Feature Request - Variable Recording Point - Similar as Metering


after a long time i tried to do a full master in WL again.
(i mainly use it for Touch ups PQ Editing and DDP)

What i miss:
wouldn’t it be great to choose your recording point within the Master Section ?
So if i want to record my processed file going through my external chain and through that 2 plugins, but not record say the deesser and the limiter f.e.? While recording i would still want and be able to hear the whole chain including the deesser and the limiter, so also everything after the record point.
I don’t want to bypass those plugs when recording since i want to listen to the recording going through the whole chain. this is essential.

Thanks for your time

Did you look into using the playback processing slots? Looks like what you want is already possible.

i know its already possible.
but wouldn’t you have something else in the playback processing slots?

limiters and stuff also don’t belong there. I think it would be great to just be able to choose whats recorded and what not, so i can paste just the unrecorded plugs to the recorded clip and leave it open for further - later - tweaking.

Well sure, I have different stuff in there that never should be in a render - the intended use, so to speak.

I don’t really see why you would want this. In the montage, we have clip, track and montage master effects, and on top of that the master section - and the playback section. This is already so flexible, I think adding an option like you request would only be adding complexity for no good reason.

IMHO too many people want to add things to WL that only they find useful and if PG listened to everyone of these requests and acted on them WL would be so bloated and complicated no one could use it. FWIW

Thomas, i don’t think your post contributes anything helpful here.

It is a feature which is available in Reaper and Soundblade.
Input effects as opposed to effects which i can hear but are not recorded.
I will try to do this with the given slots.

Your individual way of working request is one of about 10 I have seen lately on this list. Just because it would suit your way of working does not mean everyone works the same. If PG thinks it has merit he will incorporate in in some future version of WL. My concern is that the more “junque” gets put into WL the more it gets bloated and not suitable for use as a mastering program. It is not and was never meant to be an “all in one” program like ProTools. It is a mastering program, and the best one, and should be left that way. I have seen what you are asking about on other DAWs and if it works there why not just use that DAW? FWIW

During many years, WaveLab rendered the plugins bypassed for playback. This caused confusion.

Then, during many years, WaveLab added the user option to render, or not, the bypassed plugins. This also added confusion, because the option state could be forgotten.

Then, from 9.5, WaveLab removed that option: plugins are rendered as their bypass status, always. In that way, what you hear is what you render, always.

However, to have the option to use plugins only during playback (hence to skip them during rendering), the Master Section “playback section” was added. This makes it clear, what plugins are rendered or not.

Considering this past experience, I don’t think it would be wise to add an option to prevent some plugins not to render, out of the section which is dedicated to it.

Good to see some history about plugins being ‘bypassed but rendered’ (or not). I’d almost forgotten those old discussions…