Audition vs Cool Edit Pro

[Bill Finch]

I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does Audition
offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?

For what it's worth I'm cleaning up film sound and cutting custom tracks to
match what the video editor wants. I always start with mono or stereo sound
or music files. Some live, some ADR, some background ambients. I mostly cut
to length required plus remove unwanted clicks and pops and whatever. This
is all wild sound with no SMPTE timecode.
Cool Edit Pro seems OK for this. Does Audition offer any kind of advantage?

(I do all sync work is done with Pro Tools - not part of this question)

Bill Finch

[James Perrett]

Bill Finch wrote:
>
> I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does Audition
> offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?
>
> For what it's worth I'm cleaning up film sound and cutting custom tracks to
> match what the video editor wants. I always start with mono or stereo sound
> or music files. Some live, some ADR, some background ambients. I mostly cut
> to length required plus remove unwanted clicks and pops and whatever. This
> is all wild sound with no SMPTE timecode.
> Cool Edit Pro seems OK for this. Does Audition offer any kind of advantage?
>

You don't say which version of Cool Edit Pro you are using. If you are
still on 1.X then Audition will offer many improvements but if you are
on 2.X then the improvements aren't as obvious. 2.X users get a free
upgrade to Audition 1.0 anyway so there's no reason not to try it. I
still haven't upgraded to 1.5 yet although the officially supported CD
burning and VST plug-in support are the major improvements touted by
Adobe's Marketing.

Cheers.

James.

[James Perrett]

Bill Finch wrote:
>
> I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does Audition
> offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?
>
> For what it's worth I'm cleaning up film sound and cutting custom tracks to
> match what the video editor wants. I always start with mono or stereo sound
> or music files. Some live, some ADR, some background ambients. I mostly cut
> to length required plus remove unwanted clicks and pops and whatever. This
> is all wild sound with no SMPTE timecode.
> Cool Edit Pro seems OK for this. Does Audition offer any kind of advantage?
>

You don't say which version of Cool Edit Pro you are using. If you are
still on 1.X then Audition will offer many improvements but if you are
on 2.X then the improvements aren't as obvious. 2.X users get a free
upgrade to Audition 1.0 anyway so there's no reason not to try it. I
still haven't upgraded to 1.5 yet although the officially supported CD
burning and VST plug-in support are the major improvements touted by
Adobe's Marketing.

Cheers.

James.

[Arny Krueger]

"Bill Finch" > wrote in message


> I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does
> Audition offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?

> For what it's worth I'm cleaning up film sound and cutting custom
> tracks to match what the video editor wants. I always start with mono
> or stereo sound or music files. Some live, some ADR, some background
> ambients. I mostly cut to length required plus remove unwanted clicks
> and pops and whatever. This is all wild sound with no SMPTE timecode.
> Cool Edit Pro seems OK for this. Does Audition offer any kind of
> advantage?

Audition 1.5 is a significant functional improvement over CEP 2.1, if you
need its new features.

http://www.adobe.com/products/audition/newfeatures.html

[Arny Krueger]

"Bill Finch" > wrote in message


> I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does
> Audition offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?

> For what it's worth I'm cleaning up film sound and cutting custom
> tracks to match what the video editor wants. I always start with mono
> or stereo sound or music files. Some live, some ADR, some background
> ambients. I mostly cut to length required plus remove unwanted clicks
> and pops and whatever. This is all wild sound with no SMPTE timecode.
> Cool Edit Pro seems OK for this. Does Audition offer any kind of
> advantage?

Audition 1.5 is a significant functional improvement over CEP 2.1, if you
need its new features.

http://www.adobe.com/products/audition/newfeatures.html

[Norbert Hahn]

"Bill Finch" > wrote:

>I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does Audition
>offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?
>
>For what it's worth I'm cleaning up film sound and cutting custom tracks to
>match what the video editor wants. I always start with mono or stereo sound
>or music files. Some live, some ADR, some background ambients. I mostly cut
>to length required plus remove unwanted clicks and pops and whatever. This
>is all wild sound with no SMPTE timecode.
>Cool Edit Pro seems OK for this. Does Audition offer any kind of advantage?

Audition 1.5 has a couple of more features and some bugs were fixed, thus
the sound quality improved, best noticable at pitch change or time change.
Some new function are not explicitly mentioned (or they existed before
and I didn't notice them) i.e. stereo image rotation in edit mode.
Preroll and postroll for the preview function have been added. A number
of functions that existed before (and required a lot of interaction) are
now easy to access by frequency space editing (in edit mode).

