"Powell" wrote in message


"Arny Krueger" wrote

"Powell" wrote in message



After reading your post I have no idea why you're
opposed to "nondestructive" editing technology that
Sonic Foundry/Sony programs utilize. Their programs
can be downloaded for evaluation. Perhaps you should
do some homework.

For one thing Powell you obviously can't read, because
I just described for you the rich selection of nondestructive
features of Audition/CE.

Actually you said "generally non-destructive."

So what?

I have no problems with people who choose SF.

And why should you?

No reason other than the fact that you claimed I did. Thanks for destroying
your own line of attack, Powell.

You lack empirical experiences with SF 5, 6, 7 or Audition.

Horsefeathers. First, I have had empirical experience with SF. Since it
can't do multitracking and I multitrack extensively, it is irrelevant to
me.

Secondly, I do in fact own and use Audition.

No attempt was made to ram Audition down the throat.
Powell, you're the guy who decided to turn a friendly
discussion of audio editors into a duel to the death.

Actually I responded to George's question. You inserted
yourself and answered in your typical dehumanizing
fashion devoid of any meaningful answers.

Powell, while this is untrue, even if it were true it doesn't change the
fact that you turned this discussion into a duel to the death

I see a lot of evidence that SF has been playing "catch
up" by copying features that Audition has had for a long
time.

Hehehe... oh right, conspiracy theories.

What conspiracy? I made factual comments that were backed up with a direct
quote from the SF web site. SF lacked 24/96 support for years and years,
while CEPro has always been able to handle any format up to 32/999.

BTW Powell, wanna tell me...

Why would I bother , mr. Narcissist?

Prerequisite radical subjectivist personal attack noted.

"Arny Krueger" wrote

After reading your post I have no idea why you're
opposed to "nondestructive" editing technology that
Sonic Foundry/Sony programs utilize. Their programs
can be downloaded for evaluation. Perhaps you should
do some homework.

For one thing Powell you obviously can't read, because
I just described for you the rich selection of nondestructive
features of Audition/CE.

Actually you said "generally non-destructive."

So what?

Define specific attributes of "generally non-destructive"
including program and version, please?


I have no problems with people who choose SF.

And why should you?

No reason other than the fact that you claimed I did. Thanks for
destroying
your own line of attack, Powell.

You lack empirical experiences with SF 5, 6, 7 or Audition.

Horsefeathers. First, I have had empirical experience with SF.

Yes, I searched outside this new group and found
“Since it's going to cost me nothing to upgrade,
and I get to pick the one I like after I see Audition,
I'm sure I'll do it.” and “I got Audition because of
curiosity and because it cost me so little to play.”

It always comes down to the money, doesn’t it, Arny ?

In regards to your empirical claim of knowledgeable
use of Sound Forge/Sony you wrote “I have briefly
used a lite verison of SF, but really didn't see enough
of a difference to justify switching” and this “I don't
have a ton of experience with SF” and “the SF people
haven't sent me a copy of SF5 to to review, and I use
CoolEdit Pro.” Obviously no 5,6 or 7 experience.
The light version you refereed to was Sound Forge
XP 4.5 designed for W95. Your SF knowledge base
is really quite pathetic, mr. Know-it-all.

Given how cheap you are and your claim of
knowledgeable advice there is no reason for your
apathy other than narcissism. It costs you nothing
to download and evaluate the product (SF7). Do
some homework before you try to edify others.


Actually I responded to George's question. You inserted
yourself and answered in your typical dehumanizing
fashion devoid of any meaningful answers.

Powell, while this is untrue, even if it were true it
doesn't change the fact that you turned this discussion
into a duel to the death

"duel to the death"... oh please, you're not that important.


I see a lot of evidence that SF has been playing "catch
up" by copying features that Audition has had for a long
time.

Hehehe... oh right, conspiracy theories.

What conspiracy? I made factual comments that were
backed up with a direct quote from the SF web site. SF
lacked 24/96 support for years and years, while CEPro
has always been able to handle any format up to 32/999.

Well yes, what did you expect from Sound Forge XP 4.5
it was designed for W95. Please edify yourself.

http://mediasoftware.sonypictures.co...FeatureID=5799


BTW Powell, wanna tell me...

