In plain language can someone tell me exactly what they want WL to do with multichannel files?
For example, any destructive editing, including Spectrum editing…
Philippe
The same you can do with mono or stereo files in WL. What is so difficult to understand here? Or are you trying to be funny?
Montage cannot deal with interleaved files without splitting them, etc. You don’t want to split multi-channel files without a special cause.
Right now I’m working with 2OA files in Nuendo 10.3 and could not edit them in WL, nor could I edit surround files with it. I often edit stereo files in WL though.
Hopefully, Wikipedia can help, Multichannel - Wikipedia. I simply want Wavelab Pro to open multichannel files like not only stereo (2 channel/multichannel) files, but also 5.1 surround (6 channel/multichannel) files. Not only in the Montage, But also in the simple edit window.
Yes, Wavelab can handle multichannel files in the Montage (although only 5.1/6 channels) but, people are asking for it to work with multichannel files in the edit window because otherwise, Nuendo’s “Open In Wavelab” doesn’t open 5.1-files and that is just one problem and there are other problems.
No.
I hope now you have at least some confusion resolved. Welcome!
The same as it can do with stereo files; no more, no less.
Look at it another way. You perceive a two-channel file as a single entity representing the recorded sound you are working with. I perceive a four-channel file as a single entity representing the recorded sound I am working with.
doesn’t that mean that WL would become a multitrack DAW?
By your logic, it already is, because stereo files are multichannel files with two channels. Increasing the channel limit for multichannel files from two to some higher number doesn’t require a change to the nature of the program’s facilities for operating with them from the user’s point of view - a user of two-channel (aka stereo) files should notice no material change in the program.
Paul
Thanks for all the clarification. I guess I always have used WL as a two channel/two track DAW designed for things like mastering and restoration (this is what I use it for) and I did my multichannel/multi-track work in Samplitude. One question that has NOT been answered is what are these files for? Is this for surround sound like 5.1 and 7.1 and Dolby Atmos or are these music files with different instruments on each track? Just curious. I am having difficulties figuring out why you would not do your multichannel work in Cubase or Nuendo or Samplitude (DAWs designed for multichannel/multi-track work) and then do your final “mastering” in WL. Is it a work flow problem or ??? What ever the reason it seems like it has taken a very long time to implement what people want in WL. Thanks in advance for the information.
Not trying to be funny just trying to understand. Sorry if I ruffled your feathers…Not sure why you would want to open multichannel files in WL since you are already in Nuendo. Is there some magic thing that WL can do that Nuendo cannot? I am really trying to understand why it is so important for WL to be “multichannel” in the edit window.
yes, surround formats …for mastering !
They are a more complete representation of the original sound than a mere stereo file, further beyond stereo than stereo is beyond mono. Quite apart from the admittedly rare case of simply using them for more realistic reproduction of a concert at home, you have already been told of their use in applications that demand a sound representation that is isotropic in three dimensions so that it can be rotated around any axis in response to the listener’s movements - such as gaming and virtual reality, which are a marketplace which I guess is now approaching the size of that for music as a whole.
And I don’t want to use other programs because they are not more suited to my work (and also I don’t want to pay to somewhat duplicate facilities). I am trying to get across that I don’t want to do anything different with my four-channel files than you want to do with your two-channel files, and WaveLab will suit me perfectly once this missing feature is added as promised.
Paul
Then you’re unintentionally funny or just trolling for whatever reason. If you don’t get it why this or that is necessary, then just leave it to the people who understand it or have a deeper horizon generally when it comes to such topics.
Why should PG even consider it, if there was no reason and Nuendo already exists? You made me laugh …
I’m afraid he is not getting it and will ask this over and over again. Or asking this is again and again is a hobby or something for him.
Nuendo is for mixing to multichannel. Wavelab is for mastering the multichannel files. It’s why all the pro mastering programs had to add multichannel mastering to be considered pro mastering apps when 5.1 came out, and they did; Pyramix, Sequoia, Sonic/Sooundblade, and Sadie. And Wavelab did too but didn’t go all the way to add complete multichannel file handling.
I’m trying to understand what people want WL to become. Maybe I am missing out on a great new revenue stream that I don’t currently offer my clients. Maybe this is just a few people too cheap to buy a real Multi-track DAW and want WL to become a “one size fits everyone” DAW. So far most of what I have seen could be done in the Montage especially 5.1 surround which it currently can do. You seem upset which maybe because you really don’t know what it is that you really want WL to do.
