Yeah. I do love how simple that sounds in words, but I know that the way my brain works in fast paced situations, it leaves too much room for my own errors, so I truly value that the montage output effects and all effects before it are started within the .mon file.
I’m just wondering, don’t you guys work with an external chain?
I would love to use the montage for albums or EP’s
But each track needs it’s own chain settings and I just apply limiting and dithering in that same realtime render.
After all that individual processing the album is pretty much done, besides DDP.
I use an external chain quite often capturing the returning signal to a 96kHz 32 bit FP montage wherein I do final editing (clip fade-ins, -outs, spacing), level matching (I almost always find myself in need of some fine-tuning here), SRC, limiting, and dithering. Capturing to a 96kHz 32 bit FT montage as opposed to its 44,1kHz 16 bit equivalent is a safety step for me, otherwise, doing it all in one render would indeed be a simpler and a more graceful procedure.
Yes, but I do all that work in REAPER @ 96k. I find the routing, scripting and overall workflow, and the fact that the playback and record timeline are linked to be a huge advantage over doing it in WaveLab. I could write for an hour about why I prefer to do it REAPER and not WaveLab but no time time today. I was using Pro Tools for this step, but using REAPER saves me a lot of time each day. Maybe someday WaveLab will allow recording in the montage, playlists, and other advanced routing options but for now, REAPER is amazing for this. It took some time to configure and have custom scripts made but now I can’t imagine not using it.
Then I bring my captures from REAPER which have been generally trimmed up and cleaned of issues by using RX6 as the main external editor for REAPER and I assemble the EP/album (or even single song project) in WaveLab montage @96k. Montages are bit-agnostic. The files I render from REAPER are 32-bit floating because after the 24-bit capture, I do some fade ins/outs and RX6 work.
In WaveLab I put the songs in the right order, determine the spacing and do any additional fading needed to the heads, tails, or crossfades of songs, enter CD-Text/ISRC etc which is transposed to ID3 metadata thanks to a preset, apply the final limiter on the montage output, and if any songs need a small level adjustment, envelope level automation in spots, or maybe a subtle clip plugin for EQ or de-essing, I can still do it here. Then I render a new file of the “Whole Montage” at 32-bit fp/96k. This way all the plugin processing and audio processing is printed. When rendering track by track WAV or mp3 files with plugins running live, I was having too many issues with small ticks or pops when tracks have overlapping or continuous audio because some plugins need to “warm up”. The DDP render never had this problem because WaveLab does that in one render process, but the track at a time WAV process is different. So now I lock in all processing besides dither in a render of “Whole Montage” to prevent issues and have a good way to see and hear if all plugins printed correctly.
Anyway, when I render a new 32-bit fp/96k WAV I tell WaveLab to make a new montage from the resulting file so all the markers and CD-Text are present again in a new montage. All I have to do is easily copy the name of the source montage Band Name - Album Title 3296 DIGITAL MASTER V1 and Save the new montage as Band Name - Album Title 2496 DIGITAL MASTER V2. I add a 24-bit dither to the montage output and now I have a montage that is ready to render 24-bit/96k WAVs of each track.
But, to get my clients approval, I often send a DDP w/HOFA DDP Player Maker so to get to 16-bit/44.1k I quickly do this:
Use Saracon to convert the initial 32-bit fp/96k render down to 44.1k, then from my Band Name - Album Title 2496 DIGITAL MASTER V1 montage I use “Custom Montage Copy” to recreate the montage at 44.1k. I change the dither plugin from 24-bit to 16-bit and now I can render a DDP or 16-bit/44.1k WAV files, or remove the dither and make reference mp3s.
If the project needs any changes I go back to the first Band Name - Album Title 3296 DIGITAL MASTER V1 montage, Save As… to V2, make the changes and then repeat these steps.
When the project is approved I can then make all the master formats for the client such as 24/96 WAV, 24/48 WAV, 16/44 WAV, reference mp3, vinyl pre-master etc.
It’s all possible from that source Band Name - Album Title 3296 DIGITAL MASTER V1 montage.
It looks like a lot in typing but thanks to WaveLab and some good additions from PG, I can do all this very fast and easy.
As you can see, I never use the global master section and all the plugins and settings are saved in the .mon file which I prefer.
And here is a good summary I wrote about why I like doing the external gear and initial processing in REAPER rather than WaveLab:
Justin, reading that it seems you can’t use Wavelab for everything because:
-
It doesn’t record and playback on the same timeline. (i thought Wavelab could, but maybe not with the right flexibility, maybe not with external gear at all ?)
-
It doesn’t have plugin automation
What else would need to be added to Wavelab to use it for everything?
Saracon SRC ? Other things? Other routing?
I do it all in WaveLab without the slightest need to look elsewhere. And while doing it I probably use 50–75 % of what WaveLab has on offer. For instance, I’m yet to delve into scripting.
