Ozone 11
- Thread starter packhorse
- Start date
jcrosby
Senior Member
I don't use any presets. You shouldn't need more than an EQ, some dynamics, and the maximizer if a track is mixed well. You can use more processing, but the goal for mastering is to use only what's necessary. For classical music an EQ and the maximizer should be fine in most situations, (if the mix is done well).
One thing I would advise against is using the 'master assistant' for orchestral music. The master assistant isn't as smart as the marketing suggests it is, and more importantly, it tends to apply way too much processing than what you usually need. It adds stabilizer all of the time. That's basically like using a jackhammer, when you only need a small trowel.
One thing I would advise against is using the 'master assistant' for orchestral music. The master assistant isn't as smart as the marketing suggests it is, and more importantly, it tends to apply way too much processing than what you usually need. It adds stabilizer all of the time. That's basically like using a jackhammer, when you only need a small trowel.
José Herring
Lost in Cyberspace
The mastering assistant is not good imo.
I do use the generic CD Master as a starting point. Then tweak it from there.
motomotomoto
Active Member
normally I just use the eq / maxi user at the end to taste, however I have had good results mixing INTO the classical preset. Before people think this is weird consider lots of producers actually do this with Ozone and other plugins, and The God Particle is an emulation of an Ozone 4 preset.
José Herring
Lost in Cyberspace
Which one? Is that preset still around?
Aymara
Member
The mastering assistant is aimed at users, who don't know much about mastering. The results are hit and miss ... most of the time "miss". Sometimes it can give a good starting point, but it always needs manual adjustments.
Conclusion: I wouldn't use it at all, no matter which genre.
What can be worth experimenting though, is generating your own presets with the free Audio Lens.
jcrosby
Senior Member
True... This is one approach where presets are a totally valid approach... As long as you mix into something than your mix decisions should account for whatever final processing you have on your bus...
I agree. My issue with features like this are that the average person has a tendency to assume that it's 'correct' because some degree of AI is (apparently) used. When I've played with it I've always found it to be too heavy handed...
I wish I could find a video I stumbled onto where someone explains why the master assistant isn't technically AI, but more more similar to statistics... If I can find it I'll post it.
Last edited:
Aymara
Member
Confirmed ... I saw a review by a famous German mastering pro, who also explained this.
K.Pietras / Pssst! Instruments
New Member
This assistant is a great tool. For educating yourself and comparison.
I would not use it on my track in any other way. Especially in classical genre which needs only tiny tweaks (unless it's poorly and irreversibly recorded/mixed and you have to "repair" it)
I would not use it on my track in any other way. Especially in classical genre which needs only tiny tweaks (unless it's poorly and irreversibly recorded/mixed and you have to "repair" it)
QuiteAlright
Gastronomer
I think the mastering assistant is great, and I use it all the time, but not for classical. It's a good starting point for pop music, and of course you can tweak the modules after the assistant finishes.
Yes, it is still in there.
Aymara
Member
My experience is different. In my current project it completely ruined the EQ. But the mix was already nearly perfect. And it always thinks Electro-Pop (Future Pop) is Rock
Last edited:
QuiteAlright
Gastronomer
In my experience, when it fuesses the wrong genre, it's a sign that the mix is bad. But you certainly may have exceptions come up.My experience is different. In my current project it completely ruined the EQ. But the mix of already nearly perfect. And it always thinks Electro-Pop (Future Pop) is Rock
Joël Dollié
Active Member
Some people like to use ozone presets like ''The God Particle'', personally I'm not so much a preset guy, I think mastering completely depends on the mix, and sometimes all you need is a tiny EQ and a limiter.
So I would just not bother with any presets that might actually worsen the mix.
So I would just not bother with any presets that might actually worsen the mix.
Aymara
Member
Definitely not
... at least in this case.I also saw a review by one of Germany's most experienced mastering professional and he had the same problem ... a good electronic mix was detected as Rock ... reason: the drums.
motomotomoto
Active Member
If you Google around you can figure out which one, but you need Ozone 4. There is also YouTube videos from Jayden taking about it. Some users have recreated in ozone 11 and you can also find all this info on gear space in the god Particle thread. But benefit of GP is zero latency and low cpu.
K.Pietras / Pssst! Instruments
New Member
Same here. Generally if mix has compressed/limited groups or stems, all you need is limiter to control dynamics.
BTW Do you guys use compressor in your standard mastering chain? I use multiband only for specific purposes (e.g. when I am lazy and do not check if all sfx in my project have "not too high" volume).
dyross
Senior Member
Two big caveats first:
1) I am a hobbyist, not a pro
2) I mostly write (symphonic) rock, not strictly classical
While I don't find the mastering assistant or presets super helpful, I do really like the Clarity and Stabilizer modules. No matter how well I do balancing / EQ'ing individual tracks / stems, I find that arrangement differences across sections can use the adaptive "smart" EQ to keep them relatively balanced. Otherwise, I would have to automate a static EQ more than I really want to.
I use these gently, of course.
1) I am a hobbyist, not a pro
2) I mostly write (symphonic) rock, not strictly classical
While I don't find the mastering assistant or presets super helpful, I do really like the Clarity and Stabilizer modules. No matter how well I do balancing / EQ'ing individual tracks / stems, I find that arrangement differences across sections can use the adaptive "smart" EQ to keep them relatively balanced. Otherwise, I would have to automate a static EQ more than I really want to.
I use these gently, of course.
motomotomoto
Active Member
personally the only thing that is always in my mastering chain is a limiter. Everything else serves a purpose. I only compress, eq or saturate the master if I feel like the song needs it.
sostenuto
AKA _ doubtingtom37
Only Ozone 9 Elements in past, but now Ozone11 Advanced. Any hints on identifying this TGP emulation from Ozone 4 ?
