Is it possible to run multiple instances of WL 8.5 (64) concurrently on a single windows machine?
Alternatively is it possible to run multiple Record windows in a single instance of WL?
The end goal here is to have 2 independent audio streams being recorded for the purposes of parallel ingest of archival audio (2 tapes going in at once with independent transport controls for each stream).
I realise that there’ll be sample rate and clocking issues etc… but if they were manged, can it be done?
There is a non-official way of doing this. This means: not documented, not tested, and no support for it.
You can still try it, “at your own risks”:
Enter, in file:
AppData\Roaming\Steinberg\WaveLab 8.5\Startup.ini
the additional line:
canMulti=true
With this option, you can start more than one instance.
Obviously, you can’t use the same audio i/o device in both instances. And since settings are shared between WaveLab options, this won’t be practical.
Just wanted to add that this is not limited to Archiving. Many mastering engineers run different sample rate sessions at the same time. For example, the Admin functions of Sequoia allow you to run multiple instances, each at different sample rates. They can even all use ASIO simultaneously (you have to be careful with the set up).
I was able to edit the ini file for WaveLab Pro 9 to run multiple instances, but the preferences get confused as to which Sound Card/Interface you’re using. Perhaps I’m missing something.
To avoid preferences trouble it might be more practical to have WL8.5 and a previous version like 7 or 8 run alongside (or WL9 ofcourse). Especially if it’s only for ‘parallel ingest’.
You are talking about using two separate interfaces, aren’t you? It seems to work ok here, if you switch the interface in the second instance. It’s not going to remember two interfaces. Or are there problems farther along?
You can change the settings folder in Global Preferences, but I don’t think that’s going to help with this, with the multiple instances referring as they do. But if it just means switching the interface in the second instance each time, that doesn’t seem so bad. If I’m understanding correctly the setup you’re describing.
It seems to work fine with a single converter with multiple instances running at the same sampling rate - we’ll test further and let you know if we encounter any problems.