Why would I bother , mr. Narcissist?

Prerequisite radical subjectivist personal attack noted.

Hehehe... I'm just looking out for your *lack* of
spiritual growth.

"Arny Krueger" wrote

After reading your post I have no idea why you're
opposed to "nondestructive" editing technology that
Sonic Foundry/Sony programs utilize. Their programs
can be downloaded for evaluation. Perhaps you should
do some homework.

For one thing Powell you obviously can't read, because
I just described for you the rich selection of nondestructive
features of Audition/CE.

Actually you said "generally non-destructive."

So what?

Define specific attributes of "generally non-destructive"
including program and version, please?


I have no problems with people who choose SF.

And why should you?

No reason other than the fact that you claimed I did. Thanks for
destroying
your own line of attack, Powell.

You lack empirical experiences with SF 5, 6, 7 or Audition.

Horsefeathers. First, I have had empirical experience with SF.

Yes, I searched outside this new group and found
“Since it's going to cost me nothing to upgrade,
and I get to pick the one I like after I see Audition,
I'm sure I'll do it.” and “I got Audition because of
curiosity and because it cost me so little to play.”

It always comes down to the money, doesn’t it, Arny ?

In regards to your empirical claim of knowledgeable
use of Sound Forge/Sony you wrote “I have briefly
used a lite verison of SF, but really didn't see enough
of a difference to justify switching” and this “I don't
have a ton of experience with SF” and “the SF people
haven't sent me a copy of SF5 to to review, and I use
CoolEdit Pro.” Obviously no 5,6 or 7 experience.
The light version you refereed to was Sound Forge
XP 4.5 designed for W95. Your SF knowledge base
is really quite pathetic, mr. Know-it-all.

Given how cheap you are and your claim of
knowledgeable advice there is no reason for your
apathy other than narcissism. It costs you nothing
to download and evaluate the product (SF7). Do
some homework before you try to edify others.


Actually I responded to George's question. You inserted
yourself and answered in your typical dehumanizing
fashion devoid of any meaningful answers.

Powell, while this is untrue, even if it were true it
doesn't change the fact that you turned this discussion
into a duel to the death

"duel to the death"... oh please, you're not that important.


I see a lot of evidence that SF has been playing "catch
up" by copying features that Audition has had for a long
time.

Hehehe... oh right, conspiracy theories.

What conspiracy? I made factual comments that were
backed up with a direct quote from the SF web site. SF
lacked 24/96 support for years and years, while CEPro
has always been able to handle any format up to 32/999.

Well yes, what did you expect from Sound Forge XP 4.5
it was designed for W95. Please edify yourself.

http://mediasoftware.sonypictures.co...FeatureID=5799


BTW Powell, wanna tell me...

Why would I bother , mr. Narcissist?

Prerequisite radical subjectivist personal attack noted.

Hehehe... I'm just looking out for your *lack* of
spiritual growth.

"Arny Krueger" wrote

After reading your post I have no idea why you're
opposed to "nondestructive" editing technology that
Sonic Foundry/Sony programs utilize. Their programs
can be downloaded for evaluation. Perhaps you should
do some homework.

For one thing Powell you obviously can't read, because
I just described for you the rich selection of nondestructive
features of Audition/CE.

Actually you said "generally non-destructive."

So what?

Define specific attributes of "generally non-destructive"
including program and version, please?


I have no problems with people who choose SF.

And why should you?

No reason other than the fact that you claimed I did. Thanks for
destroying
your own line of attack, Powell.

You lack empirical experiences with SF 5, 6, 7 or Audition.

Horsefeathers. First, I have had empirical experience with SF.

Yes, I searched outside this new group and found
“Since it's going to cost me nothing to upgrade,
and I get to pick the one I like after I see Audition,
I'm sure I'll do it.” and “I got Audition because of
curiosity and because it cost me so little to play.”

It always comes down to the money, doesn’t it, Arny ?

