advantages of Sequoia over Cubase for Mastering

[j-madd]

Hi all,

I am just getting into Mastering over the last year, so I am very green. I currently use Cubase SX3 to master tracks and compile the layout in CD architect. What is the advantage to something like Sequoia? It seems alot of larger Mastering houses use it. Thanks for any info.

Justin

[KRStudio]

I use Samplitude but for mastering they are very similare. Object based editing and processing is the biggest difference for me. Lay your songs all in one track. comp, EQ other on each song and then burn the cd. All one program. If you go to Samplitude.com there are some great videos for mastering workflow along with other videos.

Jeff

[bob katz]

Originally Posted by KRStudio

I use Samplitude but for mastering they are very similare. Object based editing and processing is the biggest difference for me. Lay your songs all in one track. comp, EQ other on each song and then burn the cd. All one program. If you go to Samplitude.com there are some great videos for mastering workflow along with other videos.

Jeff

I second that emotion. The biggest selling point of Sampliquoia (outside of some very clean and good sounding programming) is the object-based processing, which really helps move the mastering process along if you use ANY processing in the box.

[j-madd]

Thanks guys. I will look more into this then. It would be nice to do all in-the-box processing/layout/fading and burning with the same program.

Justin

[KRStudio]

Trust me when I say it's great doing EVERYTHING in one app. Track, edit, mix, master, burn. It's a deep program but does take a little getting used to. It is unlike anny other app I have used. The workflow can be similare to others when working track by track. Editing, mixing and mastering at the object (section of wave files) level is VERY different and the thought process is unlike any other I know of.

Jeff

[kosmasepsilon]

didn't wanna open a new topic about this but, what's the best software to use on a mac for mastering? i think samplitude is only for windows, not??

[William Bowden]

Probably for Mac you'll have to go down the Sonic path, soundblade. I remember reading that a guy here somewhere was using Sequioa running under bootcamp.

Perhaps he'd care to chime in?

I use Sequoia myself - it's great.

The King

[Fat larry]

Can anyone tell me the differences between Wavelab and Sequoia,I have recently swicthed to Wavelab from an old version of Sadie(Which despite its age was rock solid) and i am not fully convinced that its for me.

[Paul Gold]

I switched from Sadie about seven years ago. I got Wavelab first. I had to get rid of it because at that time it was a 2tr. editor only and I needed multitrack routing functions. So I didn't use wavelab very long.

The main thing I didn't like is that it didn't feel like a tape machine. I'm using Samplitude. I thought the wavelab editing was better than Samplitude (but not as nice as sequoia). The file management is better in wavelab too. In samplitude there is no clip store which is annoying. I think there is a clip store in sequoia. I use samp classic. The three things I would like sequoia for: better editing, a clip store and DDP don't seem worth the extra $2500 to me, so I deal with it. When I get a new computer I'll probably bite the bullet unless wavelab on the mac happens, in which case I would seriously think about switching.

[lerone]

Sequoia is brilliant, and the DDP export is fairly essential for delivering to cd manufacturing plants.

[Cellotron]

If Samplitude users just needed DDP export/import functionality and didn't want to pony up all the extra cash for Sequoia just for this then the Sonoris DDP Creator software is one inexpensive option for creating and verifying DDP images - DDP Creator - Sonoris Audio Engineering

Another alternative for PC is SAWStudio - Welcome to RML Labs - The Makers of SAWStudio - with the JMS Audioware CSG add-on - JMS Audioware
It has great editing features and a built in "clip store" as well - but it doesn't have the exact same "object oriented" paradigm that Samplitude has (it uses other methods to get the same end result) - which for some might be a deal killer.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Cellotron]

Originally Posted by lerone

Sequoia is brilliant, and the DDP export is fairly essential for delivering to cd manufacturing plants.

fwiw - the vast majority of plants my clients (who tend to be USA based indie artists and labels) deal with actually prefer to receive CD-R master instead of DDP. So - DDP export is a really nice feature to have - but certainly not "essential" if your client base is similar to my own.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Bob Olhsson]

It makes sense that plants would prefer CD-Rs.

If they manufacture a thousand CDs directly from a DDP and then there's a problem, there's going to be lots of finger pointing and a huge hassle. If they made the DDP themselves and there's a problem, they can compare the pressings to the original CD-R and fix the problem when it's on their end or send it back if the CD-R also has the problem.

