Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default What Software for Editing Sound on PC

"Geoff Wood" -nospam wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:


Here's a news flash Valle - CE/Audition also has wave form synthesis
and a spectrum analyzer. So they aren't valid reasons to prefer SF.


One could easily prefer SF's versions, so it ain't a reason to prefer

CE/A either.

Agreed. While both products have these features, significant details of
their implementations might vary. For example, in former discussions there
were some ease-of-use differences in the implementation of normalization
that favored WL for less-experienced users.

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.

I believe that possibly Wavelab has the edge on SF in functionality.


Wavelab appears to have be RAM-based while SF & CE/Audition are disk-based.
This gives WL a speed advantage for small files. Regrettably it appears that
WL is merely a stereo product, and you have to look elsewhere in the
Steinberg line for multitracking.

Looking at Steinberg's line of products, it seems that it would take Cubase
+ Nuendo + Wavelab to compare to Audition.

But I prefer SF's user interface and way of working.


During my brief experience with SF, I was struck by how similar the programs
were for the features that both implemented.



 
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
Why do the speakers sound so bad? Trev Worsey Car Audio 3 May 25th 04 03:33 PM
SPAM New software for vehicles: MyRide thelizman Car Audio 4 February 16th 04 01:50 AM
Amps, more argument! Steve Grauman Car Audio 192 February 14th 04 04:17 PM
What Software for Editing Sound on PC SPS22 General 122 January 27th 04 12:58 AM
Audio amplifier design trivial? John Atkinson Audio Opinions 166 November 14th 03 07:34 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:24 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"