Looking for examples of why someone would need wavelab if they have cubase pro 9.5.

Looks gimmicky to me.

Im guessing it is toowrongfooyou

If you dont know WHY you need it then you dont

The examples they show are kinda ridiculous. A "pager" going off on some bongos. Man, I can tell you right now that was put with standard bongo loops you can get for free.

Oooooo look, it can "learn" and kill off some tape hiss. Oooooo.

It has 6 windows!

I mean, wavelab elements can be a tremendous help for people that don't have good audio editing (like live) but this is 580 bones (well of course there is a discount right now) for something that seems, gimmicky.

Tell me how wrong I am instead of insulting my name

There really is no need for Wavelab at this point. Some people just live in the past so they keep releasing it. I bet steinberg doesn't mind the revenue even though they should be honest with customers that it is indeed redundant.

For example, what about cubase integration? What can it do to a mix that you can't do in cubase? Tricks and things that make you drool and say "hey, I didn't know that"

All the videos I've seen are almost an 80's video. Just lights and special effects vs. something that actually makes the price tag justifiable.

Thanks.

Hello,

Have you seen the new videos on the WaveLab channel? If you do profesional mastering you definitely should consider it. In WaveLab you can do an audio montage, something you cannot do in Cubase. Create the master copy of your album, it has many more restoration tools than Cubase has. The New Master Rig and Audio Inpainting which no other software has: YouTube It is a great audio editing tool and you can modify and edit audio with surgical precision.

Best regards,
GN

Thanks!

Its like a PRS silversky

lol, only no cleancut, washed up rock stars have endorsed it

I have Cubase 9.5 and have Wavlab 8.
I have .wav files set to open in Wavlab as a default.
It means I can quickly examine files, particularly older ones without creating a new project in Cubase, check sampling rates, re-save in a different format, master etc etc.
It also has tools that Cubase doesnt have. Sometimes I master in Cubase but often I master Wavlab.

Thanks.

Yeah, thanks for nothing.

In your defense, Ive never bought WAVELAB here either. I actually picked up StudioOnePro back when to have a pseudo Mastering app that was way less complicated for making CD's, DDP, Digital releases etc.

I keep threatening to get WAVELAB someday BUT it hasn't happened yet.
LOTS of Mastering guys have an do use it for that function.

Have you thought of grabbing Elements while its on sale to see if you dig it or not?

Oh really? How are these "redundant?"

1. Smart Bypass
2. Error detection and correction
3. Faster and more "accurate" editing
4. Fantastic visual 3d frequency analysis
5. Batch processing, conversion & renaming
6. CD text
7. DDP
8. Audio Montage for assembly, effects, and CD error checks.
9. Metering tools that go far beyond Cubase
10. Spectrum editing, a completely different approach.
11. Importing Audio CDs then data integration via ww web.
12. Wavelab-Cubase integration (still not as nice as it was before Cubase SX but do-able)
13. File comparison. Ever want to hear only the differences between 2 compressors or EQs? Create a delta file and listen only to the differences.Similar to when things don't null.
14. You have 1 .wav file that contains for example 15 songs. Set up the parameters and save 15 individual .wav tracks.

These are the main functions that I use what are not in C9.5.

Perhaps you should let those ME's know that they live in the past.

For mastering albums? Formatting albums?

Same as always I suspect.

In this singles era, it seems redundant to most.

wow lots of useful stuff. What is Error detection? Is that if you play a bad note the software tells you?

more accurate editing? I'm not getting this one. Cuabse can edit down the the sample. What does wavelab do different there?


Thanks for the info

Why would you say that? What looks like a gimmick to you?

Didn't WL also show the EBU/LUFS value loudness at any point in the song (as opposed to Cubase just telling you the single peak value, and not saying where it is)?

I've often been tempted to buy the cheapest version of WL for that alone!

(As well as having access to some shortfall editing).

No.

When sending a master to a duplication plant, you want to minimize any potential errors or it can be rejected depending on the error type and the set thresholds for duplication. Depending on the issue it could also effect streaming. There are many different types of errors, and some are not audible.

In addition to the pop, clicks, and other audibles, which 3rd parties can also address Wavelab has a entire section devoted to error analysis.

Sorry for misleading you, it's more to do with streamlined and fast editing that leads to fast accuracy. Cubase today isn't bad, but IMO is still playing "catch up" from years ago when Cubase editing was dreadful. I can provide details, but away from my studio for another week. Streamlining is the better word than accuracy.

