WL Pro 11 multi channels in Montage - staying as interleaved files

How can I lock all channels of one mutli channel take for editing? I haven’t completely RTFM, but it should be made obvious for the user. I would like to move, cut etc. surround files like interleaved stereo files in Montage. I don’t need them splitted most of the time.
Otherwise there is the problem to accidently shift channels within a surround recording.

Check this: Locking Clips


regards S-EH

No, that isn’t what’s needed. I want to move, edit, fade etc. the whole surround files - locking prevents that. What I meant is editing of the combined channels of an interleaved file, like it is possible with stereo files.
If this is not possible, then there would be an unnecessary obstacle for using Monatge with surround and ambisonics files. Competing programs like Acon Acoustica can do this, Nuendo can do this. Splitting files into channels can be beneficial but that is very often not necessary.

Of course this is possible look in Montage view
Edit tab > use “Rippel” and “Auto Grouping”
and set what you need for Track and Group.

regards S-EH

Thank you, but this isn’t the same as just using an interleaved file as simple as a stereo file. There shoudln’t be any need for grouping etc. It should be the other way round: interleaved files are used, edited as entities and splitting them up is an option for extra functions, needs and channel oprations.

Try this option:

Thanks, PG, I already did this and it is a step forward. But it is still a bit cumbersome to edit. For example, copy/paste actions always need extra steps to select all channels.
I would prefer a simple, no fuzz handling of multi channels files like stereo files. It is possible in all other programs I know and use, e.g. Acoustica, Sound Forge, Nuendo …

In the audio editor, you can do that.

Although I really appreciate the new sibling feature for giving the ability to do multichannel editing at all, true multichannel tracks are still needed for serious editing.
For editing e.g. classical music there are are so many splits, cuts, copies and pastes to do, that every extra step in the workflow is a hassle. So, having all channels on one track would be a major step forward.
4-point (AKA Source/Destination) editing would also be a very nice feature on the wish list for editing, which is now only available on high-end applications like Magix Sequoia or Merging Pyramix out of the box.


1 Like

“In the audio editor, you can do that.”
Yes, we all know. But why not in the Montage too? In the current state multi-channel editing is only half baked!

To reduce the amount of complexity and to avoid stepping on Cubase/Nuendo.

Argggh - I have two Nuendo 11 and two Cubase licenses and I still would prefer WL 11 as a full featured multi-channel Wave editor! I don’t know if this a clever move by Steinberg. For me it is always a different approach to the audio takes necessary.
Concerning complexity … it is more complex to cobble together multi-channel tracks in Montage from stereo and mono channels.

Same here with Samplitude Pro (3x) and Reaper (2x). I would love to make WL my one-and-only DAE again, like in DAT stereo times back in the mid 90’s :smile:
WL 11 is a big leap towards multichannel and I really like it, but I think multichannel tracks are simply a must these days.



Evidence above suggests the net effect of updating to WL11 will bring more complexity into certain workflows.

To recap:-

1 Like

Have you tried to do multitrack editing now in WL 11 ?
Actually you can do it both ways in the Audio view or Montage view
and I think PG’s philosophy is an other take on multitrack editing compare to
other DAW’s, time will tell :wink:

regards S-EH

Not sure if that was posted for me to respond to - but anyway no, not bought the update yet.! I’m waiting for 1st maintenance/trial version.

Though, with Multitrack editing I’ve not got a problem. In fact it looks like that could be even better now in WL11 (Group Tracks, Sub-lanes, etc…) No, my concern is the (lack of) handling of multi-channel interleaved audio as one file.

And don’t get me wrong, I’ve done very little work on Surround/multi-channel/ambisonic projects over the years. I don’t even have a proper surround monitoring set-up to work with.! Just very curious why such a workflow and use of the Surround Panner tool, would be removed.

As such, would love to hear what folk like @DanMcL and @uarte and others, who regularly work with this stuff, are thinking and how they’re coping. I see those two at least have made the move…

1 Like

We’re still primarily Nuendo for daily work and my engineer is experimenting with moving to WL, so no news yet. It’s a big change, ultimately up to him but I think it’s the best choice from what I’ve seen. Working in stereo still for this, haven’t looked at multi much.


In my opinion WL has been very good since at least WL 5, 6
for Stereo editing and now in the Multi channel format too
I’m sure this will continue and grow…

regards S-EH

We’ll see. It’s the little things that matter, when you’re making thousands of assets a streamlined workflow is paramount. But like I saw, from my initial eval it appears that WL is now better than Nuendo for sound design.

1 Like

Ok - thanks Dan. I may have misread another post of yours; thought your multi-channel work was mostly in WL… Can I ask though, still not quite clear… some of your jobs in WL are using the Surround Panner, where the multi-channel interleaved file is kept intact, yes.? And for other (sound design.?) work you would be splitting things out across multiple separate tracks, though thats mainly all done in Nuendo…?

Basically, am keen to hear from those who use the Surround Panner in their multi-channel handling workflow and how they view this ‘new paradigm’ in WL11…

Once again, multi-track editing is not the concern.; its about keeping the interleaved file intact, on one track (the capability for which has been removed).

Oh, and one final point to note (field/location/ambience recordists), you can no longer record multi-channel (Surround) interleaved format files in WL11.

And there again, maybe this all isn’t quite such a big deal as I’m thinking it might be… :grinning: