Page 3 of 4

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Wed Jan 16, 2019 9:32 pm
by MrTopo
bob99 wrote:
Wed Jan 16, 2019 8:10 pm
I couldn't find a limit adding plugins in a Reaper chain. Think I added about 50 plugins.
That is the subject.
Cubase, which you asked, has a limit of 16 inserts, but it is solved quickly by creating a chain with all of the necessary fx channels. Of course, the operation of WaveLab is different, it does not have that possibility.

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2019 2:02 am
by stingray
Just my personal opinion, but I actually think it's bad practice to use very long chains of plugins except in exceptional circumstances, both from the audio quality point of view and in pure practical terms. Something like this is easy to ask for but it might be worth thinking it through from A to Z. It certainly wouldn't be easy to access/manage 25 slots in the master section. You'd probably be doing a lot of scrolling unless the slots were displayed on screen in a different manner.

However, if more inserts were added to the forthcoming WL10 master section I wouldn't complain (but I'd rarely use them since 12 is enough for me). If ever I need more (for some exceptional circumstance) I'm perfectly happy using Blue Cat's PatchWork.

Each to their own way of working of course.

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2019 6:05 am
by nkf
Justin P wrote:
Wed Jan 16, 2019 2:06 pm
On the Mac, WaveLab is REALLY hard to beat.
WL is beaten easily by Nuendo on Mac for me - more and more mastering tasks are shifted over by me to Nuendo. Just recently I worked under time pressure to finish an important fashion show music and sound design for the Fashion Week. This was just in stereo and I set up a simple chain of three plug ins in WL Pro (McDSP, Softube) while Nuendo had other projects open. Hitting "render" crashed WL immediately. I rebuilt the chain in Nuendo and the same plug ins with the same settings, in the same order worked just fine. I then mastered the rest only in Nuendo. WL is not ready for complex tasks if plug ins are involved - I'm not talking about exotic brands. It is the only application that crashes that often, and nearly always with plug ins no other application reacts bad to. I have two additional WL Elements installations (Mac and PC) and stability is generally far from what it was with WL 6.
The other program I use more and more instead of WL is RX7 Advanced, especially now when it has multi-channel capability, something that is ignored for so long in WL, that it is a running gag. I'm pretty sure the beta testers must find all these problems. The only other person I know using WL Pro, uses it on a PC and she has constant crashes too, while trying to finish some mastering of classical music. She bought Nuendo on my recommendation though ... I don't take WL development serious anymore, it became a totally unstable environment for plug ins - btw. there are still some showing just a blank window ... I click it away and use something else. Reporting makes no sense either - we get the same religious sounding answers: WL does always everything correct, while all other products are not really having the correct plug in implementation, even if they very obviously work much better with plug ins than WL. That has some comical elements.

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2019 6:16 am
by Justin P
nkf wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 6:05 am
Justin P wrote:
Wed Jan 16, 2019 2:06 pm
On the Mac, WaveLab is REALLY hard to beat.
WL is beaten easily by Nuendo on Mac for me - more and more mastering tasks are shifted over by me to Nuendo. Just recently I worked under time pressure to finish an important fashion show music and sound design for the Fashion Week. This was just in stereo and I set up a simple chain of three plug ins in WL Pro (McDSP, Softube) while Nuendo had other projects open. Hitting "render" crashed WL immediately. I rebuilt the chain in Nuendo and the same plug ins with the same settings, in the same order worked just fine. I then mastered the rest only in Nuendo. WL is not ready for complex tasks if plug ins are involved - I'm not talking about exotic brands. It is the only application that crashes that often, and nearly always with plug ins no other application reacts bad to. I have two additional WL Elements installations (Mac and PC) and stability is generally far from what it was with WL 6.
The other program I use more and more instead of WL is RX7 Advanced, especially now when it has multi-channel capability, something that is ignored for so long in WL, that it is a running gag. I'm pretty sure the beta testers must find all these problems. The only other person I know using WL Pro, uses it on a PC and she has constant crashes too, while trying to finish some mastering of classical music. She bought Nuendo on my recommendation though ... I don't take WL development serious anymore, it became a totally unstable environment for plug ins - btw. there are still some showing just a blank window ... I click it away and use something else. Reporting makes no sense either - we get the same religious sounding answers: WL does always everything correct, while all other products are not really having the correct plug in implementation, even if they very obviously work much better with plug ins than WL. That has some comical elements.
I guess more specifically, I meant the WaveLab montage with all the metadata, authoring, markers, DDP, and other export options all in one app. For me, it's the perfect place to finish mastering projects (after processing in another app via the analog chain) or when working entire "in the box" for mastering singles, EPs, and albums.

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2019 4:41 pm
by stingray
nkf wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 6:05 am
Reporting makes no sense either...
In my opinion, reporting issues makes total sense, and reporting it to both Steinberg and the plugin developer is preferable. Unfortunately, it's the only way to troubleshoot bugs.

(Excuse me for going off topic).

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2019 4:51 pm
by nkf
stingray wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 4:41 pm
nkf wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 6:05 am
Reporting makes no sense either...
In my opinion, reporting issues makes total sense, and reporting it to both Steinberg and the plugin developer is preferable. Unfortunately, it's the only way to troubleshoot bugs.
Two reasons for my remark, first problems are usually just seen on the plug in developer side and second, to many problems seem to slip thru. Reporting everything is a tedious task and I'm not getting paid to do this. I paid for the software and expect reasonable stability for all day work. Nuendo can crash too, I know exactly one plug in which can make it unstable. But look how complex a Nuendo project can be with literally hundreds of plug ins feeding 90 inputs and 90 outputs at the same time (in my case), compared to WL as a little stereo editor with a few plug ins.

