"=(8888)=" wrote in message
...
"Arny Krueger" emitted :

We don't all have to fawn over the same application.

Agreed.

However, it's not always all about fawning. It's also about having a
job to do and whether a product has the necessary features.

I sort of stumbled into CE some years ago, and just it kept meeting
my needs. CE was an early implementer of 24 & 32 bits, and still
offers unsurpassed support for far higher sample rates. I believe
that SF 5, which followed CEP by a year or more, was the first SF
to support 24/96.

I have briefly used a lite verison of SF, but really didn't see
enough of a difference to justify switching.

There appears to have been a period of a year or more when CE
supported far more data formats and higher sample rates than SF.
OTOH, SF has long appeared to have an integrated CD burning feature
that Adobe has not yet made available in Audition, after a promising
beta release from Syntrillium in CE2.

Sound Forge is more commonly used (preferred) in professional audio
circles, but don't let that bother you.

Opinion stated as fact.

False. It's an accurate observation.

Like I said though, don't let it bother you.


--
S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t



Sound Forge was recommended to me by several professionals whom i trust that
were volunteering at the same community radio station I was doing my jazz
show at. In fact, it was they who convinced me to record my little show on
the computer rather than open reel. That was a long time ago. I have
upgraded it ever since and own most of the plugins for it also. I like the
noise reduction thingy, I really think it's right up there with cedar and
used it to transcribe many old jazz records the sation gave me (that's how
they paid people for their 'volunteer' work.)
I am sure others have preferances, but I just thought I would mention mine.

Carl