Topic: Sound Forge/CD Architect vs. Wavelab, etc. (Read 18124 times)

bloodstone · « **on:** July 14, 2004, 12:45:11 PM »

Just gotten into the world of PC recording, and am "mastering" some stuff previously recorded on DAT or CD-R. In the budget range of the above, what do y'all like best for simple two track documentation/mastering/editing in a PC world? Thanks.

Invisible Member · « **Reply #1 on:** July 14, 2004, 01:51:16 PM »

SAMPLITUDE Twisted Evil

Peace,
Dennis

OTR-jkl · « **Reply #2 on:** July 14, 2004, 02:43:12 PM »

Quote:

SAMPLITUDE

Ditto...

Innominandum · « **Reply #3 on:** July 14, 2004, 03:04:53 PM »

I've heard Sony CD Architect has been discontinued. If you're on a budget and can't afford Samplitude, my vote is for Adobe Audition (formerly Syntrillium Cool Edit Pro). This is a really high quality offering, it just has some missing features.

bloodstone · « **Reply #4 on:** July 14, 2004, 05:39:53 PM »

After surfing the web, I noticed you can get a mastering/editing 6.0 version of Samplitude without all the bells & whistles of the full-blown suite for $130. Any specific pros or cons on that?

Invisible Member · « **Reply #5 on:** July 15, 2004, 01:50:05 PM »

Samplitude 6.0 Mastering edition can be had for $60 to $80 if you search around. I got Samplitude 6.0 Studio for $99.00 to get me in the Samp door and its only $250 to Upgrade to 7.X. Even Samp 6.0 is far more useful (IMO) for Mastering than CDA 5.0 and Wavelab 4.0 (I've used both), Samp 6.0 was designed to do the whole project from start to Red Book compliant CD's.

Peace,
Dennis

Viitalahde · « **Reply #6 on:** July 15, 2004, 02:04:43 PM »

So.. What are the main differences between 6 & 7 ???

The price got me really attracted. Anyone tested Samp6 with Lynx Two-A ???

bblackwood · « **Reply #7 on:** July 16, 2004, 11:11:19 PM »

I haven't used everything out there, but I can say that as a former Sadie/WaveLab user, Samp7 is stunning, amazing, and worth every penny...

bloodstone · « **Reply #8 on:** September 19, 2004, 08:39:42 PM »

I've been doing some pretty extensive testing of Wavelab 5.0 demo v. Samplitude 7.22 demo from a mastering/editing perspective (forget the multi-track capability). I see a lot of people on the boards in the Samplitude camp. I'm really having trouble understanding why. I find the majority of the plugins available within Samplitude to be inferior to those in Wavelab 5.0, especially the Soft Clip/limiter section vs. Advanced dynamics in Samplitude. I did think Samplitude's master EQ was pretty sweet, although Wavelab's Q isn't too shabby either. I was hoping someone with hands-on experience might elaborate on the virtues of Samplitude as a mastering/editing tool if they're interested. Thanks.

MASSIVE Mastering · « **Reply #9 on:** September 19, 2004, 09:39:11 PM »

I can't speak for all of us (Samplitude users), but just the point of each "object" being it's own entity on a track sold me on it.

Wavelab can work in a similar fashion in the montage, but it's just not the same... Ever since I started using Samplitude, my whole workflow has changed for the better.

Plugs? I use a few, but 90% of everything is done using outboard, and the UAD collection takes care of the rest (the new limiter smokes, BTW). As far as the stock plugs in Samplitude vs. WaveLab, I actually like most of the Samp stuff... At least if they're not abused...

hollywood_steve · « **Reply #10 on:** September 19, 2004, 11:28:59 PM »

I don't know why there is so much bad info out there about Sony and their Sound Forge and CD Architect products. They have owned these programs for a while now and have just released a major marketing program for them, along with Acid, Vegas and their other packages. CD Architect is the only audio software I use on a regular basis and it does everything I could hope for in a CD setup and burning program. I guess that I can understand why folks would like the ability to add "CD text" to their projects, but its not something that have ever used, so I don't miss it.

I really don't have any use for a powerful editor like Sound Forge, but I have one of the limited power versions they offer for producing web audio. Some day I might purchase the full version of Sound Forge, but the availability of these "low power" versions make it easy for someone to try out Sound Forge before laying out the full price. I think the current limited version is called Sony Sound Forge Audio Studio and sells for around $60. For a lot of home studio guys, it might be all you'll ever need.

resolectric · « **Reply #11 on:** September 20, 2004, 06:54:37 AM »

Innominandum wrote on Wed, 14 July 2004 20:04

I've heard Sony CD Architect has been discontinued...