Honestly, if you are genuinely interested, instead of saying there is "really no need for Wavelab at this point" perhaps watch some videos and learn what Wavelab is about. Better yet, download the manual and read about the features included in Wavelab that are not in Cubase. They are 2 very different applications. Editing is available in both.

If you do mastering professionally then you need to be able to create DDP's . You also need to be able to embed ISRC codes, CD text, cue sheets etc etc

Cubase cannot do these things so that's why I have wavelab.


MC

Seems that for a select group, there are some things that it might do well, but for the general shmoe (me) it's nothing to get excited about.

Though worded POORLY, it seems that it's true that if you don't feel the need for it, you probably don't need it.

Guess I'll have to wait until that magic day when I become a pro (times running out though, in my 50's)

I never did buy Wavelab. Mostly because I've been using Sound Forge since the previous century and to me, both were aiming for the same market. I use Sound Forge CONSTANTLY back and forth with Cubase, and I don't master any of my own music.

I've always thought of and worked with Sound Forge (and would do so with Wavelab if Steinberg happens to someday give a copy to me free) as for doing stuff on like I would do in turning to the two-track tape machine for specialized subbounce edits..... as opposed to taking a razor blade to one of my two-inch tapes.

Rather than doing surgical stuff on the main daw.... which imo creates most types of nightmares, cpu/memory/realtime hits in processing...... junk.... I'll export some number of "things" to work on in the two-track (Sound Forge), save, and then import that back into the daw.

Very clean workflow for me... and very much like my mindset of working with a two-track for edits, and then flying those back into the 24track or synchronized dual 24-trk machines.

Of course with a 2-trk editor and daw, you never lose a generation in the transfer.

If you didn't live those days.... and you're currently doing every single edit/move of a bazillion tracks of the main daw, well... you just sort of had to be there in the old days.

I actually love the speed of working between SF and Cubase. But, it's what I know.

That's a very interesting way of looking at it and makes perfect sense to me.

Maybe what I was saying had to do more with those vid's steiny provided which seemed .... weird.

Either way, I can't make use of it at this time. But wanted to explore all the options as it was on sale. I like the idea of picking something up on the cheap if possible.

I think, iirc at all, you have to sell the dongle when reselling a dongled license, which is ridiculous to have two dongles when I already have one. Point being I wanted to explore my options (please correct me if the above is not true, then I could just get it used at a later date if needed)

I bought an older version of WaveLab in a packaged deal with Cubase. I had installed it but never used it, primarily I just didn't understand it. There are reasons that have been pointed out here in this thread. However I still think it's a gimmick, Steinberg could very well include them in Cubase, but why would they when those who need those tools are willing to pay? And besides, most Cubase users do not need these tools, I for one do not.

Well, this thread has not aged too well, by now WaveLab has become one of the standards in mastering studios, and is used for all sorts of post-production, restoration, analysis, podcasts, conversions, CD authoring, broadcasting, etc...

You use a DAW to create/record and mix music or other audio content, and use WaveLab to process a track/album for distribution. Ask mastering engineers, they will tell you that you can do only so much mastering with a DAW.

Wavelab has always been one of the standards for ME's at least for the past 20 years. With the exception of WL7, IMO, it's always improved.

However you will find many ME's perhaps not using Wavelab the way some people believe. Some use it for monitoring/meters only. Some use it to capture only. Some ME's use a DAW such as Reaper that is very configurable in conjunction with WL.

The issue I see with mastering in a DAW is that it's not designed for mastering. These days, DAW developers such as PreSonus proclaim you can use Studio One to master. Well...you can...but only to an extent. It's more like basic finalizing in my opinion. Soon you realize you need to go far beyond what any DAW developer has bundled to make you feel like you don't need professional mastering. It's a lousy gimmick unless you realize the limitations.

Currently I'm auditioning 'new' Mastering Daws ..

StudioOne-5 is one of them, with its Project Page. Reaper has served for most of the 'heavy lifting', then I would Export to

HOFA DDP-Pro.

Now to find that HOFA DDP has issues with several of my main plugin tools [WEISS for example, as well as other Softube plugs].
No idea when/if this will be resolved ... thus the SO-5 demo.

Looking at WaveLAB [which I used earlier version many years ago], it looks like a special 'USB-KEY' is needed to license. I read talk that
this 'key' may be abandoned. [possible move to iLOK ... would be fine]. But can't justify buying a special key just to demo a product ... with
the possible future obsolescence.

Staying mindful that 'Mastering DAWs' are more of a niche market ... I'm also evaluating what support/updates, new features, these Companies
deliver.

I'm just following this thread for information/observations ....

thanks