Some newly introduced function do not work as I expected, i.e. automatic
click/pop removal - but that could be a problem with my recording.

New bugs? I haven't found any - that's rare nowadays.

Norbert

[Norbert Hahn]

"Bill Finch" > wrote:

>I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does Audition
>offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?
>
>For what it's worth I'm cleaning up film sound and cutting custom tracks to
>match what the video editor wants. I always start with mono or stereo sound
>or music files. Some live, some ADR, some background ambients. I mostly cut
>to length required plus remove unwanted clicks and pops and whatever. This
>is all wild sound with no SMPTE timecode.
>Cool Edit Pro seems OK for this. Does Audition offer any kind of advantage?

Audition 1.5 has a couple of more features and some bugs were fixed, thus
the sound quality improved, best noticable at pitch change or time change.
Some new function are not explicitly mentioned (or they existed before
and I didn't notice them) i.e. stereo image rotation in edit mode.
Preroll and postroll for the preview function have been added. A number
of functions that existed before (and required a lot of interaction) are
now easy to access by frequency space editing (in edit mode).

Some newly introduced function do not work as I expected, i.e. automatic
click/pop removal - but that could be a problem with my recording.

New bugs? I haven't found any - that's rare nowadays.

Norbert

[tonuk]

Bill Finch wrote:
> I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does Audition
> offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?
>
> For what it's worth I'm cleaning up film sound and cutting custom tracks to
> match what the video editor wants. I always start with mono or stereo sound
> or music files. Some live, some ADR, some background ambients. I mostly cut
> to length required plus remove unwanted clicks and pops and whatever. This
> is all wild sound with no SMPTE timecode.
> Cool Edit Pro seems OK for this. Does Audition offer any kind of advantage?
>
as example you can take only highs or lows (using new marquee selection
tool!) from spectral view and cut&paste to another place or use mix
paste - you can't do it with Cool Edit Pro, I find it sometimes very useful!

[tonuk]

Bill Finch wrote:
> I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does Audition
> offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?
>
> For what it's worth I'm cleaning up film sound and cutting custom tracks to
> match what the video editor wants. I always start with mono or stereo sound
> or music files. Some live, some ADR, some background ambients. I mostly cut
> to length required plus remove unwanted clicks and pops and whatever. This
> is all wild sound with no SMPTE timecode.
> Cool Edit Pro seems OK for this. Does Audition offer any kind of advantage?
>
as example you can take only highs or lows (using new marquee selection
tool!) from spectral view and cut&paste to another place or use mix
paste - you can't do it with Cool Edit Pro, I find it sometimes very useful!

[Ty Ford]

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 08:30:38 -0400, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article >):

> "Bill Finch" > wrote in message
>
>
>> I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does
>> Audition offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?
>
>> For what it's worth I'm cleaning up film sound and cutting custom
>> tracks to match what the video editor wants. I always start with mono
>> or stereo sound or music files. Some live, some ADR, some background
>> ambients. I mostly cut to length required plus remove unwanted clicks
>> and pops and whatever. This is all wild sound with no SMPTE timecode.
>> Cool Edit Pro seems OK for this. Does Audition offer any kind of
>> advantage?
>
> Audition 1.5 is a significant functional improvement over CEP 2.1, if you
> need its new features.
>
> http://www.adobe.com/products/audition/newfeatures.html

Me being a Mac-Only guy, I have a friend who is trying to learn editing on
his 500MHz PC laptop running Windows 2000. Does Windows 2000 do audio well
enough? Any comments as to what 4 to 8 track program he might look at. He
want's to do radio production; voice, music SFX. Cost is somewhat of a
concern.

Regards,

Ty Ford


-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

[Ty Ford]

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 08:30:38 -0400, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article >):

> "Bill Finch" > wrote in message
>
>
>> I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does
>> Audition offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?
>
>> For what it's worth I'm cleaning up film sound and cutting custom
>> tracks to match what the video editor wants. I always start with mono
>> or stereo sound or music files. Some live, some ADR, some background
>> ambients. I mostly cut to length required plus remove unwanted clicks
>> and pops and whatever. This is all wild sound with no SMPTE timecode.
>> Cool Edit Pro seems OK for this. Does Audition offer any kind of
>> advantage?
>
> Audition 1.5 is a significant functional improvement over CEP 2.1, if you
> need its new features.
>
> http://www.adobe.com/products/audition/newfeatures.html

Me being a Mac-Only guy, I have a friend who is trying to learn editing on
his 500MHz PC laptop running Windows 2000. Does Windows 2000 do audio well
enough? Any comments as to what 4 to 8 track program he might look at. He
want's to do radio production; voice, music SFX. Cost is somewhat of a
concern.