In regards to your empirical claim of knowledgeable
use of Sound Forge/Sony you wrote “I have briefly
used a lite verison of SF, but really didn't see enough
of a difference to justify switching” and this “I don't
have a ton of experience with SF” and “the SF people
haven't sent me a copy of SF5 to to review, and I use
CoolEdit Pro.” Obviously no 5,6 or 7 experience.
The light version you refereed to was Sound Forge
XP 4.5 designed for W95. Your SF knowledge base
is really quite pathetic, mr. Know-it-all.

Given how cheap you are and your claim of
knowledgeable advice there is no reason for your
apathy other than narcissism. It costs you nothing
to download and evaluate the product (SF7). Do
some homework before you try to edify others.


Actually I responded to George's question. You inserted
yourself and answered in your typical dehumanizing
fashion devoid of any meaningful answers.

Powell, while this is untrue, even if it were true it
doesn't change the fact that you turned this discussion
into a duel to the death

"duel to the death"... oh please, you're not that important.


I see a lot of evidence that SF has been playing "catch
up" by copying features that Audition has had for a long
time.

Hehehe... oh right, conspiracy theories.

What conspiracy? I made factual comments that were
backed up with a direct quote from the SF web site. SF
lacked 24/96 support for years and years, while CEPro
has always been able to handle any format up to 32/999.

Well yes, what did you expect from Sound Forge XP 4.5
it was designed for W95. Please edify yourself.

http://mediasoftware.sonypictures.co...FeatureID=5799


BTW Powell, wanna tell me...

Why would I bother , mr. Narcissist?

Prerequisite radical subjectivist personal attack noted.

Hehehe... I'm just looking out for your *lack* of
spiritual growth.

"Arny Krueger" wrote

After reading your post I have no idea why you're
opposed to "nondestructive" editing technology that
Sonic Foundry/Sony programs utilize. Their programs
can be downloaded for evaluation. Perhaps you should
do some homework.

For one thing Powell you obviously can't read, because
I just described for you the rich selection of nondestructive
features of Audition/CE.

Actually you said "generally non-destructive."

So what?

Define specific attributes of "generally non-destructive"
including program and version, please?


I have no problems with people who choose SF.

And why should you?

No reason other than the fact that you claimed I did. Thanks for
destroying
your own line of attack, Powell.

You lack empirical experiences with SF 5, 6, 7 or Audition.

Horsefeathers. First, I have had empirical experience with SF.

Yes, I searched outside this new group and found
“Since it's going to cost me nothing to upgrade,
and I get to pick the one I like after I see Audition,
I'm sure I'll do it.” and “I got Audition because of
curiosity and because it cost me so little to play.”

It always comes down to the money, doesn’t it, Arny ?

In regards to your empirical claim of knowledgeable
use of Sound Forge/Sony you wrote “I have briefly
used a lite verison of SF, but really didn't see enough
of a difference to justify switching” and this “I don't
have a ton of experience with SF” and “the SF people
haven't sent me a copy of SF5 to to review, and I use
CoolEdit Pro.” Obviously no 5,6 or 7 experience.
The light version you refereed to was Sound Forge
XP 4.5 designed for W95. Your SF knowledge base
is really quite pathetic, mr. Know-it-all.

Given how cheap you are and your claim of
knowledgeable advice there is no reason for your
apathy other than narcissism. It costs you nothing
to download and evaluate the product (SF7). Do
some homework before you try to edify others.


Actually I responded to George's question. You inserted
yourself and answered in your typical dehumanizing
fashion devoid of any meaningful answers.

Powell, while this is untrue, even if it were true it
doesn't change the fact that you turned this discussion
into a duel to the death

"duel to the death"... oh please, you're not that important.


I see a lot of evidence that SF has been playing "catch
up" by copying features that Audition has had for a long
time.

Hehehe... oh right, conspiracy theories.

What conspiracy? I made factual comments that were
backed up with a direct quote from the SF web site. SF
lacked 24/96 support for years and years, while CEPro
has always been able to handle any format up to 32/999.

Well yes, what did you expect from Sound Forge XP 4.5
it was designed for W95. Please edify yourself.

http://mediasoftware.sonypictures.co...FeatureID=5799


BTW Powell, wanna tell me...

Why would I bother , mr. Narcissist?