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2019 5:11 pm
by stingray
nkf wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 4:51 pm
Reporting everything is a tedious task and I'm not getting paid to do this. I paid for the software and expect reasonable stability for all day work.
I really do understand your point of view and frustration but remember you have paid for both the host software and the plugin. So the trick is to find out where the bug is occuring and, as I mentioned, the only real way to do this is to file a detailed report. Personally, among the bugs with plugins I've stumbled across, all of them have turned out to be on the plugin side. That's not to say that this is always the case. Anyway, as mentioned, this is going off topic.

To get back on topic, let's just hope that the forthcoming WL10 will somehow feature improved reliability with all plugins, (perhaps have an improved ability over 9.5 to detect where a problem lies and notify the user, especially in the case of a crash).

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2019 5:29 pm
by nkf
@stingray: as I said several times, the plug ins work reliable in my other hosts, even from Steinberg. I know how to report problems and do it to the plug in manufacturers all the time. But with WL they have a really hard time. They even express some very clear position towards WL, which I don't want to repeat now. The situation seems, that a few plug ins may work reliable and that is what some mastering engineers need. But I use my software for several tasks (I own licenses for many DAWs, editors and over 1000 plug ins), not only for mastering. With most DAWs and editors the plug ins run mostly smooth (a few problems can pop up everywhere) but with WL I hit a wall very fast. That is the reason I shift more and more tasks to Nuendo, which is my favourite piece of audio software by far, then comes RX7 Advanced ...

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 7:31 pm
by bob99
nkf wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 5:29 pm
The situation seems, that a few plug ins may work reliable and that is what some mastering engineers need. But I use my software for several tasks (I own licenses for many DAWs, editors and over 1000 plug ins), not only for mastering. With most DAWs and editors the plug ins run mostly smooth (a few problems can pop up everywhere) but with WL I hit a wall very fast.
If you have 1000 plugins and 500 don't work or don't work correctly in Wavelab, what's the answer? Use a translator? They probably all work fine with Patchwork and Metaplugin in Wavelab from my limited experience.

That was my experience with the specific Acustica, Sonnox, and a few other plugins that weren't working correctly in Wavelab. They did work correctly when put in Patchwork or Metaplugin in Wavelab.

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2019 1:52 pm
by Jtransition
Would it be possible to expand the use of the external gear plug in so it is available on each clip?

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2019 11:23 pm
by receng
I am evaluating Wavelab as an alternative to Pro Tools for Mastering and I really like everything I see except for the slot limitation.
The Playback section is FIXED in two slots!
If I run MetricAB and Sonar Works there is no space for anything else!
In Pro Tools, it is clunky, but I can cascade AUX tracks to my hearts content with no such limitations.And I can reserve a full 10-slot AUX track just for monitoring.
I agree with the suggestions at the beginning of this thread. This has the potential to be a very professional tool. The metering options are just great!
Wavelab needs to be more customizable in the signal flow and allow for side chains.

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2019 9:27 am
by PG
The Playback section is FIXED in two slots!
No! 12 slots. See the "+" button

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2019 2:46 pm
by Justin P
But the Playback Processing section is limited to 2 slots right?

I also think that a few more slots would be welcomed in this area.

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2019 3:10 pm
by PG
Yes. For which case do you need more than 2?

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2019 3:18 pm
by Justin P
PG wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 3:10 pm
Yes. For which case do you need more than 2?
Well, I think that is what the other person (receng) was asking about. He/She uses MetricAB and Sonarworks which doesn't leave room for anything else.

At my main studio I really just need one slot (for Clarity M) but at my home studio, I was running low on slots but I solved it another way by getting another RME AES card and adding some hardware Dorrough meters instead of using the Waves Dorrough and the plugin version of Flux Pure Analyzer, so it's closer to my main studio setup now.

I do think increasing to at least 4 slots would go a long way.

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2019 8:16 pm
by pwhodges
I can picture using an Ambisonic decoder, a room equaliser, and a meter.

Paul

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2019 2:12 pm
by bobybayo
PG wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 3:10 pm
Yes. For which case do you need more than 2?
PG, I asked for this a few months ago. I use Clarity Meter, Sonarworks and need another slot for MetricAB. I agree that 4 slots is a good number.
Robert

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:00 pm
by stingray
Justin P wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 3:18 pm
I do think increasing to at least 4 slots would go a long way.
+1

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2019 9:00 am
by davidducceschi
Please improve specific WL Plug-ins
leveller
Peak Master
Stereo Expander

thanks

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2019 4:06 am
by bob99
davidducceschi wrote:
Mon Mar 25, 2019 9:00 am
Please improve specific WL Plug-ins
leveller
Peak Master
Stereo Expander

thanks
What do you want improved in Leveler and Peak Master?

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Wed Mar 27, 2019 9:47 am
by davidducceschi
i love theese tools
they are very usefull for me
i hope a new graphic guy
with more functions

thankx ;)

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2019 10:10 pm
by LT
VIDEO

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Fri May 17, 2019 2:15 pm
by Jtransition
Jtransition wrote:
Sat Jan 26, 2019 1:52 pm
Would it be possible to expand the use of the external gear plug in so it is available on each clip?
Or each track?

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Sat May 18, 2019 11:27 am
by Thomas W. Bethel
LT wrote:
Fri Mar 29, 2019 10:10 pm
VIDEO
Get Vegas. Problem solved. We do NOT need VIDEO editing in WL.

Re: IMPORTANT FEATURES REQUEST For Wavelab 10

Posted: Sat May 18, 2019 12:08 pm
by PG
We do NOT need VIDEO editing in WL
Not Video editing, but Audio Editing along a Video reference would be welcome.