AI mastering in the test: Benn Jordan compares man against machine – but who wins? · Source: Benn Jordan / YouTube
In his YouTube video, Benn Jordan shows a comprehensive study he conducted on the quality of AI mastering compared to human mastering engineers. His conclusion: AI methods are much more affordable, but human mastering engineers still deliver the best results. What do you think about the topic of AI mastering vs. real mastering?
Everything about mastering the human versus AI shootout
Artificial intelligence vs. humans: Benn Jordan’s AI mastering experiment
For the test, Jordan sent his track “Starlight” through various AI plugins, to online mastering platforms and of course to real human mastering engineers. In the subsequent blind study, in which 472 people took part, the various AI mastering tools performed differently, but two human sound engineers, Max Hosinger and Ed the Soundman, took first place. That was to be expected – right?
You are currently viewing placeholder content from YouTube. To access the actual content, click the button below. Please note that data will be passed on to third parties.
Benn Jordan also explains in his video how important mastering is for the final quality of a track. And here he is definitely right. Through comparative listening, participants evaluated different mastering approaches for clarity, presence, and depth. But first watch the video before we discuss further here and vote at the bottom of the article.
Can artificial intelligence replace professionals?
Despite advanced techniques in AI mastering and platforms such as iZotope Ozone 11 or Kits.ai The results showed that human mastering engineers consistently produced more precise and detailed sound images – with more “human feeling”. Particularly surprising was the disqualification of LANDR, a very popular online mastering platform that did not meet Jordan’s requirements because (subjectively speaking) each master produced poor results. He also removed the online mastering results from the Bandlab, Waves, Virtu and Mixea platforms.
Over the course of the experiment, the original twelve mastering approaches were reduced to seven acceptable ones so as not to overwhelm the listeners. In the end, the finalists’ evaluation showed that advanced technologies in AI mastering such as Compound Audio Stereo Mastering and Matchering 2.0 can deliver solid results, but are inferior to human experts such as Hosinger and Ed the Soundman in the nuanced representation of the music.
Mastering with Ozone 11 Assistant is ok, but not 100%. · Source: Benn Jordan / YouTube
The mastering duel – save money or focus on quality?
Of course, Jordan also points out the costs for professional mastering engineers, which can amount to several thousand euros per album. However, AI mastering platforms offer a cost-effective alternative that can improve sound satisfactorily for the average user if the demands are not too high.
Benn Jordan mentioned aspects such as sound density, depth and musical presence as comparison criteria. While some AI mastering tools delivered creative and quick results, in his opinion, the real mixing and mastering masters produced the most coherent and technically convincing results.
Final and your assessments
And these are the top 7 of this mastering study:
- Max Hosinger
- Ed the Soundman
- a) Ozone and neutron and b) Matching 2.0
- Stereo-Mastering von Compound Audio
- Kits.ai
- iZotope Ozone 11
Affiliate Links
iZotope Neutron 5 Download No customer reviews available yet
€188.00 
How would you decide? Do you use AI mastering for your finished songs or are you more into a real second opinion and real expertise?
Further information about artificial intelligence
