This has saved me tons of time since it was added to V9.
#Dsp quattro vs hofa pdf
I don't know if REAPER can export a cue sheet but I'm guessing it can't do what WaveLab does for vinyl pre-masters and compensate the cue sheet for side B to start at 0:00 so from one session, you can export a WAV of each vinyl side (with embedded markers that some DAWs can read), as well as a PDF with track times that make sense for side B without having to slide side B down to the zero point and screw around with it.
#Dsp quattro vs hofa plus
The native metering in WaveLab is also really great which is what you need for mastering.like having a microscope at the top of the digital scale plus all the latest EBU/LUFS stuff.Īlso, especially for vinyl pre-masters these days, it's usually best practice to to supply a 24-bit/native sample rate WAV for each side of the record, as well as a PDF report to indicate where all the tracks start and end for the cutting engineer. The marker names are populated in one click from the region names, the CD-Text is populated with one more click and from there transposed to metadata without having to think about it. With WaveLab, you simply entire all the CD-Text/metadata in one time and WaveLab pushes and transpose all that to applicable places be in CD-Text, or metadata for WAV or mp3 files etc. CD-Text entry is ugly and clunky and there is still no support for metadata tagging unless somebody has made a script I'm not aware of. In order to quantize CD track makers to CD frames you have to set the tempo to something bizarre and then find the script to quantize to the right grid line, and there's no telling how accurate that really is. I love REAPER for doing the initial processing and some editing (with RX5 as primary ext editor), but not for assembling the master and rendering all the misc.
It's worth looking at.Īs I mentioned, most of what WaveLab does can be achieved one way or another in REAPER but it's not nearly as fast, accurate, or graceful IMO. It looks great and finally doesn't feel like you're using Windows 98 on a Mac. Well first of all, if you haven't used WaveLab in years, the GUI overhaul for V9 was long overdue. I'm not saying it is not better, etc., just asking for your specific thoughts. so I'm curious what exactly it does better? It's about workflow and preference more than quality. These days, the DAW game is pretty much a level playing field. It's all up to personal preference I suppose. I've seen people talk about that even being possible with Reaper as well. I do use Hofa for DDP creation, as MRMJP mentioned.
I have a hybrid approach, but am not afraid to stay ITB. SWS and scripts can help tremendously with the tasks. Since he couldn't hear what was wrong, he didn't know it was too bright. It's likely to do his room/monitor combination.
I'm currently remastering an album in which the mix engineer did some mastering when the album was released. Having someone else have a final listen to your music is extremely valueable. Self-mastering is generally not as widely accepted as third-party mastering. If you mean mastering your own music, then I get that. I don't anyone personally who doesn't believe in mastering.
#Dsp quattro vs hofa software
I know some folks don't believe in that process as its often used but what is some software that you all use or what processes do you use to finalize your recordings? I'm interested to know what some of you do, or use, to master your recordings.
0 kommentar(er)
