iZoTope Ozone 3 Released

  • Thread starter Thread starter Qwerty
  • Start date Start date
Qwerty

Qwerty

New member
Hi all,

Don't know if many/any on here use this, but I have found the earlier version of this was pretty good for "mastering" at home for a lot less than the cost of Waves et al.

http://www.izotope.com

Also got a nice upgrade offer emailled from them which was pretty cheap so I will probably get it.

Ciao,

Q.
 
I'm glad you called it "mastering"... ;)

I've tried the Ozone 2. I was as satisfyed with it as I was with T-Racks... :mad:
 
I've been using Ozone 2 for since it's release and am very satisfied with it.

However...I got the same email and was quite upset to see the upgrade was $149! I don't feel that this is very "cheap". If you don't already have an Izotope product the cost is only $199. The upgrade is 75% of the full price.

Personally, I don't see $149 worth of improvements over Ozone 2.

Earl
 
Are you sure you read that right? I though the upgrade price was $49!!! I'll have to double-check when I get home.

I happen to really like Ozone and have gotten good results w/ it. The screen shot seems to show that the EQ screen now uses a more standard bar graph to display the freq's, which I would prefer. Other than that, I don't really see a whole lot of new stuff to be excited about.

got mojo?
www.voodoovibe.com
 
moskus said:
I'm glad you called it "mastering"... ;)
Click to expand...

You mean you prefer to pay a professional to kill the dynamic range? :)


-0z-
 
LOL - the upgrade is $49, full retail is $199. So yes, it's a $150 discount.

I grabbed it -- simply because I can't say no -- Pedullist, stop looking at me like that.

There are some nice improvements in it, but I have been finding myself using it less and less anyway.

Q.
 
I have 2.0 and really like it. Probably will upgrade to 3.0 btw did you see they added automation support for Sonar now? Cool! Now you can automate any of the buttons!
Jason
 
OzNimbus said:
You mean you prefer to pay a professional to kill the dynamic range? :)
Click to expand...
I don't make techno, so how would I know? :D
 
LOL...here's a screenshot of the email I received. You can see why I thought it was $149...

ozone3.jpg


Earl
 
moskus said:
I don't make techno, so how would I know? :D
Click to expand...

I work with heavy rock. Every band I know that has sent thier music out to a "professional" mastering house has always come back with the same result: completely smashed dynamics.

The anology is to have a 'dedicated mastering engineer' master your stuff. Well, back in the 50's, the rules were to have an 'artist' and a 'producer.' Artists were not allowed to produce their own music. Thankfully, Buddy Holly changed all that.
I feel the same about mastering. Sure, I can pay someone else to do it, but why bother? I've been mastering my own, and other people's projects, for five years now.
Personally, I think you can get outstanding results with Ozone if you spend the time to learn it's idosyncracies.
 
Ozone 1.0 sucked because it was hard to use, was a resource hog and had a very distinct colour to it...

Ozone 2.0 sucked because it added even more options, was still a resource hog and still had it's own character which it imparted on tracks

Ozone 3.0 seems to have options to allow "clean(er)" processing of sound. In fact, they refer in their documentation to older v2 settings as being analogue models of various odds and ends -- something that wasn't mentioned in the 2.0 literature. So no wonder my tracks ended up sounding "Ozone'd"

I got the upgrade and it does sound cleaner and enables me to quickly tweak a mix so that only about half of my friends ask me why my CD isn't as loud as System of a Down... Whether you call this mastering or even value the process is a moot point.

It is a means to an end which serves a limited purpose for this poor homereccer.

Personally, I never expected to get a mastering engineer, $250,000 worth of gear and 30 years of experience out of a $199 plug-in, but you can't beat the bang for buck if you are looking to "master/finalise" at home.

:) Q.
 
Qwerty said:

Personally, I never expected to get a mastering engineer, $250,000 worth of gear and 30 years of experience out of a $199 plug-in,
Click to expand...

That's one way of looking at it, but then again, in the early 90's, the adat came along and changed everything.... why not the same with a $199 plug?
 
Personally, I never expected to get a mastering engineer, $250,000 worth of gear and 30 years of experience out of a $199 plug-in, but you can't beat the bang for buck if you are looking to "master/finalise" at home.
Click to expand...
Right,this "home mastering"debate always pops up any time you mention these types of software.
You know I don't have a U87 mic or a vintage tube preamp,but that's not gonna stop me from trying to make a decent recording.This is homerecording after all.
As far as the Ozone sucks,well I guess it's just a matter of opinion,or a case of who or what you're using it on.I have a guitar that I rarely ever play,but when a friend of mine comes over,he grabs it right away and sounds good on it.
It is a resource hog.Technically your supposed to be running it on a finished stereo track though,and this should'nt be a problem.As processor speeds keep going up,software will have less of a focus on CPU efficiency and more focus on doing the job at hand.So quit your whining and buy a dual processor with two 3.0's.:rolleyes: :p

You have waaaaay too much money these days, acid. Please send me some immediately.
Click to expand...
That reminds me...have I told you lately how satisfying it is to have a rig with top notch features and plenty o' headroom?:p :p :p
now I just gotta get me a Taylor....
 
OzNimbus said:
I work with heavy rock. Every band I know that has sent thier music out to a "professional" mastering house has always come back with the same result: completely smashed dynamics.
Click to expand...
Then they've obviously used wrong mastering houses. I've always been satisfyed with material sendt to mastering.

You say that before you'd have the "producer" and the "artist", and that's all changed now. True, true. But why do you think that the thought of having a seperate "mastering engineer" is still stuck, then? ;)

And I only send songs to mastering when I'm really, really, really happy with them (what the bands I record do, is up to them). Most songs I "master" myself, using some beautiful Waves plugins, which I think is way better than Ozone. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top