Thanks! So…im sorry im not in thr studio right now…when you reopen the montage it doesnt automatically open the master channel that you “saved with”?
when you reopen the montage it doesnt automatically open the master channel that you “saved with”?
Yes, and on purpose.
If you want to have one full project “per file”, then use the master plugin section of the audio montage, as suggested earlier.
So if Im switching back and forth between 48 abd 44k projects (excuse me, AMs), i have to keep manually loading the resampler or a preset with it (and unloading it) every time I switch?
What is the advantage to not making a pref for it to autoload with the AM? I can understand the benefit of being able to save and load an entire channel preset, but 99 times out of 100…actually i really dont see the advantage in not saving the MC with the AM (and autoloading it too). Can you offer an example?
Also, this hasn’t been a big issue for me (yet) since I generally dont do offline processing, but isnt it a big problem that you are auditioning your offline plugins at the end of the monitor chain, but applying them to the beginning?
So if Im switching back and forth between 48 abd 44k projects (excuse me, AMs), i have to keep manually loading the resampler or a preset with it (and unloading it) every time I switch?
Why do you need the resampler at all? Your audio card should be able to play both 44 and 48k.
Well there are many uses one can think of - not all necessarily being part of a mastering workflow. For instance, when cleaning up old recordings, maybe vinyl or other, it can be very useful to have one master section with all necessary plugins loaded as a starting point. Then go from there through all audio files and render each to archive. Since ‘old’ WL users only know the program with the single global master section, there are many more eaxamples possible. And - it’s been part of the workflow to use it like that, so many will disagree that the offline system needs to be out of the monitor chain. On the contrary, it needs to be right where it is.
This does not work for me. I’ve created a new montage, added plugins to the Master Section, selected Edit > Store Master Section preset inside montage, and Saved the Montage. I then close it and reopen it and it does not bring up the Master Section preset that supposedly was saved with the Montage. Am I doing something wrong?
LOL 
I take that back. If I select Edit>Load Master Section Preset saved with the Audio Montage, then it loads the preset. I think I will probably just use the Master Section for SRC and Dithering, while using the Clip level plugins section for plugins specific to each Clip in the Montage. I only use one track and put the songs in as clips, so the track is essentially the album or EP. I have not figured out Super Clips yet, but will see if these add any benefit.
I had Nuendo work today so I didn’t have a chance to see that. Glad it’s there, I’d still like a pref to make saving and loading that section automatic.
Ok, that’s not an example of why it’s useful to have it in the monitoring chain, that’s an example of why it’s useful to have a multi-fx chain at all, which I agree, it is. But the placement is still all wrong. And saying that users are used to it because it’s previously been that way isn’t a reason either. The AM plug-in chain was added for a reason.
Both Cubase and Nuendo have offline processing that is not in the monitor chain. You see, it’s not a matter of whether it works for something other than mastering. If you’re using the AM the way it was designed to be used, then the master channel FX are specifically in the way if their intention is for offline processing. It’s also in the wrong place. You’re applying these plug-ins to the soundfile itself so after they are applied you’re going to hear them before the clip level, but when you are auditioning them you are hearing them after the entire AM chain, clip, track and master. The only way this works is if you aren’t using any realtime processing at all - or haven’t used it yet - including envelope changes.
I’m guessing the idea is that you’re supposed to switch to the audiofile editor to do this application of the plugs from the master channel at which point you won’t hear whatever real time plugs you have in the AM? Ok, fine, but then that FX tab should be exclusively part of the audiofile editor. If I load a denoiser while in the audiofile editor, I’d like to be able to go to the AM, play the file and hear how it sounds with whatever other processing I’ve done, in the correct order. As it stands now, I’d have to apply the denoiser, then bypass it in the MC, then go back to the AM and audition what it sounds like with whatever other processing I’ve added. What if a compressor I have running brings out artifacts that I couldn’t hear in the audiofile editor? Unbypass, go back to AF Editor, Undo…and then guess at what level the denoising will actually work.
I’m new to this so I’m trying to figure out how this kind of real world usage is going to play out.
