This is a spin-off from an earlier thread in which Graham posted the
following link:

http://www.softpedia.com/get/Multime...Edit-Pro.shtml

This link points to a download of the original Syntrillium Cool Edit Pro
audio editing program as it was before Syntrillium was acquired by Adobe
Systems in 2003. It is a 21 day trial version requiring a license for full
activation. Adobe appear to be trying to charge $299 for a full license
which (from memory) is substantially more that Syntrillium used to charge.

Does anybody know how I can get a license for this program at a sensible
price? I have been a licensed user of Cool Edit 2000 for many years.

I know Adobe are offering their version called Adobe Audition but this is a
horrible bloated program which has eliminated all the simple elegance of the
original Syntrillium product.

Malcolm

"Malcolm H" wrote in message
...
This is a spin-off from an earlier thread in which Graham posted the
following link:

http://www.softpedia.com/get/Multime...Edit-Pro.shtml

This link points to a download of the original Syntrillium Cool Edit Pro
audio editing program as it was before Syntrillium was acquired by Adobe
Systems in 2003. It is a 21 day trial version requiring a license for full
activation. Adobe appear to be trying to charge $299 for a full license
which (from memory) is substantially more that Syntrillium used to charge.

Does anybody know how I can get a license for this program at a sensible
price? I have been a licensed user of Cool Edit 2000 for many years.


I very much doubt whether you could get a legal licence for less. Adobe now
own the rights, and if they charge $299 then that's that. Your only other
option is to buy a "second hand" licence, but I don't think that is legal.

David.
..

"Malcolm H" wrote in message
...
This is a spin-off from an earlier thread in which Graham posted the
following link:

http://www.softpedia.com/get/Multime...Edit-Pro.shtml

Does anybody know how I can get a license for this program at a sensible
price? I have been a licensed user of Cool Edit 2000 for many years.


Morning Malcom,

Am I missing something here? You state that you have been a
licensed user of CEP2 for many years, and then ask where
you can get a licence.

Iain

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
.fi...


"Malcolm H" wrote in message
...
This is a spin-off from an earlier thread in which Graham posted the
following link:

http://www.softpedia.com/get/Multime...Edit-Pro.shtml

Does anybody know how I can get a license for this program at a sensible
price? I have been a licensed user of Cool Edit 2000 for many years.


Morning Malcom,

Am I missing something here? You state that you have been a
licensed user of CEP2 for many years, and then ask where
you can get a licence.

Iain

The licence for CE2000 was purchased from Syntrillium.
I now want a license for CEP2.
Syntrillium no longer exists!

"Malcolm H" wrote in message
...

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
.fi...


"Malcolm H" wrote in message
...
This is a spin-off from an earlier thread in which Graham posted the
following link:

http://www.softpedia.com/get/Multime...Edit-Pro.shtml

Does anybody know how I can get a license for this program at a sensible
price? I have been a licensed user of Cool Edit 2000 for many years.

Am I missing something here? You state that you have been a
licensed user of CEP2 for many years, and then ask where
you can get a licence.

The licence for CE2000 was purchased from Syntrillium.
I now want a license for CEP2.

OK. Then isn't it time to make contact with those
nice people at Adobe. Not an impersonal e-mail,
but a phone call. Use your English charm and
persuade them that they could exchange your
CE2000 key for a CEP2, as a gesture of
goodwill. Betcha they agree:-)


Syntrillium no longer exists!

Sadly no.

One of my former colleagues was a beta
tester at the time when they were trying to
break into the professional market. I don't have
any experience with Audition, but I do remember
him saying that CEP, at least the version that he
was evaluating, lacked essential functions, like
audio scrub, that would have improved it immensely.

Can anyone list the major differences between
CEP2 and Audition? It would be interesting to
know how the program has developed.

Iain

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
.fi...


Can anyone list the major differences between
CEP2 and Audition? It would be interesting to
know how the program has developed.


PS. I forgot to add:
There is a tendency for audio editing programmes
to try to be "all things things to all people" Maybe
that is what has happened to Audition?

One of the best pieces of audio editing software of
all times has to be Studer's "Diaxis" However, as the
result of customner feedback, more and more options
were added, until the pull-down menus reached the
bottom of the screen. There were a dozen ways to do
the same task. It began to be difficult to find one's
way around.

They could have issued bespoke, dedicated versions
of the software i.e. TV and film recording,
post production, music recording and editing, etc.

Iain

Iain Churches wrote:
"Iain Churches" wrote in message
.fi...

Can anyone list the major differences between
CEP2 and Audition? It would be interesting to
know how the program has developed.


PS. I forgot to add:
There is a tendency for audio editing programmes
to try to be "all things things to all people" Maybe
that is what has happened to Audition?

One of the best pieces of audio editing software of
all times has to be Studer's "Diaxis" However, as the
result of customner feedback, more and more options
were added, until the pull-down menus reached the
bottom of the screen. There were a dozen ways to do
the same task. It began to be difficult to find one's
way around.

They could have issued bespoke, dedicated versions
of the software i.e. TV and film recording,
post production, music recording and editing, etc.

