The presets of iZotope OZONE 6's mastering suite.

[rasputin1963]

I have never studied mastering. But I've been fooling around with the mastering multi-effect unit, iZotope OZONE 6. If you haven't used OZONE, what it is, is a single VST plugin for your DAW that contains a whole suite of effects, arranged in serial or parallel, designed to give your audio a mastered finish. EQ, Compression, Excitation, Bass Boost, Stereo Placement, Phase, Dither and other criteria are all shown to you in a single plugin GUI.

 

I find it very interesting to put it on a Bus, then run my tracks through it, testing out all the Presets (see my screencap here).

 

All the presets do indeed make your audio sound quite different, and, interestingly, the most "boring" sounding one of all the 70 presets (to my ears) is the one called CD MASTER. I dunno, but it is probably the most "conservative" setting of the bunch... It dramatically tones down all trebles, midrange and bass and sort of "sandpapers" your whole mix in nearly every respect, until your mix is smooth, muted and very much "behaves"... It sounds as if you were to, say, sandpaper down a classical bas-relief frieze, haha, making everything very "safe".

 

Is that really what you want to do when you master? Also, is there (still) a great deal of orthodoxy/unanimity in what a good mastering job sounds like? Is there any reason why, say, a thoroughly modern master shouldn't be a wild-assed melange of "disobedient" frequencies, pannings and volumes? Does a good modern master need to "behave" in every respect?

 

Is it feasible and advisable to "McMaster" using something like OZONE ?

 

ras

[bieke]

I like some of the presets for drums ad acoustic guitar for instance, because I often just plug my acoustic straight into the interface to do a quick recording and then Ozone has a nice turd polishing effect. Same with drums, I use a plastic sounding virtual drumloop and then Ozone makes it sound acceptable.

 

The mastering presets are a mixed bunch, I usually start off with the Pop preset and then start tweaking it and usually revert back because I bypass EQ, Exciter, Dynamics and sometime end up with everything bypassed ...

I'm doing it wrong

[WRGKMC]

I been doing my own mastering for about 20 years now. I have Ozone 3 & 4 which I've diddled around with quite a bit.

 

The plugin can be used for mastering, but I wouldn't bother using the Presets. None are going to be optimized for your particular recording now will they achieve optimal results. Going in and fiddling around to get the best sound by ear is pretty much hit or miss too.

 

Mastering has specific goals and you really need to break the process down into specific steps. Each step has to produce the best results before you move on to the next step and optimize its results.

 

The three main steps are EQing the mixdown, Using Multiband compression/limiting to even up the dynamic response throughout the frequency response, then brick wall limiting.

 

You may not need the first two, but you must always brick wall the music to prevent peaks above 0db or you have digital distortion issues.

 

Ozone isn't a bad plugin, its just not going to give you the best results possible using a preset. With a preset, you may have tools running that aren't needed, or others that are needed and not turned on. None of the presets are optimized for your particular recording and the best you may be able to get one out of a hundred chances of one of those presets coming close to what you need.

 

My best advice is to learn the mastering process first. Its not that hard and your recordings will benefit immensely from properly applied knowledge. In the beginning it may seem like you're shooting in the dark without fences or boarders to guide you but over time it becomes a very simple process.

 

Believe it or not, I can do a better job mastering completely deaf using visual displays, targeted measurements, and the correct tools for the job then I can using the presets in Ozone. Of course I don't advise this for anyone, especially someone just getting into mastering but I say it because much of the mastering process is about targeting specific goals.

 

I break down the recording process into 4 main areas.

 

1. The musical performance and the ability to produce great sounding music.

2. Front end gear properly chosen and properly used tracking that musical performance.

3. Mixing

4. Mastering

 

All the steps before mastering influence the final results.

For example, when you Mix, you're using the two previous steps. If the choices made performing or tracking are less then optimal, the mix wont be as good as it can be and you'll use your best judgment during the mixing process to make the tracks sound as good as possible in the mix.

 

The exact same attention to details is needed Mastering. Its unlikely you'd stick a plugin on an individual track without tweaking it to sound good. You may begin by using an EQ to target the instruments frequency ranges, then you may use a compressor to limit its dynamic range or ride the levels to keep it up front. You'd tweak the threshold, attack, release and outputs to make the track sound good for the music being played. Then you may add a Chorus or Reverb after you have that compression right.

