Stable now?

I’ve held off upgrading from 9.5 mainly since I’m still on Win 7 so the external plugin in Montage doesn’t work but with the 50% deal I’m looking to get it anyway for the other features.

Reading this forum over the past few months it seems there were still a lot of teething problems with v10. Is that mostly sorted now or should I stick to 9.5?

cheers

Steinberg is having a pretty big sale right now on upgrades and full licenses so it’s a great time to at least get the WL10 license:

https://new.steinberg.net/promotion/wavelab/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_content=tweet&utm_campaign=wavelab_25_years&fbclid=IwAR09IEVJ88NEKBGWPY_iXR4cUhk--YrAQUoJ7G5PELUxBd64sUh7x6Wy9Mw

You can use WaveLab 10 and 9.5 side by side, so you can ease into it.

I’ve been using WaveLab 10 since day one and while the launch was a little rocky, it’s always been usable for me. Since there are so many ways to use WaveLab, you might just have to try it and see how it works for your workflow.

Windows 10 is only officially supported for WaveLab 10.

Wavelab 10 is rocking here. I love it, and it seems really stable so far. I’m running Windows 10 though. If I was you, I’d upgrade my machine/os for Windows 10 first, and then go ahead and upgrade Wavelab.

Thanks, went ahead and purchased it just so I have on the sale. Apart from some of the montage features (which I don’t use daily anyway) it seems to work fine.

If anyone is reading this check this post as I solved my external fx problem. Seems to work fine in Win 7:

https://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1038975#p1038975

It has not been stable for my team, we’ve reverted to 9.5 on all projects. We are on Mac / Catalina though, not sure on Windows.

It’s frustrating when we have some sessions on 10 and some on 9.5 when both use .mon extension but 10 montages won’t open in 9.5. I guess the more frustrating thing is that 10 has been so buggy for us. On these forums we were told some of our issues were because we were still running High Sierra, so we recently spent a lot of money buying 3 new maxed out macs and doing clean WL 10 installs… things are still not reliable in 10 on Mac with Catalina for us.

Still staying with 9.5.5 for the foreseeable future. Too many glitchy problems with 10. I use 10 when the work is not critical like strait transfer work or to test if it is stable, which, IMHO, it is not. Too many problems with freezing using certain plugins that work fine in 9.5.5. Hopefully it will continue to get more stable in the future.

I really wish, more than anything, that WL could get the “plug-in” problem solved. I never understood why other DAWs have no problems with the same plugins I have problems with in WL. Is there some standard way of dealing with plugin that other DAWs have that the WL developers choose not to use? This has been a problem for the past 10 years at least. FWIW.

things are still not reliable in 10 on Mac with Catalina for us.

What is not reliable for you?

Wavelab 10 is not reliable. Too many crashes with plugins that work fine in 9.5.5 and other DAWs.

If you want I can provide a list. I really don’t want to hear that it is the plugins that are the problem. If they work in 9.5.5 and other DAWs they should ALSO work in WL10. I use really well regarded plugins from reputable companies. Companies like FAB Filter and Izotope RX.

Thanks for the reply. You are the best.

What causes the crashes?

I’ve usually used WL just for cleaning up duties but switched over to it for main mastering now that it has hardware inserts. Early days (have completed a couple of projects today) but so far so good. Only issue I’ve seen is the GUI on a couple of plugins can slow it down (even with OpenGL disabled).

But what if it is the plugins that are the problem? We should probably not be burying our heads in the sand over this.

In my opinion, that doesn’t always follow since there are many variables at play here. Which DAWs and plugins are you referring to?

In my experience I’ve seen a number of plugins causing crashes and serious issues in Cubase while functioning perfectly well in Wavelab 10. It could be said that Wavelab is no better or worse than other steinberg software. And of course the actual choice of plugins is going to have an enormous influence on the user experience.

Don’t get me wrong, I agree that Wavelab 10 still seems rather sensitive with regard to plugins. However, I wouldn’t describe the program as unreliable or unstable.

P.S. On the subject of Izotope, if you do a search for Izotope RX on the Cubase or Nuendo forums you’ll see there have been a wide range of persistent RX issues over the last couple of years. So problems with Izotope RX are not unique to Wavelab 10. It would seem that RX was at one time thoroughly tested in pro tools and various others but not in steinberg software, especially Wavelab. Even now Wavelab is not listed as a supported host on the Izotope website.

I guess I am not the only one with plugin problems.

From Gearslutz
Plugin compatibility

My simple wish is that WL10, can deal with the same plugins as WL9 could. I have been a Wavelab user since version 3. The latest releases (7-10) have been struggling with plugins that work well on many other platforms. This has been fixed along way. This is not just a question about 3rd party developers making bad code, it has just as much been a problem on Wavelabs side, and this is why I’m asking.

mljung

It’s definitely no secret that WaveLab is more sensitive to 3rd party plugins than Cubase or the other big multi-track DAWs. We’ll never know if it’s because of WaveLab or because of poor plugin coding but since there seems to be similar reports in other mastering focused DAWs such as Sequoia, SoundBlade (RIP), Pyramix, and SADIE, this leads me to believe that most plugin developers don’t have the time or resources to throughly test their plugins (or even test at all) any DAWs beyond the big ones (Cubase, Pro Tools, Logic).