Regards,

Ty Ford


-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

[Arny Krueger]

"Ty Ford" > wrote in message

> On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 08:30:38 -0400, Arny Krueger wrote
> (in article >):
>
>> "Bill Finch" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>> I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does
>>> Audition offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?
>>
>>> For what it's worth I'm cleaning up film sound and cutting custom
>>> tracks to match what the video editor wants. I always start with
>>> mono or stereo sound or music files. Some live, some ADR, some
>>> background ambients. I mostly cut to length required plus remove
>>> unwanted clicks and pops and whatever. This is all wild sound with
>>> no SMPTE timecode. Cool Edit Pro seems OK for this. Does Audition
>>> offer any kind of advantage?
>>
>> Audition 1.5 is a significant functional improvement over CEP 2.1,
>> if you need its new features.
>>
>> http://www.adobe.com/products/audition/newfeatures.html
>
> Me being a Mac-Only guy, I have a friend who is trying to learn
> editing on his 500MHz PC laptop running Windows 2000. Does Windows
> 2000 do audio well enough?

It did for me until I upgraded to XP for other reasons.

> Any comments as to what 4 to 8 track
> program he might look at.

For free, there's always Audacity
For not much money, there's N-Track
For the money, there's Audition.
For more money, there's Nuendo

>e want's to do radio production; voice,
> music SFX. Cost is somewhat of a concern.

[Arny Krueger]

"Ty Ford" > wrote in message

> On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 08:30:38 -0400, Arny Krueger wrote
> (in article >):
>
>> "Bill Finch" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>> I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does
>>> Audition offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?
>>
>>> For what it's worth I'm cleaning up film sound and cutting custom
>>> tracks to match what the video editor wants. I always start with
>>> mono or stereo sound or music files. Some live, some ADR, some
>>> background ambients. I mostly cut to length required plus remove
>>> unwanted clicks and pops and whatever. This is all wild sound with
>>> no SMPTE timecode. Cool Edit Pro seems OK for this. Does Audition
>>> offer any kind of advantage?
>>
>> Audition 1.5 is a significant functional improvement over CEP 2.1,
>> if you need its new features.
>>
>> http://www.adobe.com/products/audition/newfeatures.html
>
> Me being a Mac-Only guy, I have a friend who is trying to learn
> editing on his 500MHz PC laptop running Windows 2000. Does Windows
> 2000 do audio well enough?

It did for me until I upgraded to XP for other reasons.

> Any comments as to what 4 to 8 track
> program he might look at.

For free, there's always Audacity
For not much money, there's N-Track
For the money, there's Audition.
For more money, there's Nuendo

>e want's to do radio production; voice,
> music SFX. Cost is somewhat of a concern.

[Bob Cain]

Arny Krueger wrote:


> For free, there's always Audacity
> For not much money, there's N-Track
> For the money, there's Audition.
> For more money, there's Nuendo
>

And somewhere in there is Mackie's Tracktion for $80 which
is remarkably capable and works identically on Mac or PC.
As far as processes, it can do anything you can find a VST
plugin for. It's track editing capabilities are fairly
minimal but mostly sufficient.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

[Bob Cain]

Arny Krueger wrote:


> For free, there's always Audacity
> For not much money, there's N-Track
> For the money, there's Audition.
> For more money, there's Nuendo
>

And somewhere in there is Mackie's Tracktion for $80 which
is remarkably capable and works identically on Mac or PC.
As far as processes, it can do anything you can find a VST
plugin for. It's track editing capabilities are fairly
minimal but mostly sufficient.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

[Geoff Wood]

Bill Finch wrote:
> I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does
> Audition offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?


Well, Adition doesn't give me a stiffy 'per se', but it is the same thing
plus almost a year of extra development. So it could hardly be considered a
step backwards .....

geoff

[Geoff Wood]

Bill Finch wrote:
> I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does
> Audition offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?


