Subscribe to AfterDawn's weekly newsletter.
Recommendation - Audio Editor with latest support
#1
06 Sep 2011 @ 14:34
SisterGra
Visit user's personal pageSend private message to this user
Newbie
Hello to all music enthusiasts. I’m in need of an audio editor that handles (support) .tak, .flac, and .ape files. I found ProTool 10 but its way to expensive for what I’m doing.
AfterDawn
Advertisement
#2
06 Sep 2011 @ 20:47
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
Most of us on this forum just use audacity (free). For most formats you need to to convert to wave first since that is the only editable format. Pro Tool just does the conversion in the back ground.
What are you doing that would need such a full featured editor? If you are bringing in plenty of money then a better editor is affordable because time is money. Even the pros I know used audacity for years before they bought a professional editor.
What are you doing that would need such a full featured editor? If you are bringing in plenty of money then a better editor is affordable because time is money. Even the pros I know used audacity for years before they bought a professional editor.
#3
07 Sep 2011 @ 18:31
Originally posted by Mez:Thanks for the replay Mez! I've readied that if you convert from one file to the next. The audio file becomes degraded. This is my biggest fear!... O.k, I thought about it! As an experiment; I'll try to do what you guys do.
Most of us on this forum just use audacity (free). For most formats you need to to convert to wave first since that is the only editable format. Pro Tool just does the conversion in the back ground.
What are you doing that would need such a full featured editor? If you are bringing in plenty of money then a better editor is affordable because time is money. Even the pros I know used audacity for years before they bought a professional editor.
#4
07 Sep 2011 @ 19:01
Originally posted by Mez:P.S. Just to let you know what I use to do audio editing. Here is my list:
Most of us on this forum just use audacity (free). For most formats you need to to convert to wave first since that is the only editable format. Pro Tool just does the conversion in the back ground.
What are you doing that would need such a full featured editor? If you are bringing in plenty of money then a better editor is affordable because time is money. Even the pros I know used audacity for years before they bought a professional editor.
1. Foober2000 v1.1.6
2. Medieval CUE Splitter v1.2
3. NCH WavePad sound Editor v4.26
4. Creative MediaSource Audio Convertor
#5
07 Sep 2011 @ 20:35
Have look at these two both are free you can run them in a virtual machine (virtualbox software for windows which is free)or as a live cd.
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=dreamstudio
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=ubuntustudio
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=dreamstudio
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=ubuntustudio
#6
08 Sep 2011 @ 10:43
ps355528
Senior Member
both derivatives of 64studio.. a debian based fantastic distro.
seriously.. what do most people want to do which audacity won't.. like the crowing photoshop fanboys.. they end up paying a fortune and using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
seriously.. what do most people want to do which audacity won't.. like the crowing photoshop fanboys.. they end up paying a fortune and using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
ARR! Them pesky Navy! Get out of my sea!
irc://irc.villageirc.net/afterdawn http://www.pirateparty.org.uk/
#7
08 Sep 2011 @ 12:25
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
1) As I mentioned before ALL editors edit wave files not the copmpressed files. That is true of ANY editing. Jpg photos are converted to bit maps before they are edited. Just because it is in the back ground does mean it didn't happen.
2) Most of the files you mentioned are lossless, these are lossless compressed files. This means they were not really converted at all they just changed changed compression. That is the advantage of lossless files.
3)Fidelity loss is not noticable until you get below 190 BR. The loss is not in the hearable range. It is quite noticable at 128 BR.
Audacity is probably fine for what you are doing.
2) Most of the files you mentioned are lossless, these are lossless compressed files. This means they were not really converted at all they just changed changed compression. That is the advantage of lossless files.
3)Fidelity loss is not noticable until you get below 190 BR. The loss is not in the hearable range. It is quite noticable at 128 BR.
Audacity is probably fine for what you are doing.
#8
08 Sep 2011 @ 16:30
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
ps355528 not much. Some of the advanced stuff takes a bit more time and possibly harder to figure out. The main justification to drop a grand on an audio editor is you have more work than you can handle. It may cut an hour or 2 off the weeks work so it pays for itsself in a couple of months.
ps355528 does much more audio editing than I. I normally just cut tracks out of a recording. I rarely do anything advanced.
I use photoshop and I do use the advanced features there. Not so much for editing as for enhancing photos so you can see things that you can’t make out. I am a genealogist. You can restore old photos. I have an old HP scanner that scans in the UV and IR spectrum. You can bring out details that have faded away. You need to play with the hues, contrast and brightness to bring it out more. You can enhance pictures of tomb stones. With your eye you can’t read the stone but you can make it out with a digie color photo. It must be color to get all the hues to play with.
If you just crop photos you don’t need photo shop.
Sorry for going off topic...
Not really!
ps355528 does much more audio editing than I. I normally just cut tracks out of a recording. I rarely do anything advanced.
I use photoshop and I do use the advanced features there. Not so much for editing as for enhancing photos so you can see things that you can’t make out. I am a genealogist. You can restore old photos. I have an old HP scanner that scans in the UV and IR spectrum. You can bring out details that have faded away. You need to play with the hues, contrast and brightness to bring it out more. You can enhance pictures of tomb stones. With your eye you can’t read the stone but you can make it out with a digie color photo. It must be color to get all the hues to play with.
If you just crop photos you don’t need photo shop.
Sorry for going off topic...
Not really!
#9
13 Sep 2011 @ 23:14
Originally posted by scorpNZ:Thanks for the offer but I'll just stick to Foober2000. Foober2000 UI is editable and quick to startup. Its like comparing abobe's flash to apple's quick time.
Have look at these two both are free you can run them in a virtual machine (virtualbox software for windows which is free)or as a live cd.
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=dreamstudio
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=ubuntustudio
This discussion thread has been automatically closed, as it hasn't received any new posts during the last 180 days. This means that you can't post replies or new questions to this discussion thread.
If you have something to add to this topic, use this page to post your question or comments to a new discussion thread.
If you have something to add to this topic, use this page to post your question or comments to a new discussion thread.