[OMNIFEX]

Originally Posted by Fat larry

Can anyone tell me the differences between Wavelab and Sequoia,I have recently swicthed to Wavelab from an old version of Sadie(Which despite its age was rock solid) and i am not fully convinced that its for me.

I am an old Wavelab user and, tried Samplitude. Both are similiar yet different.

The major difference I found amongst the two, is how the the plugin chain co-realates to the files.

In Samplitude, each file is assigned to it's own chain. If you close the file the plug-ins along with the master strip closes as well.

In Wavelab, all the files you have open will function on any plug-in, you have enabled in the chain.

What exactly are you looking for in which Wavelab is not meeting your expectations?

Cheers!

[Brad Blackwood]

Mastering or processing?

Unless Cubase can cut parts, you're talking about processing.

[807Recordings]

Biggest advantage of Samplitude and Sequoia is it keeps me in a job.

:D

[mcsnare]

Originally Posted by Paul Gold

I switched from Sadie about seven years ago. I got Wavelab first. I had to get rid of it because at that time it was a 2tr. editor only and I needed multitrack routing functions. So I didn't use wavelab very long.

The main thing I didn't like is that it didn't feel like a tape machine. I'm using Samplitude. I thought the wavelab editing was better than Samplitude (but not as nice as sequoia). The file management is better in wavelab too. In samplitude there is no clip store which is annoying. I think there is a clip store in sequoia. I use samp classic. The three things I would like sequoia for: better editing, a clip store and DDP don't seem worth the extra $2500 to me, so I deal with it. When I get a new computer I'll probably bite the bullet unless wavelab on the mac happens, in which case I would seriously think about switching.

Paul, gimme a call and I'll show you the best way to deal with file management. It's easy. I'm so slow on the DAW thing, someone only showed it to me recently.
Dave

[j-madd]

Originally Posted by Brad Blackwood

Mastering or processing?

Unless Cubase can cut parts, you're talking about processing.

Like I am said, I am new to this so I may be misunderstanding. Cubase has a scissor tool so segments of audio in a song can be cut and processed (volume envelop, faded, etc..). I assume this is what you mean.

Justin

[jdg]

cut parts = burn redbook compat CDRs, and/or DDP images.

[Cellotron]

Originally Posted by j-madd

Like I am said, I am new to this so I may be misunderstanding. Cubase has a scissor tool so segments of audio in a song can be cut and processed (volume envelop, faded, etc..). I assume this is what you mean.

Justin

What Brad was referring to is the ability of the program to actual create and edit PQ track indexes and subcodes necessary for a CD-R master directly in the program itself, and the ability of this app to create actual "masters" (meaning the physical or virtual "part" that gets sent to the replication plant). This way you don't have to edit and process tracks in one program and then have to load them in another to burn a master disc or create a DDP image (the "parts" that are being "cut") in separate "burning" app.

In this day of increasing digital download releases and less and less CD releases these types of lines between what is considered a "mastering app" and what is just a "standard DAW" might becoming more moot.

For now though having worked in the 2 app paradigm (where one "processes" and the other "burns parts") before I have to say the work flow of having PQ creation and editing directly in the same app you do processing in is definitely a lot smoother and more flexible.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[lerone]

The thing is though, DDP is error free, where as a CD-R is inherently flawed. Even if the CD burner managed to write a CD with 0 errors, minute surface scratches (even from putting the CD in a case!), particles of moisture in the air, etc etc, will cause some errors, even if they are audibly insignificant, they may cause issues on playback with some devices. So DDP is clearly the winner for data integrity, not to mention the fact that CD-Rs aren't gonna be around forever. Long-term Storage is also a massive benefit with DDP.

[j-madd]

Thanks guys for the explaination! Yes it would be nice to have all functions wrapped in 1 program. See, I have a lot of learning to do. I appreciate you all explaining the terminology. thumbsup

Justin

[Cellotron]

Originally Posted by lerone

The thing is though, DDP is error free, where as a CD-R is inherently flawed. Even if the CD burner managed to write a CD with 0 errors, minute surface scratches (even from putting the CD in a case!), particles of moisture in the air, etc etc, will cause some errors, even if they are audibly insignificant, they may cause issues on playback with some devices. So DDP is clearly the winner for data integrity, not to mention the fact that CD-Rs aren't gonna be around forever. Long-term Storage is also a massive benefit with DDP.

