Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Nil[_2_] Nil[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 251
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: Whats the Difference?

On 19 Aug 2017, Neil wrote in
rec.audio.pro:

On 8/18/2017 6:16 PM, Nil wrote:

I don't really compare it to Audition or Cool Edit, though. Those
two programs are really single audio file editors with some
clunky multi- track features bolted on.

Audition is the continuation of Cool Edit _Pro_ after its
acquisition by Adobe, and it was/is a multi-track recorder. I've
used it with various multi-input cards (up to 32 simultaneous
tracks) for decades.


Yes, I know and I said as much. But Audition's multi-track features
seem to me to be extremely clunky and hard to work with, at least in
versions 1.2 through 3. Maybe later versions are easier. Maybe it just
doesn't fit in with the way I think and work.

Cool Edit was a single-file editor only, no multi-track features.
  #42   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Nil[_2_] Nil[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 251
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: What’s the Difference?

On 19 Aug 2017, jtees4 wrote in rec.audio.pro:

For awhile, I used Reaper to record and mix everything and then
master in Audition...I guess I was just more familiar with it.
Then I got a new computer and didn't load Audition inti it, and
have not used it since.


I use Audition for surgical edits - fix a crackle here, fix a plosive
there, small edits that would be difficult or impossible in Reaper
itself. And I also use it to check my rendered file - the waveform
display is more detailed, so I can better see if there are any
overages, check the head and tail silences, etc. Audition is still
always part of my process.

What I love about reaper is, I know what I
need to know....whenever anything else comes up...I simply go into
Google and typw "reaper blah blah blah" and get instant info from
multiple sources on what I am trying to do.


Yeah, that's great. Lots of user resources and video tutorials. The PDF
manual is also excellent and very complete.

  #43   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
polymod polymod is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 584
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: Whats the Difference?



"Nil" wrote in message ...

On 19 Aug 2017, jtees4 wrote in rec.audio.pro:

For awhile, I used Reaper to record and mix everything and then
master in Audition...I guess I was just more familiar with it.
Then I got a new computer and didn't load Audition inti it, and
have not used it since.


I use Audition for surgical edits - fix a crackle here, fix a plosive
there, small edits that would be difficult or impossible in Reaper
itself. And I also use it to check my rendered file - the waveform
display is more detailed, so I can better see if there are any
overages, check the head and tail silences, etc. Audition is still
always part of my process.

What I love about reaper is, I know what I
need to know....whenever anything else comes up...I simply go into
Google and typw "reaper blah blah blah" and get instant info from
multiple sources on what I am trying to do.


Yeah, that's great. Lots of user resources and video tutorials. The PDF
manual is also excellent and very complete.


I bring that manual with me on vacations. Seriously. I'm amazed at the stuff
I find after multiple readings.

Poly


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

  #44   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Neil[_9_] Neil[_9_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 196
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: Whats the Difference?

On 8/19/2017 1:22 PM, Nil wrote:
On 19 Aug 2017, Neil wrote in
rec.audio.pro:

On 8/18/2017 6:16 PM, Nil wrote:

I don't really compare it to Audition or Cool Edit, though. Those
two programs are really single audio file editors with some
clunky multi- track features bolted on.

Audition is the continuation of Cool Edit _Pro_ after its
acquisition by Adobe, and it was/is a multi-track recorder. I've
used it with various multi-input cards (up to 32 simultaneous
tracks) for decades.


Yes, I know and I said as much. But Audition's multi-track features
seem to me to be extremely clunky and hard to work with, at least in
versions 1.2 through 3. Maybe later versions are easier. Maybe it just
doesn't fit in with the way I think and work.

The best reason for the existence of multiple apps is that people think
and do things in different ways. For example, I have no tolerance for
DAWs that have a pseudo-hardware style of user interface with knobs,
sliders, switches etc. So, working with waveforms and having precise
parameter adjustments via input boxes and curve adjustments is a huge
improvement over both traditional hardware and their software imitators.
But, I can understand why some would find that kind of UI challenging. ;-)

Cool Edit was a single-file editor only, no multi-track features.

