KVR Audio

dirtnap · Post by **dirtnap** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 4:54 pm

They better get busy. Wavelab 6 will be out in 5 months. Audition 1.5 was an improvement to 1.0, but they went into the wrong direction with it(as far us audio editing goes). Their objective with it is to turn it into a full blown multitrack and that's the plain truth. 2.0 might be something to reckon with. But hey... i just want a damn audio editor. Got enough multitrack sequencers, thankyou very much Adobe.

headquest · Post by **headquest** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 5:07 pm

Yes, I agree with you, dirtnap.

bastien · Post by **bastien** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 5:25 pm

I'm glad it's still going, hell, I'm using it right now for some Vinyl restoration work.

I can't even remember how long ago I got Cool Edit 2000 (1997 perhaps)? The upgrade to Audition 1 was a very good deal, but I have to say I've not felt compelled to upgrade to 1.5. As previous posters have said, the multitrack stuff is a 'nice to have' for me, as a different way of doing edits. I certianly wouldn't do sequencing with it as there are many other, better apps for that.

So 2.0 better be summat special to persuade me (and that won't be Premiere integration, I'm afraid, I've got Sony for that sort of thing).

BONES · Post by **BONES** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 5:59 pm

Strangely enough, Cool Edit 2000 came out in 2000, just as Cool Edit 95, its predescessor, came out in 1995.

Hink wrote:no mattter what AA still has some killer features...frequency band splitting, great noise reduction, an easy learning curve with a great work flow...I would like per track meters though...and "locking" fx takes quite a while...I would upgrade if it wasn't too exspensive (under 200) though Sonar 5 now gets more use...

That strikes me as completely weird. I really don't understand how you can compare a sequencer with an audio editor at all. My sequencer has about 1.5 features in common with my audio editor, which is precisely how it should be. I canno timagine why I would want an audio editor that needed ASIO drivers. Mine works fine as a non-realtime, destructive editing type thingy with a completely different arsenal of effects. Horses for courses.

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 7:00 pm

BONES wrote:Strangely enough, Cool Edit 2000 came out in 2000, just as Cool Edit 95, its predescessor, came out in 1995.
Hink wrote:no mattter what AA still has some killer features...frequency band splitting, great noise reduction, an easy learning curve with a great work flow...I would like per track meters though...and "locking" fx takes quite a while...I would upgrade if it wasn't too exspensive (under 200) though Sonar 5 now gets more use...
That strikes me as completely weird. I really don't understand how you can compare a sequencer with an audio editor at all. My sequencer has about 1.5 features in common with my audio editor, which is precisely how it should be. I canno timagine why I would want an audio editor that needed ASIO drivers. Mine works fine as a non-realtime, destructive editing type thingy with a completely different arsenal of effects. Horses for courses.

I wasn't comparing the audio editor to anything...you misunderstood. Until I got Sonar, AA was also my multi-tracker as well. I think it odd to compare CE2K with basically cool edit pro...which is what AA1.5 is...cool edit pro with updated features. Now I find that Sonar has some advantages over AA for multi-tracking, so now I am using AA mostly as an editor, FL mostly as a sequencer and Sonar to record my guitar and voal tracks. But trust me AA is much more then just an editor.

Of course that isn't set in stone and the three can work all together or seperate. But I usually start a tune in FL, record some audio parts in Sonar 5, edit the waves in AA (I have a couple scripts)...however if the time comes where I got the song with vocals and my guitar parts and I decide the organ should be changed or it needs a synth part I can add it to my multi-track project in sonar, instead of going back to FL. So as I find Sonar just a little better at multi-tracking then AA it has replaced that need for which I was using AA for the most part.

I have only had Sonar since 5 came out, but I suspect that AA will also be where I master as well...does that make any more sense now?

TVD · Post by **TVD** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 7:10 pm

Hink wrote:
BONES wrote:Strangely enough, Cool Edit 2000 came out in 2000, just as Cool Edit 95, its predescessor, came out in 1995.
Hink wrote:no mattter what AA still has some killer features...frequency band splitting, great noise reduction, an easy learning curve with a great work flow...I would like per track meters though...and "locking" fx takes quite a while...I would upgrade if it wasn't too exspensive (under 200) though Sonar 5 now gets more use...
That strikes me as completely weird. I really don't understand how you can compare a sequencer with an audio editor at all. My sequencer has about 1.5 features in common with my audio editor, which is precisely how it should be. I canno timagine why I would want an audio editor that needed ASIO drivers. Mine works fine as a non-realtime, destructive editing type thingy with a completely different arsenal of effects. Horses for courses.
I wasn't comparing the audio editor to anything...you misunderstood. Until I got Sonar, AA was also my multi-tracker as well. I think it odd to compare CE2K with basically cool edit pro...which is what AA1.5 is...cool edit pro with updated features. Now I find that Sonar has some advantages over AA for multi-tracking, so now I am using AA mostly as an editor, FL mostly as a sequencer and Sonar to record my guitar and voal tracks. But trust me AA is much more then just an editor.

Of course that isn't set in stone and the three can work all together or seperate. But I usually start a tune in FL, record some audio parts in Sonar 5, edit the waves in AA (I have a couple scripts)...however if the time comes where I got the song with vocals and my guitar parts and I decide the organ should be changed or it needs a synth part I can add it to my multi-track project in sonar, instead of going back to FL. So as I find Sonar just a little better at multi-tracking then AA it has replaced that need for which I was using AA for the most part.

I have only had Sonar since 5 came out, but I suspect that AA will also be where I master as well...does that make any more sense now?

