A Audio and hi-fi forum. AudioBanter

Go Back   Home » AudioBanter forum » rec.audio » Pro Audio
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Audio Editor vs. DAW: What’s the Difference?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 16th 17, 04:58 PM posted to rec.audio.pro
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 331
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: What’s the Difference?

http://www.toptenreviews.com/softwar...ting-software/

JUST AS I THOUGHT!!!

Jack
Ads
  #2  
Old August 16th 17, 09:07 PM posted to rec.audio.pro
geoff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,332
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: What’s the Difference?

On 17/08/2017 3:58 AM, wrote:
>
http://www.toptenreviews.com/softwar...ting-software/
>
> JUST AS I THOUGHT!!!
>
> Jack
>


Bit of a fluffy article. Their definition of 'best' might not be the
same as that of people for whom these functions are a specialty.

There is a degree of cross-over between the two, but also distinct
differences in function and purpose. Some apps could do both, but would
be IMO 'cluttered'. Essentially they got that bit right.

If you want a fully-fledged DAW for less that their $100, check out
Reaper with licence for personal use.

geoff
  #3  
Old August 17th 17, 12:22 AM posted to rec.audio.pro
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 331
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: What’s the Difference?

On Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 4:07:24 PM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
> On 17/08/2017 3:58 AM, wrote:
> >
http://www.toptenreviews.com/softwar...ting-software/
> >
> > JUST AS I THOUGHT!!!
> >
> > Jack
> >

>
> Bit of a fluffy article. Their definition of 'best' might not be the
> same as that of people for whom these functions are a specialty.
>
> There is a degree of cross-over between the two, but also distinct
> differences in function and purpose. Some apps could do both, but would
> be IMO 'cluttered'. Essentially they got that bit right.
>
> If you want a fully-fledged DAW for less that their $100, check out
> Reaper with licence for personal use.
>
> geoff


I see Reaper was used in the multi-tracks I gained. Thanks, but when I can producer better sound quality than what the Columbia Records engineers published, Goldwave is all I need.

What improved sound quality of CDs? Same claim better DA converters. I claim, getting rid of those stinking Sony PCM machines (part of DAW) that know one knew how to operate, because everyone was scared of digital "sound"!!

Cordially,
Jack
  #4  
Old August 17th 17, 01:47 AM posted to rec.audio.pro
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 331
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: What’s the Difference?

On Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 7:23:04 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 4:07:24 PM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
> > On 17/08/2017 3:58 AM, wrote:
> > >
http://www.toptenreviews.com/softwar...ting-software/
> > >
> > > JUST AS I THOUGHT!!!
> > >
> > > Jack
> > >

> >
> > Bit of a fluffy article. Their definition of 'best' might not be the
> > same as that of people for whom these functions are a specialty.
> >
> > There is a degree of cross-over between the two, but also distinct
> > differences in function and purpose. Some apps could do both, but would
> > be IMO 'cluttered'. Essentially they got that bit right.
> >
> > If you want a fully-fledged DAW for less that their $100, check out
> > Reaper with licence for personal use.
> >
> > geoff

>
> I see Reaper was used in the multi-tracks I gained. Thanks, but when I can producer better sound quality than what the Columbia Records engineers published, Goldwave is all I need.
>
> What improved sound quality of CDs? Same claim better DA converters. I claim, getting rid of those stinking Sony PCM machines (part of DAW) that know one knew how to operate, because everyone was scared of digital "sound"!!
>
> Cordially,
> Jack


But, I have always been a fan of the non Pro software.
Even in a Photoshop usenet forum, I found a Damsel in distress. I guess her job was graphics at Rollsecure. She needed to make a animation from two photos (ASAP), and no one seemed to want to help her. I told her to contact me in e-mail. Maybe 45 minutes later, I sent her the Proof, she was happier than ever. What did I use? Photoshop? Nonsense, I used GIMP!

http://www.angelfire.com/empire/abpsp/shutterwork.gif

Jack
  #5  
Old August 17th 17, 01:50 AM posted to rec.audio.pro
geoff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,480
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: What’s the Difference?