Which is why I differentiated between them by underlining "Pro".

--
best regards,

Neil
  #45   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
geoff geoff is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,812
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: Whats the Difference?

On 20/08/2017 6:12 AM, Neil wrote:


Cool Edit was a single-file editor only, no multi-track features.

Which is why I differentiated between them by underlining "Pro".


That's not the difference between 'pro' and 'not'. It's just different
things, like a truck and a van.

geoff


  #46   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Scott Dorsey Scott Dorsey is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,853
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: Whats the Difference?

geoff wrote:
On 20/08/2017 6:12 AM, Neil wrote:

Cool Edit was a single-file editor only, no multi-track features.

Which is why I differentiated between them by underlining "Pro".


That's not the difference between 'pro' and 'not'. It's just different
things, like a truck and a van.


I think he is pointing out that "Cool Edit" and "Cool Edit Pro" were not
the same piece of software.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #47   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Neil[_9_] Neil[_9_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 196
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: Whats the Difference?

On 8/19/2017 8:44 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
geoff wrote:
On 20/08/2017 6:12 AM, Neil wrote:

Cool Edit was a single-file editor only, no multi-track features.

Which is why I differentiated between them by underlining "Pro".


That's not the difference between 'pro' and 'not'. It's just different
things, like a truck and a van.


I think he is pointing out that "Cool Edit" and "Cool Edit Pro" were not
the same piece of software.
--scott

Exactly. CEP was a multi-track DAW as compared to the 2ch/stereo audio
editor that was CE.

--
best regards,

Neil
  #48   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
geoff geoff is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,812
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: Whats the Difference?

On 20/08/2017 12:55 PM, Neil wrote:
On 8/19/2017 8:44 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
geoffÂ* wrote:
On 20/08/2017 6:12 AM, Neil wrote:

Cool Edit was a single-file editor only, no multi-track features.

Which is why I differentiated between them by underlining "Pro".

That's not the difference between 'pro' and 'not'. It's just different
things, like a truck and a van.


I think he is pointing out that "Cool Edit" and "Cool Edit Pro" were not
the same piece of software.
--scott

Exactly. CEP was a multi-track DAW as compared to the 2ch/stereo audio
editor that was CE.


Click. Would have been better to drop the Edit and make it Cool Track
Pro, Cool Mix Pro, or something like that, as no longer 'just' an editor.

geoff
  #49   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Rick Ruskin Rick Ruskin is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 358
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: What’s the Difference?

On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 12:26:06 +1200, geoff
wrote:

On 20/08/2017 6:12 AM, Neil wrote:


Cool Edit was a single-file editor only, no multi-track features.

Which is why I differentiated between them by underlining "Pro".


That's not the difference between 'pro' and 'not'. It's just different
things, like a truck and a van.

geoff


Cool Edit most definitely did have a multitrack feature.



---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

  #50   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
John Williamson John Williamson is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,753
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: What�s the Difference?

On 20/08/2017 16:41, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 12:26:06 +1200, geoff
wrote:

On 20/08/2017 6:12 AM, Neil wrote:


Cool Edit was a single-file editor only, no multi-track features.

Which is why I differentiated between them by underlining "Pro".


That's not the difference between 'pro' and 'not'. It's just different
things, like a truck and a van.

geoff


Cool Edit most definitely did have a multitrack feature.

The version (Cool Edit 96) I had and which is still lurking on a CD
somewhere, could record and process stereo.

The upgrade to Cool Edit Pro gave the opportunity to record and edit
multiple stereo tracks, but effects could only be applied in the stereo
"edit" window, not the multitrack one, which was limited to automating
levels and balance.

Cool Ed
--
Tciao for Now!

John.


  #51   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Rick Ruskin Rick Ruskin is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 358
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: What?s the Difference?

On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 16:52:51 +0100, John Williamson
wrote:

On 20/08/2017 16:41, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 12:26:06 +1200, geoff
wrote:

On 20/08/2017 6:12 AM, Neil wrote:


Cool Edit was a single-file editor only, no multi-track features.

Which is why I differentiated between them by underlining "Pro".


