Author Topic: Wavelab 5.0 - mixing 2 24/96 aud sources ? (Read 11832 times)

wboswell · « **on:** September 05, 2005, 07:05:37 PM »

I've tried this a couple of ways and haven't had any luck. Well, I've had luck but each time I go to render the montage mix, Wavelab tells me that the files are over the two gig limit, even when I'm working with individual tracks... please tell me that I'm not going to have to render each individual track...

<edit for some better explanation>
these are 24/96 files - four separate tracks, each auto split with the 744t with auto split set to 1gb. I've got two stereo pairs in the montage and loaded the whole set, 1:30 minutes worth and gotten the error.

I've also merged the files in a stereo wave file, tracked both sources in cdwave and used a cue sheet to sync the individual tracks, then loaded those files in a montage, only to be again told that the 2gb file size issue. I guess my last resort is to render the two sources, track by track, but damn there's got to be a better way... Sounds like this could be a prone to flaws.

Any ideas?

thanks

fsulloway · « **Reply #1 on:** September 05, 2005, 11:21:43 PM »

William- pm Dave Friedman "Tractor" , he just did this with the Porstmouth show.

wboswell · « **Reply #2 on:** September 06, 2005, 10:44:18 AM »

I'm pretty sure he used Audition to do the mix down, so I'm hoping there is someone with some Wavelab experience that can get this done...

There's got to be a way for Wavelab to autosplit the rendered file... I just can't find the setting!

Ray76 · « **Reply #3 on:** September 06, 2005, 12:24:31 PM »

Quote from: wboswell on September 06, 2005, 10:44:18 AM

I'm pretty sure he used Audition to do the mix down, so I'm hoping there is someone with some Wavelab experience that can get this done...

There's got to be a way for Wavelab to autosplit the rendered file... I just can't find the setting!

Bos, tractor is sending me the workflow that he used to my email and Ill post it here when I get it.He just did basically the same thing that you are doin i think.... Hes workin on the specifics for me now, as Ive got a 744t and have similar questions.

Teddy

wboswell · « **Reply #4 on:** September 06, 2005, 01:38:44 PM »

he emailed me what he did and I think I did everything BUT what he did. I will work on it this evening and move on. I was just hoping that it would allow me to save the same markers as those created at track marks...

John P · « **Reply #5 on:** September 06, 2005, 04:57:32 PM »

Quote from: wboswell on September 06, 2005, 01:38:44 PM

he emailed me what he did and I think I did everything BUT what he did. I will work on it this evening and move on. I was just hoping that it would allow me to save the same markers as those created at track marks...

You can save the markers.
Save the source file under a new name. When you do a save as, WaveLab will write a new peak file.

Through windows explorer, locate the .MRK file for the original montage (or wav file) that you tracked out.

Copy the marker file or rename it to the new filename and you are good to go. (If you rename it, you will lose the markers for the original file).

WaveLab writes the peak files and marker files separately like so.

yourband2005-09-06d1t01.mon
yourband2005-09-06d1t01.wav
yourband2005-09-06d1t01.gpk
yourband2005-09-06d1t01.MRK

Hope this helps.

wboswell · « **Reply #6 on:** September 06, 2005, 05:31:53 PM »

Sounds good, but this doesn't address the 2gb file limitation that I get when I line up all the files to be rendered at once. I suppose the other option would be to use the same cue sheet saved in CD Wave.

<edit>

Problem solved... I had the preference set to 32 bit float instead of 24 bit. When I set it to 24 bit, the files fell within the 2bg limit. I'm good to go now...

wboswell · « **Reply #7 on:** September 06, 2005, 09:57:05 PM »

problems continue...

I've got the two sources rendered, but there is a sever lack of low end on the rendered file. Each of the separate aud sources have beautiful low end, but when I render the two sources, the resulting mix is severly lacking...

Any thoughts?

NewHomebrew · « **Reply #8 on:** September 07, 2005, 06:00:03 AM »

You might also try sony vegas for this. It will render long wav files at a variety of sample rates and bit depths. Also very much my favorite for fancy editing and source blending. You can flip the phase of a track in and out with a touch of a button to check which sounds better as well, perhaps that would help your bass problem?

dmonterisi · « **Reply #9 on:** September 07, 2005, 10:54:52 AM »

ok, i just messed with tracks from boswell's recordings and it's some kind of phase issue between the two sources, not between two different channels of the same source. he sent me clips of the recording from the mk21 source and the mk41 source. i opened them up in the montage and listened, and the low end of the recordings pretty much disappears. so i zoomed into a peak and could see that the two waves are exactly out of phase to each other (screenshot 1). I opened up the mk21 source in the wavelab wav editor and inverted the phase for the entire track and checked out the montage at the same point (screenshot 2) and the waves are no longer out of phase and the bass is clearly present. it's like night and day.

