SX2 + Pro Channel versus Ozone

Author
Post
Essentials Only Full Version
hellogoodbye
Max Output Level: -64 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1343
  • Joined: 2004/03/22 05:46:36
  • Status: offline
2013/06/07 15:57:31 (permalink)

SX2 + Pro Channel versus Ozone

Just wondering: is there anyone who stopped using Ozone after getting SX2 and various Pro Channel modules? I use Ozone with S8.5 and I am thinking about getting SX2 along with at least the Concrete limiter. My usage of Ozone is VERY simple: I just use master presets on the master bus... Somehow I could never really get into Ozone. After looking at a lot of video's about SX2 and Pro Channel I thought that 1. all of that would be wasted as soon as you would add Ozone on the master (all the little changes and detail would be gone, I imagine) and 2. somehow it looks easier to get into... or better said: I would be FORCED to actually do things myself because there aren't master presets that do it all for me... ;) Anyway, I wonder, as I said, if anyone here stopped using Ozone after getting SX2 and Pro Channel.

Sonar 8.5 PE, Edirol FA-66, Behringer C-1. All instruments in my songs are VSTi's. 
Check out Soundclick
#1

3 Replies Related Threads
    rtucker55
    Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 2177
    • Joined: 2005/06/20 21:11:47
    • Location: Hope, Indiana
    • Status: offline
    Re: SX2 + Pro Channel versus Ozone 2013/06/07 17:13:32 (permalink)
    I'm using X2a and I did not stop using Ozone or any of my other plugs on tracks or buses. Actually I upgraded Ozone 4 to Ozone 5 advanced because I liked the idea of having the separate modules and the Insight metering. I probably use the pro channel modules on tracks just as much as my other plugs though. I don't really use Isotopes' presets except for maybe a starting point.
     
    The pro channel modules really are good quality and I see no technical reasons why someone couldn't produce a commercial mix using them only. So you would not be forced to use Ozone if you didn't want/need to. Just my opinion...
     
    Kind regards,
    Rick

    Purrrfect Audio DAW here.  Wow!...
    #2
    clintmartin
    Max Output Level: -36.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 3893
    • Joined: 2009/10/11 12:16:43
    • Location: Fort Smith, AR
    • Status: offline
    Re: SX2 + Pro Channel versus Ozone 2013/06/07 17:15:49 (permalink)
    In the songs forum, I've been trying the Pro channel vs. T-racks deluxe. My final mix used only the Pro channel modules...plus LimiterNo.6 ( a free vst from vladg sound). The Pro channel is more than capable, but T-racks and Ozone 5 are both very nice tools to have.

    Cakewalk, Harrison Mixbus 4, Waveform 9, ADK intel i7 2600 3.40 ghz, 8gb Ram, Win 7, Presonus Audiobox 44VSL. 
    http://www.youtube.com/c/clintmartinmusic
    https://itunes.apple.com/...lint-martin/1010966023
    https://open.spotify.com/artist/4x4TBz32i56bTJkgu7b4tN
     
     
     
    #3
    GIM Productions
    Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 860
    • Joined: 2005/12/14 05:07:56
    • Status: offline
    Re: SX2 + Pro Channel versus Ozone 2013/06/08 05:26:44 (permalink)
    Hi all,i disagree with you.It's an apple and orange matter.
    Concrete Limiter is a tracks\mixing limiter concept.Infact is a plug with limited controls and fixed algorithm.
    Ozone and Tracks stuff are dedicated mastering limiter.I would recommend you that don't use a limiter in a Mixing prj on muster bus couse you must preserve all your headroom and dynamic for mastering session.Again,the limiter on muster bus can change all song's eq making wrong decisions on tracks eq.
    I always export my 32 bit wave project in an other mastering session and i use a few mastering plugs to focus my final sound object.I use Voxengo Elephant on mastering session,It has many controls to preserve original dynamic.
    Best

    Intel i7 3600,Asus Z170P,16 GIG Corsair ram,Focusrite Saffire Pro 26 i\o,Nektar Impact LX 49,Focusrite Liquid Mix,Monitors ADAM-K&H,Sonar Platinum
    Windows 10 SP1
    Producer....more stuff in SStudio, Rome ,Italy.
    #4
    Jump to:
    © 2025 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1