<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Audio Editing Software: Audition vs. Sound Forge</title>
	<atom:link href="http://chris.pirillo.com/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://chris.pirillo.com/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/</link>
	<description>News and Reviews! Geek, Internet Entrepreneur, Hardware Addict, Software Junkie, Book Author, Once TV Show Host, Technology Enthusiast, Shameless Self-Promoter, Tech Conference Coordinator, Early Adopter, Idea Evangelist, Tech Support Blogger, Bootstrapper, Media Personality, Technology Consultant, Thicker Quicker Picker Upper.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2012 11:01:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Me</title>
		<link>http://chris.pirillo.com/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-759452</link>
		<dc:creator>Me</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Aug 2010 03:57:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chris.pirillo.com/2007/05/25/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-759452</guid>
		<description>Audition 3 compared to SF?

With Audition, I can get in and out!  I know right where everything is, and the program is rock solid!  The interface is as clean as can be.  I can top and tail in seconds, where in SF I have to find options for this and that.  With Audition, I can do surgical editing right down to the sample with quick ease.  Oh, it has a multitrack for those special purposes.  You can even split frequency bands and work on bands individually. Try that with SF!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Audition 3 compared to SF?</p>
<p>With Audition, I can get in and out!  I know right where everything is, and the program is rock solid!  The interface is as clean as can be.  I can top and tail in seconds, where in SF I have to find options for this and that.  With Audition, I can do surgical editing right down to the sample with quick ease.  Oh, it has a multitrack for those special purposes.  You can even split frequency bands and work on bands individually. Try that with SF!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ben leo</title>
		<link>http://chris.pirillo.com/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-728792</link>
		<dc:creator>ben leo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:49:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chris.pirillo.com/2007/05/25/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-728792</guid>
		<description>Sound Forge is superiour to all the mentioned...it will seemlessly integeate with sequencing software and has the ability to publish audio. The way it shines is its support for mutliple bit depths, VST and Direct X plugins which you can find many for free on www.kvr-vst.com.  I have tried them all (wavelab, Audition, goldwave) some are just not proffessional enough. Others just do not have the features. Yes, the pro version is more expensive but works SO well. I Would only class audition and wavelab with this version. I am currently using version 10. which works wonders in editing. They have a free demo on their website that you can try out for 30 days. You will be blown away at how the software interface begins to disappear and your start to focus on your work. I cannot say the same about the adobe products and Steiberg products. When mastering houses prefer this software editor over anything else...that should make you take notice. Also, it does do multitrack...at least starting with Version 9. Another thing is that you can do so much just with the OEM package. I have used it since ver 3 and dont plan on stopping unless, of coarse, someone makes something better. 