Well, Adition doesn't give me a stiffy 'per se', but it is the same thing
plus almost a year of extra development. So it could hardly be considered a
step backwards .....

geoff

[Geoff Wood]

Ty Ford wrote:

>
> Me being a Mac-Only guy,


Wow, that's an open kind of scenario - a bit like being "Neumann-only guy"
! ;-)

>I have a friend who is trying to learn
> editing on his 500MHz PC laptop running Windows 2000. Does Windows
> 2000 do audio well enough?

Not before SP4, no. Anything 24 bit is truncated to 16. And if your PC has
the legs, there is little point in not going XP. Talking about 'legs', I
just got a mobo+2.4 GHz Celeron upgrade for around US$150, which should do
around 80 trax in most apps !

>Any comments as to what 4 to 8 track
> program he might look at. He want's to do radio production; voice,
> music SFX. Cost is somewhat of a concern.


I don't think there are any 4 - 8 traack Windows apps. They prettty much
all do either 2 track only (by design) , or quadzillions of trax, like,
until you run out of steam.

I gather N-track Studio is a good place to start.

geoff

[Geoff Wood]

Ty Ford wrote:

>
> Me being a Mac-Only guy,


Wow, that's an open kind of scenario - a bit like being "Neumann-only guy"
! ;-)

>I have a friend who is trying to learn
> editing on his 500MHz PC laptop running Windows 2000. Does Windows
> 2000 do audio well enough?

Not before SP4, no. Anything 24 bit is truncated to 16. And if your PC has
the legs, there is little point in not going XP. Talking about 'legs', I
just got a mobo+2.4 GHz Celeron upgrade for around US$150, which should do
around 80 trax in most apps !

>Any comments as to what 4 to 8 track
> program he might look at. He want's to do radio production; voice,
> music SFX. Cost is somewhat of a concern.


I don't think there are any 4 - 8 traack Windows apps. They prettty much
all do either 2 track only (by design) , or quadzillions of trax, like,
until you run out of steam.

I gather N-track Studio is a good place to start.

geoff

[Geoff Wood]

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "Ty Ford" > wrote in message
>
>> On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 08:30:38 -0400, Arny Krueger wrote
>> (in article >):
>>
>>> "Bill Finch" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>> I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does
>>>> Audition offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?
>>>
>>>> For what it's worth I'm cleaning up film sound and cutting custom
>>>> tracks to match what the video editor wants. I always start with
>>>> mono or stereo sound or music files. Some live, some ADR, some
>>>> background ambients. I mostly cut to length required plus remove
>>>> unwanted clicks and pops and whatever. This is all wild sound with
>>>> no SMPTE timecode. Cool Edit Pro seems OK for this. Does Audition
>>>> offer any kind of advantage?
>>>
>>> Audition 1.5 is a significant functional improvement over CEP 2.1,
>>> if you need its new features.
>>>
>>> http://www.adobe.com/products/audition/newfeatures.html
>>
>> Me being a Mac-Only guy, I have a friend who is trying to learn
>> editing on his 500MHz PC laptop running Windows 2000. Does Windows
>> 2000 do audio well enough?
>
> It did for me until I upgraded to XP for other reasons.
>
>> Any comments as to what 4 to 8 track
>> program he might look at.
>
> For free, there's always Audacity
> For not much money, there's N-Track
> For the money, there's Audition.
> For more money, there's Nuendo
>
>> e want's to do radio production; voice,
>> music SFX. Cost is somewhat of a concern.

[Geoff Wood]

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "Ty Ford" > wrote in message
>
>> On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 08:30:38 -0400, Arny Krueger wrote
>> (in article >):
>>
>>> "Bill Finch" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>> I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does
>>>> Audition offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?
>>>
>>>> For what it's worth I'm cleaning up film sound and cutting custom
>>>> tracks to match what the video editor wants. I always start with
>>>> mono or stereo sound or music files. Some live, some ADR, some
>>>> background ambients. I mostly cut to length required plus remove
>>>> unwanted clicks and pops and whatever. This is all wild sound with
>>>> no SMPTE timecode. Cool Edit Pro seems OK for this. Does Audition
>>>> offer any kind of advantage?
>>>
>>> Audition 1.5 is a significant functional improvement over CEP 2.1,
>>> if you need its new features.
>>>
>>> http://www.adobe.com/products/audition/newfeatures.html
>>
>> Me being a Mac-Only guy, I have a friend who is trying to learn
>> editing on his 500MHz PC laptop running Windows 2000. Does Windows
>> 2000 do audio well enough?
>
> It did for me until I upgraded to XP for other reasons.
>
>> Any comments as to what 4 to 8 track
>> program he might look at.
>
> For free, there's always Audacity
> For not much money, there's N-Track
> For the money, there's Audition.
> For more money, there's Nuendo
>
>> e want's to do radio production; voice,
>> music SFX. Cost is somewhat of a concern.

