Any opinions regarding one vs. the other as an audio editor/mastering app?
-U
Audition vs. Sound Forge
-
- KVRAF
- 7489 posts since 6 Jul, 2004
I tried the demos of both and then chose/bought Adobe Audition.
At that time though, Sound forge did not host VST effects while Audition did. Audition was also cheaper back then (since then the price of SF has dropped), and has multitrack audio recording/mixing capabilities that sound forge lacks.
Having said all that I would almost certainly still go for Audition of the two, because the noise reduction is so much better, as are the effects in general, and frequency spectrum editing is very cool. I think that Audition overall has a lot more to offer.
Sony also seem to get quite a bad rap.
At that time though, Sound forge did not host VST effects while Audition did. Audition was also cheaper back then (since then the price of SF has dropped), and has multitrack audio recording/mixing capabilities that sound forge lacks.
Having said all that I would almost certainly still go for Audition of the two, because the noise reduction is so much better, as are the effects in general, and frequency spectrum editing is very cool. I think that Audition overall has a lot more to offer.
Sony also seem to get quite a bad rap.
-
- KVRAF
- 2861 posts since 3 May, 2003 from Germany
Audition has multitrack-function (up to 128 Tracks), Soundforge not! I would choose Audition, it's capable of mored functions and (I believe) cheaper.
Symphony Nr.1
Meet the Cities Repair Team Unimportant laughter
music has become meaningless...we just keep doing it
Meet the Cities Repair Team Unimportant laughter
music has become meaningless...we just keep doing it
-
- KVRist
- 58 posts since 9 Oct, 2005 from ZGB
Sound Forge 8 - without any doubt!
SF is 2x faster than Audition, and btw. can host VST FX (I really don't care what was few years ago).
The only important thing that SF can't do, in this duel vs. Audition, is multitrack. But if you use any type of sequencer/multitrack host you just don't care about that.
In every other thing SF is better/equal and sooooooooooooo muuuuuuuuuuuch faster
and one more thing:
Adobe Audition - $299.00
Soound Forge - $299.96
Audition IS cheaper
****************
SF is 2x faster than Audition, and btw. can host VST FX (I really don't care what was few years ago).
The only important thing that SF can't do, in this duel vs. Audition, is multitrack. But if you use any type of sequencer/multitrack host you just don't care about that.
In every other thing SF is better/equal and sooooooooooooo muuuuuuuuuuuch faster
and one more thing:
Adobe Audition - $299.00
Soound Forge - $299.96
Audition IS cheaper
****************
-
- KVRian
- 1469 posts since 18 Sep, 2004 from Suffolk, UK
Er, Audition can host VST FX and is no slouch either. I don't know where you get the "2x" faster claim from. Do you have some accurate bench test results ?cornix wrote:Sound Forge 8 - without any doubt!
SF is 2x faster than Audition, and btw. can host VST FX (I really don't care what was few years ago).
The only thing that SF can't do, in this duel vs. Audition, is multitrack. But if you use any type of sequencer/multitrack host you just don't care about that.
In every other thing SF is better/equal and sooooooooooooo muuuuuuuuuuuch faster
and one more thing:
Adobe Audition - $299.00
Soound Forge - $299.96
Audition IS cheaper
[/b]
I used to like Soundforge, but Audition is way more intuitive and quicker to use. I particularly like it's noise reduction algorithms.
Audition for me
-
- KVRAF
- 4222 posts since 23 Feb, 2004 from Tucson Arizona USA
Faster at what? Rendering effects? Writing the audio to file?cornix wrote: SF is 2x faster than Audition
Unless, of course, you *do* care about that.The only important thing that SF can't do, in this duel vs. Audition, is multitrack. But if you use any type of sequencer/multitrack host you just don't care about that.
-
- KVRAF
- 10815 posts since 26 Nov, 2004 from UK
IMO SF is better for chopping up a audio file
you can also highlight a part of a audio file then drag & drop it to make a new audio file
i prefer SF
but i multi track in T2
PS i own nither of them
Subz
you can also highlight a part of a audio file then drag & drop it to make a new audio file
i prefer SF
but i multi track in T2
PS i own nither of them
Subz
-
- KVRist
- 58 posts since 9 Oct, 2005 from ZGB
For the start - opening files... and it's not some kind of "accurate bench test" it's simple test: my experience. Let's test that again... 45 MB wav file (16b 44.100) on SF.... 4 sec....... Audition...... same file.................................... 7 sec. hm... you are right. SF is not 2x faster.james0tucson wrote:
Faster at what? Rendering effects? Writing the audio to file?
That's true.james0tucson wrote: Unless, of course, you *do* care about that.
no way m8. no way...Lovesign wrote:Audition is way more intuitive and quicker to use.
Unfocused. Try demos and buy ........... SF8
-
- KVRAF
- 10815 posts since 26 Nov, 2004 from UK
-
- KVRAF
- 2861 posts since 3 May, 2003 from Germany
Ah yes, thx lovesign, I forgot: The noisereduction / noiseprofiling is very nice and helpful. I don't think either that soundforge is faster 
Yes I used soundforge too, but not anymore. Audition rules
Yes I used soundforge too, but not anymore. Audition rules
Symphony Nr.1
Meet the Cities Repair Team Unimportant laughter
music has become meaningless...we just keep doing it
Meet the Cities Repair Team Unimportant laughter
music has become meaningless...we just keep doing it
-
- KVRAF
- 7489 posts since 6 Jul, 2004
+2
Having said that, depending on your host you may not need an audio editor at all - some of the bigger hosts now include most of this stuff as standard (I just got Sonar 5 PE and it does most of what I need without ever opening Audition. However, when using Ableton Live I regularly use Audition alongside it.)
Having said that, depending on your host you may not need an audio editor at all - some of the bigger hosts now include most of this stuff as standard (I just got Sonar 5 PE and it does most of what I need without ever opening Audition. However, when using Ableton Live I regularly use Audition alongside it.)
-
- KVRian
- 1469 posts since 18 Sep, 2004 from Suffolk, UK
WOAH THERE NEDDY !!cornix wrote:For the start - opening files... and it's not some kind of "accurate bench test" it's simple test: my experience. Let's test that again... 45 MB wav file (16b 44.100) on SF.... 4 sec....... Audition...... same file.................................... 7 sec. hm... you are right. SF is not 2x faster.
A whole 3 secs ???? Well, that's it, I'm convinced. My whole studio time will be drastically reduced
cornix wrote:no way m8. no way...Lovesign wrote:Audition is way more intuitive and quicker to use.
Way !
cornix wrote:Unfocused
cornix wrote:Try demos and buy ........... SF8
Already bought and regretted, which is why I stick with Audition. SF8 is a good editor, but for what I do and my way of working, Audition is my weapon of choice. If we were all the same, there would be no internet forum arguments
-
- KVRAF
- 7489 posts since 6 Jul, 2004
YIKES!!Lovesign wrote: If we were all the same, there would be no internet forum arguments
Then we'd all have to go get ourselves a life!
-
- KVRian
- 1469 posts since 18 Sep, 2004 from Suffolk, UK
Scary, ain't itheadquest wrote:YIKES!!Lovesign wrote: If we were all the same, there would be no internet forum arguments
Then we'd all have to go get ourselves a life!
-
- KVRAF
- 6490 posts since 14 Jun, 2004 from Rochester, NY
theyre all tools why pit them against each other? just try out whats best for you and stick with it!
RoNC
RoNC