Prerequisite radical subjectivist personal attack noted.

Hehehe... I'm just looking out for your *lack* of
spiritual growth.

"The Artist" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack recording and
production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed for that
purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and raving about SF.

I've been do it for years with Audition/CE and I do it
all the time - was doing it today a few hours ago.

For a professional solution consider ProTools, SX, SawPlus, Vegas,
Bias, Logic, Sonar, Samplitude...

...or Audition or several others.

"The Artist" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack recording and
production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed for that
purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and raving about SF.

I've been do it for years with Audition/CE and I do it
all the time - was doing it today a few hours ago.

For a professional solution consider ProTools, SX, SawPlus, Vegas,
Bias, Logic, Sonar, Samplitude...

...or Audition or several others.

"The Artist" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack recording and
production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed for that
purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and raving about SF.

I've been do it for years with Audition/CE and I do it
all the time - was doing it today a few hours ago.

For a professional solution consider ProTools, SX, SawPlus, Vegas,
Bias, Logic, Sonar, Samplitude...

...or Audition or several others.

"The Artist" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack recording and
production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed for that
purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and raving about SF.

I've been do it for years with Audition/CE and I do it
all the time - was doing it today a few hours ago.

For a professional solution consider ProTools, SX, SawPlus, Vegas,
Bias, Logic, Sonar, Samplitude...

...or Audition or several others.

"Arny Krueger" wrote

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack
recording and production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed
for that purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and
raving about SF.

The original poster (SPS22) wrote: "Well, I am essentially
trying to convert cassettes to CD's". What benefit is there
for utilizing "12 track multitrack" for the user's two channel
application, Arny? Zero, none, nada, zip.

"Arny Krueger" wrote

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack
recording and production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed
for that purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and
raving about SF.

The original poster (SPS22) wrote: "Well, I am essentially
trying to convert cassettes to CD's". What benefit is there
for utilizing "12 track multitrack" for the user's two channel
application, Arny? Zero, none, nada, zip.

"Arny Krueger" wrote

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack
recording and production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed
for that purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and
raving about SF.

The original poster (SPS22) wrote: "Well, I am essentially
trying to convert cassettes to CD's". What benefit is there
for utilizing "12 track multitrack" for the user's two channel
application, Arny? Zero, none, nada, zip.

"Arny Krueger" wrote

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack
recording and production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed
for that purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and
raving about SF.

The original poster (SPS22) wrote: "Well, I am essentially
trying to convert cassettes to CD's". What benefit is there
for utilizing "12 track multitrack" for the user's two channel
application, Arny? Zero, none, nada, zip.

"Powell" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack
recording and production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed
for that purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and
raving about SF.

The original poster (SPS22) wrote: "Well, I am essentially
trying to convert cassettes to CD's". What benefit is there
for utilizing "12 track multitrack" for the user's two channel
application, Arny? Zero, none, nada, zip.

Nice job Powell, of trying to avoid taking responsibility for your attempts
to move the discussion off of the original topic. Both CE/Audition and SF
would do a fine job of digitizing most cassettes, as would Audacity and
Goldwave.

BTW Powell, why not tell us about your vast empirical experiences with
digitizing cassettes. I've been doing them for years with CE.

"Powell" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack
recording and production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed
for that purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and
raving about SF.

The original poster (SPS22) wrote: "Well, I am essentially
trying to convert cassettes to CD's". What benefit is there
for utilizing "12 track multitrack" for the user's two channel
application, Arny? Zero, none, nada, zip.

Nice job Powell, of trying to avoid taking responsibility for your attempts
to move the discussion off of the original topic. Both CE/Audition and SF
would do a fine job of digitizing most cassettes, as would Audacity and
Goldwave.

BTW Powell, why not tell us about your vast empirical experiences with
digitizing cassettes. I've been doing them for years with CE.

"Powell" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack
recording and production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed
for that purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and
raving about SF.

The original poster (SPS22) wrote: "Well, I am essentially
trying to convert cassettes to CD's". What benefit is there
for utilizing "12 track multitrack" for the user's two channel
application, Arny? Zero, none, nada, zip.