[Geoff Wood]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> For free, there's always Audacity
> For not much money, there's N-Track
> For the money, there's Audition.
> For more money, there's Nuendo

And for less money, there's Vegas.

geoff

[Geoff Wood]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> For free, there's always Audacity
> For not much money, there's N-Track
> For the money, there's Audition.
> For more money, there's Nuendo

And for less money, there's Vegas.

geoff

[Leoaw3]

Tonuk wrote:
>Bill Finch wrote:
>> I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does Audition
>> offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?
>>
>> For what it's worth I'm cleaning up film sound and cutting custom tracks to
>> match what the video editor wants. I always start with mono or stereo sound
>> or music files. Some live, some ADR, some background ambients. I mostly cut
>> to length required plus remove unwanted clicks and pops and whatever. This
>> is all wild sound with no SMPTE timecode.
>> Cool Edit Pro seems OK for this. Does Audition offer any kind of advantage?
>>
>as example you can take only highs or lows (using new marquee selection
>tool!) from spectral view and cut&paste to another place or use mix
>paste - you can't do it with Cool Edit Pro, I find it sometimes very useful!

The feature Tonuk is referring to is called "frequency space editing" and it
can be a godsend in particular circumstances - such as removing a cough or
chair squeak or something like that out of a great performance without
affecting the performance. It sounds like it would be helpful in your
situation.

However, the best thing would be to download the *free* trial version and try
it yourself on some of the material. I believe that the chances you'll think
it rocks and does what you need easily make it worth the time and bandwidth.

-lee-

[Leoaw3]

Tonuk wrote:
>Bill Finch wrote:
>> I've been using Cool Edit Pro (and Pro Tools) for a while. Does Audition
>> offer any advantage over Cool Edit Pro?
>>
>> For what it's worth I'm cleaning up film sound and cutting custom tracks to
>> match what the video editor wants. I always start with mono or stereo sound
>> or music files. Some live, some ADR, some background ambients. I mostly cut
>> to length required plus remove unwanted clicks and pops and whatever. This
>> is all wild sound with no SMPTE timecode.
>> Cool Edit Pro seems OK for this. Does Audition offer any kind of advantage?
>>
>as example you can take only highs or lows (using new marquee selection
>tool!) from spectral view and cut&paste to another place or use mix
>paste - you can't do it with Cool Edit Pro, I find it sometimes very useful!

The feature Tonuk is referring to is called "frequency space editing" and it
can be a godsend in particular circumstances - such as removing a cough or
chair squeak or something like that out of a great performance without
affecting the performance. It sounds like it would be helpful in your
situation.

However, the best thing would be to download the *free* trial version and try
it yourself on some of the material. I believe that the chances you'll think
it rocks and does what you need easily make it worth the time and bandwidth.

-lee-

[Bill Finch]

Hi Ty. I have two MAC 2.5 G5 s in a rack. I use them with Final Cut Pro and
Pro Tools for film mixing. They work great - never a problem. I don't
consider myself a MAC guy but these units with OSX are solid like a brick.

I have Windows 2000 Professional installed on a Dell 2 GHz single P4
workstation with a digidesign 001 card and Pro Tools LE and Cool Edit Pro. I
start it up in the morning and shut it down at night. It froze once in the
last two years - my fault - no work lost. Cheap and dependable - no problem
with 8 tracks of 48 KHz audio.

I use an MBOX with MAC Powerbook 15" 1.5GHZ for location wild sound with Pro
Tools LE. This is just two ch. If I need more I feed it with a 1402 Mackie
or small Soundcraft mixer. No problems.

For radio production, W2000 would do quite well. I would buy Audition since
Cool Edit is no longer available.

If your friend is ready to buy, the sales guys at Swee****er are very
patient and know what's good for a price. They will talk all day for free.
Also, BSW specializes in "cheap" radio products. The BSW guys know what
radio folks are doing to save a buck.