CD Architect is still available and being commercialized as a stand-alone software program, by SONY.

CD-Architect v.5 is a complete software program for "mastering" and assembling of CDR masters, ready for replication.

You can edit/cut/paste/overlap/crossfade in every conceivable way all your stereo files. Index and Track markers can be edited and freely placed everywhere in the project.

You can use Direct-X PlugIns to apply to each wave, individually, or to the final mix output.
So, if your "mastering" process is based on PlugIn processing, all mastering can be performed from CD-Architect alone.

Extremely good value for the money.

I use CoolEdit Pro 2.1 (now called Adobe Audition) for detailed editing before assembling files in CD-Architect, but you can do it all in CD-A.
Still, dedicated editing programs allow for a far more detailed editing of the waves, mostly because wave viewing capabilities are superior.

I am not advising these software programs over any others, i am just considering what i believe are the good points in those, since they're the ones i use.
Just a couple of years ago, before Audition was released, CoolEdit Pro was the one that gave the most detailed view of a Wave being edited. That's why i stick with it.
Haven't tested latest WaveLab or SoundForge versions though.

bloodstone · « **Reply #12 on:** September 20, 2004, 09:14:31 AM »

MASSIVE Mastering wrote on Mon, 20 September 2004 02:39

I can't speak for all of us (Samplitude users), but just the point of each "object" being it's own entity on a track sold me on it.

Wavelab can work in a similar fashion in the montage, but it's just not the same... Ever since I started using Samplitude, my whole workflow has changed for the better.

Plugs? I use a few, but 90% of everything is done using outboard, and the UAD collection takes care of the rest (the new limiter smokes, BTW). As far as the stock plugs in Samplitude vs. WaveLab, I actually like most of the Samp stuff... At least if they're not abused...

Could you expand on the downside of Audio Montage vs. Samplitude's methodology? Honestly, it's not really clear to me how you actually line up a group of mixes, master & burn them in either program yet. Despite its shortcomings CD Architect at least makes that function very simple and straightforward. Thanks again.

MASSIVE Mastering · « **Reply #13 on:** September 20, 2004, 12:35:09 PM »

With me, it's all about intense tweakability - Every object (song), even lined up on the same track, has a huge battery of controls from EQ, volume, compression, stereo enhancement, aux sends, inserts - just about everything you could want, individually.

After I run tracks through any analog processing, if something needs an additional digital tweak of some sort to bring everything together, it's all right there, fast and easy to control. WL had a somewhat similar function using plugs, but it was a nightmare to navigate compared to Samplitude.

That's just the tip of the iceberg...

Fifthcircle · « **Reply #14 on:** September 20, 2004, 01:34:21 PM »

Another vote for Samplitude here- been using it for years (actually I use Sequoia, but close enough Razz

) and I can't look back.

Personally, these days, I'd stay away from Samplitude 6. As version 8 is about to hit the street, you'll find support issues and a host of features missing.

Samp 6 vs. 7... Many, many, many differences. Version 7 was probably one of the largest feature updates that Magix has ever done. The updates went from POW-R dither, to real-time room simulation, to ASIO driver support and numerous MIDI things (which you won't need to worry about doing mastering). Version 8 is about to hit and there are a number of good updates there, but it isn't going to be as large of a feature set update as going from 6 to 7. The updates I see as being interesting there are the new surround implementation, DVD-A support, the new Analog plugins, and for the midi guys- more MIDI updates.

Putting a series of mixes together to master a CD in Samplitude is very easy. The way you do it depends on how you like to work. When I master an album, everything is dropped into the VIP (by opening .wav files). I always move everything manually because I am picky about my track spacings (there is also a CD arrange mode where objects can be automatically snapped in place). At that point, I can either manually place PQ marks or I can click on the auto mark and PQs are set at the edge of every object. Burn the disc and call it a day. The object editor allows for placement of specific effect plugins at specific places non-destructively. Other stuff can go on the master channel. If you use outboard, send the audio out one output and record the capture back in another.

--Ben

Innominandum · « **Reply #15 on:** September 20, 2004, 01:38:32 PM »

Sorry, by discontinued I meant "No further development."

OTR-jkl · « **Reply #16 on:** September 20, 2004, 01:51:26 PM »

Quote:

...click on the auto mark and PQs are set at the edge of every object.