Now the question is what would cause this? the fact that it is two different sources directly out of phase to each other suggests that it is not a cable issue, but rather a processing or mic issue. would the fact that one is a sub card and the other is a hyper or super card with a rear lobe create the phase difference? is it an a/d issue? perhaps a 744 firmware issue. boswell will have to give you the exact source info, one of these is mic-in to the 744 and the other is digi-in out of the v3.

any thoughts?

i guess friedman ran into a similar lack of bass in a 4 mic mix he did from portsmouth?

wboswell · « **Reply #10 on:** September 07, 2005, 11:05:09 AM »

Source info for files noted above:

mk41>kc5>cmc6xt>generic IC>744T
mk21>kc5>cmc6xt>generic IC>V3>zoalla s/pdif>744T

Firmware on unit: 1.42

I vaguely remember reading something about the 744T recording two sources out of phase, but I couldn't find it in any of the documentation on their website for fimware fixes, etc. However, this is what seems to be the issue at hand, at least to me...

heath · « **Reply #11 on:** September 07, 2005, 11:51:19 AM »

i'm guessing that the problem lies in the 744 firmware. but that is a coin-flip type guess. So many variables. My first instinct would be to test the 744 at home with a stereo.

Run 4 mics into it and see how how the waveforms relate to each other.

next, try mimicing the show data, by using the v3 and again compare waveforms

i find it hard to say it's a mic issue since the waveforms are directly opposite each other. that leads me to believe it is either software error or wiring.

h

wboswell · « **Reply #12 on:** September 07, 2005, 11:54:41 AM »

The 744T is being shipped back to the owner, J. Pollock, so maybe he can test.

dmonterisi · « **Reply #13 on:** September 07, 2005, 12:10:43 PM »

Quote from: heath on September 07, 2005, 11:51:19 AM

i find it hard to say it's a mic issue since the waveforms are directly opposite each other. that leads me to believe it is either software error or wiring.

h

thanks heath...could it have something to do with the polar pattern of the mics? not that the mics were malfunctioning, but that hypers are somehow natively out of phase to subcards? (if that makes sense?). i guess it's possible that cabling had something to do with it, but the fact that it's both channels means both cables on one side of the rig are f'd up. also, if friendman had a similar issue in his portsmouth 4 mic mix and he was v2>2k out of phase (presumably) with the 744, that suggests it's the 744. hopefully dave can chime in with his results.

heath · « **Reply #14 on:** September 07, 2005, 12:55:57 PM »

if it were an inter-relationship between the mics, I don't think we'd be seeing exact opposites. I would expect minor phasing issues, but not a completely opposite waveform....

dmonterisi · « **Reply #15 on:** September 07, 2005, 12:57:46 PM »

ok, makes sense...now as far as mixing the two goes, does it matter which source is manipulated to get them on phase? is there a way to figure out which of the two sources is actually out of phase? does it matter or is it just a comparison of the two?

does this make sense?

heath · « **Reply #16 on:** September 07, 2005, 01:32:43 PM »

yeah, the out of phase waveform will be visible in your speaker. when a kick drum hits, etc the cone should push OUT, not suck IN. Whichever one does that is out of phase.

dmonterisi · « **Reply #17 on:** September 07, 2005, 01:37:25 PM »

Quote from: heath on September 07, 2005, 01:32:43 PM

yeah, the out of phase waveform will be visible in your speaker. when a kick drum hits, etc the cone should push OUT, not suck IN. Whichever one does that is out of phase.

roger, so what do i do to test on my pc speakers where i do all my critical listening?

jimmyrow · « **Reply #18 on:** September 07, 2005, 02:13:13 PM »

Quote from: wboswell on September 07, 2005, 11:05:09 AM

I vaguely remember reading something about the 744T recording two sources out of phase, but I couldn't find it in any of the documentation on their website for fimware fixes, etc. However, this is what seems to be the issue at hand, at least to me...

I think you're thinking of the Edirol issues (the R4 I think).....where all the old ones were recalled.......

NewHomebrew · « **Reply #19 on:** September 07, 2005, 02:27:54 PM »

So I was actually right? I'm such a PIMP!!!

mmedley. · « **Reply #20 on:** September 07, 2005, 02:41:00 PM »

Is there a setting in the menus on the 744 to reverse the phase? Seems like I remember reading that, but hell I'm prolly way off!

