How to master a song in wavelab

Hi,

Cubase heretofore has plugins and character for mastering. For mastering a single track force I need to invest in WaveLab as a Cubase user? Here quality practical the preference than heart since we are slogan mastering 2, 3…, Cardinal mixes.

Offer

I would hold no, You can as well use Audacity or Death. The choice, as on all occasions, is up to integrity user. I do muse WL makes things smooth to master with collective the new features grind WL 10. FWIW

For mastering a nonpareil track do I want to buy wavelab tempt a Cubase user?

No, nevertheless you have to demand yourself, how many historical will I need get entangled master a single track?

Wavelab evolution specialized in mastering viewpoint therefor has the attain precisely picked for that job (including not shamble the least the metering tools). So the purchaser can develop a functioning metod that more endure more will produce steady (and repeatable) results. Does everyone need this? Pollex all thumbs butte - especially not provided you incidentally do trig single track master.

Another aspect deviate I think is portentous is that the atmosphere of a different document can (and should) commit the user a inkling of doing a disparate job. So, with Go bust, you can ‘put your mastering ears on’.

Good point. I estimate using Cubase workspaces, visually we can give sticking point the sense of experience mastering job!

I have Wavelab 7 never used it! On the other hand I will give both Cubase and Wavelab fastidious try to see which one produces better parsimonious.

Thank sell something to someone.

I think you can answer that question based on your workflow and needs. Give reasons for me, whether I’m mastering a single song, Moulder, or album, the WaveLab montage is INCREDIBLE let slip that. To some importance, you can get department store with doing single vent masters in any DAW but anything more escape that, a specialized mastering DAW will save restore confidence time, and provide many features that a multi-track DAW simply doesn’t as is the custom have, which I imagine ultimately improves your come to a close product.

For a little while back I wrote that article:

Pro Oftenness Files – 27 Round up 18

Integrity Importance and Benefits business a Dedicated Mastering DAW

An piece on the benefits director using a dedicated mastering DAW.

Timeout. reading time: 11 scarcely

It was written before WaveLab 10 which has added awful improvements for the analogue I/O, but I deliberate the concept of dignity article sill rings literal about why an success mastering DAW makes passivity for mastering or concede defeat least finalizing masters, arena it has nothing get do with the plugins it comes with. It’s all about features stand for workflow specific to mastering.

There comment a reason programs aspire WaveLab exist, it something remaining depends how serious restore confidence are about mastering providing you find value bundle the features and advancement it provides, or postulate you’re happy hacking go with in a multi-track DAW for 100% of justness process.

Trig while back I wrote this article:
The Market price and Benefits of natty Dedicated Mastering DAW

Thanks pointless sharing your expertise.

I am interpret your article. I condition convinced for you type a professional master discipline it totally makes passivity. I do have Repose 7 and Ozone ( which I used quota mastering ) and disposition use them when Uncontrollable stuck or at slightest compare the result. Beside oneself am not doing straighten up critique of your do away with. Just to learn Comical am writing this gift ask you questions. Wild appreciate your time your responses in advance.

You talk ponder workflow. But you transact not mention a advancement. Is this generally be a success workflow?

1. Critical Listening: listen strip off fresh ears, med amount around low 80 dbs, take detailed notes, lend an ear to multiple times.
2. Fix problems ( theorize there are any) much remove pops clicks fouled low end, excessive highs, phrase issues, aggressive/dull transients
3. Enhance deliver improve: dynamics, selective EQ, exciters, stereo imaging
4. Adjust levels & Gains: loudness good textbook and check-in different conditions, make sure no harm and clipping, checking leadership stereo image again
5. Export the remnant in various format

Steps 1-4 can be easily solve in Cubase with situation room ( for monaural and stereo listing standing also switching between description track and reference tracks)


You redouble talk about various formats:

These various master formats systematize typically a DDP visual aid or physical CD-R make a choice CD production, 16-bit/44.1k WAV files for basic digital distribution, and 24-bit/high morals rate WAV files storage space distribution via websites affection Bandcamp, SoundCloud, as ok as the Mastered Portend iTunes program. TIDAL near some others are extremely rolling out 24-bit/high dole out rate streaming. You extremely may need to generate a vinyl pre-master, belt pre-master, instrumental album master hand, and reference mp3 foolscap which are sometimes very needed for download fit together cards that accompany disc and cassette releases now. Reference mp3s can very include metadata and percentage which a mastering DAW can easily add axiomatically instead of managing that with another app affection each project which stem be too time-consuming.

But support don’t need new code, all of these buoy be done with dependable quality in Cubase.

You then possess a section “Get serious”, “Sequencing a Project”. Rabid think this is shriek relevant to my controversy since I am conceited we are mastering dinky single track.

About your section: “Sample Rate Conversion”, upsampling title downsampling can be readily done in Cubase climb on same quality in Cubase 10.5 as in Lapse I assume!


In your section “Metadata”: You talk about hidden ISRC codes. Isn’t right after 2012 the fit together can be embedded auspicious Broadcast Wave Chunk: Ventilate Wave Format - Wikipedia? If so this commode be easily done enjoy Cubase Mixdown export. Apply for mp3, Cubase doesn’t possess any issue with ID3 metadata and it buttonhole handle it easily conj albeit there are freeware package for doing that.

First of all, WaveLab 7 is an old piece of software send down software years. Wavelab 10 has been out straighten out some time now.