You can also tell Samp to arrange the objects according to how much time you want in between each one using the "Arrange Objects" function as well as set the ID Offset time (how far away from the beginning of the object you want Samp to place the Track ID) and Samp will place the IDs at your specified time in front of each object.

As goes the saying amongst Samp users:
"The deeper you get into Samp, the more cool things you discover that it does and the more it wows you..."

resolectric · « **Reply #17 on:** September 21, 2004, 07:02:39 AM »

Innominandum wrote on Mon, 20 September 2004 18:38

Sorry, by discontinued I meant "No further development."

Well, we never know. Since CD Architect now belongs to SONY, and they're famous for not letting out any news before the fact... Wink

Anyway, my oppinion is, it is working 100% so, no need for development. Unless we start asking the program to do stuff it wasn't meant to do.

Or, did you find any bugs there?

TotalSonic · « **Reply #18 on:** September 21, 2004, 08:42:26 AM »

resolectric wrote on Tue, 21 September 2004 12:02

Innominandum wrote on Mon, 20 September 2004 18:38

Sorry, by discontinued I meant "No further development."

Well, we never know. Since CD Architect now belongs to SONY, and they're famous for not letting out any news before the fact... Wink

Anyway, my oppinion is, it is working 100% so, no need for development. Unless we start asking the program to do stuff it wasn't meant to do.

Or, did you find any bugs there?

I'd think burner apps are among the ones that need constant development in order to keep up with all the new burners that manufacturers are continuously releasing.

fwiw - I have CDA5 and find it very useful for doing quick resequencing - but it does indeed have a couple of minor bugs (once in blue moon crashes on launch in Win2ksp4, etc) - but to me there are definitely better options for primary mastering apps out there.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

Invisible Member · « **Reply #19 on:** September 21, 2004, 09:40:32 AM »

Fifthcircle wrote on Mon, 20 September 2004 10:34

Another vote for Samplitude here- been using it for years (actually I use Sequoia, but close enough Razz

) and I can't look back.

Personally, these days, I'd stay away from Samplitude 6. As version 8 is about to hit the street, you'll find support issues and a host of features missing.

Getting Samp 6.0 at less than $100 will whack $200 of of getting into Version 7 because of the upgrade loophole that why I suggested it, but if you wait until after V8 comes out you lose the uprade loophole for that. IMO, paying $300 for Samp 7 via upgrades is better than $459-$549 for outright purchases. It may be too late though for the loophole.

Peace,
Dennis

resolectric · « **Reply #20 on:** September 21, 2004, 10:43:09 AM »

TotalSonic wrote on Tue, 21 September 2004 13:42

...to keep up with all the new burners that manufacturers are continuously releasing.
...

Well, it certainly won't work with plasmatic drivers for ionic disks of the future. That's what i mean when i say: asking the software to do things it wasn't meant to do.

That would be called "forwards compatibility" and such a thing doesn't exist.

The latest developments, be they hardware devices or software programs have to be backwards compatible, hence, at the present date, it seems that the problem is with several CD drives not being compatible with CDA, since they were released after CDA. They should be, though. Their manufacturer's fault. Wrongly implemented ASPI drivers and stuff like that.

From what i've seen at CDA Forum most incompatibilities with CD drives couldn't be traced down to CDA.

TotalSonic wrote on Tue, 21 September 2004 13:42

...it does indeed have a couple of minor bugs (once in blue moon crashes on launch in Win2ksp4, etc)
...

Mine never crashed.

Windows XP SP1
Pentium 3 1GHz

Maybe because i have a P3

bblackwood · « **Reply #21 on:** September 22, 2004, 06:36:18 AM »

I don't really use plug-ins except for an occasional cross-fade limiter or maybe some parallel compression, so my preference for Samp over Wavelab is due to the speed and ease of which I can accomplish anything I need to. Wavelab is a fine editor and I used it for a couple of months, but there are limitations that simply cannot be worked around.

No to mention the DDP option costs 4X as much as the software itself...

masterhse · « **Reply #22 on:** September 22, 2004, 09:26:37 AM »

bblackwood wrote on Wed, 22 September 2004 06:36

I don't really use plug-ins except for an occasional cross-fade limiter or maybe some parallel compression, so my preference for Samp over Wavelab is due to the speed and ease of which I can accomplish anything I need to. Wavelab is a fine editor and I used it for a couple of months, but there are limitations that simply cannot be worked around.