On 17/08/2017 11:22 AM, wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 4:07:24 PM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
>> On 17/08/2017 3:58 AM,
wrote:
>>>
http://www.toptenreviews.com/softwar...ting-software/
>>>
>>>
>>>

JUST AS I THOUGHT!!!
>>>
>>> Jack
>>>

>>
>> Bit of a fluffy article. Their definition of 'best' might not be
>> the same as that of people for whom these functions are a
>> specialty.
>>
>> There is a degree of cross-over between the two, but also distinct
>> differences in function and purpose. Some apps could do both, but
>> would be IMO 'cluttered'. Essentially they got that bit right.
>>
>> If you want a fully-fledged DAW for less that their $100, check
>> out Reaper with licence for personal use.
>>
>> geoff

>
> I see Reaper was used in the multi-tracks I gained. Thanks, but when
> I can producer better sound quality than what the Columbia Records
> engineers published, Goldwave is all I need.


You can try others for free to see if the workflow is the same, better,
or worse for you. Sound 'quality' in itself not likely to be
significantly different, unless Goldwave has some inherent low-spec flaws.


> What improved sound quality of CDs? Same claim better DA converters.
> I claim, getting rid of those stinking Sony PCM machines (part of
> DAW) that know one knew how to operate, because everyone was scared
> of digital "sound"!!


"Know one" ?!!!

The Sony PCM machines were nothing to do with DAWs at all.

What improved quality of CDs ? Better AD and DA conversion, in recording
side as well as in domestic players. And more recently bigger deeper
faster computer processors which allowed things to be done at higher
resolution and precision that earlier.

And then there was musical 'taste', which in one period seem to equate
over-bright with clarity.

geoff
  #6  
Old August 17th 17, 03:34 AM posted to rec.audio.pro
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 331
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: What’s the Difference?

On Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 8:50:12 PM UTC-4, Geoff wrote:
> On 17/08/2017 11:22 AM, wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 4:07:24 PM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
> >> On 17/08/2017 3:58 AM,
wrote:
> >>>
http://www.toptenreviews.com/softwar...ting-software/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>

> JUST AS I THOUGHT!!!
> >>>
> >>> Jack
> >>>
> >>
> >> Bit of a fluffy article. Their definition of 'best' might not be
> >> the same as that of people for whom these functions are a
> >> specialty.
> >>
> >> There is a degree of cross-over between the two, but also distinct
> >> differences in function and purpose. Some apps could do both, but
> >> would be IMO 'cluttered'. Essentially they got that bit right.
> >>
> >> If you want a fully-fledged DAW for less that their $100, check
> >> out Reaper with licence for personal use.
> >>
> >> geoff

> >
> > I see Reaper was used in the multi-tracks I gained. Thanks, but when
> > I can producer better sound quality than what the Columbia Records
> > engineers published, Goldwave is all I need.

>
> You can try others for free to see if the workflow is the same, better,
> or worse for you. Sound 'quality' in itself not likely to be
> significantly different, unless Goldwave has some inherent low-spec flaws..
>
>
> > What improved sound quality of CDs? Same claim better DA converters.
> > I claim, getting rid of those stinking Sony PCM machines (part of
> > DAW) that know one knew how to operate, because everyone was scared
> > of digital "sound"!!

>
> "Know one" ?!!!


You no that was a typo!!

>
> The Sony PCM machines were nothing to do with DAWs at all.


That's funny, until I came here, no one or know one, new of these Sony Machines, two were very common in mastering CDs. Scott was told something by someone and had an unclear picture, even he didn't know. I thought this was "Pro" group? It was I who investigated the Sony "Hot" and not so "hot" audio from someone was was instrumental in the CD mastering business.

>
> What improved quality of CDs ? Better AD and DA conversion, in recording
> side as well as in domestic players. And more recently bigger deeper
> faster computer processors which allowed things to be done at higher
> resolution and precision that earlier.


'But CDs are still 16 bit.
>
> And then there was musical 'taste', which in one period seem to equate
> over-bright with clarity.


-- I have yet to hear any thing like that on CD!
-- Like that Elton John CD I had, that made me return my very first CD player.
-- The master tapes are held in the UK, not USA, why the CD sounded more tape hiss than music!!

Let's move on!!

Jack
>
> geoff


  #7  
Old August 17th 17, 03:55 AM posted to rec.audio.pro
Mike Rivers[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,946
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: What’s the Difference?

On 8/16/2017 8:50 PM, Geoff wrote:
> The Sony PCM machines were nothing to do with DAWs at all.


