Apr 06, 2004 01:35 am i'd say definitely run ozone offline, however you want to. there might be a benefit to running it in realtime that i don't know about...but i still don't know what it is.
Sound Forge + Ozone Question
Posted on Apr 06, 2004 01:05 am
Bob
Member Since: Jun 20, 2003
I've been using Ozone for a few months and I have been pleased with the results in filling-out the final mix. Generally I do a mixdown to a stereo track in Sonar 3, then add Ozone to one of the main busses & solo the mixed down track with Ozone running real-time. Since going from Sonar 2.2 to Sonar 3, Ozone uses even more of the CPU. My question is : would I benefit from running Ozone separate from Sonar from say Sound Forge? What would Sound Forge with Ozone do for me different or better than Sonar with Ozone? Anybody using this combo?
[ Back to Top ]
Apr 06, 2004 01:35 am i'd say definitely run ozone offline, however you want to. there might be a benefit to running it in realtime that i don't know about...but i still don't know what it is.
Apr 06, 2004 06:57 am Yes, definitely run it with Soundforge instead of with Sonar. At first, I used it with Sonar but it took alot of my CPU. But with Soundforge, works perfect.
Apr 06, 2004 07:01 am Sonar is for recording and mixing your music. Ozone is a mastering tool, Sound Forge is a mastering application. Ultimately I see little or no difference to the actual sound you will get from doing it either way, but using it in Sonar would be much more CPU-intensive rather than just opening the stereo track in Sound Forge and doing it there.
You are always best off having a more clear line between you mixing and mastering stages, otherwise you can end up stepping on your own feet...
Apr 06, 2004 10:04 am I agree.
I used to try to mix and master all at once, but I found that doing it in different steps took a little longer, but I'm able to do a better job. I'm not trying to do two different tasks at once, and it lets me concentrate more on each step.
Now I even make sure I step away from the mix for a little while before I master. Fresher ears, as well as a mind not in "mixing mode" lead to better masters.
The process takes a little longer that way, but the final product is much better.
Apr 06, 2004 02:27 pm I thank you all for the advice. There's really no other place to find such a collection of experts as here on HRC.
OK, so I'm starting to take a serious look at Sound Forge. I'm wondering if the Wave Hammer mastering tools that come with it would do a better, worse, or not the same job as Ozone? Any opinions on that?
Apr 06, 2004 02:45 pm Wave Hammer is a different tool, and the features that are the same aren't as in depth.
I use Ozone first, then on some jobs that require a little more loudness, I'll use Wave Hammer to touch it up
Apr 06, 2004 05:58 pm Agreed, use Ozone in Sound Forge or WaveLab. WaveHammer is not nearly what Ozone is.
Apr 06, 2004 06:07 pm Then pass it off to Har-Bal and you're good to go.
Apr 06, 2004 06:33 pm Or should you Har-Bal-ize before...? Right now I find that it sounds good to run my mix through all the Ozone modules except for the loudness maximizer / dithering module, then send it to har-bal, then back to Ozone for just maximization and dithering. I was wondering- what do you think about that, dB?
Bob- Do you have the latest patch for Ozone 3 off their website? It significantly improved the speed for me in while working in Sonar.
Also, it sounds like you're mastering in the same project file as you're mixing. That would be your problem right there. Soloing the bounced mix doesn't make it easier on the CPU-- you're just as well (actually better) off not bouncing to a single track and just putting Ozone in the main bus (leaving everything unmuted) if you're doing it that way. It will be just as hard on the cpu. It's still doing the job of playing back all those tracks and applying those effects, you just can't hear them. The only way to keep it from taking up that CPU power is to either delete all the tracks or "Archive" them.
Open up a new project file, import your bounced file, and master there with Ozone in the main bus. Then I'm sure you'll be MUCH better off!
Hope I interperated your predicament correctly :)
-Porp
Apr 06, 2004 11:15 pm Thanks again all you guys.
