what kinda linage is this?

[momule]

744t>Wavelab 5>CD Wave>Wavelab 5>Flac

Why the wavelab twice?
Ok So I get they dont like to track in wavelab (which is a whole other thread  )
But why would one load to WL then into cdwave then back into WL, then encode.  I dont get it. 

just wondering
Nick

[audBall]

Fades after tracking?

[momule]

I assumed that was done with the first wavelab. 

[BC]

Fades after tracking?

That would make sense. WL first to dither down to 16 bit, then track in cdwav, then do fades on the individual tracks in WL.

[dgodwin]

I've done similar stuff before (fade in, but forget to fade out, etc)  and had to take the individual wav file created in cd wav and edit it in audition.  I never noted it in the txt file, but I'd make sure there were no sbe's before uploading.   

[OFOTD]

Some people just have workflows that work for them and don't make much sense when spelled out like that.  At least it looks like the seeder was being honest in the lineage.

[fsulloway]

I recognize the lineage but think he actually does it this way to end up with a 16 bit source.
744>WL5(fades on 24 bit source)> cdwave(track 24 bit and save cues)>WL5(resample/dither to 16/44.1)>CDwave(load 16 bit file and cues)>flac lvl6

Nevermind. I just decided to call him and ask.
The first WL renders the 4 channels to 2.
CD wave to track.
2nd WL to batch process.
flac