No Automation Lanes?

Well I am a little underwhelmed with the lack of automation options. I master dynamically in Cubase, pushing the mix, relaxing the mix, boosting EQ in specific places as the track evolves… how does one accomplish that in Wavelab?

I looked this up in the forum and PG had indicated it would be in 8.5 or 9… Still, no joy?

Each clip in the montage has a volume automation (and panning) envelope that can be automated on the timeline. You can also determine if the level is automated before or after the clip effects. (see attachment)

Plugin parameters cannot be automated but the blend (wet/dry or parallel) of an inserted plugin on a clip can be automated throughout a clip in a similar fashion to the volume and panning.

I agree that an overall level automation for each montage track (after all clip processing) and of course plugin parameter automation would be a nice addition for a future update.
WL9_Automation-Envelope.png

Thanks for responding Justin and for providing the attachment.

Yes, I can get part of the way there with the features you point out. My goal was to really leave the mastering/finalizing duties to Wavelab and just do minimal mastering chain stuff with Cubase figuring I would get more organic results across a larger project entailing 14 or so songs. Without the automation functionality I can’t get their with Wavelab. I should appreciate the fact it is general purpose tool and it is trying to serve many masters (so to speak) and perhaps this application takes a backseat to comping podcasts and clip manipulation (both valid) . Regardless I am very impressed with the product. IF PG could step into this conversation for moment and offer his thoughts I’d really appreciate the input and perhaps a thoughtful redirection if I am missing the point, which is entirely possible. - Scotty

I’m inclined to agree with you Scotty. I actually can’t believe there’s no automation still in WaveLab. A serious mastering application requires the ability to apply dynamic adjustments to processing across a track, not just allowing one bunch of static settings.

I really hope this is addressed. I paid for the upgrade immediately though, purely based on the sheer overwhelming happiness of the promised end to the diabolical version 8 GUI.

I agree. I seriously thought automation was mentioned quite a lot here and I really thought it would be there. Pretty much let down actually. :blush:

I actually can’t believe there’s no automation

This is not exact. There is automation of the effect send level, and this is far from nothing. And this can even be applied on a single channel (L/R/M/S), something plugin parameter automation is not able to do.

So the obvious follow up question is this a priority or am I barking up the wrong tree? I can live with the answer, I’ll just use wavelab for sample and clip manipulation which I can accept albeit it is a little less than I have naively expected with a mature product. . I’d just like to know that’s all.


OK Philippe, apologies for the hyperbole. I will rephrase: I can’t believe there’s no plugin parameter automation, still!

I’m sure that a brilliant mind, such as yours, capable of authoring software like WaveLab, would also understand the necessity for this. The automation you have described is simply not enough.

Why not give me insert plugins then, applied per channel, with parameter automation? Now that would be the icing on the cake. As it is, I still can’t use WaveLab as an all-in-one mastering solution without having to resort to Cubase.

A fair question and I think a more than reasonable expectation of (what I imagine Steinberg would consider) industry-leading mastering software — and given the price tag it commands.

Why not give me insert plugins then, applied per channel, with parameter automation? Now that would be the icing on the cake. As it is, I still can’t use WaveLab as an all-in-one mastering solution without having to resort to Cubase.

Parameter Automation is in the future plans. There was not enough time for WaveLab 9. To be honest, send automation was faster to implement, this is why it has come first.

Though certainly not as flexible as parameter automation in Nuendo/Cubase, good sounding results can be obtained by dividing tracks (in montage) into separate clips and setting different plugin parameters for each clip. The clips can be x-faded for a morphing effect.

Thanks,
BW

That would be great and I certainly hope for 9.5. I can see you obviously put a lot of work into v9, I paid for the upgrade purely for the updated GUI. But really, I’m looking forward to the day I can do everything inside WaveLab.

Yes, sure, a workaround for some situations which I’d rather avoid! :wink:

i reached this post searching for the same topic. Still not possible in version 10 pro ?
If not, this is needed for many.