I have noticed that the Ozone 5 compression is a killer,  and so is the limiter. and the exciter, and the stereo imager. with all those pre-sets, it seems to be made to be used for mono-tracks and not just the mix. is there anything which you would you held against using Ozone 5 on pretty much mono tracks? or would this be just too much?

well if you want to do that, and it works for you, by all means, but ozone is quite a cpu intensive application cuz its linear phase and so on, but personally i wouldn't use it on tracks, and if transparency is what im looking for then ill use a transparent compressor for track or buss duties, id recommend against you using ozone on tracks tbh

Aside from eating your CPU for lunch, Ozone is a stereo effect, so the output from your mono tracks would end up stereo-interleaved, which might impact your panning options when they go to a bus. You might want to take a look at iZotope's Alloy plugin, which is similar to Ozone but intended for use on individual tracks.

I can't even use Ozone on the master bus unless I freeze all of my VSTi's. It really is a gas guzzler.

bitflipper
Aside from eating your CPU for lunch, Ozone is a stereo effect, so the output from your mono tracks would end up stereo-interleaved, which might impact your panning options when they go to a bus. You might want to take a look at iZotope's Alloy plugin, which is similar to Ozone but intended for use on individual tracks.

I had to check this to be sure but I just tried it and it appears that if you put Ozone 5 on a mono track the output of the plugin remains mono.  If you put it on a stereo track the output is stereo.  It doesn't interfere with panning of a mono track when used on a mono track.  I have Ozone 5 Advanced so I guess it could be different than the regular (non-Advanced version).  In Advanced you also get the individual components.  That really helps with CPU loading.  I think there a lot of plugins that behave just the way BF stated.  I know I have several.  Ozone senses what kind of a track it is placed on and acts accordingly.  What really surprised me is that I put Ozone 5 on a mono track it behaves as a mono plugin.  If I then switch the track to stereo leaving the plugin in the effects bin Ozone switches to stereo.  If I then switch back to mono - so does Ozone.  Amazing.
 
Kudos to iZotope and Cakewalk for providing very well behaved software that makes excellent use of the VST2 interface.  iZotope Alloy even supports sidechaining (along with FabFilter and others) using VST2.

Ozone is best left on the Mastering process ...... Save it for Pyro or Wavelab

I do use Ozone (I have 3 & 4) on the tracks and the master.... AS NEEDED.   It's not a given that it gets used on a particular track or bus beside the master where it always resides.
 
The neat thing about Ozone is that you can shut off the modules you are not needing or wanting to use. Since I don't like the Ozone reverb at all, it's off 99% of the time in every instance. I will also have the loudness module off most of the time as well. That loudness control can easily turn a nice looking wave into a very loud brick with just the slide of the fader.  I do however like it's EQ and multiband compression so I will pop it in to a track if I feel O4 is the best option for me.

Ozone 5 Advanced includes its modules as separate VSTs just for adding to tracks. I wouldn't add Ozone to a track if it were the full plugin. 

I had to check this to be sure but I just tried it and it appears that if you put Ozone 5 on a mono track the output of the plugin remains mono.

Don, you're absolutely right. I mis-spoke. It's not the first time I've underestimated the programming genius behind Ozone. 

dear all,
 
thanks for the answers. I guess due to its cpu usage, it would not be recommended to be used on tracks. I have already looked into
Alloy, but it is quite pricey. But if it does wonders to the track as Ozone does on the mix, I guess it is worth the money!