin to shape the wave to suit the tune. Don’t waste your money on every available plugin, a simple decent quality mastering EQ plugin will get you much closer. Check that your EQ plugin works ‘multi-instance’ so that you can have a few of them in a chain, each doing a little task on the whole tune.
You don’t need millions to do mastering, it just takes a few essential tools, and a lot of practice.
if i had money i would use a pro mastering enginner ofc. but for me its very useful with ai mastering. i was hoping to see some testing of the SSg Optimus, i thought that one was the best so far.