Audacity - is it any good?

[Tricky-Loops]

Audacity is good, but not so good as the pro stuff...

If I want to use VST, I always go for Wavosaur - for example, I cannot load a single VST into Audacity, it wants them all in ONE folder in the Audacity directory. And I think there is no preview, is there?

But I like Audacity for simple tasks, especially cutting or inserting silence or DC-offset-correction.

With Audacity and Wavosaur I can do very much - except mastering.

[trimph1]

Yeah...for mastering it really is not that good.

But for simple audio processing it is pretty good at that.

[SampleScience]

Wavosaur is my to go wav editor. Oceanaudio looks cool though, I'll give it a try (since I'm an audio app. junky!)

[Syncretia]

Probably can't add to much to this, but the question is quite dubious from the beginning.

There's no such thing as a "good" or "bad" editor. You have to really evaluate it's individual functions. I use it all the time to convert my music to MP3 (with the LAME plugin). However, I would never apply any of Audacity's inbuilt FX like compression for example. I tried the compressor once, and the threshold was so I high it squashed the !#$# out of everything and the threshold was too hard to adjust.

I'd say that if you wanted to mix, or do other things in Audacity, it would be as good as any other editing tool out there. Try googling "audacity summing engine" to see if there are tests to compare its mixing to other DAWs/editors. They all basically seem to be the same to me.

[cryophonik]

In my line of work, we have a saying:

Good, fast, cheap. Pick two.

I think that applies here as well. Audacity is cheap (well, free) and it's fast, in terms of workflow, due to its simplicity. In the grand scheme of audio editors, however, it does the basic jobs, but I wouldn't call it good.

[pljones]

I tried the compressor once, and the threshold was so I high it squashed the !#$# out of everything and the threshold was too hard to adjust.

I used to avoid it too... but recently I seem to have found it invaluable. It's not flattening my mixes any more than I'm asking it to (I've got "based on peaks" checked). It's still a little weird, admittedly, as it seems to apply make up gain even if you don't ask for it. I'm wondering if it improved greatly between 1.2.x and 1.3.x(beta) as I switched a while back.

[Tex Ariox]

My biggest bugbear with it is that you can't grab and move the edge of a selection.

You can in Audacity 2.0.

[pljones]

You can in 1.3.x, too.

[chk071]

For audio editing i found Audacity pretty circuitious and unusual in handling. Which is both pretty bad... for example there is no such thing as markers, which is quite essential for me. Also you gotta have to install a bridge to be able to use VST plugins e.g. I just can compare to Wavelab, which is a bliss in terms of handling compared, i wished smaller developers would take a look at those programs which are standards since years and try to implement the most useful functions but no...

[pljones]

At the time Audacity adopted the bridge approach, it was the only way to avoid breach of their own licence...

[alvfaria]

I really like the Edison editor included in FL Studio but the VST version costs too much moolah. Heck, I'd buy that if Image Line reduced the cost or did a decent special on it. Anyone from Image Line listening?

+1

[tropicalontour]

It's my go to editor for quick and dirty edits, but there is little by way of help to teach you how to get the very best out of it. I find it a bit clunky to operate and I don't think the VST implementation cuts it, to be honest. I would not use it for mastering.

[suecae_sounds]

I love it for what it is, and do not wish it to be something it is not. It gets the job done, if I'm not out for something esoteric or need ASIO.