What happens when you change the phase in WaveLab and mix? Does it fix it?

dmonterisi · « **Reply #21 on:** September 07, 2005, 02:41:36 PM »

Quote from: martin on September 07, 2005, 02:41:00 PM

What happens when you change the phase in WaveLab and mix? Does it fix it?

yep

tractor · « **Reply #22 on:** September 07, 2005, 03:25:52 PM »

When I first did the Portsmouth 4 Mic Mix I thought it was very bright no bass at all. After Sulloway points me to this post I now know why. When I get off of work I will check the montage files and see if I have the same issue. I am 99.9% sure I do since I thought it was lacking bass.

Dave

mmedley. · « **Reply #23 on:** September 07, 2005, 05:11:15 PM »

Quote from: tractor on September 07, 2005, 03:25:52 PM

When I first did the Portsmouth 4 Mic Mix I thought it was very bright no bass at all. After Sulloway points me to this post I now know why. When I get off of work I will check the montage files and see if I have the same issue. I am 99.9% sure I do since I thought it was lacking bass.

Dave

I definitely notice(d) the lack of low end on the Portsmouth FWIW.

tractor · « **Reply #24 on:** September 07, 2005, 05:39:34 PM »

After looking at the files again I too had the same problem. Doing what same suggested does fix the problem. Its like the show has life now.

Thanks Boswell and Damon for the help.

fsulloway · « **Reply #25 on:** September 07, 2005, 05:42:27 PM »

Yeah, we all might have noticed it but none of us spoke up until today.

dmonterisi · « **Reply #26 on:** September 07, 2005, 05:44:42 PM »

any sense of how to tell which source is out of phase? it would make sense for it to be the mic-in on the 744 since that's the only piece of common gear in the two chains. but the wavelab phase scope only seems to work when one channel is out of phase with the other in a 2 channel recording, not where both channels are out of phase. heath's suggestion of looking at my speakers didn't really get it done.

mmedley. · « **Reply #27 on:** September 07, 2005, 05:48:14 PM »

Quote from: fsulloway on September 07, 2005, 05:42:27 PM

Yeah, we all might have noticed it but none of us spoke up until today.

I figured you SOB's knew what you were doing!

j/k

Frank, I have yet to get to the store to get a good box and some bubble rap to mail you all my stuff. I got lazy. I'll work on it tonight.

Brian · « **Reply #28 on:** September 07, 2005, 05:53:41 PM »

Quote from: dmonterisi on September 07, 2005, 05:44:42 PM

any sense of how to tell which source is out of phase? it would make sense for it to be the mic-in on the 744 since that's the only piece of common gear in the two chains. but the wavelab phase scope only seems to work when one channel is out of phase with the other in a 2 channel recording, not where both channels are out of phase. heath's suggestion of looking at my speakers didn't really get it done.

just load each source into WL individually. you should be able to tell based upon the previous pictures. i'm guessing microphone in was on tracks 1+2 and the digi went to tracks 3+4?

dmonterisi · « **Reply #29 on:** September 07, 2005, 05:56:19 PM »

in the first pic i posted, those are unmanipulated wavs in the montage window...1+2 were mk21>v3, 3+4 were mk41>744. i inverted the mk21 source because i didn't know and just picked one. so comparing to those windows doesn't really give the answer does it? what should i look for when i open them in WL? sorry if i'm being an idiot, but well, i'm an idiot.

Brian · « **Reply #30 on:** September 07, 2005, 06:16:03 PM »

load one source in. take notcie to it's location in the time table. then load the next source. whichever one is off "to the right" in the timetable is most likely, the culprit.

i'd be willing to believe that whatever source starts first is fine and whatever one comes later (180º out of phase) is the one out of phase.

can anybodyy else either back me up or refute that? that would be my guess.

edit - on the surface it's seems like a rather big assumption. maybe it's the complete opposite of what i just said? you really need to perform the speaker to test to find out.

tractor · « **Reply #31 on:** September 07, 2005, 06:34:03 PM »

I found that the source that used the pre/ad of the 744 needed to be fixed not the one that went digi in.

wboswell · « **Reply #32 on:** September 08, 2005, 11:24:15 AM »

Quote from: tractor on September 07, 2005, 06:34:03 PM

I found that the source that used the pre/ad of the 744 needed to be fixed not the one that went digi in.