What would really make sense would be to have the same MC plug-in slots, but make them exclusive to the AF editor. Make them run in real time - with the ability to render if you choose. And be able to audition said soundfile in the AM WITH the SF Editor FX running. Basically take it from the end of the chain and move it to the beginning, which is where it’s actually going to be applied anyway.
Sorry, the scenario im thinking of is trying to dump any AM to CD that is above 44khz. Is there another way to do it other than using the Crystal Resampler in the MC?
Sorry, the scenario im thinking of is trying to dump any AM to CD that is above 44khz. Is there another way to do it other than using the Crystal Resampler in the MC?
Indeed, you need to use the Master Section. But rendering is a one time operation. You should load a Master Section preset with the Crystal Resampler when doing this operation. This is quick. And since this is common settings for all non-44.1 montage, it is good to have this Master Section setting independent from any montage (because reusable).
Well, I disagree, the placement is perfect. And I wasn’t speaking of Audio Montage but Wave Editor. Obviously you want to hear what is applied to the audio, so ‘monitoring chain’ or ‘offline process’ is semantics IMO.
I’m wondering if there might be an advantage to truncating/dithering after SRC? In which case my preset would include that in the Master Section too. Please consider it a feature request to be able to marry a given Master Section to an AM. I might be switching around between several clients in the course of a day. It’s quick and easy to load a preset but it’s also one more thing to have to think about. If all I have to do is make some tiny tweak and then generate a new master…etc etc. I need to be able to view each discrete client project (album) as ONE open command. It really doesn’t make sense to have it be more complicated than that.
It’s not semantics, it’s whether what you’re hearing is being fed through the rest of your plug-in or not, and at what point.
I do think this is mostly about me…again…learning the workflow that’s expected with this particular software. If i’m working in an audio montage and I decide that a particular song needs to have a process applied to it - say…denoising. I need to open that underlying audio file in the audiofile editor, render the denoiser from the master channel. etc. So the question is, what am I hearing at that point? When I’m auditioning the denoiser in the audiofile editor (wave editor?) is it going through all the 3 levels of plugs I have in the montage too? Is the denoiser BEFORE those plugs? After them? It’s in “the Master Section” which in every other way is after the AM plug-in chain, but if you’re rendering in the waveform editor you’re absolutely doing it before that chain. I have to test it of course but my guess is that it bypasses the AM all together. And that’s no good either.
I’m giving you solid reasons why this is either in the wrong place, or labelled and laid out in the most confusing way possible (dual use of “Master” and having the same section serve as POST montage and PRE montage).
All you’re saying is “The placement is perfect”. Why is it perfect? This is a very basic question of signal flow and the fact that I even have to ask it is a problem in design all by itself. There’s only ONE master in other DAW and it’s always the last step in the monitor chain.
No, you don’t need to “open the underlying file in the audio file editor”. Why not just denoise in the montage? You can denoise using a clip effect, you don’t need to use the master section.
Just because you have to ask does not mean there is a design problem. If anything, if you have to ask it probably means the signal flow is way more helpful and flexible than you are used to. Like Arjan, I too think the placement is very good. I mean what more could you ask for? You can insert plug-ins in the audio montage just about anywhere within the signal flow. The Audio montage is a very powerful audio processing environment but to use it properly you really have to know it well. I’d recommend reading the Audio montage section of the PDF manual which starts on p.236. Even if you don’t like reading manuals, in this case just make an exception. You’ll be glad you did and it will probably actually be less time-consuming than posting here.
For the signal flow in the audio montage see p.240 of the PDF manual.
No, one thing to keep in mind is that the Master Section is global in Wavelab. So without an Audio Montage loaded it is there and is the final step in processing. When several things are open, montages and waves, anything in the MS will be applied to any of those, for monitoring and rendering - that’s why I find the placement perfect. Any processing in one montage (clip, track or master output effects) has no bearing on anything else. Not on other montages or waves that may be open. Do check out the Audio Montage signal flow on p.239. Simply by subtracting all before ‘Master Section’ you have the Wave Editor signal flow.
I just tested this right this second. WIth an AM running, whatever is in the MC plug-in slot is running POST all other plug-ins. That isn’t “global”. That’s in a very specific spot. If you want to hear that MC plug BEFORE the other plugs - you’d have to close the AM or manually bypass each and every other plug in since there isn’t a chain bypass. Then you’d be faced with the problem of not hearing what the other plugs are going to do AFTER the MC plug is applied until you unbypass them or open the AM again.