No to mention the DDP option costs 4X as much as the software itself...

Brad -

Do you use Samplitude as your main DAW (i.e. editor, assembly, etc.)?

bblackwood · « **Reply #23 on:** September 22, 2004, 09:48:38 AM »

masterhse wrote on Wed, 22 September 2004 08:26

Brad -

Do you use Samplitude as your main DAW (i.e. editor, assembly, etc.)?

Yep, and love it. Going to upgrade to Sequoia for V8 as Samp V8 won't support DDP...

masterhse · « **Reply #24 on:** September 22, 2004, 10:00:07 AM »

bblackwood wrote on Wed, 22 September 2004 09:48

masterhse wrote on Wed, 22 September 2004 08:26

Brad -

Do you use Samplitude as your main DAW (i.e. editor, assembly, etc.)?

Yep, and love it. Going to upgrade to Sequoia for V8 as Samp V8 won't support DDP...

What are you using for audio hardware (I/O), also does Sequoia support inserts from external digital devices? I'm assuming this is also hardware dependent.

bblackwood · « **Reply #25 on:** September 22, 2004, 10:06:08 AM »

masterhse wrote on Wed, 22 September 2004 09:00

What are you using for audio hardware (I/O), also does Sequoia support inserts from external digital devices? I'm assuming this is also hardware dependent.

RME cards. No idea about inserts, lemme ask Ben Maas to drop in and answer that...

OTR-jkl · « **Reply #26 on:** September 22, 2004, 10:37:54 AM »

bblackwood wrote on Wed, 22 September 2004 08:48

Going to upgrade to Sequoia for V8 as Samp V8 won't support DDP...

Brad, what is the reason for your decision to upgrade to Seq8 vs. just keeping Samp7? I'm assuming Samp7 w/your DDP option is doing everything you need it to, so what is it about v8 that has attracted you to go for the upgrade?

Fifthcircle · « **Reply #27 on:** September 22, 2004, 12:21:09 PM »

I use RME cards here on one machine and Lynx on the other... Eventually, both will become Lynx-based boxes, though, as they have worked really well for me.

As for the digital insert question: There is not a specific Insert, however though a number of ways, you can route audio just about anywhere as long as you have the inputs and outputs on your card. There is a routing for output of each track, but I don't remember if there is a place to make that output as a pre-fade output (I'll look a bit later this afternoon when I turn everything on in the studio). Because there is a lot of flexibility in routing, there are a number of ways that one could get around that, though, pretty easily.

--Ben

Fifthcircle · « **Reply #28 on:** September 22, 2004, 03:57:36 PM »

So I just got done with my client and much to my surprise I couldn't find anything to change the insert/output point for outboard gear. So.... As things stand, you can output a track through outboard gear, but you cannot do a prefade insert though outboard without jumping through some hoops. To get around it, you could always assign a prefade aux and send signal out through that... Kind of a messy way to work, though.

With plugins, you can insert at any point, though and you can change your plugin routing through any channel pretty easily.

--Ben

masterhse · « **Reply #29 on:** September 22, 2004, 06:03:36 PM »

Thanks Ben,

What I'm basically trying to find out is how digital outboard gear would be inserted in place of plug-ins.

bblackwood · « **Reply #30 on:** September 22, 2004, 07:17:39 PM »

Why not just process on load-in? Are you having to rely on midi or something to change your parameters?

bblackwood · « **Reply #31 on:** September 22, 2004, 07:19:50 PM »

OTR-jkl wrote on Wed, 22 September 2004 09:37

Brad, what is the reason for your decision to upgrade to Seq8 vs. just keeping Samp7? I'm assuming Samp7 w/your DDP option is doing everything you need it to, so what is it about v8 that has attracted you to go for the upgrade?

Well, couple of reasons. One is that there are features in the new software I'm interested in trying that are specific to Sequoia. Another is support - after V8 is released you won't see any further revisions (after 7.23) and all software ca be tweaked to run smoother...

masterhse · « **Reply #32 on:** September 23, 2004, 12:03:41 PM »

bblackwood wrote on Wed, 22 September 2004 19:17

Why not just process on load-in? Are you having to rely on midi or something to change your parameters?

Not at the moment, but I may be potentially in the future.