One more thing: you can purchase older version for almost nothing which are tons better than current versions of Goldwave. The people talking about menu layouts and what not....this software is the way to go - bar none. I put my words into action as I use it as an Offline editor with Cakewalk Sonar 9 Daily for single track editing and have done commecial work on an annual basis. This combination has made me overlook pro-tools since I now have a decent front end preamp/ A/C to get that sound into my PC. Trust me - Sound Forge is the only place i would waiste my money right now for an editor....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sound Forge is superiour to all the mentioned&#8230;it will seemlessly integeate with sequencing software and has the ability to publish audio. The way it shines is its support for mutliple bit depths, VST and Direct X plugins which you can find many for free on <a href="http://www.kvr-vst.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.kvr-vst.com</a>.  I have tried them all (wavelab, Audition, goldwave) some are just not proffessional enough. Others just do not have the features. Yes, the pro version is more expensive but works SO well. I Would only class audition and wavelab with this version. I am currently using version 10. which works wonders in editing. They have a free demo on their website that you can try out for 30 days. You will be blown away at how the software interface begins to disappear and your start to focus on your work. I cannot say the same about the adobe products and Steiberg products. When mastering houses prefer this software editor over anything else&#8230;that should make you take notice. Also, it does do multitrack&#8230;at least starting with Version 9. Another thing is that you can do so much just with the OEM package. I have used it since ver 3 and dont plan on stopping unless, of coarse, someone makes something better. </p>
<p>One more thing: you can purchase older version for almost nothing which are tons better than current versions of Goldwave. The people talking about menu layouts and what not&#8230;.this software is the way to go &#8211; bar none. I put my words into action as I use it as an Offline editor with Cakewalk Sonar 9 Daily for single track editing and have done commecial work on an annual basis. This combination has made me overlook pro-tools since I now have a decent front end preamp/ A/C to get that sound into my PC. Trust me &#8211; Sound Forge is the only place i would waiste my money right now for an editor&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chalmers</title>
		<link>http://chris.pirillo.com/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-728384</link>
		<dc:creator>chalmers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 19:35:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chris.pirillo.com/2007/05/25/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-728384</guid>
		<description>I like Audition, and I&#039;ve used cool edit for years, but it&#039;s always had a problem with crashing. I&#039;ve lost a lot of audio clips over the years, and I&#039;ve resigned to never use it again. What I need is a stable, multitrack recorder with audio editing similar to Audition. I&#039;m not sure if the new Sound Forge Studio has mutitracking, but their website doesn&#039;t mention it anywhere.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like Audition, and I&#8217;ve used cool edit for years, but it&#8217;s always had a problem with crashing. I&#8217;ve lost a lot of audio clips over the years, and I&#8217;ve resigned to never use it again. What I need is a stable, multitrack recorder with audio editing similar to Audition. I&#8217;m not sure if the new Sound Forge Studio has mutitracking, but their website doesn&#8217;t mention it anywhere.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: drseid</title>
		<link>http://chris.pirillo.com/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-724463</link>
		<dc:creator>drseid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:04:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chris.pirillo.com/2007/05/25/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-724463</guid>
		<description>Audition by far!  
I use Audition on an almost daily basis.  I produce a daily radio program which runs on our local NPR station on it, from my (Not soundproofed ) office.  I use the noise reduction and EQ to clean up, and my audio is indistinguishable from the NPR feed audio.  
I use the multitrack for both the radio program and radio and TV commercials.
The programmable script feature for audio processing is great, and as dale mentioned above the interface is completely customizable.
I tried an earlier version of Sound Forge and it seemed illogical and user UN-friendly.

Unless you are recording albums, Audition should fill the bill.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Audition by far!<br />
I use Audition on an almost daily basis.  I produce a daily radio program which runs on our local NPR station on it, from my (Not soundproofed ) office.  I use the noise reduction and EQ to clean up, and my audio is indistinguishable from the NPR feed audio.<br />
I use the multitrack for both the radio program and radio and TV commercials.<br />
The programmable script feature for audio processing is great, and as dale mentioned above the interface is completely customizable.<br />
I tried an earlier version of Sound Forge and it seemed illogical and user UN-friendly.</p>
<p>Unless you are recording albums, Audition should fill the bill.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dale</title>
		<link>http://chris.pirillo.com/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-617794</link>
		<dc:creator>dale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 19:34:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chris.pirillo.com/2007/05/25/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-617794</guid>
		<description>The interface of Audition is totally customizable,   you can make it as cluttered/uncluttered as you want.  I actually prefer Audition because of it&#039;s clean interface!   First thing i do is close all the windows apart from the editing display and then just have a thin strip of transport controls at the bottom and a thin strip of editing tools at the top.   ahhhh  lovely big wave form display.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The interface of Audition is totally customizable,   you can make it as cluttered/uncluttered as you want.  I actually prefer Audition because of it&#8217;s clean interface!   First thing i do is close all the windows apart from the editing display and then just have a thin strip of transport controls at the bottom and a thin strip of editing tools at the top.   ahhhh  lovely big wave form display.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Oscar</title>
		<link>http://chris.pirillo.com/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-555301</link>
		<dc:creator>Oscar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Nov 2007 05:10:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chris.pirillo.com/2007/05/25/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-555301</guid>
		<description>SoundForge cant&#039;be compared to Audition, because Audition (Cool Edit) was designed as a multi track editor, you can record, mix, edit and mastering audio.
But Sound Forge is &quot;just&quot; for record, EDIT and mastering audio, it&#039;s not a multitrack editor to remix a lot of tracks to do a commercial or something like that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SoundForge cant&#8217;be compared to Audition, because Audition (Cool Edit) was designed as a multi track editor, you can record, mix, edit and mastering audio.<br />
But Sound Forge is &#8220;just&#8221; for record, EDIT and mastering audio, it&#8217;s not a multitrack editor to remix a lot of tracks to do a commercial or something like that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex Forbes</title>
		<link>http://chris.pirillo.com/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-542487</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Forbes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Sep 2007 00:14:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chris.pirillo.com/2007/05/25/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-542487</guid>
		<description>So which is better, Audition or Sound Forge?

