Cubase with Wavelab
-
- KVRist
- 351 posts since 25 Feb, 2005 from Houston, TX
What exactly can you do in Wavelab that cubase can't accomplish. Cubase has a wave editor included and you can set up a mastering template so I just don't understand the need to buy a separate editor.
-
- KVRAF
- 19156 posts since 13 Feb, 2003 from Vancouver, Canada
Wave editors are favoured for mastering and editing because they open quickly, are "lighter" and you notice that in an editor like Wlab, you can have mutliple files open and quickly switch back and forth bewteen windows, without having to solo or mute other tracks. Or you can highlight a section and just drag and drop it to the workspace, creating a new wave file. You can freely open, resample and export in any samplerate/bitrate without having to worry about a master sample rate that wil cause incorrect playback. You can also swap the order of fx in the Master Effects chain, and solo FX - you can't do this in Cubase. Wave editors generally support a wider variety of formats also.
Basically, you can do most things in a host that you can in an wave editor, but it will take longer to do.
Basically, you can do most things in a host that you can in an wave editor, but it will take longer to do.
-
- KVRist
- 174 posts since 25 Apr, 2006
Actually it was true that using an external wave editor outside Cubase SX was necessary.
Now, after trying it both ways for a while, I've found that it's more efficient - especially for sample cut-up - to stick with Cubase.
Cubase SX not only has a "wave editor", but it has a bunch of really terrific capabilities that go well beyond what most wave editors normally do. For example, consider cutting up a sample:
1. Drop the sample into the Cubase pool.
2. Create a Part for the sample editor and open it in the audio editor
3. Define "Regions" in the sample, naming them as you select the cuts from the sample you want
4. From the pool, do "export regions as files" for the part. In one go, Cubase creates all the files from your cutting.
This turns out to be a great way to work. Everything stays in one place in that Cubase project, so it's easy to go back get back to where you were in that workflow, and do some other things later.
At this facility, it has been shown that it's HARDER to use an external program for wave editing, not easier. At least when we're using Cubase SX, as we do most of the time...
Now, after trying it both ways for a while, I've found that it's more efficient - especially for sample cut-up - to stick with Cubase.
Cubase SX not only has a "wave editor", but it has a bunch of really terrific capabilities that go well beyond what most wave editors normally do. For example, consider cutting up a sample:
1. Drop the sample into the Cubase pool.
2. Create a Part for the sample editor and open it in the audio editor
3. Define "Regions" in the sample, naming them as you select the cuts from the sample you want
4. From the pool, do "export regions as files" for the part. In one go, Cubase creates all the files from your cutting.
This turns out to be a great way to work. Everything stays in one place in that Cubase project, so it's easy to go back get back to where you were in that workflow, and do some other things later.
At this facility, it has been shown that it's HARDER to use an external program for wave editing, not easier. At least when we're using Cubase SX, as we do most of the time...