Great discussions there but some do not like the way the forum software (WebX) works. Takes some getting used to perhaps.
Great discussions here too!
AT LAST!! Adobe Audition 2 info
-
- Rad Grandad
- 38041 posts since 6 Sep, 2003 from Downeast Maine
well Ozpeter I will say that perhaps the lay out is why I am not there often...but there are some great minds there that truly make me want to shut up listen (BH, for instance) and truly the litlle I have gotten to know you has been a pleasure...
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 7489 posts since 6 Jul, 2004
Some very good points there xanderxander wrote: Plenty of chart-busting hits getting airplay these days using loops. KVR is a forum for 'virtual instruments'. Not everyone can or even wants to put a 'band' together to record their music.
I'll bet you a lot of money that I can do a song with loops and samples that you will not be able to tell from the "real thing" (mainly since they are the real thing anyway... yuk yuk yuk)
Regarding the issue of loops, I believe the primary reason that Adobe include the excellent Loopology collection is so that those who use Audition in conjunction with their other video products can produce music beds for their film even though they may be <*cough*> "non-musicians" themselves. And there's nothing wrong with that of course. I guess that some in that position will even get bitten by the music bug and look to take their skills further, which is obviously great.
However, when I expressed happiness that the Loopology content also works in Ableton Live, I was thinking about using loops in other, more creative ways than simply producing canned music. A program such as Live allows you to use and mash up the loops and sample content beyond its original form. Also they can be loaded into Ableton's "Simpler" sample-based instrument, small portions can be isolated and turned into complete new musical instruments which can then be used in the creation of your own original music. Very nice
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 7489 posts since 6 Jul, 2004
@ Hink... now that the drama of purchase has passed and the dust settled, how are you liking the upgrade?
-
- Rad Grandad
- 38041 posts since 6 Sep, 2003 from Downeast Maine
well I was using the demo anyhow, but yeah I love it. I really like being able to tab between the mixer and main window, the docking choices are cool...the freeze sure beats lock from the old version as well...but they haven't sent me the link for the comp...headquest wrote:@ Hink... now that the drama of purchase has passed and the dust settled, how are you liking the upgrade?
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 7489 posts since 6 Jul, 2004
Hink wrote: ...but they haven't sent me the link for the comp...
Uh-oh... 
-
- Rad Grandad
- 38041 posts since 6 Sep, 2003 from Downeast Maine
I really don't need another compressor...headquest wrote:Hink wrote: ...but they haven't sent me the link for the comp...
...I love voxengo...The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 7489 posts since 6 Jul, 2004
Well, when you do get the email from them you will find they are offering (non-musical) alternatives to the Izotope tube-compressor that may interest you more. For my part I generally resort to either the Kjaerhus Golden Compressor or the Sonitus fx one. But the new Izotope one from Adobe is very good at what it does.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 7489 posts since 6 Jul, 2004
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 7489 posts since 6 Jul, 2004
PART TWO
Okay, so now that the dust has well and truly settled, I'm quite interested to know how other users are getting along with the Audition 2 upgrade?
In terms of going first... it seems to me that the biggest improvements to AA in version 2 relate to the multitrack use. As such it moves closer to competing with my sequencing host. For those that use it as their main multitrack recording programme I guess these are awesome improvements. However, I don't think that Audition really compares (for me) with Sonar 5PE as a multitrack environment. For really good multitrack work I think the following are missing from Audition still, and they're things I often use or rely on:
* Tempo Track
* Time signature changes
* MIDI sequencing
* Better rewire support
I also find Audition lacking in terms of having very sluggish GUI refresh rates, and I don't personally like to have multiple lanes for automation envelopes (given the choice).
The other disappointment for me relates to the MIDI controller support - so far as I can discover (from the manual, forum and help files) this is just for Mackie Controller support devices; with my M-Audio Ozonic I've not found a way to map the faders to Audition's mixer (if I'm wrong maybe somebody could help me out there!!)
So I'm finding that I only use Audition as an audio editing, mastering and CD burning package at this stage, and not for multitrack work. ...but that also means that the upgrade cost from 1.5 to 2.0 MAY NOT actually have been worth it, as there seem to me to be only minor improvements to these aspects in terms of what I actually USE in the program.
Not meant as a moan - just a realistic assessment of how I feel now the dust has cleared and I've had a bit of time to integrate the new version alongside my other software.
Anyone else?
Okay, so now that the dust has well and truly settled, I'm quite interested to know how other users are getting along with the Audition 2 upgrade?