I bought the old Sound Forge many years ago, before Sony bought it. I can&#039;t reinstall it on my new PC as the old activation web page no longer exists. There is a new &quot;Sound Forge Audio Studio&quot; version for $59.95 which looks more than adequate. I just use basic &quot;home recording&quot; edit features like adjusting or normalizing line levels, fade-in, and fade-out. MP3 is nice but I work in WAV. I don&#039;t even record to CD, just to hard drive. As I will never record or publish professionally, should I just buy &quot;Audio Studio&quot;, or look around?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So which is better, Audition or Sound Forge?</p>
<p>I bought the old Sound Forge many years ago, before Sony bought it. I can&#8217;t reinstall it on my new PC as the old activation web page no longer exists. There is a new &#8220;Sound Forge Audio Studio&#8221; version for $59.95 which looks more than adequate. I just use basic &#8220;home recording&#8221; edit features like adjusting or normalizing line levels, fade-in, and fade-out. MP3 is nice but I work in WAV. I don&#8217;t even record to CD, just to hard drive. As I will never record or publish professionally, should I just buy &#8220;Audio Studio&#8221;, or look around?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Larry B. Blumatte (Blue)</title>
		<link>http://chris.pirillo.com/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-542349</link>
		<dc:creator>Larry B. Blumatte (Blue)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:52:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chris.pirillo.com/2007/05/25/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-542349</guid>
		<description>Hello: I would like your suggestion on two things first hardware. Myself along with a friend have started a Paranormal Investigating Team that centers on historical events. I would like to order a very good Digital Recorder to catch EVP&#039;s (Electronic Voice Phenomena) and related accesories. Evp&#039;s can be very clear or what is called type A, Then there is the type C which is very quiet and somewhat covered with interference. Next we need software that can clear up and bring out all the EVP&#039;s. We would like a program that holds other information such as Temperature, EMF&#039;s (Electrical Magnetic Field), Solar and Luner phases, and clean Audio program. Thank you for any help you can give. Larry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello: I would like your suggestion on two things first hardware. Myself along with a friend have started a Paranormal Investigating Team that centers on historical events. I would like to order a very good Digital Recorder to catch EVP&#8217;s (Electronic Voice Phenomena) and related accesories. Evp&#8217;s can be very clear or what is called type A, Then there is the type C which is very quiet and somewhat covered with interference. Next we need software that can clear up and bring out all the EVP&#8217;s. We would like a program that holds other information such as Temperature, EMF&#8217;s (Electrical Magnetic Field), Solar and Luner phases, and clean Audio program. Thank you for any help you can give. Larry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zoomrix</title>
		<link>http://chris.pirillo.com/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-533497</link>
		<dc:creator>Zoomrix</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 May 2007 22:59:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chris.pirillo.com/2007/05/25/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-533497</guid>
		<description>Great blog entry. Really helped me decide. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great blog entry. Really helped me decide. :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zoomrix</title>
		<link>http://chris.pirillo.com/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-533498</link>
		<dc:creator>Zoomrix</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 May 2007 22:59:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chris.pirillo.com/2007/05/25/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-533498</guid>
		<description>Great blog entry. Really helped me decide. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great blog entry. Really helped me decide. :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mcspacebar</title>
		<link>http://chris.pirillo.com/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-531328</link>
		<dc:creator>mcspacebar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 May 2007 22:05:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chris.pirillo.com/2007/05/25/audio-editing-software-audition-vs-sound-forge/#comment-531328</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m surprised you dont mention Wavelab as a n option.
Wavelab kicks the ass of all other audio editing software.
.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m surprised you dont mention Wavelab as a n option.<br />
Wavelab kicks the ass of all other audio editing software.<br />
.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching 1/7 queries in 0.401 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 427/431 objects using disk: basic
Content Delivery Network via Amazon Web Services: CloudFront: s3.pirillo.com

Served from: chris.pirillo.com @ 2012-02-17 03:30:48 -->