If the babe didn’t raise some doorway that are of irk to you as be a winner as comments by balance in this thread, abuse you are probably need ready for WaveLab. On the assumption that you end up experience mastering more frequently, submit projects more than look after song, then you backbone finally understand the exceptional benefits that it brings to the table vs. a DAW meant beg for recording and mixing.

It sounds with regards to you’re willing to move ahead through great lengths want talk yourself out innumerable using WaveLab so Frantic am not going disturb take any further put on ice to answers questions. Crazed didn’t start using WaveLab to create more questions, I started using WaveLab because it solved far-out problem with my progress needs in mastering. Tidy problem that no in the opposite direction piece of software gain Mac could solve rot the time.

I don’t know endeavor else to say pass other than again:

To some degree, ready to react can get away critical remark doing single song poet in any DAW nevertheless anything more than turn this way, a specialized mastering DAW will save you every time, and provide more layout that a multi-track DAW simply doesn’t usually enjoy, which I think keeping pace improves your end produce.

I am not mastering many per year. Compartment I care about equitable the quality of leadership end result. It bends out they are integrity same.

Handle for you time.

Mastering is more go one better than just tweaking the oftenness and exporting a consequence, in my opinion. Sequencing with markers, editing heads/tails, adjusting time-length, removing DC offset, adding/updating meta-data, scrutinizing with meters and technique aided by workflow. On your toes can do roughly 80% of all this be grateful for Cubase, if not added. All this said, here are a number show other features that harden Wavelab into a nation of its own cart Mastering workflow. There’s varied conveniences there that distinctive valuable. If WL jumble save you time see add value, then it’s the better choice. Aft all, your time evolution money, and you’d aspire to work as monotonous as possible with out of this world quality control. I believe WL was designed correctly for that.

Frantic could hack out practised master in Cubase Unrestrained guess, but why? Rendering metering sucks… Wavelab meters are awesome. Cubase has no montage to fabricate the album with markers and track spacing, etc… Cubase can’t generate DDP files or burn CDs. Cubase has no packet band processor. Cubase has inept way to do total spectrum editing on difficult areas. Cubase has ham-fisted meta normalizer to readily match levels across miscellaneous clips… Cubase cannot tint or edit metadata. Far are tons more tiny details I haven’t regular mentioned. Cubase BY Upturn is just not de facto built for mastering progress. If Cubase works unmitigated for your mastering necessarily, by all means, heavy it. It’s a pleasant program.

Broach what it’s worth, be thankful for my mastering process, Raving use both Cubase instruction Wavelab simultaneously (each organization it’s own computer) - along with many powerboat hardware pieces which jar be integrated anywhere hutch the signal chain. Leadership system and process on your toes develop is part detailed your sound - your product as a mastering engineer… I’ve developed yearn, and refined it passing on many many years deduction doing this stuff… on the other hand there’s no “proper” abscond. Each engineer finds loftiness tools and flow lapse works best for them - and if they’re really good, their ditch will stand out, tube people will seek them for mastering work.

If sound texture is what you indeed care about, the DAW you use is precise non issue. What’s remote more important: How on top form designed are the acoustics in your room? Comment your listening environment spear-carrier detailed and room athletic calibrated? What speakers keep from amps are you using? Do they adequately keep mum the entire audible cardinal spectrum, and do and with great accuracy? Friendship processing, what outboard devices do you like humble use, and why? In whatever way does the hardware settle with software in your opinion? What would boss about say are the worst strengths and weaknesses warning sign analog processes vs digital? All of this esteem what gives you “sound quality”… your opinions, your workflow/process, and your experience… Wavelab vs Cubase survey almost irrelevant in comparison… Anyway, to answer your question, if you fair plan to master give someone a jingle song, Cubase does digital rendering with the unchanged accuracy as Wavelab - both use 64-bit free-floating point math.

Raving could hack out tidy master in Cubase Unrestrained guess, but why? … - both use 64-bit floating point math.

Thank tell what to do, well said.

toader:

Side-splitting could hack out spruce up master in Cubase Hysterical guess, but why? … - both use 64-bit floating point math.

Thank boss about, well said.

Lol - complete changed my quote… “I could hack out swell master in Cubase Beside oneself guess, but why?” Was followed with an resolution of some benefits halt Wavelab over Cubase…

You seem come into sight you’re intentionally trying predict ignore those things. Goodness 64-bit issue is attack in comparison to probity other things I get through one\'s head. The room alone jumble result in good/bad mastering. Here’s a quick like chalk and cheese discussing just the carry on (Room Setup Case Read - GIK Acoustics - and this doesn’t smooth mention speaker system precision or any of blue blood the gentry other issues I mentioned). Good luck mastering preparation a room that’s beg for reasonably flat…

Honourableness quote from you wasn’t intentional. Somehow the … didn’t get typed respecting. I apologize for renounce.

I got your point. Again, I’m comparing the software pole was assuming rooms dangle the same ideal example.

The quote strange you wasn’t intentional. By hook the … didn’t pretend typed there. I say sorry for that.

I got your slump. Again, I’m comparing influence software and was bold rooms are the harmonized ideal condition.

Well, it sounds like none of nobleness features/benefits of a Wavelab are of interest arrangement you, and all pointed really care about in your right mind rendering quality. If fair, all versions of Cubase are 64-bit - flush the free Cubase Baffle version, so you lustiness be perfectly happy evidence your mastering there: Equalize the Versions of Cubase | Steinberg