Ozone 12 - a nice 2nd opinion with its Assistant/Analytics option?

[zerocrossing]

I recently picked up the full version of Ozone 12 Advanced, and I have to say, it seems to do a great job, though I always seem to decrease the amount of EQ that it's doing. I used to not care about what my tracks sounded like. Few people even bother to listen to my music, but I decided that if I'm going to put stuff out there at all, it might as well be as good as I can get it. Ozone 12 and VSX have become part of my complete mastering breakfast.

[Caine123]

i really like from Ozone 12 to check the different of the stereo field, a lot of times it is making things a lot narrower but i feel i mix too much in wideness so nice to have and A/B so i narrow down some elements and re-pan some stuff. also add some 5k - 10k breathe and sometimes a lot more bass mixed, so it wont magically save all mix/mastering process but a great 2nd opinion to have and get back from the tunnelvision when working only with my own material

[zerocrossing]

...it wont magically save all mix/mastering process but a great 2nd opinion to have and get back from the tunnelvision when working only with my own material

This, this, and so much this. Recently, someone trashed a mix I did. While I wouldn't have argued that it was amazing, or anything, I didn't think it deserved the title of "worst" that he a-hole gave it. Then I went and listened to the final and it was fine, and I went on YouTube to see how it was translating... and it was a totally different cut. I'd accidentally used an early rough mix to make the video, instead of the final. It's not like I wasn't listening to the track as I was cutting the video, but I wasn't hearing it. I fixed the video, and even went back and remixed and remaster it since, now that I have a better monitor situation and Ozone 12. Even better.

I've now instituted a new policy: I run a 45 minute timer whenever I'm mixing/mastering. I force myself to get up, do some pushups and knee bends, get a drink, do something other than listen to the same track over and over again, which is my natural state when I get going.

[ksandvik]

Yes, I mix and master for max 20 minutes and take a long break with no audio, otherwise I can't make proper decisions due to ear fatigue and knowing the parts too well to hear differences.

[osiris]

I love Ozone's Dynamic EQ and wish it was a separate plugin. From what I see it's not nearly as nuanced as Fabfilter, but it's good. I always feel you have to dial back the settings it will come up with.

[zerocrossing]

I’m starting to think the suggested EQ curve is a bug. It literally just puts the same amount of the same EQ curve on everything.

My advice still stands. Let it do its thing, but don’t assume it’s good. The first two tracks I used it on worked out great, though I removed the EQ on one, and significantly altered it on the other. The one I just tried it on was sort of a disaster. I basically reset all the modules by hand and got a much better result. Maybe it’s because my songs tend to evolve a lot, maybe it’s machine learning just isn’t up to snuff, but as always, let your ears be the final arbiter of what you want the track to sound like.

[zerocrossing]

I love Ozone's Dynamic EQ and wish it was a separate plugin. From what I see it's not nearly as nuanced as Fabfilter, but it's good. I always feel you have to dial back the settings it will come up with.

In general, I’m finding the AI suggestion to be less effective than using your own judgment. I guess it’s like a preset that you have to tweak to make work for you.

[Caine123]

I’m starting to think the suggested EQ curve is a bug. It literally just puts the same amount of the same EQ curve on everything.

My advice still stands. Let it do its thing, but don’t assume it’s good. The first two tracks I used it on worked out great, though I removed the EQ on one, and significantly altered it on the other. The one I just tried it on was sort of a disaster. I basically reset all the modules by hand and got a much better result. Maybe it’s because my songs tend to evolve a lot, maybe it’s machine learning just isn’t up to snuff, but as always, let your ears be the final arbiter of what you want the track to sound like.

i think it always works the same? it compares the EQ spectrum with a reference/a suggested reference and just adjust the eq curves to it, mostly the high end a lot raised and low end mostly a bit lowered, for me.
what i like is the clarity plugin and also the imageshaper, i then get back to my mix and adjust/eq the single elements to get a more refined non-muddy mix to my ears and also check the stereo width, i experienced that some mixes are a lot too much stereo width and less mono'ish elements and ozone made me kinda rethink to narrow down some drones/pads and other elements.
even having a full ambient soundscape track having only wide and bright elements kinda made me rethink my mixing.

great tool to get a 2nd opinion but the EQ settings are mostly always the same and too much high end/hifi sounding.

[zerocrossing]

I’m starting to think the suggested EQ curve is a bug. It literally just puts the same amount of the same EQ curve on everything.

My advice still stands. Let it do its thing, but don’t assume it’s good. The first two tracks I used it on worked out great, though I removed the EQ on one, and significantly altered it on the other. The one I just tried it on was sort of a disaster. I basically reset all the modules by hand and got a much better result. Maybe it’s because my songs tend to evolve a lot, maybe it’s machine learning just isn’t up to snuff, but as always, let your ears be the final arbiter of what you want the track to sound like.

i think it always works the same? it compares the EQ spectrum with a reference/a suggested reference and just adjust the eq curves to it, mostly the high end a lot raised and low end mostly a bit lowered, for me.
what i like is the clarity plugin and also the imageshaper, i then get back to my mix and adjust/eq the single elements to get a more refined non-muddy mix to my ears and also check the stereo width, i experienced that some mixes are a lot too much stereo width and less mono'ish elements and ozone made me kinda rethink to narrow down some drones/pads and other elements.
even having a full ambient soundscape track having only wide and bright elements kinda made me rethink my mixing.

great tool to get a 2nd opinion but the EQ settings are mostly always the same and too much high end/hifi sounding.

Maybe I need to find a reference track that will work better for me. It made my last track painfully bright.

[osiris]

From what I can tell, the EQ is just basic presets. It's not a case of Ozone deciding what EQ is nest for your track. I do see the Dynamic EQ working differently because it always cuts in different places. For regular EQ I think you need reference tracks.