Nice job Powell, of trying to avoid taking responsibility for your attempts
to move the discussion off of the original topic. Both CE/Audition and SF
would do a fine job of digitizing most cassettes, as would Audacity and
Goldwave.

BTW Powell, why not tell us about your vast empirical experiences with
digitizing cassettes. I've been doing them for years with CE.

"Powell" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack
recording and production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed
for that purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and
raving about SF.

The original poster (SPS22) wrote: "Well, I am essentially
trying to convert cassettes to CD's". What benefit is there
for utilizing "12 track multitrack" for the user's two channel
application, Arny? Zero, none, nada, zip.

Nice job Powell, of trying to avoid taking responsibility for your attempts
to move the discussion off of the original topic. Both CE/Audition and SF
would do a fine job of digitizing most cassettes, as would Audacity and
Goldwave.

BTW Powell, why not tell us about your vast empirical experiences with
digitizing cassettes. I've been doing them for years with CE.

"Arny Krueger" wrote

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack
recording and production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed
for that purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and
raving about SF.

The original poster (SPS22) wrote: "Well, I am essentially
trying to convert cassettes to CD's". What benefit is there
for utilizing "12 track multitrack" for the user's two channel
application, Arny? Zero, none, nada, zip.

Both CE/Audition and SF would do a fine job of digitizing
most cassettes, as would Audacity and Goldwave.

You’re still trying to make a decision for the consumer.
Like your amps=amps mentality you believe that technical
specifications and cost are the sole determiners in the
selection process. You ignore many other deal
breakers/makers like the software suitability for the skill
level of the user. Personal preferences play a significant
role in the user's long term satisfaction. Each program
you name-dropped has its own unique menus and
intuitiveness.

The audiophile approach would be to try-before-you-
buy. You’re just trying to put your hat on everyone else's
head. So in answer to your statement “Both CE/Audition
and SF would do a fine job” I still reply, "How would you
know?"


BTW Powell, why not tell us about your vast empirical
experiences with digitizing cassettes. I've been doing
them for years with CE.

Quack, quack, quack...

"Arny Krueger" wrote

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack
recording and production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed
for that purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and
raving about SF.

The original poster (SPS22) wrote: "Well, I am essentially
trying to convert cassettes to CD's". What benefit is there
for utilizing "12 track multitrack" for the user's two channel
application, Arny? Zero, none, nada, zip.

Both CE/Audition and SF would do a fine job of digitizing
most cassettes, as would Audacity and Goldwave.

You’re still trying to make a decision for the consumer.
Like your amps=amps mentality you believe that technical
specifications and cost are the sole determiners in the
selection process. You ignore many other deal
breakers/makers like the software suitability for the skill
level of the user. Personal preferences play a significant
role in the user's long term satisfaction. Each program
you name-dropped has its own unique menus and
intuitiveness.

The audiophile approach would be to try-before-you-
buy. You’re just trying to put your hat on everyone else's
head. So in answer to your statement “Both CE/Audition
and SF would do a fine job” I still reply, "How would you
know?"


BTW Powell, why not tell us about your vast empirical
experiences with digitizing cassettes. I've been doing
them for years with CE.

Quack, quack, quack...

"Arny Krueger" wrote

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack
recording and production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed
for that purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and
raving about SF.

The original poster (SPS22) wrote: "Well, I am essentially
trying to convert cassettes to CD's". What benefit is there
for utilizing "12 track multitrack" for the user's two channel
application, Arny? Zero, none, nada, zip.

Both CE/Audition and SF would do a fine job of digitizing
most cassettes, as would Audacity and Goldwave.

You’re still trying to make a decision for the consumer.
Like your amps=amps mentality you believe that technical
specifications and cost are the sole determiners in the
selection process. You ignore many other deal
breakers/makers like the software suitability for the skill
level of the user. Personal preferences play a significant
role in the user's long term satisfaction. Each program
you name-dropped has its own unique menus and
intuitiveness.

The audiophile approach would be to try-before-you-
buy. You’re just trying to put your hat on everyone else's
head. So in answer to your statement “Both CE/Audition
and SF would do a fine job” I still reply, "How would you
know?"


