Does WL10 support opening multichannel .wavs in the waveform view (not montage)?
Is it possible to batch render r128 loudness for multichannel files?
Does WL10 support opening multichannel .wavs in the waveform view (not montage)?
No
Is it possible to batch render r128 loudness for multichannel files?
Yes, as WaveLab 9.5 already can.
Philippe
hi PG - not in anyway trying to be negative, Iâve been a strong supporter of WL over the years (since WL1.5)
Iâve been requesting this feature since about 2005 ! - is there a specific reason youâre not doing it, technical or otherwise. Iâve seen quite a lot of requests for it over the years.
thanks
1 Like
is there a specific reason youâre not doing it
Some other features took more time than expected, simply. The priority of features is always a sensible topic.
Philippe
appreciated - I wont give up hope yet
I wont give up hope yet
Not me either 
I am sorry to say that I was assured before buying Wavelab Pro 9.5 that version 10 was going to have the ability to open surround/multichannel files directly without montage.
Therefore, I rested assured and bought wavelab 9.5 and was super excited about the version 10 update. But, well, I am very sorry to know otherwise now. I feel really sad. I donât know how I should feel. Anyway, I suppose that not too many people even know or miss it. So, priorities considered, Wavelab 10 may be just awesome. But, I may not buy it unless it has the promised basic feature.
Anyway, congratulations nevertheless. Much love.
Output effects in a multichannel (four, in my test) still does not accept non-Steinberg four-channel effects (it now puts up an explicit messge saying they must be two-channel). Previously Steinberg effects like gain worked there - now they are accepted but cause the montage output to change to two-channelâŚ
Unbelievable! Nuendo and Cubase are multi-channel DAWs, Halion and Spectral Layers work with multi-channel files too. Itâs just with WL, where it is: other things were more important and demand was low. But the chief programmer doesnât give up his hope. Nice - hope for higher priority or for higher demand? We donât know - we just know: there are more multi-channel demands than ever (Ambisonics anyone?) and the âProâ Mastering software from Steinberg persist in not supporting them. Wow.
Most music ends today still ends up as two channel material on the WWW or on Vinyl or CDs. WL was NEVER designed to be a multichannel recorder/mixer. If you need that option to do what you do I suggest you look at Cubase or some other multichannel DAW. FWIW
I never understood why people keep asking for WL to be multitrack. It is bascially a âmastering and restorationâ DAW and there a lot of people who use it that way everyday. Not every DAW has to be multitrack capable. 
With respect Thomas,
firstly wavelab is already multichannel - itâs just that itâs limited to 2 channels. I can only assume you are confusing multichannel with multitrack.
I see youâve commented on this âfeature requestâ previously on other threads over the years- just because you donât use for multichannel work as that doesnât mean that others do. Looking at your website it looks like you donât have any surround sound setup ? As you say âYOU donât understandâ probably because itâs not something that YOU need. Hey, ask Phil Spector, why do you even need stereo ? Welcome to the 21st century.
What I canât understand is when somebody requests a feature and people weigh in with a "no you donât want that featureâŚafter all I DONâT NEED IT " - is it some kind of alpha male response ? Are you trying to mansplain ? are you saying we should all work in the same way as you ?
I work extensively with film/video and everything is multichannel - WL has just put in a video playback engine - but no (simple) multichannel audio file support.
I also mix/master surround sound audio - mulitchannel masters.
I also edit multi-mic channel wav files for sample libraries - more multichannel files
the list goes on.
Thanks for your suggestion to look a cubase/nuendo (sigh) Nobody expects WL to be cubase or nuendo (both of which I use extensively and have been using since they first appeared) but I would appreciate the ability to open and MASTER multichannel files. As you can see from this forum I am not the only one.
As to whether âWL was NEVER designed to be a multichannel recorder/mixerâ âŚwell as you say âYou donât understandâ BUT fortunately PG is not developing WL just for you .
peace
Nothing new here, again a paternalistic phrase collection. I have two Nuendo and two Cubase Pro licenses and so on, thank you, I know what Iâm talking about. It is not about WL being not usable for stereo work anymore, which I recently did with it in a 96 kHz stereo Montage for classical piano - works great - clients impressed. Donât compare your small, simplified audio world with mastering in general, or even with other professional demands for a modern audio editor. Weâre not in the 1990ies anymore. Furthermore WL has all the tools to be a sound design editor, especially with its direct link to Nuendo and Cubase.