That's not the difference between 'pro' and 'not'. It's just different
things, like a truck and a van.

geoff


Cool Edit most definitely did have a multitrack feature.

The version (Cool Edit 96) I had and which is still lurking on a CD
somewhere, could record and process stereo.

The upgrade to Cool Edit Pro gave the opportunity to record and edit
multiple stereo tracks, but effects could only be applied in the stereo
"edit" window, not the multitrack one, which was limited to automating
levels and balance.

Cool Ed


I was thinking about CEP. The effects limitation was never a problem
for me since I brought all tracks back throug an analog console and
did all processing & there. I still work that way most of the time.



---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

  #52   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Neil[_9_] Neil[_9_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 196
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: What?s the Difference?

On 8/20/2017 12:28 PM, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 16:52:51 +0100, John Williamson
wrote:

On 20/08/2017 16:41, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 12:26:06 +1200, geoff
wrote:

On 20/08/2017 6:12 AM, Neil wrote:


Cool Edit was a single-file editor only, no multi-track features.

Which is why I differentiated between them by underlining "Pro".


That's not the difference between 'pro' and 'not'. It's just different
things, like a truck and a van.

geoff

Cool Edit most definitely did have a multitrack feature.

The version (Cool Edit 96) I had and which is still lurking on a CD
somewhere, could record and process stereo.

The upgrade to Cool Edit Pro gave the opportunity to record and edit
multiple stereo tracks, but effects could only be applied in the stereo
"edit" window, not the multitrack one, which was limited to automating
levels and balance.

Cool Ed


I was thinking about CEP. The effects limitation was never a problem
for me since I brought all tracks back throug an analog console and
did all processing & there. I still work that way most of the time.
You _can_ apply EQ, compression, reverb and all of the other effects in

the multi-track window of CEP and Audition, but they're applied to
individual tracks instead of as a master control. I prefer that way of
working anyway, and only make master-level changes to the final mix
and/or mastering of the project.


--
best regards,

Neil
  #53   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
geoff geoff is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,812
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: What�s the Difference?

On 21/08/2017 3:52 AM, John Williamson wrote:
On 20/08/2017 16:41, Rick Ruskin wrote:
On Sun, 20 Aug 2017 12:26:06 +1200, geoff
wrote:

On 20/08/2017 6:12 AM, Neil wrote:


Cool Edit was a single-file editor only, no multi-track features.

Which is why I differentiated between them by underlining "Pro".


That's not the difference between 'pro' and 'not'. It's just different
things, like a truck and a van.

geoff


Cool Edit most definitely did have a multitrack feature.

The version (Cool Edit 96) I had and which is still lurking on a CD
somewhere, could record and process stereo.

The upgrade to Cool Edit Pro gave the opportunity to record and edit
multiple stereo tracks, but effects could only be applied in the stereo
"edit" window, not the multitrack one, which was limited to automating
levels and balance.

Cool Ed


Jeepers that still doesn't half sound 'limited'.

geoff
  #54   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
James Price[_5_] James Price[_5_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 110
Default Audio Editor vs. DAW: Whats the Difference?

On Saturday, August 19, 2017 at 12:22:38 PM UTC-5, Nil wrote:
On 19 Aug 2017, Neil wrote in
rec.audio.pro:

On 8/18/2017 6:16 PM, Nil wrote:

I don't really compare it to Audition or Cool Edit, though. Those
two programs are really single audio file editors with some
clunky multi- track features bolted on.

Audition is the continuation of Cool Edit _Pro_ after its
acquisition by Adobe, and it was/is a multi-track recorder. I've
used it with various multi-input cards (up to 32 simultaneous
tracks) for decades.


Yes, I know and I said as much. But Audition's multi-track features
seem to me to be extremely clunky and hard to work with, at least in
versions 1.2 through 3. Maybe later versions are easier. Maybe it just
doesn't fit in with the way I think and work.

Cool Edit was a single-file editor only, no multi-track features.


Cool Edit Pro, however, had multi-track features.
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

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 12:58 PM
Looking for a good audio editor Buzz Tech 4 January 7th 07 01:15 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 02:06 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:53 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"