So how did you determine that the mic source was out of phase? I'm guessing you could have inverted the digi in source and gotten the same results. On the other hand, my simple minded logic leads me to think that the mic in source would be the one more succeptible to the phase inversion. Once the digital information is encoded, I would doubt that the 744 is doing much if anything to it, besides writing the data to the HD.

dmonterisi · « **Reply #33 on:** September 08, 2005, 11:56:08 AM »

cross posted to the oade board:

http://www.oade.com/Tapers_Section/Forum/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=100&topic_id=3212&mesg_id=3212&page=

tractor · « **Reply #34 on:** September 08, 2005, 12:20:45 PM »

Boswell,

I used your logic that the digital source into the 744 was not problem since the 744 wouldnt alter the wav. I guess you could change the digital source's phase and it still works. Let me know what you hear from SD on this issue.

Dave

wboswell · « **Reply #35 on:** September 08, 2005, 01:35:46 PM »

This was posted over on the SD forum by a member who also posts here on occasion...

Quote from: trajhip2000

this doesn't explain the issue with your first source, but ithe AD2K+ was found to invert phase long after they first went on sale - see http://www.benchmarkmedia.com/manuals/ad2402-96-manual.pdf for details.

Steve

fobstl · « **Reply #36 on:** September 08, 2005, 02:22:43 PM »

So are you guys finding that the word clock is matching up exactly for the analog in source and the digi in source on the 744? In other words are the tracks lining up exactly lengthwize not factoring in the phase issue. I have a few 4 channel 744 sources on my computer that are sbd 2 channels analog in and aud 2 channels V3 digi in, wondering if when I get them lined up in one spot on the recording will they be lined up throughout. If they are the exact length I am guessing that means that the 744 locks the analog inputs to the digi in word clock in this case instead of using the 744 word clock?

Brothers

tractor · « **Reply #37 on:** September 08, 2005, 02:48:43 PM »

Yes I found that both sources were clocked. I didnt have to do anything to the sources but fix the phase and mix.

fobstl · « **Reply #38 on:** September 08, 2005, 03:01:16 PM »

Quote from: tractor on September 08, 2005, 02:48:43 PM

Yes I found that both sources were clocked. I didnt have to do anything to the sources but fix the phase and mix.

Cool, thanks Dave. Hope you are doing well.
Brothers

wboswell · « **Reply #39 on:** September 08, 2005, 03:41:34 PM »

Quote from: fobstl on September 08, 2005, 02:22:43 PM

So are you guys finding that the word clock is matching up exactly for the analog in source and the digi in source on the 744? In other words are the tracks lining up exactly lengthwize not factoring in the phase issue. I have a few 4 channel 744 sources on my computer that are sbd 2 channels analog in and aud 2 channels V3 digi in, wondering if when I get them lined up in one spot on the recording will they be lined up throughout. If they are the exact length I am guessing that means that the 744 locks the analog inputs to the digi in word clock in this case instead of using the 744 word clock?

Brothers

The 7xx series internal a/d will automatically clock to any external digital source fed via s/pdif or AES, as per SD, so given two mics in a similar space, there will be no timing issues. A sbd and aud source on the same 744 will have timing issues though. The latency here is from the distance from the PA and the mics, which we all know. However, the cool thing I noticed on the recent firmware upgrade, it appears that the source delay has increased from 20 milliseconds to 150 milliseconds, or at least that's what I remember seeing when I was thumbing through the menu last week. Someone else will have to confirm that this is enough delay to make an on the fly mix as I was a C student in physics...

fsulloway · « **Reply #40 on:** September 08, 2005, 04:24:26 PM »

Quote from: fobstl on September 08, 2005, 02:22:43 PM

So are you guys finding that the word clock is matching up exactly for the analog in source and the digi in source on the 744? In other words are the tracks lining up exactly lengthwize not factoring in the phase issue. I have a few 4 channel 744 sources on my computer that are sbd 2 channels analog in and aud 2 channels V3 digi in, wondering if when I get them lined up in one spot on the recording will they be lined up throughout. If they are the exact length I am guessing that means that the 744 locks the analog inputs to the digi in word clock in this case instead of using the 744 word clock?