You're somewhat correct in your post - but you're ignoring the facts of what happens when a CD-R master is sent in for transfer to glass master (in order to make stampers for pressing replicated CD's)
i.e.
* the CD-R master is first tested to make sure it is within the plants spec - including making that all read errors from it are in fact CORRECTABLE. In fact the presence of even a single E32 (aka "CU" - an uncorrectable error) will get the master rejected by the plant.
* after the pre-test the CD-R masters' data image is streamed to an intermediary storage place (either a hard drive or a RAM cache) using a "secure" extraction method which does multiple reads on any area where an error flag is triggered so that correctable errors get corrected at this point.
* the CD-R master's data stream is converted to DDP format and then reclocked prior to being sent to the LBR (laser beam recorder).

It should also be noted that flaws in the developing, plating, and pressing can potentially lead to distortions in some (which to be in specs need to be very small) parts of the pit geometry in the pressed CD's - so any pressed CD can then possibly trigger error flags in the playback transport at places that are completely different from what was present on the master. This can happen regardless of whether the master was a DDP image or a CD-R master.

In terms of long time storage I think just saving bwf wav files (as per AES/NARAS current archival recommendations) will do better than DDP, as the amount of software to playback and edit wav is much more extensive and readily available than DDP.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Paul Gold]

Originally Posted by mcsnare

Paul, gimme a call and I'll show you the best way to deal with file management.

Will do, thanks. The specific thing I'm complaining about is loosing the object name when deleted from a vip. If I slice a file into a few objects and name all the objects once the object is deleted from the vip it's like it never existed.

I've found ways around this but the way Sadie deals with this is much more elegant. You never have to worry about the file name as long as you name and rename the clips or objects. I like this layer above file name for session management.

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by lerone

The thing is though, DDP is error free, where as a CD-R is inherently flawed.

Not true at all. The number of corrected errors that are found with modern hard drives would give most folks a heart attack. The audio CD spec allows error concealment whereas other digital media doesn't however that's why we run error-checks to make sure that there are only correctable errors.

[24-96 Mastering]

Originally Posted by Paul Gold

When I get a new computer I'll probably bite the bullet unless wavelab on the mac happens, in which case I would seriously think about switching.

FYI: The next Wavelab version (7) will be ported to Mac. This has been confirmed by Steinberg folks as well as by Wavelab's main programmer. No date has yet been given for the v7 release though, they're currently working on it but it's likely still quite a while away.

Originally Posted by OMNIFEX

In Samplitude, each file is assigned to it's own chain. If you close the file the plug-ins along with the master strip closes as well.

In Wavelab, all the files you have open will function on any plug-in, you have enabled in the chain.

That has changed in Wavelab. Currently, you can assign processing in 3 ways:
1. via master section (which applies to everything being played)
2. via track FX (which applies to all clips on that montage track / channel)
3. clip based (which applies to a single clip in the montage only)

[OMNIFEX]

Originally Posted by 24-96 Mastering

That has changed in Wavelab. Currently, you can assign processing in 3 ways:
1. via master section (which applies to everything being played)
2. via track FX (which applies to all clips on that montage track / channel)
3. clip based (which applies to a single clip in the montage only)

That's good to hear!

I am waiting patiently for PG to release Wavelab 7 so I can retire Wavelab 3.

It seems, as this will be his best version yet. I just hope he doesn't change the screen layout too much.

Cheers!

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

Not true at all. The number of corrected errors that are found with modern hard drives would give most folks a heart attack. The audio CD spec allows error concealment whereas other digital media doesn't however that's why we run error-checks to make sure that there are only correctable errors.

Agreed!
I always check my work using an actual CD and always deliver both DDP's and a CD master.

[Rick Hoekman]

At the moment PreSonus Studio One is entering RC1 .. I'm Beta testing and my main focus was testing the mastering section. It's incredible easy to use and has all export features built in. K-Metering etc. It runs on Mac and on PC. If you can wait two to three months you might want to give it try.

You can check out the details here (with video):

PreSonus