Sound editing software

[Paul C.]

I'd like to hear people's views on what might be the best software for manipulating sound files, in preparation for burning onto CD or whatever.

I've noticed that a few people here use CoolEdit and seem to regard it quite highly. How does it compare with other "heavyweight" editors such as WaveLab and SoundForge?

ANy comments on these particular programs, or others, would be greatly appreciated.

[SonicZone]

I moved from GoldWave to Cool Edit Pro. Smartest thing I ever did.

[trilogia]

wavelab has been a good program for me.

[RetroSmith]

Cool edit Pro 2.0 is just amazing. What you get for the price is pretty astounding. With a pro grade sound card, like a GINA24, you have the equivalent of a multimillion dollar studio on your PC.



Mikey

[romanotrax]

I personally use Sound Forge. I have 5.0 and 6.0 loaded on my computer but, because they no longer use the CD Architect (cd burning program), I continue to use version 4.5. VERY easy to use. Great for placing track marks wherever you want in your sound file and, to me, sounds great. No 24bit recording with 4.5 though.

I also have Wavelab and CEP 2.0 but I still prefer SoundForge.

[JonUrban]

Like Bob, I use Sound Forge 6.0, which is a vast improvement over version 5.0. I also still have version 4.5 w/CD Architect on the PC as well, just to be able to use CDA to divide a large wav file (usually DTS encoded) into separate tracks upon burning. Noise REduction 2.0a is also a must.

I have CEP 2.0, and many people are telling me that this is a great program, I just have to get used to it. It is hard to switch programs once you get used to them.

:-jon

[Grant]

I am a CEP 2.0 user and have Sound Forge 5.0. I beta-tested SF 6.0 but decided not to get it because I didn't want to pay $139 after paying $99 for 5.0. I know, i'm a cheapskate! But, I use both CEP and SF 5.0.

[JonUrban]

Originally posted by Grant
I am a CEP 2.0 user and have Sound Forge 5.0. I beta-tested SF 6.0 but decided not to get it because I didn't want to pay $139 after paying $99 for 5.0. I know, i'm a cheapskate! But, I use both CEP and SF 5.0.


Grant, I hear you. That was a real rip-off. However, the fact that it lets you work on the files in memory makes it MUCH faster.

And they SHOULD have given the 5.0 owners a better deal, esp since 5.0 was not out that long.

:-jon

[Grant]

Originally posted by oblio98





And they SHOULD have given the 5.0 owners a better deal, esp since 5.0 was not out that long.

:-jon

THAT'S the part that pissed me off! And, anyway, Cool Edit works as fast as SF 6.0. SF is just playing catch up! And, Cool Edit has better dither, noise shaping, and sample rate conversion.

[Paul C.]

Thanks for that info. Trilogia, which version of Wavelab are you using, and can you comment on how it measures up against the competition?

I always thought that CoolEdit had a pretty clunky interface, although it seems to have improved with the latest version.

I am interested is using one of these programs for LP to CD transfer. I'm not sure which features are most important for that task. I guess being able to adjust levels readily is important, and being able to monitor changes made to sound files along the way. I suppose declicking and (heaven forbid) denoising might be fun to play around with.

[trilogia]

paul, i use wavelab 3.0. it takes some time to get used to if you are'nt too experienced with this kind of stuff like i wasnt when i started using it. hell, i was afraid to even mess with it for awhile but after you start to understand it, i think its a nice program. i use it for transfering vinyl to cd and it does a nice job. it makes a nice good looking, realistic wavelength. has tons of options and presets of course. to remove clicks theres really no one shot preset or anything like that. you pretty much just have to go in and magnify the wave and take it out yourself which isnt too bad if there arent many. i leave the surface noise in mine though anyhow. you may be more particular. it burns cd's as well. basically, its a professional program so that is what is to be expected. there is a 32 bit float option on it as well. its a loaded program and i would recommend it.

oh, and i like the interface and how it operates. like i said, just gotta get used to where everything is. you can drop markers whenever and wherever to split tracks. i usually record the whole album to one file, then go in and manually add the markers. then you can go and split them in many different ways and it does it for you and numbers them and everything.

it has this thing called master section that you can use to use presets and adjust volume and the likes. i basically just try to keep my recordings as true to the vinyl as i can though so i dont really use the master section all that much. im still trying to learn about the whole thing myself really.

what kind of soundcard are you using out of curiousity?

[Grant]

I don't like Wavelab. I don't like it's interface, I don't like the way it works.

To answer your question about what is important: EVERYTHING you can get your hands on is important! And, don't scoff at NR for cleaning up records! You would be amazed at what you can do. It;s very sad that the pros can't even utilize NR right!

It takes a while to learn how to restore stuff. I was never scared. I jumped right in!

The easiest thing for me to do is tape. I don't use NR on it. I may fade, gate, or silence the ends. The secret is to get the cleanest playback first. I rarely EQ.

For cleaning up vinyl, my view is that anything goes.

As Steve would say, "Does what you do work for you? Are you happy with the results?"...

[Paul C.]

