Ozone or FGX ?

[LeSedna]

Hello,

Simple question for recommandation, how does Ozone 5's maximizer compares with Slate's FG-X ?

Do you guys use ozone 5's eq for mastering ?

 

[abt]

They're pretty different. Personally, I'd go for Ozone as you get a bunch of stuff that you can't do with FG-X. The way I use ozone most is to throw it on the master bus and pull up a preset just to get a bit of instant gratification while tracking. They I take if off after that and continue.

I think it also depends on how good your mixes are. If you suck at mixing like me then you want Ozone because it instantly adds about 3 liters of wowwee juice. If you can get pretty good mixes but just want to get your mixes loud without killing everything go with FG-X.

Both have free trials I believe.

 

[Emdprodukt]

A lot of people from this forum sold FG-X because it's not as clean as it says. It differs the sound in a way ome people don't like.

 

[LeSedna]

I don't think I'm great at mixing but I'm more after a transparent and efficient loudness maximizer than anything else.

I read some Ozone 5 topics and decided I would go for the normal version of Ozone anyway so thanks

 

[Lasse Lammert]

DEFINITELY Ozone....
there's a reason why almost everyone sold FGX half a year after they bought it
Ozone is killer!
Not saying FGX is bad. but it's by no means clean, it adds a harsh/cold/brittle quality to everything you run through it (IME)

 

[dcb]

lately i had great results using fab filter l.. try that out. kills both in my opinion.

 

[ArthurD]

Ozone has more options.

 

[Eduardo Apolonia]

FG-X works great for me.
I have to automate the ITP through the entire song so I don't get distortion.

I bought Ozone recently and I don't know it so well yet to give a fair opinion on it. But from what I tried it works great too. Probably better than FG-X. At least it has more options

Massey L2007 also works great on some stuff.

 

[Sloan]

I like FGX for just slapping on and getting shit loud. My ears are not good enough to notice a huge difference between the mix and master, it just sounds much louder to me. But since Ozone is an entire mastering suite, I would say that it probably has more options. If you can use it's features as separate plugins (like T-RackS), then I would say it would be a wiser investment, but definitely try demos before you buy...

 

[Matt-Steele]

I have both and I have difficulty with Ozone. FG-X has been easier for me. I love the other mastering tools in Ozone, they're really great and VERY powerful, but I have had difficulty getting the limiter to sound the way I want it. I'm not giving up though. It has a wider range of limiting capabilities, I just can not decide which to use. ARGH!

 

[Charles J]

Ozone has MUCH more features, but I REALLY like using FG-X as a SUBTLE processor after the BULK of my mastering and carving has been done to a mix.

It has a really cool character that can really work well with a mix that has lost either A) transient info and B) dynamics, oddly enough.

Ozone just...IDK, too much going on for me! =D

 

[Josh Burgess]

DEFINITELY Ozone....
there's a reason why almost everyone sold FGX half a year after they bought it
Ozone is killer!
Not saying FGX is bad. but it's by no means clean, it adds a harsh/cold/brittle quality to everything you run through it (IME)

This. Ozone is cleaner sounding than FG-X.

Ozone 5 using one of the Intelligent modes and the Mid-Side processing capability to run the left and right sides through the maximizer (limiter) separately = great sounding.