Also keep in mind that mastering DAWs often have clip/object/item FX which must have some functional differences than track FX as we have in multi-track DAWs.

Exactly.

Same here, a lot of plugs that work fine in 9.5 (and every other DAW) cause problems in 10 (especially izotope)

Other issues that my team is experiencing in 10:

-Audio randomly stops working until restarting WL.

-external FX have been useless as Clip FX, audio glitches after playback, and GUI doesn’t sync with with audio, even more so when external FX are between plugins.

-audio glitches randomly in printed audio when using izotope (neutron and Ozone). This alone prevents us from using it. We never had that issue in previous versions.

-there is no way to select plugins in a chain to copy and paste without opening them (like it was in 9.5)

-masterbus FX aren’t being delay compensated, for instance, if you put Fx on master bus and print individual files (based on splice markers) from one continuous album, there will be slight silence and delayed audio between songs when printing through master FX.

We switched from Seqouia years ago to wavelab so that we could run on Macs instead of PCs, with hopes that the external FX limitations from <9.5 would be fixed one day. So we were so happy to hear those limitations were finally here in 10, but it’s all
been so glitchy that we still can’t use 10. (We have 5 licenses / rigs that we upgraded)

We love WL and would just want all of the features to work as intended and for it to be as stable as it has been in previous versions.

Is there any hope that these issues will be resolved in an update?

Thanks!

Nathan

-there is no way to select plugins in a chain to copy and paste without opening them (like it was in 9.5)

This is possible also in WaveLab 10. Simply click on the slots, while pressing Control (Command on the Mac).

-masterbus FX aren’t being delay compensated

For sure they are. But certain plugins don’t declare the latency properly to WaveLab.

Philippe

This is possible also in WaveLab 10. Simply click on the slots, while pressing Control (Command on the Mac).

Yes, I see that but how do you then select only one after multiple are selected? It just seems like it got more complicated and I’m not sure what the benefit was in changing that.

For sure they are. But certain plugins don’t declare the latency properly to WaveLab.

I should have been more specific, I meant on the Final FX / Dithering slots. This is important when using the resampler, so that we can control the change in peak levels after resampling.

To test this, I just made a new montage at 44.1k, loaded in a 4 min 1k sine wave, added start, splice and end markers, then added Steinberg Master Rig (with limiter) in the last slot of final FX, then rendered “all regions” and created new montage with the results, its not one continuous file, the sine wave has been disrupted.

Is master Rig not reporting latencies properly?

I think the MasterRig reports latency properties. But what you must be observing is not a bug but a side-effect of how DSP filter works. I mean, filtering from a point T in time, depends on the preceding samples.
This means if you process a file from start to finish, this is not the same as if you process in two parts (for example), and join the sum. The second part is rendered without knowing the preceding samples.
This is not a bug of the plugin, nor of WaveLab.

If continuity is important for you, process in one go, then split afterward.

Yes, I just assume that all the clip and montage plugin processing on top of live Resampling all in one rendering process is just too much. Too easy for something to go wrong.

First I do one long render to lock in all the plugin processing cleanly at the same native sample rate and floating point audio to a new montage, which works great. With the right settings, all your original marker and CD-Text/metadata will carry over too.

Then in the newly created montage I can render WAVs of each track, and then whether you prefer the internal SRC of WaveLab or some external SRC such as RX or Saracon, doing SRC outside of montage and using Create Custom Duplicate works really well to get the montage down to 44.1k before rendering track by track.

It may look like a lot in writing and seem like a hassle at first, but you’ll find that you can do it very quickly and it produces perfect results that you can trust, especially when you have overlapping songs/tracks.

No sure that I agree with this 100%. Here - the main “DAW” is Studio one - which is not small but not “Big” either. But I have to be honest - I have never had a plugin fail in over 6 years of Studio One usage. The same cannot be said for WL. And I use the identical plugin set in both apps - since I all I use is these two main apps.

So - whatever Studio One is able to do - WL is not (in specific circumstances). And I also not buying the “sensitivity” angle when it comes to plugins in WL either. If WL is too “sensitive” vs say Studio One (which has always allowed full functionality of ALL of my plugins) - this implies that something else is going on here.

Since the plugin complaints about WL have been going on for literally years - there is no way that WL is 100% compliant and the plugin vendors are always at fault - WL has to be playing a role.

If the vendors were building shoddy plugins (and I only use the “big” established name plugins) - logically they should be failing all over the place in numerous apps.

VP