All this race towards faster workflows, don’t you get to a point where it simply doesn’t matter anymore because the time required to think about musical decisions starts “underpacing” the workspeed offered by technology?
Routing is a big thing. In REAPER I have it set up so I have a totally untouched (digital or analog) version going digitally to my Avocet to monitor the untouched version. Then I have a version with some plugins on each item (or clip in WaveLab terms) simultaneously feeding both stereo D/A units. On the way in I have a way to seamlessly toggle REAPER between my two A/D units.
None of that is really possible in WaveLab.
I don’t really do too much plugin automation so that’s not the biggest thing. It’s more about the timeline sharing, and the growing number of scripts that allow me to set up a session and work incredibly quickly in REAPER.
When I was using Pro Tools for play/capture, I thought it wouldn’t be hard for WaveLab to add things to replicate that. Since using REAPER, now I’m not so sure.
I really don’t like the idea of having the play and record timeline not be related. I find value for editing, punch-ins, redo to have them linked. Maybe it’s possible in WaveLab but it’s not very obvious and seems like there is room for error.
In REAPER, if I am proofing a capture from analog and hear a noise. I press one button on my Avocet and check to see if it’s in the untouched source file. In WaveLab, it’d be more a scramble to find that section on the source file.
Or if I’m working, I can quickly A/B the totally raw mix (no plugins or analog gear) with my current work of plugins and analog gear. Instant A/B in one touch.
I think ability to record in the montage and Pro Tools style playlists would be a big start, but we also need much better routing to multiple outputs pre and post FX (clip, track, montage, global) as well.
Hmmm, my setup is PnP in WL, plugins and outboard in one print. Don’t need to look elsewhere either.
No. It’s not always about speed, or speed to the end result. But speed to help make musical decisions and less time navigating software leaves more time to get into the music and let the software get out of the way.
Workflow is very personal, I just work with file groups instead of montages and commit to 1 chain in the master section.
Justin, have you given a try to WaveLab scripting?
It is for sure. This is just my two cents about how to make WaveLab more attractive to some users. I’m not the only one that does the main work in another DAW, and then uses WaveLab to finalize.
No. I no barely anything about scripting but I’m learning a little bit from REAPER. Not enough to make a script, but enough to know who to ask to make them, and maybe tweak a few lines here and there.
My time is better spent paying somebody to make the script that knows how to do it well, than to try and learn it. At least in the near future.
I didn’t mean you writing those scripts, just using. You say you use scripts extensively in REAPER, did you try to use them to the same extent in WaveLab? If so how did it fare?
I did not try it. Too many things like routing don’t apply in WaveLab so there is no need for me to try it.
REAPER is known for having a extensive collection of exiting scripts that you can add on very easily and share with others. If you ask if something can be done on the REAPER forum, it’s either already possible, or somebody will offer to script it for you.
In my 6 or 7 years of using WaveLab and this forum. I have never seen a script for WaveLab.
Don’t get me wrong, I love WaveLab for certain things but it’s not possible to do anything close to the preferred workflow I have in REAPER for initial processing. Some major roadblocks early on make anything that is scriptable not practical at this time.
For all “in the box” mastering projects I use REAPER 100% but I do use RX6 standalone first to remove any noises/clicks/etc before starting.
I don’t have any more to say about it now so don’t be offended if I stop responding to you.
And I’ll add to Bob’s question that another big thing in REAPER that is similar to Pro Tools AudioSuite in REAPER is that I can highlight part of an item, press a button, and a copy of that item opens in RX6 for editing/repair work. I save the file after the work is done and it’s perfectly in my session.
I was skeptical about REAPER at first because of no AudioSuite but this workflow is actually faster and better IMO because you get better visual feedback in the spectrogram than you do on just the waveform in your DAW.
I know WaveLab has some spectral editing but RX6 is my preferred spectral editor and the way in interacts with REAPER as REAPER’s external editor is phenomenal.
Raphie, what keeps you from doing this? Is it because you can’t send to external chain from a montage clip and return to another track in the montage to record or capture the realtime render? Would External Gear type plugins in the montage solve this?
No, as the gear settings will be different for each track
I can work with the montage, but then I had to adapt to a two step aproach. Also I like full control over rhe chain till pribt in one pass, so except DDP there wouldn’t be much left to do in the montage.
Yes, I didn’t mean all in one pass, if that’s what you mean. I realize you’d have to reset external gear settings between clips. I mean just to have all the source files in a line in the montage beforehand, and render “selected clip” or “region” separately, with an external gear plugin on each clip that returns to the clip, after which there could be a limiter plugin or whatever applied just to that clip in the clip plugin chain. So everything saved within one montage, with only external gear settings to change for each clip.
Rather than work from 10 separate source files in the “audio file workspace”.
edit: I said “old” audio file workspace. “old” not in a bad way, but because it’s not called audio file workspace anymore afaik.