Basically I find it easier to work this way (feeding in once unprocessed). Once it is in the DAW, if there is a section that is problematic I can loop around it, or jump to sections more easily than if I had to find the spot on the tape and check it on playback. I also sometimes use automation, and the play between a plug-in and an outboard effect would be impossible if it wasn't already in the DAW. Another reason is that if I need to recall to change anything, I can just call it up, make changes, and rebounce to disk.

I used to use load-in in the past and it just took much longer in general.

Oh yeah, and many of my mixes are coming in on a data CD, so feeding in through another D/A and A/D conversion wouldn't buy anything.

Fifthcircle · « **Reply #33 on:** September 23, 2004, 01:37:06 PM »

masterhse wrote on Wed, 22 September 2004 15:03

Thanks Ben,

What I'm basically trying to find out is how digital outboard gear would be inserted in place of plug-ins.

Well, in a mastering situation, I'm not as concerned about placing the insert prefade. That is more of a concern when mixing.

To route a track of audio out of the computer is very simple in Sequoia. The caveat is that it is the last thing in the signal chain. In a mastering situation if you are using both hardware and software, route your audio though plugs (if you want them first), then out into your outboard, then back into the DAW. If you want your plugs after the outboard, route your audio out of the track unprocessed, then back into a new track with the plugs that you want on them. You can monitor with sofware FX monitoring (although, there will be some issues- especially if you are using a DSP card as you can have serious latency problems). After you have your chain put together, capture through outboard, bounce your plugins and burn your disc.

In writing, it seems like a lot more complex than it actually is... I do this kind of work all the time here.

--Ben

bblackwood · « **Reply #34 on:** September 23, 2004, 02:02:27 PM »

masterhse wrote on Thu, 23 September 2004 11:03

I used to use load-in in the past and it just took much longer in general.

Interesting. I've worked both ways and always found that I get better results from process on load-in. Different strokes and all that.

Quote:

Oh yeah, and many of my mixes are coming in on a data CD, so feeding in through another D/A and A/D conversion wouldn't buy anything.

Same here, but I still haven't heard dig processing that beat my analog chain for 95% of what comes in the door...

bloodstone · « **Reply #35 on:** September 23, 2004, 03:10:58 PM »

bblackwood wrote on Thu, 23 September 2004 19:02

masterhse wrote on Thu, 23 September 2004 11:03

I used to use load-in in the past and it just took much longer in general.

Interesting. I've worked both ways and always found that I get better results from process on load-in. Different strokes and all that.

Quote:

Oh yeah, and many of my mixes are coming in on a data CD, so feeding in through another D/A and A/D conversion wouldn't buy anything.

Same here, but I still haven't heard dig processing that beat my analog chain for 95% of what comes in the door...

What do you do if someone sends you 24 bit data files?

masterhse · « **Reply #36 on:** September 24, 2004, 11:13:49 AM »

Fifthcircle wrote on Thu, 23 September 2004 13:37

Well, in a mastering situation, I'm not as concerned about placing the insert prefade. That is more of a concern when mixing.

Agreed, not my concern either.

Fifthcircle wrote on Thu, 23 September 2004 13:37

To route a track of audio out of the computer is very simple in Sequoia. The caveat is that it is the last thing in the signal chain. In a mastering situation if you are using both hardware and software, route your audio though plugs (if you want them first), then out into your outboard, then back into the DAW. If you want your plugs after the outboard, route your audio out of the track unprocessed, then back into a new track with the plugs that you want on them. You can monitor with sofware FX monitoring (although, there will be some issues- especially if you are using a DSP card as you can have serious latency problems). After you have your chain put together, capture through outboard, bounce your plugins and burn your disc.

In writing, it seems like a lot more complex than it actually is... I do this kind of work all the time here.

--Ben

Probably less complex that what I'm doing at the moment. It would be nice to be able to mix and match outboard with plugs in various hybrid configuration IMHO. For example, I usually like to insert a Weiss EQ before some plugins (like Phoenix, and potentially others) and then go back to the DS1 and back into a plugin for dithering or limiting.

bblackwood · « **Reply #37 on:** September 24, 2004, 12:08:10 PM »

bloodstone wrote on Thu, 23 September 2004 14:10

What do you do if someone sends you 24 bit data files?

I play them back using Wavelab through my analog chain and capture in Samp...

bloodstone · « **Reply #38 on:** September 24, 2004, 08:19:28 PM »

bblackwood wrote on Fri, 24 September 2004 17:08

bloodstone wrote on Thu, 23 September 2004 14:10

What do you do if someone sends you 24 bit data files?

I play them back using Wavelab through my analog chain and capture in Samp...