In terms of going first... it seems to me that the biggest improvements to AA in version 2 relate to the multitrack use. As such it moves closer to competing with my sequencing host. For those that use it as their main multitrack recording programme I guess these are awesome improvements. However, I don't think that Audition really compares (for me) with Sonar 5PE as a multitrack environment. For really good multitrack work I think the following are missing from Audition still, and they're things I often use or rely on:
* Tempo Track
* Time signature changes
* MIDI sequencing
* Better rewire support
I also find Audition lacking in terms of having very sluggish GUI refresh rates, and I don't personally like to have multiple lanes for automation envelopes (given the choice).
The other disappointment for me relates to the MIDI controller support - so far as I can discover (from the manual, forum and help files) this is just for Mackie Controller support devices; with my M-Audio Ozonic I've not found a way to map the faders to Audition's mixer (if I'm wrong maybe somebody could help me out there!!)
So I'm finding that I only use Audition as an audio editing, mastering and CD burning package at this stage, and not for multitrack work. ...but that also means that the upgrade cost from 1.5 to 2.0 MAY NOT actually have been worth it, as there seem to me to be only minor improvements to these aspects in terms of what I actually USE in the program.
Not meant as a moan - just a realistic assessment of how I feel now the dust has cleared and I've had a bit of time to integrate the new version alongside my other software.
Anyone else?
Last edited by headquest on Wed May 31, 2006 1:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Banned
- 4073 posts since 15 Mar, 2004
I agree with what you've pointed out here HQ.
I dont use Sonar and have always been a Cool Edit Pro or Audition user for multitrack work (outside of the studio).
I think the upgrade was worth it for me. I especially like the racking features for mastering and FX and the 'Workstation' templates, and of course now the mixer has individual meters -- a small thing but important for me. Overall the MT mixer appears to act more like a real console (perhaps this is the way they're going with it).
You CAN put a SMPTE track in for a tempo track, yeah? But the midi support is not clever enough and it's true -- time sig changes would be an awesome addition. I dont use rewire that much but it worked OK with Melodyne the one time I used it other than having to fiddle about more than I would care to.
I feel the GUI is better overall tho some things bother me -- like the inability to change much of the colour scheme.
It appears to handle some of those wonky VSTi modules better than 1.5 did -- so 'Refresh FX' works more efficiently.
Although my DAW is pretty zippy (P4 3.8GHz, 4GB RAM) I did notice what seems to be more efficient CPU usage/handling, especially on BIG wav files.
One to ten on the satisfaction scale: 7.5
Cheers,
Alex
I dont use Sonar and have always been a Cool Edit Pro or Audition user for multitrack work (outside of the studio).
I think the upgrade was worth it for me. I especially like the racking features for mastering and FX and the 'Workstation' templates, and of course now the mixer has individual meters -- a small thing but important for me. Overall the MT mixer appears to act more like a real console (perhaps this is the way they're going with it).
You CAN put a SMPTE track in for a tempo track, yeah? But the midi support is not clever enough and it's true -- time sig changes would be an awesome addition. I dont use rewire that much but it worked OK with Melodyne the one time I used it other than having to fiddle about more than I would care to.
I feel the GUI is better overall tho some things bother me -- like the inability to change much of the colour scheme.
It appears to handle some of those wonky VSTi modules better than 1.5 did -- so 'Refresh FX' works more efficiently.
Although my DAW is pretty zippy (P4 3.8GHz, 4GB RAM) I did notice what seems to be more efficient CPU usage/handling, especially on BIG wav files.
One to ten on the satisfaction scale: 7.5
Cheers,
Alex
-
- KVRian
- 897 posts since 2 Aug, 2001 from norway
i got in in the big studio.. but havent really given in a chance yet.. i always end up using sonar instead for audio recording now (instead of audition 2 or pro tools)
-
- KVRian
- 500 posts since 13 May, 2003 from Mostly in NSW Central Tablelands, Australia
Say what? Neither version supports VSTi plugins. It's VST FX only.xander wrote:It appears to handle some of those wonky VSTi modules better than 1.5 did
For my part, I'm happy with the upgrade and I'm happy it doesn't add a MIDI sequencer try and take on the likes of Sonar, Cubase etc. Let it stick with what it's best at, and that's be an audio editor. But I feel that way because I have my sequencing needs well and truly covered elsewhere. I guess I prefer specialised tools, not an all-in-one which mightn't do everything satisfactorily.
-
- KVRAF
- 4878 posts since 13 Jun, 2002 from Montreal
I can see no advantage to upgrade from Vs 1.5. I never use the multi-track feature and the editing functions and VST FX support are perfectly fine as they are/
Cheers,
Gordon
Cheers,
Gordon