Thanks for that folks. Trilogia, I don't actually have a computer system with burner yet. I am hoping to shortly purchase a new computer with all the necessary bells and whistles. At the moment I am running a laptop, which allows me to play around with software, at least. I have checked out what I think are some of the best options for audio burning in software and hardware, but haven't committed to anything yet.

Grant, I have looked at the new demo of SoundForge 6 - seems like a nicely laid out program. Can you comment on why you thing that CoolEdit has better dither, noise shaping and sample rate conversion?

As for soundcards, I was quite interested in the M Udio Audiophile 24/96, as a cheapish high quality card with good conversion. I was a bit dismayed to read yesterday in another thread that adjusting recording levels with the card can't be done with the software, and that you have to use a preamp volume control or tape monitor control - I can't say I fully grasp what's involved, but it sounds like a hassle. I wonder whether it has anything to do with the fact that this card doesn't have an internal CD audio input.

Another card that interests me and appears to be in about the same price range is the Marian Marc 2, from Germany. Anyone know anything about this one? I've only read a little bit about it, but it's was very positive. It does have an internal audio CD input (not sure what the significance of that is).

As far as burners go, I have been interested in the Yamaha 24X model with Audio Master Quality - seems that it is effective in reducing jitter. There is a new model about to come out that adds 1X and 8X Audio Master burns speeds to the original 4X.

[trilogia]

i have heard that you shouldnt dither in the first place. might be better to just record in 16 bit. you tell me grant.

i have to say for the record i dont have any experience with these other programs. however, i dont think wavelab is bad at all. im willing to stick my neck out and say it cant possibly do anything worse than the other programs discussed. if they say they are better though and are cheaper than soundlab, well than i would say go for it.

there is a program that i have that i dont even have installed right now called acid pro i think. im not even sure if it would be suitable for recording vinyl. anyone else know?

[Grant]

Originally posted by Paul Christie


Grant, I have looked at the new demo of SoundForge 6 - seems like a nicely laid out program. Can you comment on why you thing that CoolEdit has better dither, noise shaping and sample rate conversion?


Because it does. It is highly configurable to your tastes and SOUNDS better. SoundForge just doesn't give you much choice. You can create ANY noise shaping curve you wish with Cool Edit.

Now, I have both programs. Sound Forge's effects are Direct-X so I can use them inside Cool Edit if I want. Some tools are good for some things, some good for others. I don't like to be tied down with just one company's product.

i have heard that you shouldnt dither in the first place. might be better to just record in 16 bit. you tell me grant.
IF you do not plan to do ANYTHING to your files, record in 16-bit. If you plan to de-click or anything else, record or convert your files to 32-bit float. When you go back to 16-bit you MUST use dither, at least!

You will have to do your own experentation to see what works for YOU and YOUR music. There is no right or wrong answer.

[Grant]

Oh yeah, Acid is NOT for recording. It is for creating your own music with the use of instrumental loops.

[Paul C.]

Thanks for that.

So, here's a hypothetical situation - if i want to transfer my LPs to CD, and do some declicking and what have you before buring , at what sampling rate should I convert the analog signal? What would be the best way to go about it, in your opinion?

[Grant]

Originally posted by Paul Christie
Thanks for that.

So, here's a hypothetical situation - if i want to transfer my LPs to CD, and do some declicking and what have you before buring , at what sampling rate should I convert the analog signal? What would be the best way to go about it, in your opinion?

It could depend on your card. For most cards, I would say use 48kHz, because most of the time it will be the internal sampling rate. But, then you will have to downsample before you convert to 16-bit with dithering. I use the Turtle Beach Santa Cruz card which has very transparent sample rate conversion, so I can comfortably record at 44.1 and save sound degredation and time by not having to downsample.

Experiment and do what you feel is best and compromises the sound the least.

[Paul C.]

Thanks Grant. So does the Turtle Beach card have the same issue as the M Audio Audiophile 2496, whereby you need an external preamp or integrated amp tape monitor control in order to adjust recording levels for transferring CD to LP?

[Paul C.]

I've another query - does the Turtle Beach card have separate L/R RCA jacks for hooking up to your hifi, or one of those mini-stereo jacks?

[Grant]

No, and no. I hook it up to my stereo system by using a cable and/or a Y plug wiuth a 1/4 inch stereo plug on one end. It works the same.

[trilogia]

i dont get what you mean there grant. i understand that you can hook your comp up to your home stereo, but dont you use a preamp? and also wondering if anyone knows of a good preamp for a nice low price out there?

[Grant]

The tape out goes from the reciever (amp/preamp) into the soundcard. The speaker out on the card goes into the tape input of the reciever (amp/preamp).

Actually, this the basic setup. I also have a DAT in the card playback chain because I ran out of outputs on the reciever. I also have things stored on DAT that I can immediately transfer to the computer.

[trilogia]

so when you are recording vinyl on to your computer, what is your turntable hooked up too? you're tape deck in?

[Grant]

Originally posted by trilogia
so when you are recording vinyl on to your computer, what is your turntable hooked up too? you're tape deck in?
Oh, no! The turntable has to first be connected to the phono input so the signal can be brought up to line level and be subjected to the RIAA curve. My TT is connected to the reciever.