Ozone 9 to 11 upgrade...worthwhile?

[jjmmuir]

As ozone have a sale, I'm wondering whether the version 11 would add much value over the 9 (advanced both). I prefer the visuals and appearance of 9 but has anyone an opinion on the functionality and fidelity?

[Frankie.T]

I like 9 more than 11 even if the upgrade was free i'd stay with 9.

If there is anything in particular you need that it's present on 11 feel free to write it, and maybe there is also a free/cheaper alternative

[jjmmuir]

I like 9 more than 11 even if the upgrade was free i'd stay with 9.

If there is anything in particular you need that it's present on 11 feel free to write it, and maybe there is also a free/cheaper alternative

Thanks Frankie - a little surprised that the upgrade (well double upgrade) didn't improve any aspect of the experience for you, or perhaps you didn't like some of the changes. It seemed to me that the level matching and spatial tools were improved, as well as the overall look...

[Frankie.T]

I like 9 more than 11 even if the upgrade was free i'd stay with 9.

If there is anything in particular you need that it's present on 11 feel free to write it, and maybe there is also a free/cheaper alternative

Thanks Frankie - a little surprised that the upgrade (well double upgrade) didn't improve any aspect of the experience for you, or perhaps you didn't like some of the changes. It seemed to me that the level matching and spatial tools were improved, as well as the overall look...

Because there are certain tools that just works and are good enough in v9.

The reason they keep changing and adding stuff is just because they make money to sell plugins, and people feel outdated with older numbers for no reason tbh.

The new plugins in v11 doesn't really makes anything special imo and the imager got worse to my ears from v10

[Opaque]

The ozone master assistant is tricky because it utilizes all those smart spectral processing modules, trying to match your audio to various curves or profiles - e.g. stabilizer, clarity, impact, spectral shaper... These are very good and capable, especially in combination with transient/sustain and stem separation, but can often mess with the groove in your tracks. You can imagine it pushing up and down when percussion is playing and changing the feel which, in my experience, can happen even when used quite subtly. Also, if there's a need for this in your own music, you are better off going back to the mix and adjusting there, instead of doing stem processing, etc.

So, weirdly, I think Ozone 11 is ideal if you're either a beginner and cannot do our own mixing/mastering to a satisfactory degree or if you're actually a professional working on other people's music. In the latter case, if you would only have the stereo file to work on, Ozone would be a phenomenal toolbox of modules capable of extracting, manipulating, and repairing parts within the track.
Despite how powerful it is, if it were your own track, you would always be better off going back to the mixing project and fixing things there if you know what you're doing.

The fundamental tools, like eq, compression, imager, etc. are as you know already there in Ozone 9, the difference is mostly in these advanced modules, stem and transient/sustain processing.

Just my opinion, of course.

[jjmmuir]

The ozone master assistant is tricky because it utilizes all those smart spectral processing modules, trying to match your audio to various curves or profiles - e.g. stabilizer, clarity, impact, spectral shaper... These are very good and capable, especially in combination with transient/sustain and stem separation, but can often mess with the groove in your tracks. You can imagine it pushing up and down when percussion is playing and changing the feel which, in my experience, can happen even when used quite subtly. Also, if there's a need for this in your own music, you are better off going back to the mix and adjusting there, instead of doing stem processing, etc.

So, weirdly, I think Ozone 11 is ideal if you're either a beginner and cannot do our own mixing/mastering to a satisfactory degree or if you're actually a professional working on other people's music. In the latter case, if you would only have the stereo file to work on, Ozone would be a phenomenal toolbox of modules capable of extracting, manipulating, and repairing parts within the track.
Despite how powerful it is, if it were your own track, you would always be better off going back to the mixing project and fixing things there if you know what you're doing.

The fundamental tools, like eq, compression, imager, etc. are as you know already there in Ozone 9, the difference is mostly in these advanced modules, stem and transient/sustain processing.

Just my opinion, of course.

Yes I see what you mean, and it's a fair point! I imagine that the general algos are improved across the board with each iteration but there's probably not too much in it. As for all the new bells and whistles, I am not sure I'd use them!

[electro]

Steinberg Spectra layers 10 + Steinberg Wavelab 11

Can't see how anything could compete with those two powerhouses