Why no cheap or free audio editors for Windows?
-
- KVRAF
- 6740 posts since 25 Mar, 2002 from sheffield, england
-
- KVRian
- 717 posts since 30 Apr, 2004 from Jerusalem, Israel
No, it leads to page with 2 links:kovacs wrote:Actually, that link leads to adobe. Try this instead:scamme wrote:Cool edit 2000 still can be found here:
http://www.sonicspot.com/cooledit/cooledit.html
http://www.softpedia.com/get/Multimedia ... -Pro.shtml
1.home page
2. direct link to coll edit 2000 download (http://files1.sonicspot.com/cooledit/ce2kmain.exe)
-
deleted deleted https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=1
DELETED
- KVRAF
- 2744 posts since 5 Dec, 2003 from Harlan's World
Yes...it gives you a trial. Sorry.headquest wrote:That one leads to a site where you can buy the old Cool Edit Pro for $299. The price of the latest Audition is not much more than that
I guess it's hard to find the old non-$299 version these days.
My Soundcloud Too many pieces of music finish far too long after the end. - Stravinsky
-
- KVRAF
- 4908 posts since 10 Aug, 2004 from Colorado Springs
Scamme:scamme wrote:rockstar_not wrote:Exactly. This is a great audio editor - free - no VST, but does support DX - and has about a million file types that it can shuttle back and forth between.
-Scott
'Goldwave' - is NOT free. I think it's evaluational for some time and then it stops to output audio.
If this happens to you. Delete it; re-install; evaluate again. Besides, it's cheap if you want to pay for it. I only use it a couple times per year since I do most of my audio editing right inside my host, but it's a great program nonetheless.
And it's completely legal. I'm not so sure about the Cool Edit 2000 being legal.
-Scott
-
- KVRAF
- 4908 posts since 10 Aug, 2004 from Colorado Springs
FYI,
You can still find cool edit 96, which was a completely non-nag version of this program, still worth it's salt as an audio editor. Whether that version is legal or not, I don't know. I won't provide the link, but just to let you know it's available.
I used to use it as even back then it had a pretty nice time and pitch stretch algorithm as an off-line process.
But GoldWave is doing it for me now. And if you want to buy after the very generous trial, it costs only 55 CDN, or about $48 US.
For what it's worth - it was a dark day in DSP-land when Adobe bought Syntrillium.
-Scott
You can still find cool edit 96, which was a completely non-nag version of this program, still worth it's salt as an audio editor. Whether that version is legal or not, I don't know. I won't provide the link, but just to let you know it's available.
I used to use it as even back then it had a pretty nice time and pitch stretch algorithm as an off-line process.
But GoldWave is doing it for me now. And if you want to buy after the very generous trial, it costs only 55 CDN, or about $48 US.
For what it's worth - it was a dark day in DSP-land when Adobe bought Syntrillium.
-Scott
-
Stupid American Pig Stupid American Pig https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=4753
- KVRAF
- 7065 posts since 25 Nov, 2002 from not sure
Just curious, but why does every one master out side of their host- I cant think of a single thing some audio editor could do that I couldnt do in Sonar to the entire project before rendering. Im genuinely curious as to why- so please enlighten me.
- KVRAF
- 1577 posts since 20 May, 2002 from Cambridge, UK
Personally I concentrate on getting the mix right in the host, than render the file and often master it later. It's quicker and easier in an audio editor and there's no danger of screwing up the mix
THIS IS MY MUSIC: https://spti.fi/rZyjX7i 
-
- KVRian
- 882 posts since 12 Mar, 2002 from London - UK
I don't, I render to a file then re-import that to a new project (in SX3) and add any master effects etc there.Stupid American Pig wrote:Just curious, but why does every one master out side of their host-
- KVRAF
- 2744 posts since 5 Dec, 2003 from Harlan's World
I don't. I don't actually master my tracks, I usually just render them, using mastering plugs at the end of the chain in the master output in Ableton Live.Stupid American Pig wrote:Just curious, but why does every one master out side of their host
My Soundcloud Too many pieces of music finish far too long after the end. - Stravinsky
-
Stupid American Pig Stupid American Pig https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=4753
- KVRAF
- 7065 posts since 25 Nov, 2002 from not sure
Ok Im not that crazy then. The big sequencers these days have the mastering/remixing tools built in, so I dont really see a need for sound forge or wavelab really.
