I've been finding Ozone's Master Assistant thing to be generally brilliant. But I agree with the makers that it provides a starting point rather than a finished master. But overall, Ozone 8 is amazing. And if you get Neutron 2 as well, and make use of the way the plugins can interact, you can get some astonishing results very quickly. It's a massive time saver.

Leee
But a key point you did not emphasize is that  the "Craig Mastering" involved a fair amount of tweaking to get it the way you wanted to sound.   Was there any tweaking done with the Ozone mastering?
My point is that with the same amount of tweaking you did on your own mastering take, you could have gotten the same or better results with Ozone 8.  Most people know that the presets and AI results in Ozone, are just the starting point, you'll almost always need to tweak no matter what tools you are using.

The "Craig Mastered" take is clearly the best one of the three, not too soft, not too hot.  Like Goldilocks and The Three Bears.
But each of the Ozone mastering takes, could have easily matched your take, with just a little bit of adjusting.

 
Okay, this requires further discussion...
 
The song I pitched to Ozone 8 was a softball - that song needed no edits, and pretty much mixed itself during the mixing process. This isn't the first time that an automated process pretty much matched what I did -- see this article on the frei:raum automatic processor. As long as all you need is a little EQ and some dynamics, not much needs to be done. For example, Ozone 8 bypassed the compression process completely because it didn't see the need for any (neither did I).
 
Ozone 8 essentially generates an "intelligent" preset. I already have a "preset" in my brain of what needs to be tweaked. It doesn't take me much time to get to the initial settings. 
 
But, REAL mastering is about more than a preset with some processors. Check out this video from "You Mix, We Master" in the 2017.07 issue of Tech+Music and read the accompanying article that starts on page 35. There's no way any automated process can replace the value judgments needed for many songs, as evidenced in this video...let along figure out the sequencing for an album, cutting out the overindulgent 4 measures in the middle of a guitar solo, surgically remove clicks, etc. 
 

 
Is Ozone 8 terrific at anything that doesn't need much fixing? Yes. Is it good at creating a preset for more challenging masters? Yes. For anything else, a good human will beat it every time. That's not a slam on Ozone 8...that's recognition that humans can make artistic decisions as well as technical ones.

Craig, I think we're both saying basically the same thing, but you say it much better.
I still have much to learn about the finer points of mastering, which is one of the reasons I use Ozone.  It gives you a handicap and starts you in the right direction (as opposed to starting from scratch)

But either way, I would not presume to debate or discuss mastering with an expert like yourself.  I'd just end up putting my foot in my mouth (or in my ear).  Compared to you and your experience, I've only begun to scratch the surface of professional mastering.  But as I said, I think we're basically on the same page when it comes to Ozone.

I'm off to go check out that video link you posted....
Thanks!
 

I am still demoing the O8N2 release, and the mastering assistant stands out as the heaviest hitter amongst the new features. Bear in mind (unless the paid version is different than the trial, but I think that is isn't), that the Mastering Assistant defaults to only one signal chain (and will strip off anything else in place prior to usage), which is EQ->Dynamics->Dynamic EQ->Maximizer. It also defaults to IRC IV on the Maximizer, and does not use any other modules. Overall it is rather impressive unto itself, but is does create a semi-"cookie cutter" output that should be reviewed for intent.
 
The Visual Mixer (from N2) came in a close second since it taps into fader, pan, stereo width of individual tracks without the rigamarole of scrolling around the console and making sure you are on the right track (unintended pun). It came across as similar to channel tools in some ways, but definitely allows for a nice visual rendition of the sound stage.
 
The Tonal Balance Control still doesn't seem incredibly useful to me. Although the premise behind it is interesting, it doesn't give any insight into the contributors. Although it allows for tapping into the EQs of tracks, it is a bit unwieldy if a projects track/buss count is very high. If the Mastering Assistant is used, it will land inside the bands for the most part anyway, so only has "use" for mixing that I can tell.

In regards to this kind of thing, I'm of two minds. What does it mean to the artistic process that I can press a button and have AI do some of the most difficult and tedious work of finishing off a song? Is it like an author pressing an 'auto-edit' button and receiving the edited version in moments instead of weeks? There is something truly distasteful about it. Thinking about the art of the future as a collaboration between human and AI just does not excite me. On the other hand, part of my own process is using effects and finding and tweaking presets within those effects. And some mastering 'brands' are like presets in some respect, as artists turn to them to achieve specific 'sounds'. But the sound is the result of a combination of tastes. This strikes a nerve, but for me it's the same nerve that's getting struck all the time.

jonboper
In regards to this kind of thing, I'm of two minds. What does it mean to the artistic process that I can press a button and have AI do some of the most difficult and tedious work of finishing off a song? Is it like an author pressing an 'auto-edit' button and receiving the edited version in moments instead of weeks? There is something truly distasteful about it.

I couldn't disagree more, you know. I think it's just like using a spell-checker. It's not going to definitely finish your book off to your satisfaction, and you're still going to have to proof-read, but you've just got rid of hours of donkey work.

Using Master Assistant is really no different than calling up a preset to get you started. It just creates a "custom" preset.

Wow!
 
I am always looking for ways to reduce tinker-time and be more productive and THIS is turbo-LandR!
On my PC.
With accessibility.
 
I have looked at the Isotope website for reasons why I should move from Ozone 7 to 8.
It took this video to give me that reason.
 
I cannot understand why software companies put up videos that are either superficial and banal, or overly-long for product insiders only. Wow videos aimed at those with music software experience but no detailed product knowledge are rare. This is a Wow video. I can see in 3 minutes how Ozone8 will boost my creativity.
 
You have just made a sale.
 

Many thanks for doing this Craig.  I upgraded to Ozone8 and found the Mastering Assistant stunning.  Its designers have better ears than me (I'm 69 this year and I've lost some top end in my hearing) and I'm no snob when it comes to presets.  This tool's just what I need, well done Izotope.  I expect in future enhancements they'll incorporate Craig's suggestion re. graduated intensities.

twelvetone

I cannot understand why software companies put up videos that are either superficial and banal, or overly-long for product insiders only.
 

iZotope sorta jumped the gun with release versus adequate details, but they continue to honor their fairly gracious trial periods. I have taken to the mindset that if a trial is not available, then it won't get purchased (a lot of marketing is either highly biased or pure fluff anyway). These days customer reviews are easy to come by, so waiting if in doubt is always a good thing.