This is my list of new features suggestion for WL11. Some of them are old requests but there are a news ones. Feel free to comment.
Wave Color. In that way the pitch could be represented by the “hue” . Doing that, low tones could be red, mid tones could be green, and high tones could be blue. Also, the saturation could be another useful tool if the more tonal and harmonic the signal, the more saturated the color, the more noise there is, the less saturated the color will be. It is very useful to locate some kind to events in the sound in a large recording. For example, to locate the start of a take with claps or a clapperboard.
DSD Import and Export
Mackie HUI protocol for remote MIDI control of WaveLab with support for timecode in the surface display.
Convert Markes into Regions but adding a new marker or region (the end of the region) just prior a new marker or region
Auto Loudness correction with option to include a dynamic compression
Drag a region with automatic and visible crossfades
Group video and audio clips with group names. So it will needed a group window list to rename it or reorder.
Some good suggestions Grundman. I hope someone is listening. I would add, they need change the monitoring section entirely. Using the Cubase Pro Control room is a vastly superior experience and it makes sense they use a common monitoring section to allow for a smooth workflow from Cubase to Wavelab.
+1 here! Totally agree on how the monitoring section, and I would add the master section, are integrated as of now. I would also suggest reviewing these sections and make them more “coherent” with other Steinberg products, such as Nuendo/Cubase. Easier workflow, more intuitive and probably much more “appealing” to new comers, which means more sales for them as well.
+1 for Mackie protocal for remote control of Wavelab via Midi (quick and easy pre-made setup).
+1 also for the Wave Color, just something that bring so much added value.
+1 for Auto Loudness Correction with optional dynamic compression, an great and easy way to get things more coherent and corrected in an easy auto process.
I’m sorry for the confusion. What I tried to mean is if you are correcting loudness in a video program by means of Wavelab if will be useful to have de possiblity of automatically correct the loudness according to EBU R128 or ITU-R-BS 1770. Doing that with a lot of files through the batch processing tool will make Wavelab essential for video postproduction.
PG, my vision of this was more of a “Smart Bypass” on plugin instances.
By automatically compensating effect output loudness level to match the effect’s input loudness level, an Auto Loudness Correction would allow for a very efficient way to keep levels constant while working with a certain plugin instance, allowing for very rapid “A/B” testing and decision making, preventing from having to continuously “gain correct” the plugin instance’s output level. This would also allow to keep a uniform gain staging pattern between plugin instances in any effect rack very quickly.
This could be enabled/disabled on top of an effect rack, plugin window or again in WaveLab settings as default. The optional “dynamic compression” would simply be an Enable/Disable switch allowing or not the software to use a transparent peak limiter if needed to achieve necessary loudness levels.
From what I know, I haven’t seen this in any other software to this date, and I am more than confident this would clearly bring a big plus to mastering sessions in WaveLab. A/B’ing and decision making at constant listening/loudness levels are important topics today, as is proper gain staging.
Loudness-based waveform colorization could be useful. I believe Ian Shepard has the best plugin for that (Dynamater). But using his experience and expertise, it might be useful to add the loudness colorization in WL11 to be adjusted based on the loudness, PSR, and PLR targets that Ian uses today in Dynamater.
Aside from that, I implore the addition of automation in both audio file and montage. This has certainly been a long-standing request since WL7, and it’s one area a well-known €2.500 Windows-only DAW has an edge on WL today. If nothing else, being able to manage the loudness envelope (pre and post) in the audio editor (as it is in Montage) would be awesome. Much of my mastering today heavily uses level envelopes. You can use envelopes in the normal file editor, but it’s not as easy as in Montage. But I have trouble mastering single files for multiple exported version in a single Montage.
Sorry to be unclear here. In mastering, it would be handy to have two envelopes: one that can be tailored for input Gain (pre), and another for output “master” level (post), separately. One to control the input gain, and one to control the final volume or output level. Being able to control these levels separately with automation would be quite useful to me.
I think you and I are spoiled with Cubase automation. Before anyone suggests Effect Morphing, yes that exists, but nothing like what exists with Cubase.
It appears some, iirc Justin Perkins, claimed he isn’t familiar with Cubase automation, or has never used it. And if you are a traditional ME, I’m not surprised.
From a mastering standpoint, the need hasn’t manifested itself very much over the years, however I’m no longer mastering. The few times it did, were client consulted and unique sonic objectives that should have been achieved at the mix process.
If it’s a feature most ME’s haven’t used much in the past, but more would in the future, I guess PG has to consider adding it? However adding it like it functions in Cubase I would guess would be a huge undertaking, adding potential negative side effects
Most of the stuff I do with Wavelab that doesn’t fall under the heading of traditional ‘mastering’. It’s actually why I think the term ‘Montage’ was an act of =genius=… although I know it confuses some new people. It fits what I do perfectly.
I could probably do everything like this in Cubase. But just between us girls… WL is more precise and consistent. The UX in WL keeps getting better whilst the UX in Cubase keeps getting, er… well.
I’d like automation because it’s just more straightforward, brainwise,
And also, I coulda sworn that PG has said that it -was- coming at some point. If I got that wrong I apologise.
Perhaps apropos of nothing, the guy I use for mastering my pro projects works in Pro Tools (with all the outrageously expensive analog stuff doing the actual ‘processing’). And I think it’s at least partly for the automation. He’s got several Grammy’s so I assume it’s a knowledgeable choice.
PG said it was coming several versions back. I was led to believe either 9 or 9.5 when I was expecting it, but never happened. Since then he says it’s coming, but he has not suggested when. So I remain on the upgrade chain waiting…
One thing I fear is a mastering environment that becomes too cluttered, making the tool more difficult or less streamlined. So far, IMO, he has kept it pretty clean without adding too much beyond the editing/mastering realm. Good automation, like Cubase, could come at a price…(bugs not financial) and this is what I hope he avoids.
Last I read here, unlike around version 9, PG is not saying when it will happen.
You see here the four claps.
