Mix/Mater Inside or Out

<<sheesh>> MASTER not "Mater" ... Lordy, all you countryfied will tell me I need salt! @_@

"IF" you are a home recording hobbyist &&
"IF" your music is to be shared not sold &&
"IF" you have no spendable funds for 'pro mastering' &&
"IF" I were to use Ozone to 'master' a piece...

Would it be practical to use ozone on the Master bus of the project vs exporting a wave file that I'll just reload for the same purpose? I understand the exporting for a send off to be mastered. I got that. However, for someone like myself it seems more efficient to do it all inside the project. I just see work flow being smoother. Record, add fx, mix and get all the automations so-so, turn on ozone and master. The benefit for me, I think, is being able to tweek the mix if I can't get say the vocal bedded nicely. Using the faders in real time seems better than remix-export-import rinse&&repeat. I know in the real world I'm making a complex process sound real simple... but in my world I am the quazimodo of KISS.

Recording at 24/44 or 24/48 seems to provide a good range for a 16/44 reduction. With my limited experience I am uncertain about all the theories surrounding the various techniques used for mastering, but my thought here, to me, seems practical. What if anything will I be missing out on?  I probably watch entirely too many "how-to" videos on youtube... ;-p

Your thoughts, as always, are much appreciated!

Thanks mate! That is what I gathered from all the reading of how folk used ozone. It just seemed practical. Yep, I got that part about exp & enviro down real pat. Hopefully, in time, both those areas will improve steadily and I'll be able to use the tools to the result they were all designed for... great music! ;-)
 

Yes, that's the way I do it. Throw mastering plugs in master bus and be done with it. Boost 11, multiband compression, etc..
That is more than adequate for a "home recording enthusiast".