BTW Powell, why not tell us about your vast empirical
experiences with digitizing cassettes. I've been doing
them for years with CE.

Quack, quack, quack...

"Arny Krueger" wrote

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack
recording and production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed
for that purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and
raving about SF.

The original poster (SPS22) wrote: "Well, I am essentially
trying to convert cassettes to CD's". What benefit is there
for utilizing "12 track multitrack" for the user's two channel
application, Arny? Zero, none, nada, zip.

Both CE/Audition and SF would do a fine job of digitizing
most cassettes, as would Audacity and Goldwave.

You’re still trying to make a decision for the consumer.
Like your amps=amps mentality you believe that technical
specifications and cost are the sole determiners in the
selection process. You ignore many other deal
breakers/makers like the software suitability for the skill
level of the user. Personal preferences play a significant
role in the user's long term satisfaction. Each program
you name-dropped has its own unique menus and
intuitiveness.

The audiophile approach would be to try-before-you-
buy. You’re just trying to put your hat on everyone else's
head. So in answer to your statement “Both CE/Audition
and SF would do a fine job” I still reply, "How would you
know?"


BTW Powell, why not tell us about your vast empirical
experiences with digitizing cassettes. I've been doing
them for years with CE.

Quack, quack, quack...

"Powell" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack
recording and production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed
for that purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and
raving about SF.

The original poster (SPS22) wrote: "Well, I am essentially
trying to convert cassettes to CD's". What benefit is there
for utilizing "12 track multitrack" for the user's two channel
application, Arny? Zero, none, nada, zip.

Both CE/Audition and SF would do a fine job of digitizing
most cassettes, as would Audacity and Goldwave.

You're still trying to make a decision for the consumer.

How, by NOT ramming SF down his throat?

Like your amps=amps mentality you believe that technical
specifications and cost are the sole determiners in the
selection process.

Absolute nonsense.

You ignore many other deal
breakers/makers like the software suitability for the skill
level of the user.

A figment of your imagination, Powell.

BTW Powell, tell us about your empirical experiences with Goldwave and
Audacity.

Personal preferences play a significant
role in the user's long term satisfaction. Each program
you name-dropped has its own unique menus and
intuitiveness.

Right, and both Goldwave and Audacity are distributed for free. Goldwave is
freely distributed as mildly-limited shareware and Audacity is out-and-out
freeware.

The audiophile approach would be to try-before-you-
buy.

Entirely feasible with a number of the alternatives I listed.

You're just trying to put your hat on everyone else's
head.

How, by NOT shoving SF down people's throat?

So in answer to your statement "Both CE/Audition
and SF would do a fine job" I still reply, "How would you
know?"

Been there, done that.

BTW Powell, why not tell us about your vast empirical
experiences with digitizing cassettes. I've been doing
them for years with CE.

Quack, quack, quack...

This non-answer speaks for itself.

"Powell" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack
recording and production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed
for that purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and
raving about SF.

The original poster (SPS22) wrote: "Well, I am essentially
trying to convert cassettes to CD's". What benefit is there
for utilizing "12 track multitrack" for the user's two channel
application, Arny? Zero, none, nada, zip.

Both CE/Audition and SF would do a fine job of digitizing
most cassettes, as would Audacity and Goldwave.

You're still trying to make a decision for the consumer.

How, by NOT ramming SF down his throat?

Like your amps=amps mentality you believe that technical
specifications and cost are the sole determiners in the
selection process.

Absolute nonsense.

You ignore many other deal
breakers/makers like the software suitability for the skill
level of the user.

A figment of your imagination, Powell.

BTW Powell, tell us about your empirical experiences with Goldwave and
Audacity.

Personal preferences play a significant
role in the user's long term satisfaction. Each program
you name-dropped has its own unique menus and
intuitiveness.

Right, and both Goldwave and Audacity are distributed for free. Goldwave is
freely distributed as mildly-limited shareware and Audacity is out-and-out
freeware.

The audiophile approach would be to try-before-you-
buy.

Entirely feasible with a number of the alternatives I listed.