 

If you stuck the plugins in the track and selected presets you know the results may be pot luck. You may find settings that are acceptable but its unlikely those settings will work with all tracks or all music types.

 

You do the mastering in a similar way, step by step till one step sounds great, then you move on to the next if its needed. If the mix doesn't need any additional EQing, skip it. Overly hyped responses don't translate well to all playback systems so the goal is to only use what's essential, and if you're using too much, you need to go back to the mix to fix it.

 

Mastering again is looking back to what was already done, wearing a different hat and doing a new job. If someone gave you a two track stereo recording and you were asked to make it sound better you wouldn't have access to tweaking the mix. You have to evaluate what you have, compare it to other commercial recordings and decide on what can be done to make it sound as good as possible.

 

I call this RX. You do whatever restoration possible to achieve the healthiest results. There are things that cannot be fixed mastering of course. Bad mixing decisions like too much reverb, too much compression or individual instruments with too much of anything cant be separated out and fixed so you basically have global effects that target the entire mix.

 

Multiband is a key tool however because it targets frequency bands. If the bass is in the low range, guitar middle, cymbals top, you can still do allot to fix loudness issues within those bands. EQ is of course first but EQ is fixed. Multiband compression can bring down attacks in a band and even up one instrument with another within that band and get your speakers pushing as a unified piston pushing air.

 

I do find Ozone difficult to use "properly" over other mastering tools I have available. The EQ and limiter are fairly straight forward, but the multiband is pretty tricky to get right, but it can be done. I don't like the harmonic crap. If my mix lacks air I'd rather fix it in the mix. Those kinds of plugins cause more trouble then good and should be used with prudence. The reverb in ozone sucks. I couldn't get a decent sound out of it on anything, besides, reverb is better in the mix where you can apply it to individual instruments. Used mastering it makes everything from the kick to cymbals swell and wash out.

 

I mainly use Ozone on a drum buss if I use it at all. Even then its a matter of weather its really making the drums sound better or is it masking what's making them sound bad. I may try a preset to get the mix going then come back to it and refine its settings to the mix. In reality however I can do a much better job with singular plugins.

 

I used TRacks as a mastering plugin for a long time too. I really didn't know how to mater very well and mainly used my ears. I wound up damaging allot of good recordings by its overuse. Once I learned the proper way of using mastering effects and revisited the suite, my mastering results improved ten fold.

 

I've posted this mastering tutorial here many times. I found it a great foundation for getting great mastering results. I actually have all the plugins and mastering tools in the list they use so I was able to follow the process to a Tee. After awhile I used other substitute plugins and found the process worked equally well with just about any substitute, so long as you used it long enough to become proficient in its use.

 

The key is the step by step process and understanding exactly what you're trying to do. If you're doddering around hoping to find something that sounds good, its like wandering around in the dark trying to find a door. If you have a plan, you can systematically rule out

all the space until only the correct door is left.

 

It does take practice, but I assure you it not only gets easier over time, but the results get better with practice. I have over 5000 recordings I've mixed and mastered and I can compare my results dating back to may analog days in the 70's. Allot of that was hit or miss and I was lucky to get one out of ten that sounded good. Today its more like one out of 25 may not sound as good as it can.

 

Take this tutorial and use the individual plugins within Ozone and apply them one at a time. Use the EQ, Multiband and Limiter only for awhile. When you get those nailed down, then you can add some of the others if needed. If you select a plugin to start, its more difficult to go in and tweak those to where they need to be, but eventually even that wont be too hard, but stick by the procedure starting with the very first steps. Getting the mix levels correct before you master are critical. I'd also mix down to stereo and use the stereo track to master. you don't want to be tempted to tweaking the mix to make the mastering tools sound good. Get the mix sounding good then end that process. You're done there and its time to learn mastering with all its benefits and shortcomings.

 

http://hdqtrz.com/Files/Har-Bal_Mastering_Process.pdf

[Anderton]

I don't use mastering presets. Not because I'm a snob, but because every project has different requirements. For me, it would take more time to try to bend a preset into what I want then just edit the parameters from scratch. The consider EQ the most important component in mastering, and no way a preset will do what you need unless you get lucky and just happen to hit something that works.