Iain



I use Audition quite a lot as there is still enough of CEP in there that
I can find my way round the menus blindfold, and that makes work very
quick. Bad things? Bloat - clearly. The thing takes forever to load, and
quite often leaves behind unwanted processes when you shut it. Also it
insists on loading every single DX and and VST plugin as it starts; sure
it is nice to have them readily to hand when you need them, but that is
rare enough that I would rather it left them out until I decide they are
needed. It also expects to find them in a Steinberg directory - what's
that about? More bad stuff? Splitting a session into tracks to make a CD
is really non-intuitive. You have to follow the tutorial every time. I'm
sure plenty more will occur to me, but that will do.

Oh, I really like the way multi tracks work. All the right buttons in
the right places.

d

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
Iain Churches wrote:
"Iain Churches" wrote in message
.fi...

Can anyone list the major differences between
CEP2 and Audition? It would be interesting to
know how the program has developed.


PS. I forgot to add:
There is a tendency for audio editing programmes
to try to be "all things things to all people" Maybe
that is what has happened to Audition?

One of the best pieces of audio editing software of
all times has to be Studer's "Diaxis" However, as the
result of customner feedback, more and more options
were added, until the pull-down menus reached the
bottom of the screen. There were a dozen ways to do
the same task. It began to be difficult to find one's
way around.

They could have issued bespoke, dedicated versions
of the software i.e. TV and film recording,
post production, music recording and editing, etc.

Iain

I use Audition quite a lot as there is still enough of CEP in there that I
can find my way round the menus blindfold, and that makes work very quick.
Bad things? Bloat - clearly. The thing takes forever to load, and quite
often leaves behind unwanted processes when you shut it. Also it insists
on loading every single DX and and VST plugin as it starts; sure it is
nice to have them readily to hand when you need them, but that is rare
enough that I would rather it left them out until I decide they are
needed.

Hmm. That was one of the good things about Diaxis, and also ProDisk
you could define tasks (different ways of working) and prescribe
the plug ins and extensions required for each specific task. So, the
system was up and running very fast, and trimmed specifically to
your requirements. In addition a link to the automation of the console
meant that the desk would be configured also. You select "Voice Over"
and you snap into multitrack with a mic channel assigned to Ch 1 and
foldback ready routed.

It also expects to find them in a Steinberg directory - what's that about?
More bad stuff?

I believe that the plug-ins have probably come from Steinberg CueBase
and also from EMU originally.

Splitting a session into tracks to make a CD is really non-intuitive. You
have to follow the tutorial every time.

I know of one chap who does CD mastering with CEP2.
He uses "Open" to place the first title, then "Generate/Silence/3secs"
to leader and the "Open Append" to insert subsequent titles.
He tops and tails as he goes. It is simple and quick. He uses a
Studer CD recorder which updates the track ID at any leader
(or segment of audio below -60dBFS) CEP2 seems to load
in the time you can open a CD jewel case and place the disc
into the recorder.

Iain

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
Iain Churches wrote:
"Iain Churches" wrote in message
.fi...

Can anyone list the major differences between
CEP2 and Audition? It would be interesting to
know how the program has developed.


I use Audition quite a lot as there is still enough of CEP in there that I
can find my way round the menus blindfold, and that makes work very quick.
Bad things? Bloat - clearly. The thing takes forever to load, and quite
often leaves behind unwanted processes when you shut it. Also it insists
on loading every single DX and and VST plugin as it starts; sure it is
nice to have them readily to hand when you need them, but that is rare
enough that I would rather it left them out until I decide they are
needed. It also expects to find them in a Steinberg directory - what's
that about? More bad stuff? Splitting a session into tracks to make a CD
is really non-intuitive. You have to follow the tutorial every time. I'm
sure plenty more will occur to me, but that will do.


I forgot to ask, Don, does Audition have "audio scrub"
where you can use the mouse or trackball to go backwards
and forwards over a couple of bars to locate an edit point by
ear?

Iain

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
.fi

One of my former colleagues was a beta
tester at the time when they were trying to
break into the professional market. I don't have
any experience with Audition, but I do remember
him saying that CEP, at least the version that he
was evaluating, lacked essential functions, like
audio scrub, that would have improved it immensely.

Very obsolete information.

The current version (3.0) and the previous version of Audition (2.0) have
audio scrub.

I find the scrub feature so compelling that I generally avoid using Audition
2.0 which I own. I continue to use CEP 2.1.

Audio scrubbing is one of those holdovers from the days of analog tape that
is surprisingly easy to live without. However, you have to change paradigms
to visual-intensive editing to do that. Visual-intensive editing is
generally more productive.

I do use scrubbing when I edit video, but this is mostly because the video
editing software I use does not provide the same quality visual environment
for editing audio that CEP/Audition does. I periodically export audio from
A/V tracks, edit it in CEP, and then put it back, including restoring
lip-synch by hand if necessary.

Can anyone list the major differences between
CEP2 and Audition?

Adobe should be able to do that. Audition 1.0 and 1.5 were very similar to
CEP 2.1. Check their web site for info about the various release upgrades.

Audition 2.0 was a major rewrite. The UI was redone pretty thoroughly. I
tried to use it as my preferred audio editor for about a year, and then gave
up on it and went back to CEP 2.1.

It would be interesting to
know how the program has developed.

In the opinion of most it seems, not for the better. The product suffers
from adding feature after feature and trying to be all things to all people.