semiPro mastering shootout (fgx vs. ozone vs. hybrid)

gabriel g.

gabriel g.

Member
Sep 7, 2006
3,171
1
38
Hamburg
www.myspace.com
I am struggeling with FGX for a while now so I decided to make a fast shootout between the mastering processors.

I used the waves lin Low-band (hp @22hz with a q of 0.5) only with the ozone and the hybrid version.

FGX is made to be a standalone tool so I used it like it.

The waves api2500 is moving the GR like the slate-comp in fgx.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1425397/sneap shootout slate vs. ozone/api2500 mh softsat ozone.mp3

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1425397/sneap shootout slate vs. ozone/master FGX.mp3

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1425397/sneap shootout slate vs. ozone/mastered with only ozone4.mp3

and here is the unmastered aif file.
Feel free to try you own mastering with the snippet or show me the right way to use FGX

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1425397/sneap shootout slate vs. ozone/mixed file with nothin on 2bus.aif

cheers
 
the last ozone sounds the best to me, the bass was sticking out way to much in the first and the fgx sounded really flat
 
thanks gabriel! I'll post my master with FG-X and the settings in just a bit.
 
Here is my master:

www.stevenslate.com/gabriel/SlateFGX.wav

All I did was use a linear eq to attenuate the slightly overbearing sublows, and then I used this setting:

www.stevenslate.com/gabriel/fgxset.JPG

I automated the ITP during the initial sustain, and then left it on .3, with the exception of a quick ITP drop during a tom fill. The MkII of the FG-X will be even more adaptive so that you won't even need to do these little automations.

To my ears, this sounds really good. Its very punchy, open, much clearer, and doesn't have that mushy squash thing happening.

I used the FG Comp also to give some extra articulation to the transients as well as tighten the lows. Let me know if anyone has any questions.
 
Thank you very much Steven. Your costumer support is just outstanding!!!

About the master:
your version is much better then my fgx version but the sub-drops (the band requested them :/) got lost.
And the lowend got a little weakend IMO.

cheers
 
Hi Gabriel, I'm glad to help and thanks so much for posting! The sublows are definitely a challenge on that mix. If you listen to it on a system with a sub, the problem I had was that the clarity of the upper mids and highs gets a bit clouded. If the band wants the sublows, I'd get a bit fancier and put automate the eq so that during the subdrops, the low attenuation automates back to 0.. Overall, the sublow content was a bit heavy handed though, especially for the genre. But in the end, its what the band wants! So try some clever eq automation to give it a good balance, and then try the FG-X setting I posted, making sure to automate the ITP.
 
hey steven, can i ask about eq? You add, some HP, or low shelf only? Your master is much much better, low end is more tight and clear, i like;P
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back