It’s completely absurd. You have one piece of real estate, the MC plugs serving two discrete purposes that you really need to be running at the same time and in a very specific order.
I don’t get why this is so hard for us suss out. The fact that at it’s even this complicated is ridiculous. I don’t even know what you mean by “global” but whatever it means, it shouldn’t be 
. The AF Workspace should have it’s own channel strip that is ALWAYS BEFORE the montage and the AM Workspace should have its own that is ALWAYS after. And there is no benefit whatsoever to confusing those things.
Phillipe can you please take a stab at helping me to understand what you had in mind, or confirm what I’m saying? I mean ultimately what this means is it forces a chronology to the workflow. You REALLY need to deal with any plugs that you want to commit to the soundfile before you even bring that file into the AM. Certainly before you start applying any plugs in the AM.
BTW I checked out P. 239. That’s not really a signal flow. I drew a crude chart - attached.
I actually do like reading manuals. I didn’t get a manual. I got a PDF (for $500 - anyway). But I appreciate you pointing out the correct page number. That does explain the signal flow but it doesn’t address the problem I’m discussing. What more I could ask for is comprehensive automation so that I’m not locked into this signal flow. With true snapshots you can shuffle anyway you please.
I’m no stranger to arcane software. Sonic had a learning curve and flexibility that was much greater than this. What I expected when I bought WL was consistency since I was already very familiar with Nuendo. This product is interesting but it’s closer in architecture, and nomenclature to other manufacturers.
Anyway, I brought up this issue at the very start of this thread. ANY plugin you put at the clip level multiplies instances every time you cut. So if cutting clips is the only way to automate changes - which right off the bat is really limiting compared to true dynamic automation, but it also can actually become a resource issue on a large project. a 12 or 15 song album that needs a lot of work…yeah, you start getting an average of 15-20 (or more) cuts per song?
It also means a plugin like a tape emulator that you absolutely want to hit first in the chain and NOT change over time, really needs to be rendered or again, you get a waste of resources once you start cutting. Is rendering so bad? Well…no, but it’s committing when you shouldn’t have to. So, Phillipe suggested using Super-Clips - do you see how we’re just adding one level on top on another to make up for what could just be done with proper automation?
And this begs…well, where CAN I do something with this kind of flexibility? In NUENDO. Where I have infinitely variable dynamic automation and editable fader envelopes that can be pre or post my plug-ins and the master is always the master.
All WL really needed to be was Nuendo + a delivery mechanism. It’s the whole Steinberg strategy that is messed up. They could’ve just crippled the MIDI and POST and whatever else isn’t mastering to make a unique product for non-SB DAW users.
WL is offering 5 levels (6 with superclips) with one that’s a moving target, where 2 would not only suffice, but be significantly easier to use.
Take it or leave it, but this is the impression of someone who has been using many different DAWs over the years, and specifically SB’s flagship DAW and I fully understand signal flow and mastering. Can I make WL work? Yes of course. There is a much better potential solution though and much like Cubase was reworked to be a light version of Nuendo, there’s no reason why WL couldn’t also be a component of the same overall software and erase the learning curve for SB’s existing customers. That would have a LOT of value. It would move traffic both ways too. A user who bought WL might be more incline to move to Cubase or Nuendo If they’ve basically already learned it.
BTW - I don’t like PDFs but I watched both Groove 3 videos. They don’t mention superclips once. They don’t address the overall signal flow. Honestly , it horrendous. The guy spends almost an entire video on the opening dialog that has 4 choices lol. The Cubase videos are way better. By the time I was getting to the end of the videos I was stabbing my leg to stay awake. There is good info in there but God do they make you work for it.
Global = in use for any and all montages and/or audio files you have open in Wavelab.
I’m sorry you apparently had the wrong idea about WL when you bought it. If in your view it needs so much redesigning then it probably isn’t the software for you. You do bring up some valid points, and some have already been acknowledged by Philippe (effects automation, for one), but my advice would be to try to use the program with all the flexibility it already has, instead of trying to make it function the way you believe it should.