Brothers

I think it's about 1 ms per foot between mics and PA. However if you're within 20-25ft, you can probably get away without using any delay. How far do you think the mics were from the PA?

fobstl · « **Reply #41 on:** September 08, 2005, 10:05:34 PM »

Quote from: fsulloway on September 08, 2005, 04:24:26 PM

Quote from: fobstl on September 08, 2005, 02:22:43 PM
So are you guys finding that the word clock is matching up exactly for the analog in source and the digi in source on the 744? In other words are the tracks lining up exactly lengthwize not factoring in the phase issue. I have a few 4 channel 744 sources on my computer that are sbd 2 channels analog in and aud 2 channels V3 digi in, wondering if when I get them lined up in one spot on the recording will they be lined up throughout. If they are the exact length I am guessing that means that the 744 locks the analog inputs to the digi in word clock in this case instead of using the 744 word clock?

Brothers

I think it's about 1 ms per foot between mics and PA. However if you're within 20-25ft, you can probably get away without using any delay. How far do you think the mics were from the PA?

Mics were probably 30' from the PA. I do plan to line up the sources first, just wanted to know if I could do it in one spot or if I had to cut up songs to do it. Sounds like lining up in one spot will work.
Thanks!

dmonterisi · « **Reply #42 on:** September 09, 2005, 08:27:11 AM »

steve, have you checked out the 4 channel recordings that you've done with the 744 to determine if they have any phasing issues? it sounds like you haven't mixed them down yet, but i wondered if you might've checked them out in the wavelab montage yet?

fobstl · « **Reply #43 on:** September 09, 2005, 08:43:14 AM »

Quote from: dmonterisi on September 09, 2005, 08:27:11 AM

steve, have you checked out the 4 channel recordings that you've done with the 744 to determine if they have any phasing issues? it sounds like you haven't mixed them down yet, but i wondered if you might've checked them out in the wavelab montage yet?

I have not checked them out yet but I do plan to do so soon since reading this thread. I had kind of temporarily given up on mixing them because of the issues with the over 2 gig files. Figured sooner or later someone would figure it out. I need to go back and read over this thread to nail down the work flow and will report back on what I find on the phasing.

fobstl · « **Reply #44 on:** September 11, 2005, 02:09:06 AM »

OK I have read through this thread and I am still not sure I have figured out how to mix the 2 24/96 stereo channels I have in Wavelab. Would someone mind posting a quick work flow for idiots like me so I can do something with these shows I have had on my hard drive. Thanks for the help!

kskreider · « **Reply #45 on:** September 11, 2005, 02:24:22 AM »

Quote from: fobstl on September 11, 2005, 02:09:06 AM

OK I have read through this thread and I am still not sure I have figured out how to mix the 2 24/96 stereo channels I have in Wavelab. Would someone mind posting a quick work flow for idiots like me so I can do something with these shows I have had on my hard drive. Thanks for the help!

There are work flows already posted. Just use the search feature and look for making a matrix using wavelab. There are a couple different ways. I toyed with it until I get it just right and relaized that it was actually pretty easy once you got the hang of it. Good luck

Ray76 · « **Reply #46 on:** September 11, 2005, 06:09:58 AM »

Quote from: DarkStarJedi on September 11, 2005, 02:24:22 AM

Quote from: fobstl on September 11, 2005, 02:09:06 AM
OK I have read through this thread and I am still not sure I have figured out how to mix the 2 24/96 stereo channels I have in Wavelab. Would someone mind posting a quick work flow for idiots like me so I can do something with these shows I have had on my hard drive. Thanks for the help!

There are work flows already posted. Just use the search feature and look for making a matrix using wavelab. There are a couple different ways. I toyed with it until I get it just right and relaized that it was actually pretty easy once you got the hang of it. Good luck

a basic idea of how it works..

go to NEW>Audio Montage..pick the sample rate, bit depth...

go down to the blank area in the bottom of the screen. right click. >Add File...pick one of your tracks....after that one is in there..click on the (1) (it has a triangle below it..its a drop down bar) click ADD STEREO TRACK..there you are....both tracks...you can mute the tracks individually, and also have a few effects to add to them if you choose to do so. there is a slider beside each track...this is a volume control....get the volume rto your liking..get it lined up how you want it...(you can use time stretch or cut..which is easier IMHO)..and then go to the MASTER Section...click RENDER...Make sure you choose the right Save properties...the default is 32 bit float...Choose 24/96 . anyway..thats basically how you do it..PM me if you have any questions that didnt get answered. Ive done about 15 Matrixes now using wavelab.finally getting the hang of it. I also have a Time Drift EXCEL File that calculates the time stretch for you (made by Dklein) if you want.

HTH

teddy

Author Topic: Wavelab 5.0 - mixing 2 24/96 aud sources ? (Read 11832 times)

Ray76

kskreider

Ray76