I did not see Steinberg listed either but there is still a lot of time between now and then.
And yes - it’s a US based show - but Steinberg has launched big releases at shows like NAMM etc in the past.
If all the scuttlebutt in here is suggesting a late 2019 release - and major Steinberg release announcements are almost universally tied to an event of some kind (MusikMesse, NAMM, etc etc) - after looking at the 2019 show calendar - AES looks like the most logical “point” to drop it.
But then again - it could come out anytime that Steinberg feels like releasing it.
Actually, my particular hobby-horse (arbitrary multichannel files) is in many ways more of a revolutionary step change than evolutionary, because it touches almost every aspect of the program. We have been told that this is being addressed in this release, so I can see that it may be hard for PG or Steinberg to have a clear date in mind (unless the work is nearly done).
This is one area where I have given up interest, partly because my work has of late scaled down to basic stereo. But yes, it would have been nice a few years ago to be able to ingest an RME DURec recording and create the appropriate mono and stereo tracks in the one process. Outboard software as supplied by RME, Sound Devices, QSC was needed to make their use of multichannel .wav viable. Should this happen, out of curiousity I would dig out a few of my old DURec files and see how well it works.
As I see it, WL (as with SF) has hitherto regarded its mission as being a multichannel editor, not a multi-track production tool. The necessary structural change to implement the latter would indeed, in my opinion, be worthy of a ‘10’ … if it survives in a recognisable form!
But I don’t want it to become a production tool; I’m looking forward to it becoming a fully-functional multichannel editor which it currently is not in any real sense.
PG, Please don’t ever turn Wavelab into a multi-track production tool like Cubase, etc. Unless it’s limited to like 12 tracks or something. If I need to mix, I can do it in Cubase, or another software specializing in that.
That is the last thing I want WL to become. There are sooooooooooooooooooooooo many multitrack editors. WL is fine as a MASTERING DAW. Please don’t make it into a multitrack recorder/editor. FWIW
People who keep wanting this should spend some money and buy a good multitrack editor and quit trying to make WL an “audio Swiss Army Knife”.
Yes, but people on this list keep asking for WL to become a multitrack recorder and editor and I am not sure why they cannot use something like CuBase or Samplitude?? Why do we need for WL to become something it is not designed to do. It is a MASTERING DAW not a general purpose DAW.
FWIW!
The terms are often used confusingly, but there are two clearly different concepts.
Picture an editor in which you have stereo files on different track and you can vary the mixing of them; This (especially if it has a fader view) is a DAW for music production. Now change each stereo file to be a 5.1 file - six channels in one multichannel file - you can still mix the different 5.1 groups on the separate tracks.
How is it not better if Wavelab can work better with multichannel or/and multitrack files?
Multitrack mixing is catered for in other programs like Cubase. But WaveLab is unrivalled for editing and mastering. It can even edit surround audio - but only with the channels in several separate mono and stereo files which have to be placed on different tracks of the montage - even though they are conceptually a single “surround track”. But every action is complicated by having to select all the clips to be acted on together, and only some actions can be done on multiple clips at all. Using WaveLab for handling more channels then the two of stereo is a hack - usable for some things, but ultimately severely limited.
All my audio is surround, which is why I want to be able to handle files with not just two channels, but greater numbers (not limited to 5.1 or even 7.1).
Precisely my point. I use WL daily and it works GREAT for mastering and restoration and even post production. I also have Samplitude if I need a multitrack recorder and editor. I personally do not need WL to become a full blown multitrack recorder and editor. I like it fine the way it is.
I have long wondered about the people that want WL to be a multitrack recorder and editor. Are they so cheap they cannot afford two different DAW programs??? I currently have 5 separate DAWs on my computer that I use for different purposes. If you are a professional you can write off software purchases.
Odd discussion … quite simply, many of us would like to be able to edit interleaved multi-channel (surround) audio files in Wavelab in exactly the same way as stereo files.
So that would include eg, 5.1, 7.1 etc but the challenge would also in be how far that could go in terms of more recent contemporary formats, eg Dolby Atmos, VR etc. Perhaps the latter may well be best reserved for the likes of Nuendo, still, it would make much sense to consider the ‘hot links’ between Nunendo and Wavelab which presently serve little purpose other than for round-tripping only stereo or mono files. Overall, seems a little dated and tends to focus and assume mastering for CD (in 2019!?). At the very least, surely 5.1 & 7.1?
Then of course, the update to also include SpectralLayers IO as per Nuendo & Cubase.
You are very much right and this is being addressed in the next big upgrade (v10) if I am not mistaken. So, I am eagerly waiting for that upgrade to be released.
Well, that’s a bold statement. So, stereo is for CD and cutting edge is 5.1 or 7.1 at least?
Last time I checked, people had two ears (the ones I know at least), so however desirable multichannel editing may be for WL, the bulk of the work for mastering engineers will remain stereo. How it is delivered is not really relevant - you might wanna check the increasing popularity of vinyl!
Hmm. Last time I checked, the world was three dimensional, and hearing sound reproduced in a line between two speakers utterly failed to represent how it is perceived in that real world!
But I hope you do see everyone in public (ages 10 - 70 roughly) with only two earbuds, either wired or not, one in each ear, right? They listen to whatever it is, but we all call it stereo. Only 2 channels. And they do wander the real world, and someone needs to master what they’re listening to - in stereo. Not 5.1 or 7.1 (at least!) multichannel.
But music in games and virtual reality, even though delivered through earbuds, can be moved around in response to head movements from a fully 3D source (the most powerful technology for doing that is Ambisonics). There’s more I could say, but this isn’t really the place.
One of WaveLabs’ great strengths is in the area of radio broadcasting, where the montage facility is un-equalled as a production tool for assembling a broadcast sequence (stereo is fine - not too many surround radio stations so far). Keeping this market happy (offering improved flexibility and productivity) would possibly encourage cash-strapped broadcasters to shell out some of their meagre budget for upgrades …
The ability to take a multichannel location recording and efficiently down-mix it to a stereo form in the montage mode could be part of this. But multitracking (a la project studio) is not something I am looking for WaveLab to do, because there exists already a panoply of programs out there that do it very well. But few of them do the things that WaveLab does very well. So, horses for courses …
I don’t really have an opinion on the multi track thing one way or another … but I will make the observation that putting the licenses in place to make WL function like ProFools Ultimate/HD or Nuendo (which I have zero experience with) may not be straight forward. And I suspect that having the Dolby Atmos thing happening may not be inexpensive and present challenges on different levels. WL as an editor is unrivaled I think. And editing the files … as opposed to adjusting mix elements … I can totally understand why that would be useful indeed. Would I want to adjust a 3D mix in it … well that’s a personal DAW choice but ‘maybe not’.