Bill Finch

Ty Ford previously wrote:

> Me being a Mac-Only guy, I have a friend who is trying to learn editing on
> his 500MHz PC laptop running Windows 2000. Does Windows 2000 do audio well
> enough? Any comments as to what 4 to 8 track program he might look at. He
> want's to do radio production; voice, music SFX. Cost is somewhat of a
> concern.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ty Ford
>
>
> -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other
audiocentric
> stuff are at www.tyford.com
>

[Bill Finch]

Hi Ty. I have two MAC 2.5 G5 s in a rack. I use them with Final Cut Pro and
Pro Tools for film mixing. They work great - never a problem. I don't
consider myself a MAC guy but these units with OSX are solid like a brick.

I have Windows 2000 Professional installed on a Dell 2 GHz single P4
workstation with a digidesign 001 card and Pro Tools LE and Cool Edit Pro. I
start it up in the morning and shut it down at night. It froze once in the
last two years - my fault - no work lost. Cheap and dependable - no problem
with 8 tracks of 48 KHz audio.

I use an MBOX with MAC Powerbook 15" 1.5GHZ for location wild sound with Pro
Tools LE. This is just two ch. If I need more I feed it with a 1402 Mackie
or small Soundcraft mixer. No problems.

For radio production, W2000 would do quite well. I would buy Audition since
Cool Edit is no longer available.

If your friend is ready to buy, the sales guys at Swee****er are very
patient and know what's good for a price. They will talk all day for free.
Also, BSW specializes in "cheap" radio products. The BSW guys know what
radio folks are doing to save a buck.

Bill Finch

Ty Ford previously wrote:

> Me being a Mac-Only guy, I have a friend who is trying to learn editing on
> his 500MHz PC laptop running Windows 2000. Does Windows 2000 do audio well
> enough? Any comments as to what 4 to 8 track program he might look at. He
> want's to do radio production; voice, music SFX. Cost is somewhat of a
> concern.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ty Ford
>
>
> -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other
audiocentric
> stuff are at www.tyford.com
>

[Blind Joni]

>> For free, there's always Audacity
>> For not much money, there's N-Track
>> For the money, there's Audition.
>> For more money, there's Nuendo
>
>And for less money, there's Vegas.
>

I think Magix Music Studio is only $50.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637

[Blind Joni]

>> For free, there's always Audacity
>> For not much money, there's N-Track
>> For the money, there's Audition.
>> For more money, there's Nuendo
>
>And for less money, there's Vegas.
>

I think Magix Music Studio is only $50.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637

[Ty Ford]

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 13:25:53 -0400, Bill Finch wrote
(in article >):

> Hi Ty. I have two MAC 2.5 G5 s in a rack. I use them with Final Cut Pro and
> Pro Tools for film mixing. They work great - never a problem. I don't
> consider myself a MAC guy but these units with OSX are solid like a brick.
>
> I have Windows 2000 Professional installed on a Dell 2 GHz single P4
> workstation with a digidesign 001 card and Pro Tools LE and Cool Edit Pro. I
> start it up in the morning and shut it down at night. It froze once in the
> last two years - my fault - no work lost. Cheap and dependable - no problem
> with 8 tracks of 48 KHz audio.
>
> I use an MBOX with MAC Powerbook 15" 1.5GHZ for location wild sound with Pro
> Tools LE. This is just two ch. If I need more I feed it with a 1402 Mackie
> or small Soundcraft mixer. No problems.
>
> For radio production, W2000 would do quite well. I would buy Audition since
> Cool Edit is no longer available.
>
> If your friend is ready to buy, the sales guys at Swee****er are very
> patient and know what's good for a price. They will talk all day for free.
> Also, BSW specializes in "cheap" radio products. The BSW guys know what
> radio folks are doing to save a buck.
>
> Bill Finch

Thanks Bill,

How's he learning curve on Audition?

Ty




-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

[Bob Cain]

Ty Ford wrote:

>
> How's he learning curve on Audition?

I became intimate with it as CEP 1.2 without opening the
manual and did so pretty darned quickly. My only prior DAW
had been Cakewalk and I'm far from an interface genius.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

[Hal Laurent]

"Bob Cain" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Ty Ford wrote:
>
> >
> > How's he learning curve on Audition?
>
> I became intimate with it as CEP 1.2 without opening the
> manual and did so pretty darned quickly. My only prior DAW
> had been Cakewalk and I'm far from an interface genius.

Like Bob, I also learned it as CoolEdit Pro. I got CEP and Vegas
at about the same time. In the early days, I found CEP much easier
to figure out. However, once I became more familiar with both
programs I found Vegas much easier to accomplish what I was
trying to accomplish.