Nobody wants to take your tiny stereo world away - calm down.
And all dr said before this post âŚ
⌠and I use WL since version 1.x or so ⌠immediately bought the update for WL 10 Pro. My audio editing grew with WL as an important tool, but it is disappointing WL didnât grew with my format diversity needs.
agreed, Iâve been with it since v1.5 and been with cubase since the early atari days - I paid for an upgrade to one (I have many) of my licences as soon as it was available. I fully support PG and wavelab - think itâs an amazing product.
Itâs my intention keep gently pressurising PG to add features that I, and others, feel we need. IF others donât need it then great - they save themselves the price of the upgrade.
just an fyi:
this is the oldest request I can find from this forumâŚ
obviously the links to the cubase.net forum are now dead but I remember asking for this in the old cubase.net forum back around 2005 - I believe the Wav spec has allowed multi channel (more than 2) since the dinosaurs were around.
Mastering is not just about stereo any moreâŚin fact it hasnât been for many decades !
I have to agree with you.
I was more than a bit grumpy when I first saw that this hadnât made it, in spite of PGâs very clear hint a while ago that it would. But his explanation above is sufficient to calm me again (I used to be a software developer, and know how hard it is to get timescales right), so I apologise for my first immoderate remarks.
Given the earlier hint, I am now living in hope that work on it has actually been started, and dream that it will appear, maybe even in a 10.1.0 (free) release, otherwise certainly by 10.5 (paidâŚ).
Paul
Whilst itâs not multichannel per se, there is no denying that this is a rapidly changing environment illustrated by Sonyâs â360 Realityâ Audioâ announcement this week.
I have some more info on this but am unable to share it at present.
First, big thanks to PG (and team.!) for the new release - video support and Reference Track are already being used, and very welcome (no more fiddling in 3rd party plugin/app).
To others in this thread, Iâm curious/a little naiveâŚ
Other than full, surround-sound mix/mastering to picture jobs, DVD production, and maybe game audio production, where else might I look for multichannel audio fix/finishing type work.? By the way, Iâm not ready to trust hooking up my domestic DVD surround audio playback system, into my main audio workstation, just yet⌠Am only fishing/curious for possibilities out there⌠
Having said that, is there a minimum one could get away with (faking it somehow.?) to achieve acceptable/reliable results� Are you guys all making use of high-end, fully calibrated surround-sound monitoring/room setups.?
Dunno; just shooting the breeze a little here. Maybe I should go and read up a bit more myself first⌠Any quick thoughts would be welcome though; donât bust a gut or anythingâŚ! Weâre all busyâŚ
Cheers,
Bob
PS:- @Rat - interesting, thanks for that⌠youâre right though, not quite with this threadâŚ
I have been with WL since 1.6.3 so I am a long time user.
You are correct I donât do surround projects and donât intend to do them in the future.
The one problem I see is that the more âjunqueâ people ask for in WL the more cumbersome the interface and the more chances for something to interfere with the basic uses of the program. If all of you who have responded have other mutlitrack/multichannel programs why not just use them? One of the mastering engineers I know works in ProTools and is enamored with its features but he sometimes works here on transfer projects. He is not familiar with WL but has caught on very quickly to all of its features and ways of working. He likes a lot of WL can do but prefers to go to his studio and use his ProTools setup for most things. Different strokes for different folks is what my Dad told me when asked about why we drive a certain car and my friends drive other makes.
The more âjunqueâ people ask for the more bloated the program is the way I see it. Maybe PG should think about leaving WL alone and write a completely new multitrack/multichannel program for people you need it - oh wait it is called CUBASE (not written by PG but by other Steinberg authors) and has already been written.
Now if you want to add real features that are needed in WL IMHO then add MIDI support and automation to plugins which would be most welcomed by me.
Sorry to get your feathers in a ruffle. 
apology accepted