It depends on your definition of "DAW." Taken literally, a couple of
video cassette decks, a PCM converter, and a video editor slightly
customized for audio editing formed a digital audio workstation. But
there aren't many of us here who were around and working in audio at the
time, so it's easy to dismiss anything that came before software on a
general purpose computer as "not a DAW."


--

For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com
  #8  
Old August 17th 17, 04:50 AM posted to rec.audio.pro
geoff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,480
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: What’s the Difference?

On 17/08/2017 2:34 PM, wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 8:50:12 PM UTC-4, Geoff wrote:
> That's funny, until I came here, no one or know one, new of these
> Sony Machines, two were very common in mastering CDs. Scott was told
> something by someone and had an unclear picture, even he didn't know.
> I thought this was "Pro" group? It was I who investigated the Sony
> "Hot" and not so "hot" audio from someone was was instrumental in the
> CD mastering business.


I think pretty much everybody here knew what the PCM-1610 etc were.

>
>>
>> What improved quality of CDs ? Better AD and DA conversion, in
>> recording side as well as in domestic players. And more recently
>> bigger deeper faster computer processors which allowed things to be
>> done at higher resolution and precision that earlier.

>
> 'But CDs are still 16 bit.


Yes, and ?

>>
>> And then there was musical 'taste', which in one period seem to
>> equate over-bright with clarity.

>
> -- I have yet to hear any thing like that on CD! -- Like that Elton
> John CD I had, that made me return my very first CD player. -- The
> master tapes are held in the UK, not USA, why the CD sounded more
> tape hiss than music!!
>
> Let's move on!!



Starting to get silly again. Over and out.

geoff


  #9  
Old August 17th 17, 01:07 PM posted to rec.audio.pro
Scott Dorsey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,458
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: What’s the Difference?

geoff > wrote:
>Bit of a fluffy article. Their definition of 'best' might not be the
>same as that of people for whom these functions are a specialty.


It looked pretty content-free. Sadly, there is no best software. The stuff
that I obsess over, like making sure I can get a bit-for-bit copy from input
and output, are not something the pop music people care about. The stuff the
pop music people care about, like added control functions for tracking to
click and being able to run multiple plugins in parallel, are not things that
I care about.

If it were not like this , there would be no need for multiple packages
out there.

>There is a degree of cross-over between the two, but also distinct
>differences in function and purpose. Some apps could do both, but would
>be IMO 'cluttered'. Essentially they got that bit right.


And now we are coming to an era when some of the video editing applications
now have sufficiently good sound editing functions that there are people
using them for just sound work. And it's not just Fairlight, although there
are still plenty of Fairlight devotees.

>If you want a fully-fledged DAW for less that their $100, check out
>Reaper with licence for personal use.


Except that the DAW is more than just software.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #10  
Old August 17th 17, 01:11 PM posted to rec.audio.pro
Scott Dorsey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,458
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: What’s the Difference?

In article >, Mike Rivers > wrote:
>On 8/16/2017 8:50 PM, Geoff wrote:
>> The Sony PCM machines were nothing to do with DAWs at all.

>
>It depends on your definition of "DAW." Taken literally, a couple of
>video cassette decks, a PCM converter, and a video editor slightly
>customized for audio editing formed a digital audio workstation. But
>there aren't many of us here who were around and working in audio at the
>time, so it's easy to dismiss anything that came before software on a
>general purpose computer as "not a DAW."


I'd call that "not a DAW" because the whole idea of the DAW is that you
can work faster than realtime. Being able to load files into the computer
and edit on the screen totally changed the world in the eighties and nineties,
and totally changed the studio workflow.

I remember editing PCM F-1 tapes, and just doing basic sequencing was a
painful thing that took hours. When Sonic and Waves came along, you just
loaded it unattended (sadly that was still in realtime), made a few cuts
on the screen, and dumped it back (often also in realtime unfortunately).
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best Audio Editor Peter Larsen[_2_] Pro Audio 0 January 23rd 08 11:58 AM
Looking for a good audio editor Buzz Tech 4 January 7th 07 12:15 PM
Audio Editor Pro Jayme Pro Audio 3 April 15th 06 11:23 PM
Want WAV editor allows cutting without changing remaining audio [email protected] Tech 4 May 11th 05 09:46 PM
Looking for simple WinXP audio editor Ixkorr Oxkarr Pro Audio 3 March 11th 04 01:06 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AudioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.