Hal Laurent
Baltimore

[Bob Cain]

Hal Laurent wrote:

> Like Bob, I also learned it as CoolEdit Pro. I got CEP and Vegas
> at about the same time. In the early days, I found CEP much easier
> to figure out. However, once I became more familiar with both
> programs I found Vegas much easier to accomplish what I was
> trying to accomplish.

I'll bet that was multi-track related. Do you think the
latest Audition 1.5, or even 1.0, brought it near par?


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

[Steve King]

"Hal Laurent" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Bob Cain" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >
> > Ty Ford wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > How's he learning curve on Audition?
> >
> > I became intimate with it as CEP 1.2 without opening the
> > manual and did so pretty darned quickly. My only prior DAW
> > had been Cakewalk and I'm far from an interface genius.
>
> Like Bob, I also learned it as CoolEdit Pro. I got CEP and Vegas
> at about the same time. In the early days, I found CEP much easier
> to figure out. However, once I became more familiar with both
> programs I found Vegas much easier to accomplish what I was
> trying to accomplish.
>
> Hal Laurent
> Baltimore
>

Man 'o man. I guess that I am going to have to dive into Vegas for audio
production. I've been going on the premise that 'if it's not broke, don't
fix it'. CEP and now Audition has done everything I've asked of it and
more. For someone who, in my first year in the studio business, cobbled
together a four-track machine from old Ampex 300/350/1 parts in the late
60s, computer recording and editing is a miraculous thing. Maybe I've set
my sights too low.

Steve King

[Hal Laurent]

"Bob Cain" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Hal Laurent wrote:
>
> > Like Bob, I also learned it as CoolEdit Pro. I got CEP and Vegas
> > at about the same time. In the early days, I found CEP much easier
> > to figure out. However, once I became more familiar with both
> > programs I found Vegas much easier to accomplish what I was
> > trying to accomplish.
>
> I'll bet that was multi-track related. Do you think the
> latest Audition 1.5, or even 1.0, brought it near par?

I have no idea. I never bothered with the free upgrade
from CEP to Audition, as by then I was quite happy
with Vegas and never used CEP.

Hal Laurent
Baltimore

[Hal Laurent]

"Steve King" > wrote in message
...
> "Hal Laurent" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Bob Cain" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > Ty Ford wrote:
> > >
> > > > How's he learning curve on Audition?
> > >
> > > I became intimate with it as CEP 1.2 without opening the
> > > manual and did so pretty darned quickly. My only prior DAW
> > > had been Cakewalk and I'm far from an interface genius.
> >
> > Like Bob, I also learned it as CoolEdit Pro. I got CEP and Vegas
> > at about the same time. In the early days, I found CEP much easier
> > to figure out. However, once I became more familiar with both
> > programs I found Vegas much easier to accomplish what I was
> > trying to accomplish.
> >
> > Hal Laurent
> > Baltimore
>
> Man 'o man. I guess that I am going to have to dive into Vegas for audio
> production. I've been going on the premise that 'if it's not broke, don't
> fix it'. CEP and now Audition has done everything I've asked of it and
> more.

On the other hand, if you're happy with Audition, then why change? If it's
not broke, then why fix it?

Hal Laurent
Baltimore

[James Perrett]

Geoff Wood wrote:
>
> Ty Ford wrote:

>
> >I have a friend who is trying to learn
> > editing on his 500MHz PC laptop running Windows 2000. Does Windows
> > 2000 do audio well enough?
>
> Not before SP4, no. Anything 24 bit is truncated to 16. And if your PC has
> the legs, there is little point in not going XP.
>


This is only true if you are using the KS Mixer. Many apps don't use it
and will therefore do 24 bits with no problem in Win2k - certainly
Audition will.

Cheers.

James.

[Geoff Wood]

"Steve King" > wrote in message >
> Man 'o man. I guess that I am going to have to dive into Vegas for audio
> production. I've been going on the premise that 'if it's not broke, don't
> fix it'. CEP and now Audition has done everything I've asked of it and
> more. For someone who, in my first year in the studio business, cobbled
> together a four-track machine from old Ampex 300/350/1 parts in the late
> 60s, computer recording and editing is a miraculous thing. Maybe I've set
> my sights too low.