Since WL can now do “mastering” in the Montage and you can use all the plugins your system will allow how is opening things in the Edit window going to give you any more ??? whatever??? I am having trouble differentiating the subtle differences. So if you could explain I will stop asking questions. I currently use Samplitude for multi-track mixing but I could also use it for mastering, I instead take my two channel master over to WL for the final mastering. The biggest question is that you can do almost everything in Montage, including mastering, so why is doing it all in the edit window so much different? That is what I don’t understand.
Maybe you should read back this topic. People want to be able to do with multichannel files 2> what now is already possible with multichannel files <2. Or, like Philippe already mentioned: “any destructive editing, including Spectrum editing…”
I think people are upset because EVERY time this LEGITIMATE request rears up - and it has for many many many years now - you chime in saying that, even though you don’t understand it, you definitely don’t want it.
The patronising responses are just icing on the cake !
So far most of what I have seen could be done in the Montage especially 5.1 surround which it currently can do. You seem upset which maybe because you really don’t know what it is that you really want WL to do.
I know exactly what I want WaveLab to do! Why would you think otherwise?
As for the montage, there are significant things which it doesn’t do (spectral editing for a start). Also, although I prefer the montage for most routine editing in stereo, editing surround in the montage is rather a pain - because you have to take care to group items, to use a modifier key for some commands which can work on multiple tracks or clips, to remember which ones don’t have that ability (e.g. you can change the length of a fade on multiple clips, but you can’t change the shape of a fade on multiple clips). In short it is far more error-prone. For cinematic 5.1 this is easier to cope with, as this format is logically made up of a collection of essentially independent stereo and mono tracks (your dreaded “multitrack DAW” raises its head!) - but my multichannel files are a single unit which is only ever handled as such, and whose channels must remain in alignment to the exact sample at all times which having the channels split into separate files makes harder to ensure.
Also, the montage is limited to eight outputs, and higher-order ambisonics requires (typically) perfect squares of channels - 4, 9, 16, 25 are in routine use in the field, with a couple more in common use in research. I have a microphone which has 19 capsules - obviously I use Reaper to work with that, but it would be nice if my preferred program could handle it at some point.
None of this need have any significant impact on the use of the program for stereo, so there should be no cause for concern over it.
Paul
So, right back at you - this is what I don’t understand from you (my boldening above)… Why haven’t you ditched WL and just use Samplitude for all your 2-channel ‘Mastering’ duties as you put it (patronising against Samplitude as you go…).
And for all the reasons you come up with, will be the exact same reasons why folk are requesting WL support handling multichannel audio files more fully - montage or editor.
Not sure where the complication is, making it so difficult to understand…
Thanks, these are the first “REAL” reasons anyone has put forward. I am starting to understand. Just wondering how many other people are doing what you are doing and using REAPER or some other program since WL does not do what they want it to do. Sounds like this would be a real selling point for WL if Steinberg could do as you ask. I wonder why this is taking so long??? I seem to remember this has been going on for at least a decade or more. I thought one of the big selling point for WL 10 was its ability to do what you are asking for. Maybe at some point PG will tell you/us when we can expect WL to be capable of multichannel in the edit window.
Let’s get down to specifics…I don’t know how many copies of WL are out in the world but i really wonder how many of the people who own WL are clamoring for MULTI-CHANNEL in the edit window. It seems like the same few people here are the only ones asking for this “feature”. I know the reason I chose WL 25 years ago (Version 1.6.2) was it’s two track recording, editing and mastering capabilities and did want to go with other editing/mastering software where the mastering was a “tack on” application and did not work very well. What I have been saying from the beginning is that GREAT if this is something that can be added BUT does not make WL useless for what I and a lot of other people use it for on a daily basis. That, if you read my posts, has been my stance from the beginning. I would love it if I could edit video in WL but that is not something that is akin to WL primary abilities.
Please don’t get upset at me. I am only trying to protect what I love to use for mastering and two track recording and editing. I have watched other DAWs get so bloated they no longer work for what they were intended for. I just don’t want that to happen to WL. THANKS and be safe and STAY HEALTHY!
Many audio programs started out as stereo and had multichannel working added later. This was true of Audition, and more recently of Samplitude, RX, and SpectraLayers for example. These programs have been expanded as the techniques used in the audio world have expanded, and thus have been in a position to retain or pick up customers, even if only a modest minority for now, as their requirements also grew. WaveLab has been falling behind in this race; but we have already been told that multichannel capabilities are being worked on, so I am hopeful we will see them start to become available in the relatively near future.
Paul