This is interesting to me. Before I got a PC I used to mix from an analog board to outboard DAT via the analog ins. Extensive experiments trying to send the board's output into Rosetta 48 or Lucid AD then to the DATs digital in proved inferior to my ears. Then I would "master" my mixes by sending the analog outs of the DAT into stuff like an Avalon 747sp and/or Drawmer 1969, then to the analog ins of an outboard CD-R. It made things sound better, but I always felt like I was jury-rigging some whack signal chain.

I didn't realize that professional commercial mastering houses would actually take something from the digital domain out to analog and back in to digital again. I had this notion that was kind of taboo or something, i.e. once you're digital you "have to " stay digital.

I'm going to have to experiment some with the concept of "out of Wavelab into Samp.."

Thanks for the ideas.

OTR-jkl · « **Reply #39 on:** September 24, 2004, 09:22:50 PM »

Quote:

I'm going to have to experiment some with the concept of "out of Wavelab into Samp.."

You can do the same thing with two instances of Samp - one for playback, one for capture. Only thing is, as Brad has pointed out before, Samp wants everything to be in .wav format...

MASSIVE Mastering · « **Reply #40 on:** September 24, 2004, 10:57:47 PM »

I do the same thing out of ONE instance of Samplitude...

Assuming that the rates match, of course...

masterhse · « **Reply #41 on:** September 24, 2004, 11:20:40 PM »

Again I use inserts in PT for signal jacking. Just use analog I/O instead digital. The cool thing with this is I can move my analog outboard gear anywhere in the chain by just dragging it where I feels it needs to be.

OTR-jkl · « **Reply #42 on:** September 25, 2004, 12:16:55 AM »

MASSIVE Mastering wrote on Fri, 24 September 2004 21:57

I do the same thing out of ONE instance of Samplitude...

John -
I just tried it with one instance and, while it does work, I encountered some periodic hiccuping (may just be a buffer issue...).
Another cool and useful thing with using 2 is the metering. The master meter on the playback instance (S1) shows what peaks you're working with before you head out of the box (so you can catch stray peaks) while the master meter in S2 shows the final pgm level including your RMS.

Are you using 1 or 2 soundcards? or one w/multiple I/O...? That may take care of the playback issue. How do you A/B before/after? I use the Win Mixer to listen to pre-outboard, post-outboard or final.

MASSIVE Mastering · « **Reply #43 on:** September 25, 2004, 01:39:31 AM »

I run a 16X digital router (Lynx AES16).

Track > D/A > Analog stuff > A/D > New track that plays back on monitoring D/A. Just like tracking, but switching the monitoring.

This way, I get to see my output and input meters right next to each other.

During setup, it's a hardware switch to monitor the original (though I rarely do, I just hit "bypass" on everything instead).

Once everything is back, I just mute the original and route it to the monitoring D/A. When I want to hear it, I just hit SOLO for real-time A/B'ing.

Can't tell you on the hiccup issue - This shouldn't be any different than recording a guitar track after a piano track as far as the program is concerned.

Fifthcircle · « **Reply #44 on:** September 25, 2004, 08:07:45 PM »

OTR-jkl wrote on Fri, 24 September 2004 18:22

You can do the same thing with two instances of Samp - one for playback, one for capture. Only thing is, as Brad has pointed out before, Samp wants everything to be in .wav format...

Not necessarily... AIFF works fine and in Samp SDII can play, but requires a manual import. In Sequoia SDII is supported natively. To get AIFF to work, though, you do need quicktime installed on your machine (don't know why, but that is what it needs)

--Ben

OTR-jkl · « **Reply #45 on:** September 27, 2004, 11:16:43 AM »

Quote:

To get AIFF to work, though, you do need quicktime installed on your machine (don't know why, but that is what it needs)

I'll have to check on that. Not sure whether I've installed QT on the new DAW (seems like I remember it wanting me to when I first installed Samp...). Every time I've tried to open up an AIFF file to work on, Samp opens the import window and then proceeds to convert to .wav...

Fifthcircle · « **Reply #46 on:** September 28, 2004, 12:25:17 AM »

Sounds like you're missing QT on your machine. Install it and you should be fine.

Samp and Sequoia still work best with .wav files, but .aiff's are fine when you have QT and SDII is fine on Sequoia, but requires a manual import on Samp.

--Ben

R/E/P Community

Author Topic: Sound Forge/CD Architect vs. Wavelab, etc. (Read 18124 times)