- KVRAF
- 1577 posts since 20 May, 2002 from Cambridge, UK
what about normalising, chopping the ends off or doing graphical fades? can you see the waveform of what you're actually working on?
THIS IS MY MUSIC: https://spti.fi/rZyjX7i 
- GRRRRRRR!
- 17879 posts since 14 Jun, 2001 from Somewhere you're not!
Maybe it is for exactly the reasons I said - because if you can do that stuff just as easily in your host it is not a priority for an audio editor, particulary given that I doubt Steinberg ever inteded for the VST standard to be applied to non-realtime environments.ermi wrote:I don't understand why the situation is like this.
You will find that Audition is actually based on Cool Edit Pro which was always multi-track.headquest wrote:No... and yes. The developer sold to Adobe, who renamed it Audition. They have also added a ton of features developing it far beyond its original sample editing features... it is now a 128-track multitrack audio recording, editing, mixing and mastering suite, complete with VST, DX and ReWire support.
In fact I didn't think that there was a whole lot added in CE2k over '96 so its still a pretty solid choice [except for lack of DX plugins but there is a plugin for CE2k that might also work in '96].rockstar_not wrote:You can still find cool edit 96, which was a completely non-nag version of this program, still worth it's salt as an audio editor.
I am really surprised how well Adobe have treated Audition. It is slightly cheaper than CEPro was and they have not tried to skrew with the workflow. If I needed any of the extra stuff it has I would buy it in a heartbeat.For what it's worth - it was a dark day in DSP-land when Adobe bought Syntrillium.
Maybe your host has better metering than mine but I really need the accuracy of an audio editor to make sure everything is properly normalised. Its also much quicker and easier to to work with for many tasks.Stupid American Pig wrote:Just curious, but why does every one master out side of their host- I cant think of a single thing some audio editor could do that I couldnt do in Sonar to the entire project before rendering. Im genuinely curious as to why- so please enlighten me.
NOVAkILL : Legion GO, AMD Z1x, 16GB RAM, Win11 | Audient EVO 8 | Lumi Keys | Studio Pro 8
Korg Odyssey, bx-oberhausen, Proxima, PolyMax, GR8, JP6K, Union, Atomika,
Invader 2, Flow Motion, Olga, TRK 01, Thorn, Spire, VG Iron
Korg Odyssey, bx-oberhausen, Proxima, PolyMax, GR8, JP6K, Union, Atomika,
Invader 2, Flow Motion, Olga, TRK 01, Thorn, Spire, VG Iron
-
- KVRist
- 358 posts since 2 Dec, 2002
Don't forget "Computer Muzys" that you get from the cover CD of every issue of Computer Magazine. It's a sequencer/VST host foremost but includes a decent wave editor, imho. You can do all the VST stacking you want! I'm missing a stereo view of the wave though...
-
- KVRAF
- 7489 posts since 6 Jul, 2004
A good audio editor lets you do things to an audio file which in a sequencer would be either:
A. Impossible. e.g.
* destrucitve editing
* Audition's frequency spectrum editing where you remove or add effects to certain specified frequencies only, etc)
* snapping to a zero-crossing when selecting or slicing, which is important but impossible in either of the big hosts I own
or B: Difficult, and/or expensive plugs required (i.e. Waves, etc) ...e.g.
* Noise reduction - getting rid of hum, crackle, lead noise, etc
* Audio restoration
Also its worth noting that the effects that come bundled in Audition and SoundForge (for example) are worth the price of the software alone!
A. Impossible. e.g.
* destrucitve editing
* Audition's frequency spectrum editing where you remove or add effects to certain specified frequencies only, etc)
* snapping to a zero-crossing when selecting or slicing, which is important but impossible in either of the big hosts I own
or B: Difficult, and/or expensive plugs required (i.e. Waves, etc) ...e.g.
* Noise reduction - getting rid of hum, crackle, lead noise, etc
* Audio restoration
Also its worth noting that the effects that come bundled in Audition and SoundForge (for example) are worth the price of the software alone!