You're just trying to put your hat on everyone else's
head.

How, by NOT shoving SF down people's throat?

So in answer to your statement "Both CE/Audition
and SF would do a fine job" I still reply, "How would you
know?"

Been there, done that.

BTW Powell, why not tell us about your vast empirical
experiences with digitizing cassettes. I've been doing
them for years with CE.

Quack, quack, quack...

This non-answer speaks for itself.

"Powell" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack
recording and production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed
for that purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and
raving about SF.

The original poster (SPS22) wrote: "Well, I am essentially
trying to convert cassettes to CD's". What benefit is there
for utilizing "12 track multitrack" for the user's two channel
application, Arny? Zero, none, nada, zip.

Both CE/Audition and SF would do a fine job of digitizing
most cassettes, as would Audacity and Goldwave.

You're still trying to make a decision for the consumer.

How, by NOT ramming SF down his throat?

Like your amps=amps mentality you believe that technical
specifications and cost are the sole determiners in the
selection process.

Absolute nonsense.

You ignore many other deal
breakers/makers like the software suitability for the skill
level of the user.

A figment of your imagination, Powell.

BTW Powell, tell us about your empirical experiences with Goldwave and
Audacity.

Personal preferences play a significant
role in the user's long term satisfaction. Each program
you name-dropped has its own unique menus and
intuitiveness.

Right, and both Goldwave and Audacity are distributed for free. Goldwave is
freely distributed as mildly-limited shareware and Audacity is out-and-out
freeware.

The audiophile approach would be to try-before-you-
buy.

Entirely feasible with a number of the alternatives I listed.

You're just trying to put your hat on everyone else's
head.

How, by NOT shoving SF down people's throat?

So in answer to your statement "Both CE/Audition
and SF would do a fine job" I still reply, "How would you
know?"

Been there, done that.

BTW Powell, why not tell us about your vast empirical
experiences with digitizing cassettes. I've been doing
them for years with CE.

Quack, quack, quack...

This non-answer speaks for itself.

"Powell" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote

"Arny Krueger" emitted :

BTW Powell, wanna tell me how to do 12 track multitrack
recording and production with SF?

Why ask such a stupid question? It was never designed
for that purpose. They have Vegas for that.

You know that, I know that, but Powell keeps ranting and
raving about SF.

The original poster (SPS22) wrote: "Well, I am essentially
trying to convert cassettes to CD's". What benefit is there
for utilizing "12 track multitrack" for the user's two channel
application, Arny? Zero, none, nada, zip.

Both CE/Audition and SF would do a fine job of digitizing
most cassettes, as would Audacity and Goldwave.

You're still trying to make a decision for the consumer.

How, by NOT ramming SF down his throat?

Like your amps=amps mentality you believe that technical
specifications and cost are the sole determiners in the
selection process.

Absolute nonsense.

You ignore many other deal
breakers/makers like the software suitability for the skill
level of the user.

A figment of your imagination, Powell.

BTW Powell, tell us about your empirical experiences with Goldwave and
Audacity.

Personal preferences play a significant
role in the user's long term satisfaction. Each program
you name-dropped has its own unique menus and
intuitiveness.

Right, and both Goldwave and Audacity are distributed for free. Goldwave is
freely distributed as mildly-limited shareware and Audacity is out-and-out
freeware.

The audiophile approach would be to try-before-you-
buy.

Entirely feasible with a number of the alternatives I listed.

You're just trying to put your hat on everyone else's
head.

How, by NOT shoving SF down people's throat?

So in answer to your statement "Both CE/Audition
and SF would do a fine job" I still reply, "How would you
know?"

Been there, done that.

BTW Powell, why not tell us about your vast empirical
experiences with digitizing cassettes. I've been doing
them for years with CE.

Quack, quack, quack...

This non-answer speaks for itself.

"The Artist" wrote in message


Put Audition and the several others at the bottom of the list to get a
true reflection of the pecking order in the market place for
multitrack production facilities.

Prove it.

"The Artist" wrote in message


Put Audition and the several others at the bottom of the list to get a
true reflection of the pecking order in the market place for
multitrack production facilities.