Short summary of what Hink is saying:

FL Studio.......for drum & MIDI programming

Sonar 5......for guitar, organ, & vocal recordings

Audition......for final audio editing & mastering.

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 7:16 pm

Basically...

TVD · Post by **TVD** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 7:16 pm

chardin wrote:Adobe is going to buy Macromedia, maker of Flash. I wonder if that has slowed things down a bit.

I think so!

I can only imagine a future Audition 2.0 as a Cool Edit meets Flash Player-like technology.

I think it will be a great thing as long as Rewire is still included.

TVD · Post by **TVD** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 7:21 pm

headquest wrote:Hi.

If the grapevine is to be believed, Audition 2.0 has been beta testing for a few months, and will be with us soon

However, the release will be tied in with the release of Premier Po 2.0 and Encore 2.0, all of which are components of the Adobe Video Collection package.

Lips are definitely sealed about what will be new in Audition 2.0, although ASIO support is widely expected by the user-base, as is better VST support. At present VSTs only work if their developers follow the rules of the VST spec very closely!

Whether or not you are bothered by any of this probably depends on where Audition sits in your workflow. If you want to use it as a sequencer then I think it's fair to say that programs like Sonar and Ableton Live are moving much faster. Multitrack is more advanced in Audition than it is in any of the other audio editing suites... but this "added bonus" (so far as I am concerned) means that some people inevitably try to use it alone, rather than alongside a fully-featured MIDI/Audio DAW.

I personally find AA 1.5 to be an outstanding piece of software, and I have had hardly any problems at all with it. And I do use it for multitrack recording and editing... although I mostly tend to use Ableton as my main sequencing host.

Hi Headquest!

You have a "perfect" studio set-up by using Live & Audition via Rewire.

birrbits · Post by **birrbits** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 10:54 pm

BONES wrote:I canno timagine why I would want an audio editor that needed ASIO drivers. Mine works fine as a non-realtime, destructive editing type thingy with a completely different arsenal of effects.

AA needs ASIO:
Punch-in recording in AA is fantastic, especially for multiple quick takes. I have yet to see a sequencer come close. But, you can't preview effects (in realtime) on the dry signal you are recording.

As far as having a fully featured midi sequncer in AA? No thanks, but I wouldn't mind the ability to play/record a VSTi in realtime...(audio not midi)

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 11:06 pm

birrbits wrote:
BONES wrote:I canno timag
AA needs ASIO:
Punch-in recording in AA is fantastic, especially for multiple quick takes. I have yet to see a sequencer come close. But, you can't preview effects (in realtime) on the dry signal you are recording.

As far as having a fully featured midi sequncer in AA? No thanks, but I wouldn't mind the ability to [/img]play/record a VSTi in realtime...(audio not midi)

I agree, but AA has another cool feature for recording...if you make blocks (generate silence) and insert them into the multi-track view like below, arm all the tracks, in one take it will only record in the blocks each pass through. Hilite the area around it for loop record and enable multiple takes and quickly you'll see how cool this is...you don't even need the autopunch...which is a great autopunch, but not much different then any other...

birrbits · Post by **birrbits** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 11:21 pm

holy cow that is absolutely sick Hink!
I will try it out soon, thanks!

Its the looping/multiple-take function of the autopunch that makes it stand out for me, letting the waves stack up in the same spot take after take or sending them each to thier own track.

kevink · Post by **kevink** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 11:41 pm

I evaluated Cool Edit Pro at the same time as I evaluated Sonar 2. I thought CEP was great - it even ran on my ancient Win98 laptop with 64M of RAM! At the time, I wasn't into soft-synths, but I needed at least some basic MIDI sequencing capability for a drum machine, and since CEP couldn't handle that, I went with Sonar as a host. After a couple of months, I bought CEP anyway, for use in 100% audio projects, and mastering my Sonar projects.

But after a year or so, I started using Sonar more and more for audio due to just one stupid defect in CEP/AA: it won't let me bind my Kenton MIDI control surface to the console controls. When I'm working on a mix, I really, really like to be able to simultaneously shift the level of a couple of tracks. Sonar and most other MIDI-oriented hosts can be trivially set up to work with just about any MIDI control surface, but AA 1.5 can only handle a couple of oddball/proprietary ones.

If they put a "MIDI learn" function into the controls of AA 2.0, I'll upgrade in a second.

BONES · Post by **BONES** » Thu Nov 24, 2005 3:41 am

Hink wrote:I think it odd to compare CE2K with basically cool edit pro...which is what AA1.5 is...cool edit pro with updated features.

That's because you never used it with the Mixer Plugin.

I have only had Sonar since 5 came out, but I suspect that AA will also be where I master as well...does that make any more sense now?

No. Working with more than one host never makes any sense to me at all.

birrbits wrote:AA needs ASIO Punch-in recording in AA is fantastic, especially for multiple quick takes.

CE2l doesn't need ASIO and its punch-in is probably a) the same and b) actually relevant in that it only has 4 stereo track. Whereas your average sequencer/host/editor has unlimited tracks so you can just do your retakes on a new track. Punch in/out is far less relevant now than in was in a 16-track studio.

I have yet to see a sequencer come close. But, you can't preview effects (in realtime) on the dry signal you are recording.

Wouldn't want to but that's just because I only use it to record vocals.

bastien · Post by **bastien** » Thu Nov 24, 2005 4:56 am

BONES wrote:Strangely enough, Cool Edit 2000 came out in 2000, just as Cool Edit 95, its predescessor, came out in 1995.

Well f**k me sideways, it seems like longer than that... I must have been pissing about with that 'choose two features' box for longer than I've remembered.

Adobe Audition disapointment