Mastering with Izotope Ozone 4/Waves
Re: Mastering with Izotope Ozone 4/Waves
Stop being a twat.
Re: Mastering with Izotope Ozone 4/Waves
see you edited your post as well to make ti look like I misread the situation.
Re: Mastering with Izotope Ozone 4/Waves
LOL, the guy suggested he stole the plugins. If he didn't then I will take it right back and will SINCERELY apologiseUKRuss wrote:Stop being a twat.
Re: Mastering with Izotope Ozone 4/Waves
Unlikely. You are too much of a internet drama queen to let it go as anyone who 'knows' you knows.
Just fuck off out of other peoples threads if you haven't got anything nice or constructive to say.
Just fuck off out of other peoples threads if you haven't got anything nice or constructive to say.
Re: Mastering with Izotope Ozone 4/Waves
Touché PMSL
Re: Mastering with Izotope Ozone 4/Waves
thanks for all the comments + feedback, it means a lot.
rave, you are entitled to your opinion, but make sure you have the facts right before you go and make more presumptions..
rave, you are entitled to your opinion, but make sure you have the facts right before you go and make more presumptions..
Re: Mastering with Izotope Ozone 4/Waves
Bee Dub wrote:thanks for all the comments + feedback, it means a lot.
rave, you are entitled to your opinion, but make sure you have the facts right before you go and make more presumptions..
I guess you didn’t get my pm earlier
Re: Mastering with Izotope Ozone 4/Waves
Rave wrote:Bee Dub wrote:thanks for all the comments + feedback, it means a lot.
rave, you are entitled to your opinion, but make sure you have the facts right before you go and make more presumptions..
I guess you didn’t get my pm earlier
Correction u did, u just didn’t mention it. How nice of u
So what are the facts? Don’t avoid the question now?
Re: Mastering with Izotope Ozone 4/Waves
@ UKRuss: i had many problems mostly in combination with the 64bit version of win7 ...
Live couldn't see them as plugins without a trick (check signature), automation and editing live's device box wasnt possible and when moving projects PC<->MAC the settings wasnt there. Big pain to note each setting of each device and re-applying it to the same project in an other OS. Also some minor problems with the shell (Standalone mode) ... glitches and drops with 88.2k files and downsampling.
Love the sound of these plugins anyway
Live couldn't see them as plugins without a trick (check signature), automation and editing live's device box wasnt possible and when moving projects PC<->MAC the settings wasnt there. Big pain to note each setting of each device and re-applying it to the same project in an other OS. Also some minor problems with the shell (Standalone mode) ... glitches and drops with 88.2k files and downsampling.
Love the sound of these plugins anyway
Re: Mastering with Izotope Ozone 4/Waves
That is a pain! A shame as you say because they do the business.
Re: Mastering with Izotope Ozone 4/Waves
it really depends on the kind of music and what you are planning to do with it, but if you forked out loads of money specifically to master your own tracks when your intention is to get them signed to a label then sadly you have wasted your money because the label will get it mastered themselves anyway. They will want a rendered AIFF or WAV with NO compression on the master track. You can still use a peak limiter PURELY to catch any overs, but nothing more than that (this is why the Ableton limiter is totally fine). They will simply send it back to you and ask you for a render without anything on the master.
You are far better off reading Tarekith's links and focusing much more on your mixing and reducing the need for mastering plug-ins.
"Mastering" gets thrown around these days as though it is some magical process where you spend loads of money on expensive software to make your tunes fatter, but ultimately it is really about producing a "Master" that can then be used to cut the release from. In the olden days this actually meant making it suitable for vinyl so that the needle wouldn't bounce off the record and things like that. These days it's changed a bit, but the point still remains.
If you are planning on releasing it yourself then it's a different matter, but the same still applies - put your time and energy into mixing and reducing the need for any "mastering".
Also, on the subject of labels, again it probably depends a lot on the genre of music, but I think there is a lot of thinking around now that you don't need a label and you can do it all yourself.
It might be true that the old "major" label system has changed, but on a smaller scale, such as in house music etc, there are many labels out there and in my humble opinion smaller independent labels are needed now more than ever because that is how you get yourself heard.
While it's possible to do more yourself than at any other time in history, you are also at the same time a tiny speck in the enormous ocean of the internet, so the job of promotion is a really big one. That's what you need a label for.
Just look at your soundcloud/myspace account if you have one. You will no doubt get spammed by dozens, even hundreds of people every week saying "hey check out my tune" and unless you have all the time in the world, you will never click on any of them unless you have heard of them and know you like them. In most cases I would personally guess the ones you will have heard of outside your own circle of friends will be artists that are signed to labels.
my little sidetracked rant for the day!
You are far better off reading Tarekith's links and focusing much more on your mixing and reducing the need for mastering plug-ins.
"Mastering" gets thrown around these days as though it is some magical process where you spend loads of money on expensive software to make your tunes fatter, but ultimately it is really about producing a "Master" that can then be used to cut the release from. In the olden days this actually meant making it suitable for vinyl so that the needle wouldn't bounce off the record and things like that. These days it's changed a bit, but the point still remains.
If you are planning on releasing it yourself then it's a different matter, but the same still applies - put your time and energy into mixing and reducing the need for any "mastering".
Also, on the subject of labels, again it probably depends a lot on the genre of music, but I think there is a lot of thinking around now that you don't need a label and you can do it all yourself.
It might be true that the old "major" label system has changed, but on a smaller scale, such as in house music etc, there are many labels out there and in my humble opinion smaller independent labels are needed now more than ever because that is how you get yourself heard.
While it's possible to do more yourself than at any other time in history, you are also at the same time a tiny speck in the enormous ocean of the internet, so the job of promotion is a really big one. That's what you need a label for.
Just look at your soundcloud/myspace account if you have one. You will no doubt get spammed by dozens, even hundreds of people every week saying "hey check out my tune" and unless you have all the time in the world, you will never click on any of them unless you have heard of them and know you like them. In most cases I would personally guess the ones you will have heard of outside your own circle of friends will be artists that are signed to labels.
my little sidetracked rant for the day!
Re: Mastering with Izotope Ozone 4/Waves
Good points though. Wish I'd have had some more pep talks like that.
Necessary mastering is really the correction of mixing. Or the improvement of the mixing beyond the mixers technical, technological and/or judgemental capacity.
I guess!
Necessary mastering is really the correction of mixing. Or the improvement of the mixing beyond the mixers technical, technological and/or judgemental capacity.
I guess!