Porp - I'm going to go the route you suggested and run Ozone in a separate Sonar project file. I'll also try using Har-Bal at the end as dB suggested or in-between as you suggested (and see which works best). I've currently got Ozone V3.01 & I see they are up to 3.03 so I'll get updated & see if that calms my CPU down a bit. It sounds like you've fought this same battle & got some experience with these particular tools (running within Sonar instead of a mastering app), so here's a couple more questions for you:
Does your method of running Har-Bal inserted in the middle of Ozone require you to have 2 instantiations of Ozone?
What exactly does the dither stage of Ozone do? Does that convert from 24 to 16 bit. Do I have to do a bounce to track in Sonar playing through Ozone to get the output dithered to 16 bits? If I run Ozone as an effect on the main bus & then export a broadcast 16-bit wave file is Ozone doing the conversion or Sonar? I know I should do my homework on this but I'm lazy so I thought I would just ask.
With the tools I've got now (Ozone & Har-Bal) running out of a Sonar project containing just the mixdown, what would I gain by going out & buying a mastering app (like Sound Forge), other than a big hole in my wallet?
Apr 07, 2004 04:48 am Har-Bal is meant to be the last thing you do before final maximization.
Apr 07, 2004 04:04 pm Cool, dB. That's how I just said I do it.
Quote:
Does your method of running Har-Bal inserted in the middle of Ozone require you to have 2 instantiations of Ozone?
No, what I do is I leave the maximization/dithering module bypassed when I go through it the first time, then I export the mix (still in 24 bit if you record in 24 bit) and import it into har-bal. After that I bring it back into Sonar as another track, mute the old track, and then bypass all the other Ozone modules except for maximization/dither. (Keep in mind that you should have Ozone inserted into the Main output's effects bin this whole time). Then I output to 16-bit (make sure that SONAR's dithering is off in the options menu if your recording is 24 bit and you're using Ozone's dithering!).
Quote:
What exactly does the dither stage of Ozone do? Does that convert from 24 to 16 bit.
Well, it "gets it ready" to be converted from 24 to 16 bit (if you recorded in 24 bit in the first place). Sonar is what actaully converts it when you export to 16 bit, but Ozone does the job of dithering, which is something I don't fully understand myself, but it preserves some of the 24 bit quality by adding some very quiet noise to your recording. If it confuses you too much, just leave it off and use Sonar's built in dithering which can be turned off and on under one of the options menus.
Quote:
Do I have to do a bounce to track in Sonar playing through Ozone to get the output dithered to 16 bits?
You should never actually have to use the "bounce to track" option during this entire process. The term "bounce" just means mixdown. All you have to do is use the "export" function under the file menu. No need to actually use the "bounce" function beforehand.
...In short, no.
Quote:
If I run Ozone as an effect on the main bus & then export a broadcast 16-bit wave file is Ozone doing the conversion or Sonar? I know I should do my homework on this but I'm lazy so I thought I would just ask.
Haha... Well, luckly, I did my homework ;) As I said before, Ozone is a plug-in so it can't actually do the conversion to 16-bit, but Ozone will be applied to the output if the main out effects box is checked, which it is by default. If you are using Ozone's dithering, leave Sonar's dithering off and just convert to 16 bit. This will "trunkate" the file, but that's alright because Ozone is doing the dithering.
Quote:
With the tools I've got now (Ozone & Har-Bal) running out of a Sonar project containing just the mixdown, what would I gain by going out & buying a mastering app (like Sound Forge), other than a big hole in my wallet?
In my opinion, not much of anything.
Remember to download that Ozone patch. Get back to me on the results! Hope that all made sense :)
-Porp
Apr 07, 2004 07:07 pm Agree on the Har-Bal thing. If you use that there is no need for the other stuff. And it is a great piece of software which in my case can replace using 2 or 3 differant pieces of software at once and switching back and forth.
Apr 08, 2004 02:20 pm Thanks for the good answers Porp, Noize,
I Downloaded Ozone 3.03 last night. Haven't had time to try it yet.
|
Related Forum Topics: |
If you would like to participate in the forum discussions, feel free to register for your free membership.