Been using WL since version 6 and I NEVER HAD TO HAVE Plugin automation to get the job done. Yes it would be nice but…so would a lot of other things that users keep asking for. I guess that is what new releases are all about…wish fulfillment.
Honestly PG I can’t understand why you’re now asking for ‘accurate cases’
Because there are several ways to implement it:
Plugin automation inside clip or/and on tracks or/and on global output?
MIDI recording of events or only manual envelopes?
BTW, plug-in automation prevents undo/redo of plugin states, as a plugin state now changes with timeline. IOW, plugin automation will remove one useful feature.
“he who can do more can do less”, but I would not like to over-complexify this feature, and limit it to where it really calls to be.
Use cases would be moving an EQ band freq/gain for certain parts, as well as compression and limiter settings for quiet and loud parts.
I think manual envelopes that can be set to the current plugin parameters would be enough, instead of live recording options.
1 Like
My 2c is that a lot of the underlying function being discussed really comes down to gain automation: what levels you are feeding the chain in different sections of the track. So being constructive, maybe a refinement/more extensive implementation of gain automation would go a long way to what is being sort.
While I am in no way “against” automation … for me, one of the biggest advantages of working ITB is recall of plugin settings. If automation sacrifices that then that’s a price I’d rather not pay.
I make the observation that, generally, if a mix engineer who knows what they are doing sends me a track with quiet and louder passages … that’s intended and automation which serves to “even” that out will probably guarantee a recall.
Why not full automation, if other mastering programs have it?
1 Like
I will jump into this thread with my point of view.
I’ve been making a living as a pro mastering engineer for 20 years.
For a long time (17 years) I’ve done this solely on outboard gear, no plugins or automation.
Times have changed. Most important, software has changed. Now, I can do things in my home studio that I still cannot do in the old, over-priced mastering studio where I have spent so many years.
With the impressive development of plugin quality, the need for automation is certainly present while mastering.
I don’t always use automation in mastering, but I WILL NOT let a DAW limit my possibilities. This is why i abandoned Sadie. This is why I gave up on Pyramix. These DAWS have flawed automation and plugin support and are obsolete for my mastering tasks. Still, I need a DAW to finalize my masters. For this purpose, I use Wavelab. However, for the processing itself? No. With only gain automation, this is a joke. Even the master rig does not justify the lack of automation, as I NEVER USE master rig because of this. For me, master rig is a useless addition to Wavelab.
I do my mastering (and mix) processing in Cubase 9.5, because there I can automate whatever I want. So Wavelab, despite its new functions, is primarily just used to make the masters in their various formats. Even the improved error correction in Wavelab is inferior to the one I get from iZotope. So Wavelab is only for making the masters and some monitoring. I wish it was not like this, but such is life.
I can do a perfectly good mastering job without automation… if it’s absolutely necessary though, I just use Cubase for automation.
Despite that though, there are times when I would welcome automation. I personally don’t care about MIDI control/input for it… drawing automation points is fine with me. I know there are some people though who would like to be able to enter it with a controller.
With only gain automation, this is a joke
I recall that WaveLab can already automate clip plugin’s wet-level with envelopes, with a lower granularity that parameter automation will alway be able to achieve.
But people use parameter automation anyway? Does this mean Wavelab won’t be getting parameter automation for clip plugins? Or tracks? Maybe I assumed too much, but I thought that was in the plans.
At first I was also like ‘I want automation’ but I found out that the most automation I use is some volume automation and some ‘wet/dry automation’ of let’s say a de-esser. Both can be done already and for me it suits the job. Maybe if the feauture is there it gets more use but to be honest, for mastering you don’t need it I think. Think of it differently, hardware and automation? Most pro mastering-studio’s (including me) also use hardware and you can’t automate.
Does this mean Wavelab won’t be getting parameter automation for clip plugins?
I did not say so, there will be some parameter automation.
I said there is already some useful automation, to answer people that say there is none.
I use some analog gear on about 80% of projects but even on those, it would be nice to do things like automate the threshold of a limiter, de-esser, or maybe automate a few EQ frequency or gain changes. Maybe this is part of why I do my analog processing in REAPER and not WaveLab but even with projects heavy on analog processing, I will still do the final limiting in WaveLab where automation of limiter threshold would be nice. Then of course, projects that are all “in the box” in WaveLab it would be very nice to have some parameter automation instead of just a wet/dry blend.
That being said, not a lot of plugin developers support WaveLab officially. Many just test Cubase and assume it’s good enough for WaveLab too (which it’s not), so it’s hard to say how reliable the automation will be during playback and rendering in WaveLab. I’ve finally got all the plugins I normally use to be stable on WaveLab 9.5, no GUI issues, no crashes during rendering, or absent processing on rendering. I’m not sure if I have it in me to go through another round of testing all of them for plugin automation accuracy in all scenarios.
Thanks PG. Mainly per track. EQ automation, especially notch filters. Compressor thresholds. Both already mentioned. But really, any plugin parameter, to deal with the dynamic and changeable nature of a mix one might have to deal with.
Global output would be useful too. The situation would always arise.
“he who can do more is always prepared”
In 2021 I would like to be able to automate -
Limiter threshold, attack and release (for all dynamics processors - some chorus parts are double time, may require different treatment for example)
EQ automation is essential
Thresholds, Gains for dynamic EQ
Thresholds, ratio on a de esser
Hell, sometimes I want to change a side chain filter frequency if a chorus has way more bass content
There are literally tons and tons of reasons why people use automation. Even IK’s cheesy lurrsen mastering console has automation (along with the rest of T-Racks, I believe.
Would love to buy Wavelab and use it together with Cubase, but like many others, there is no chance of that happening if and until it gets automation.
Yes - people used to use analog gear. They also used to record on 4 tracks. Shall we limit ourselves to four tracks?
As for not recalling plugins, maybe I am mistaken - but in S1 you can now have full mixer undo, and save snapshots of plugins for recall, and have event automation and channel automation.
Same in Reaper IIRC. Again, maybe I am missing something here…but we are not talking about the inability to recall plugin settings - rather the lack of undo history