Ozone yea or nay?

[camsr]

One thing I didn't like about v3 was only one EQ module. I prefer to use pre and post compression EQ when maximizing a track. But it doesn't matter so much, just add another plugin right? Anyways, this is way too expensive for me, so I will stick with my usual tricks

I see the added ability to change crossover points between modules, that is a plus.

EDIT: I see it does allow two EQs now.

Well g damn.

[lightsfadelow]

That question got asked on Gearslutz and someone rattled of a whole host of famous folks that iZotope listed on their website as Ozone users. But mastering is such a black art and there is such a range of mastering businesses from "Some Guy on the Internet with the Plugins" to Bob Katz who probably has $1,000,000 mastering chain that's 100% analog.

So yes and no

[tehlord]

Now, if those clever folks in Amsterdam would just get busy and build us a nice multi-band compressor, that would leave only the exciter as a reason to keep Ozone around.

Oh please oh please oh please

[ObsoleteAcc99]

[DELETED]

[ObsoleteAcc99]

[DELETED]

[ObsoleteAcc99]

[DELETED]

[tehlord]

dont' forget pro-l on it's own costs the same as the entire ozone 5 basic street price.

!!

not that i could say a bad word about pro-l, it is very special.

This is true. To be honest I think even the bundles are a little pricey but I'm soooo in love with them.

[ObsoleteAcc99]

[DELETED]

[djanthonyw]

Nay for me. I prefer separate options to make my own chain.

and you can.. even with ozone basic by disabling certain processes, or with the advanced using indi plugs.

I never use just ozone as a complete chain but i will use one or two of it's modules, maybe three, always.

Different ones for different tracks.

So i say it's still very worthwhile.

It's always mixed with other stuff.

but it always adds "something" i can't replace with others.

The stereo control is terrific, in advanced, the new sat modes are terrific, i have even used the reverb two or three times to help with glue and it worked.

What I mean is that there are far better third party options available separately for not that much more money, or less.

As a whole, Ozone is about convenience, and because of that I'm not saying it sounds horrible, but there are just better sounding individual modules elsewhere.

I just think it's funny because one of the main complaints at the moment are that people have wanted the separate Ozone modules for a while now when they could have just gotten separate third party options that already and still do sound better.

[lightsfadelow]

This is where subjectivity comes in. So I'll give you my opinion... I don't agree. In most cases, you'd be hard-pressed to find better plugins than many of the modules found in Ozone 5. And many of the modules Ozone offers, you'd need 2-3 different plugins to replace one of the Ozone modules.

For example--

You could buy Fabfilter Pro-G and Pro-C and have great single band gates and compressors but you'd be lacking multiband support as well as (I believe) mid-side processing.

You could buy FabFilter Pro-Q and have a great EQ with mid-side and choose between linear phase or not... but you wouldn't be able to do mixed phase and you don't get matching EQ or snapshots.

You could buy Pro-L and get a great sounding limiter, but you wouldn't get transient recovery or dithering.

You could buy Valhalla Room and have an amazing reverb but you wouldn't get plate emulation.

You could buy Magneto and get great tape saturation, but you wouldn't also get solid state, tube, etc. emulation.

You see where I'm going?

[camsr]

Of course there is different products that do the same thing. The point is this one kicks serious ass, and for anyone involved with audio for $$$ is worth the investment. Time saved = Ozone. Sheeet, even for a hobbyist, this brings results in the time it takes to load.

But quality here is always subjective, and there isn't faults that stand out.

Truth is, I could do the same things Ozone does, differently, with freebies, but then my project file looks a mess and routings get hard to remember. Having all the leveling and dynamics controls with extras in one plugin is mighty professional.

[djanthonyw]

This is where subjectivity comes in. So I'll give you my opinion... I don't agree. In most cases, you'd be hard-pressed to find better plugins than many of the modules found in Ozone 5. And many of the modules Ozone offers, you'd need 2-3 different plugins to replace one of the Ozone modules.

For example--

You could buy Fabfilter Pro-G and Pro-C and have great single band gates and compressors but you'd be lacking multiband support as well as (I believe) mid-side processing.

You could buy FabFilter Pro-Q and have a great EQ with mid-side and choose between linear phase or not... but you wouldn't be able to do mixed phase and you don't get matching EQ or snapshots.

You could buy Pro-L and get a great sounding limiter, but you wouldn't get transient recovery or dithering.

You could buy Valhalla Room and have an amazing reverb but you wouldn't get plate emulation.

You could buy Magneto and get great tape saturation, but you wouldn't also get solid state, tube, etc. emulation.

You see where I'm going?

No, because there are certainly better options. For example with Voxengo Soniformer you get multiband compression (32) as well as mid-side processing. I tested Ozone's saturation and it's horrible compared to another option such as Nebula. I don't know why anyone would want to use multi-band saturation, or reverb on the master channel anyway.

[lightsfadelow]

I think LOTS of people use saturation on the master channel. In fact, so many people master stuff by bouncing to analog tape--that's all about dynamics and saturation. Multiband is really helpful in saturation in particular because you get different effects when you apply saturation to different frequency bands. I suppose you could sidechain and EQ and then mix back in saturation to just the bands you want... but then you have to deal with phase issues, etc.

I can't really respond to the other part of your statement because you clearly have a very strong opinion and, as I said, it's very subjective. My point was pretty basic: Ozone 5 is pretty inexpensive when you consider all it offers. Subjectively, I believe that many of the effects Ozone offers are phenomenal and in some cases (IRC3 with transient recovery, EQ being prominent examples) are better than anything comparable I've tried.

[Gonga]

You can also re-order modules in any order you want along the chain, in series or parallel.

Good to hear it's parallel also. I don't think that was the case in v3? Can it duplicate modules now as well in one plug instance?

I'm sorry I was wrong - apparently only Alloy offers parallel modules.

[camsr]

You can also re-order modules in any order you want along the chain, in series or parallel.

Good to hear it's parallel also. I don't think that was the case in v3? Can it duplicate modules now as well in one plug instance?

I'm sorry I was wrong - apparently only Alloy offers parallel modules.

No worries friend, I was somewhat dazed with this topic. I might save up for this to make my life easier. It has 2 EQs only which is absolutely necessary and no parallel routing, so no parallel compression or gating. At least I didn't see that on their website. I really do like Alloy though, so it's a toss up for me.