Usually with Vegas, if you can't figure out the way to do something really
easily, it's because it's so straightforward that you were actually looking
for some way harder (!) , if you get what I mean....

Demo available at
http://mediasoftware.sonypictures.com/download/step1.asp?catid=1
Blub at http://mediasoftware.sonypictures.com/products/vegasfamily.asp

If you decide to buy, then the demo changes to real. No need to d/l another.

Tell them I sent you, so I get my commission.

(joke)

geoff

[Peter Larsen]

Norbert Hahn wrote:

[about audition 1.5]

> Some newly introduced function do not work as I expected,
> i.e. automatic click/pop removal - but that could be a problem
> with my recording.

Get the third party Clickfix plugin for it .... it appears to work very
well and very fast, including that automated appears to do a good job.

> Norbert


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************

[Peter Larsen]

Norbert Hahn wrote:

[about audition 1.5]

> Some newly introduced function do not work as I expected,
> i.e. automatic click/pop removal - but that could be a problem
> with my recording.

Get the third party Clickfix plugin for it .... it appears to work very
well and very fast, including that automated appears to do a good job.

> Norbert


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************

[Peter Larsen]

Ty Ford wrote:

> Me being a Mac-Only guy, I have a friend who is trying to learn
> editing on his 500MHz PC laptop running Windows 2000. Does Windows
> 2000 do audio well enough?

Yes. Installing servicepack 4 is strongly recommended.

> Any comments as to what 4 to 8 track program he might look at. He
> want's to do radio production; voice, music SFX. Cost is somewhat
> of a concern.

He *will* run out of steam on a 500 MHz laptop if he tries to do a lot
of tracks, at least with Audition, but it will do a neat job in two
channel mode if he is patient. It will probably do a way better job on a
500 Mhz machine with multiple harddisks, somewhat depending on what he
wants to do.

There is other software out there, and it would have been nice to be
able to suggest an "Audition Lite", but that lineage was discontinued.
The Magix stuff looks interesting, but I haven't actually tried it,
partly because their webshop assumed that someone wanting a german
version also wanted it delivered to a german address - or some
such/similar error - months ago now, it may be fixed.

> Ty Ford


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************

[Peter Larsen]

Ty Ford wrote:

> Me being a Mac-Only guy, I have a friend who is trying to learn
> editing on his 500MHz PC laptop running Windows 2000. Does Windows
> 2000 do audio well enough?

Yes. Installing servicepack 4 is strongly recommended.

> Any comments as to what 4 to 8 track program he might look at. He
> want's to do radio production; voice, music SFX. Cost is somewhat
> of a concern.

He *will* run out of steam on a 500 MHz laptop if he tries to do a lot
of tracks, at least with Audition, but it will do a neat job in two
channel mode if he is patient. It will probably do a way better job on a
500 Mhz machine with multiple harddisks, somewhat depending on what he
wants to do.

There is other software out there, and it would have been nice to be
able to suggest an "Audition Lite", but that lineage was discontinued.
The Magix stuff looks interesting, but I haven't actually tried it,
partly because their webshop assumed that someone wanting a german
version also wanted it delivered to a german address - or some
such/similar error - months ago now, it may be fixed.

> Ty Ford


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************

[Al]

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 23:01:32 +1200, "Geoff Wood"
-nospam> wrote:
>
>Well, Adition doesn't give me a stiffy 'per se', but it is the same thing
>plus almost a year of extra development. So it could hardly be considered a
>step backwards .....
>
>geoff


I didn't appreciate that they raised the upgrade price from $100 to
$169 while I was considering it. They don't show upgrading to 1.0 as
an option.

For that price I could buy a 250 GB hard disk or 1 GB of memory.
Pretty spendy for a software upgrade that I paid a sum for originally.

[Leoaw3]

The latest Audition includes a number of new functions like frequency space
editing, and an autotune like function that would cost you about $200 as a
plugin.

-lee-

[Laurence Payne]

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:04:20 GMT, (Al) wrote:

>>Well, Adition doesn't give me a stiffy 'per se', but it is the same thing
>>plus almost a year of extra development. So it could hardly be considered a
>>step backwards .....
>>
>>geoff
>
>
>I didn't appreciate that they raised the upgrade price from $100 to
>$169 while I was considering it. They don't show upgrading to 1.0 as
>an option.

There's some nifty new features in Audition 1.5. But if the
functions included in Cool Edit are all you need, Audition won't do
them any better or worse than CE did.

CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm
"Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect