Ozone vs T-Racks?

[FaeryTaleAdventurer]

Which one would you consider the better mixerer/masterer?

It would be most helpful if someone has used both tools.

Garagebandandbeyond recommended T-Racks, and those whom I chatted with on NGAP Skype chat use Ozone for the most part. I've no experience with either, I work with the DAWs' built-in tools.

Lemme hear your experience, and what you like and/or dislike about Ozone/T-Racks. If you believe there's a better mixmaster tool out there than these two, I'm all ears!

[St0mpy]

At 8/17/13 07:08 PM, FaeryTaleAdventurer wrote: Which one would you consider the better mixerer/masterer?

It would be most helpful if someone has used both tools.

Garagebandandbeyond recommended T-Racks, and those whom I chatted with on NGAP Skype chat use Ozone for the most part. I've no experience with either, I work with the DAWs' built-in tools.

Lemme hear your experience, and what you like and/or dislike about Ozone/T-Racks. If you believe there's a better mixmaster tool out there than these two, I'm all ears!

I have used both.

The one thing Ozone has that T-Racks doesn't have is an exciter. That does NOT put it in front of T-Racks by a long shot, however. T-Racks has the ability to use different kinds of processors, from a classic EQ to a Linear-Phase EQ for example. A Black-76 to a "Classic Compressor". Brick Limiter to a Quad-Range Limiter, and so on. This makes processing for different genres and different styles of music very fluent and adaptable for whatever the track calls for. T-Racks has it's way of forming a mastering chain, being able to set one process before or after one another: Compressor before EQ, etc. T-Racks also supplies you with a stereoscopic/phase analyzer, a Peak, RMS, Percieved Loudness meter, and of course an EQ spectral analyzer.

Ozone has all the basics down too. It's tools are as they are and just there to be used, meaning there's no Black-76 to a Classic compressor changability. That's not a bad thing, because there are many different parameters that you can change to your liking. You can also change the mastering chain, as with T-Racks. The one thing that Ozone sets itself apart from T-Racks is it's EQ matching ability. You can insert your reference song (track used as a guide, quality/loudness/EQ wise, etc.) and make Ozone capture/paint the "image" of the EQ spectrum in that track and have your song that you're mastering "match" it. The other standout is the exciter. With 6 different modes of excitation, and 4 different frequency bands to play with it, the exciter gives a lot more character to anything you're working with.

It's really all a matter of your workflow/taste. I personally use Ozone more than T-Racks for mastering. T-Racks can be awesome for mixing, especially because of it's ultra low CPU usage.

[stephenparkhum]

At 8/17/13 07:08 PM, FaeryTaleAdventurer wrote: Which one would you consider the better mixerer/masterer?

It would be most helpful if someone has used both tools.

Garagebandandbeyond recommended T-Racks, and those whom I chatted with on NGAP Skype chat use Ozone for the most part. I've no experience with either, I work with the DAWs' built-in tools.

Lemme hear your experience, and what you like and/or dislike about Ozone/T-Racks. If you believe there's a better mixmaster tool out there than these two, I'm all ears!

I've used Ozone for years and it's my go-to for mastering any project. The only instrument I tend to use it on when it comes to individuals is the bass. Or sometimes the drums if they need a more roomier 'verbed sound. I get that a lot with black metal artists.

Ozone makes a ton of good products, I love their work. I also use their RX line for any clean ups that need to be done.

[sorohanro]

Every time I used Ozone, it sounded overly aggressive to my ears. To be fair, also T-Racks if you just slam presets there might be too aggressive, but somehow to me sounds warmer and closer to what I need.

[MetalRenard]

At 8/18/13 03:56 AM, sorohanro wrote: Every time I used Ozone, it sounded overly aggressive to my ears. To be fair, also T-Racks if you just slam presets there might be too aggressive, but somehow to me sounds warmer and closer to what I need.

That's user error. :P

I use Ozone (and Alloy) which I love. I don't use T-Racks so I can't compare, sorry. All I can do is say that I think Ozone is a great plugin which really sets the standard high.

[SineRider]

I like Ozone, but I tend to use McDSP's ML4000 and a few other basic effects to master my tracks, but then again, McDSP plugins are expensive as fuck so I can't say I recommend it unless you the got money to spend.

On the flipside, Ozone is kinda nice because I don't have to have my ilok in to use it hahah

[MetalRenard]

At 8/18/13 12:10 PM, SineRider wrote: On the flipside, Ozone is kinda nice because I don't have to have my ilok in to use it hahah

Oh man I hate the very idea of iLoks... It's my biggest hangup with EWQL but I'm gonna bite the bullet one day and just get some of their stuff.

I used to master my stuff with Reaper's in-built FX but thanks to using tools like Ozone I actually learnt a lot about mixing and mastering too. I didn't just use it to create, I used it to explore. These kinds of plugins have so much going for them it's crazy to not have one or the other.