Prove it.

"The Artist" wrote in message


Put Audition and the several others at the bottom of the list to get a
true reflection of the pecking order in the market place for
multitrack production facilities.

Prove it.

"The Artist" wrote in message


Put Audition and the several others at the bottom of the list to get a
true reflection of the pecking order in the market place for
multitrack production facilities.

Prove it.

"The Artist" says to Arny:.

It's not like you make an income from
audio production, after all.


Ouch!!




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"The Artist" says to Arny:.

It's not like you make an income from
audio production, after all.


Ouch!!




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"The Artist" says to Arny:.

It's not like you make an income from
audio production, after all.


Ouch!!




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"The Artist" says to Arny:.

It's not like you make an income from
audio production, after all.


Ouch!!




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message


"The Artist" says to Arny:.

It's not like you make an income from
audio production, after all.

Ouch!!

Not at all. It simply shows how desperate Dormer is to be overbearing,
officious and insulting.

Dormer seems to be going over the top with his habit of being presumptuous.
He now fancies himself "The Artist". LOL!

If the posts on rec.audio.pro and the Adobe audition newsgroups are any
indication, there are a great many professionals who rely on CE/Audition.
One area where it seems to be heavily used is broadcasting. There's even a
whole newsgroup devoted to that one application of Audition. Adobe if
nothing else, knows who their market is!

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message


"The Artist" says to Arny:.

It's not like you make an income from
audio production, after all.

Ouch!!

Not at all. It simply shows how desperate Dormer is to be overbearing,
officious and insulting.

Dormer seems to be going over the top with his habit of being presumptuous.
He now fancies himself "The Artist". LOL!

If the posts on rec.audio.pro and the Adobe audition newsgroups are any
indication, there are a great many professionals who rely on CE/Audition.
One area where it seems to be heavily used is broadcasting. There's even a
whole newsgroup devoted to that one application of Audition. Adobe if
nothing else, knows who their market is!

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message


"The Artist" says to Arny:.

It's not like you make an income from
audio production, after all.

Ouch!!

Not at all. It simply shows how desperate Dormer is to be overbearing,
officious and insulting.

Dormer seems to be going over the top with his habit of being presumptuous.
He now fancies himself "The Artist". LOL!

If the posts on rec.audio.pro and the Adobe audition newsgroups are any
indication, there are a great many professionals who rely on CE/Audition.
One area where it seems to be heavily used is broadcasting. There's even a
whole newsgroup devoted to that one application of Audition. Adobe if
nothing else, knows who their market is!

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message


"The Artist" says to Arny:.

It's not like you make an income from
audio production, after all.

Ouch!!

Not at all. It simply shows how desperate Dormer is to be overbearing,
officious and insulting.

Dormer seems to be going over the top with his habit of being presumptuous.
He now fancies himself "The Artist". LOL!

If the posts on rec.audio.pro and the Adobe audition newsgroups are any
indication, there are a great many professionals who rely on CE/Audition.
One area where it seems to be heavily used is broadcasting. There's even a
whole newsgroup devoted to that one application of Audition. Adobe if
nothing else, knows who their market is!

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message


"The Artist" says to Arny:.

It's not like you make an income from
audio production, after all.

Ouch!!

Not at all. It simply shows how desperate Dormer is to be overbearing,
officious and insulting.

Dormer seems to be going over the top with his habit of being
presumptuous.
He now fancies himself "The Artist". LOL!


Beats "Arny the Internet Dork".




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message


"The Artist" says to Arny:.

It's not like you make an income from
audio production, after all.

Ouch!!

Not at all. It simply shows how desperate Dormer is to be overbearing,
officious and insulting.

Dormer seems to be going over the top with his habit of being
presumptuous.
He now fancies himself "The Artist". LOL!


Beats "Arny the Internet Dork".




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message


"The Artist" says to Arny:.

It's not like you make an income from
audio production, after all.

Ouch!!

Not at all. It simply shows how desperate Dormer is to be overbearing,
officious and insulting.

Dormer seems to be going over the top with his habit of being
presumptuous.
He now fancies himself "The Artist". LOL!


Beats "Arny the Internet Dork".




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---