I think like all of these new AI tools, it can be a tool for you to use, but an amateur with untrained ears will still not make "professional-grade" masterings. But you can get maybe 80% there. If you're a hobbyist and don't know anything about mastering and can't afford to pay a professional, this is great!
There's quite a few people who hate the modern mastering, so... maybe that's not a bad thing? Also considering the pro grade masters are often aimed for wildly different setup than the cheap earbuds many people will use. I'm not trying to say pros don't know what they're doing. But also, I'd love to see people play a bit more. (Still dreaming of a real release format that contains the raw elements + effects stack)
Then again, I'm a weirdo who honestly prefers some accidentally preserved band practice recordings with noise and mistakes and raw energy to their released official albums.
to me the whole 'mastering AI' stuff misses at least some of the point of what mastering really is, but i suppose it'll be useful for people doing stuff on their own who wouldn't pay a proper mastering engineer anyway.
> Because you can make a film that looks like anything, you can shoot on your iPhone, no one’s going to complain. But if you mix the sound a certain way, or if you use certain sub-frequencies, people get up in arms.
Essentially, consumers now might pay X amount to get only a 40% solution (probably unusable and not something a company would even offer), but with AI, the same X gets you an 80% solution.
The price of >80% solution will remain the same, until AI improves.