Adobe Audition Upgrade

[3dz]

Does anybody know if the upgrade from: Cool Edit Pro 2.1 to Adobe Audition makes a big difference?
A few months ago there was an offer for the free upgrade to Adobe Audition, but you had to have cool edit online. As good as hackers are becoming, I keep my music off-line. I have one computer for online, and one computer for recording, off-line. I do recall an offer for an upgrade CD, costing $30. Now they're wanting $69 for the upgrade. My question is: is it worth it. Looking forward to your answers.
3dz

[lpdeluxe]

It's $69 for the upgrade, which includes a comprehensive manual and of course support that you can't get from Syntrillium! Not to mention a DVD tutorial. Other than that there are a lot of new features, very few of which I have experience with yet. It has been troublefree since I loaded it. I'd say it was well worth the money.

[3dz]

A manual is always nice, but I did not know it came with a DVD tutorial. I went to Adobe's Web site, and saw some of the new features. Sound pretty good, I particularly like the integrated CD burning, and the enhanced video support. It's nice to hear there is somebody out their having no problems with the upgrade.
Thank You


If there is anybody out there having problems with this software, I would love to hear about it.

[sjdude]

Originally posted by 3dz
If there is anybody out there having problems with this software, I would love to hear about it.

About a year into a recording project with CoolEdit Pro 2.0 & 2.1, I tried upgrading to Audition 1.0. The first night I tried adding a track to an existing session, Audition crashed. Thankfully, no data was lost, but I decided then and there to leave Audition on the shelf until the album project was completed.

My audio gear is a Aardvark Q10. I run Windows XP Home Edition on a real Intel P4 2.0 GHz with 500Mb DDR RAM.

--sjdude

[Stewbone]

So, sjdude,

Have you since loaded Audition and used it without any trouble? It occurs to me that maybe you have to re-save everything you have in CEP to Audition before you can actually continue with the new software?

Rog.

[sjdude]

Hi Rog,

No, I haven't yet reloaded Audition. I'm into mixing the album right now. I intend to give it another try when I'm done (not depending on it for anything).

As far as "re-saving" the sessions, I saw nothing in any literature nor any dialog boxes prompting me to do this. The session files seem interchangeable between CEP 2.0 and 2.1, and AA 1.0 made no complaints about them when I opened them. If a conversion was necessary, there was no indication it was required.

--sjdude

[Stewbone]

Funny... (not funny ha-ha!)

I'm having a consistent issue with windows closing my CEP 2.0, and I have it under some evidently good authority (dawboxpro), that it's my motherboard. I believe it's a Via model, which is supposed to be below-standard for audio apps, so I'm practicing some casual interest here in wondering if it's a system problem you're having... I couldn't begin to venture about the cause of that trouble, though.

Have you gone to the Adobe forum/website? Maybe there's a bug they've ironed out? I'd be interested to know how it works out.

By the way, do any of you folks know anything about how to aquire the Adobe upgrade (to 1.5) without doing it on-line via credit card? I'm talking walk-in to a place and pay cash.

?

Rog.

[sjdude]

Hi Rog,

I neglected to mention in my earlier post that I am using an Intel motherboard, too, with the 845 chipset, as I recall. Why did I choose this? Well, I'll tell ya...

I bought my Aardvark Q10 planning to install it into an existing machine I had and discovered, like you, that certain motherboards are not real friendly to high throughput, real time audio applications. So I called Aardvark and got some great advice about putting together an ideal system for running their Q10. At the time (2 years ago) they said that the mainboards that had the best PCI implementation were Intel's boards, and, again at the time, the 845 chipset was very reliable. So that's what I bought and built. They also recommended an AGP slot graphics card to keep things off the PCI bus.

The other probelm I had initially running the Q10 was that the bundled audio softare, Cakewalk Pro 9 at the time, crashed and hung audio channels at least twice a night for me. Cheezed me off so badly I parted with another couple hundred bucks to purchase Cool Edit Pro. Once I used it, everything went stable.

The above is why I recoiled in horror as Audition 1.0 crapped out on me. I had been used to my system being so stable for over a year. When I get time to investigate it further, perhpas I'll find out the cause of my Audition crashes. Until then, I have a stable setup.

Good luck with your motherboard problem. I don't think the crash I experience is related to my hardware.

--sjdude

[Stewbone]

Hey SJdude,

Thanks for sharing the background. Might be helpful, as I'm (unfortunately) into investigating the innards of the PC-based DAW. I'm using a VIA motherboard- VIA chipset, at least- and my windows is closing CEP. Said that...

The guy who built the computer for me says it'll probably work allright if we get it up to its' optimum spec, meaning install a 400 FSB DDR RAM. That'll make it up to speed with the CPU presently on board (we've got the separate AGP card going on. The Tascam web-site offers an optimizing guide on .pdf). Dawboxpro says "Bah!" (my tongue-in-cheek interpretation!), and that I should get an Intel # D865PERL. Which sounds like a later-model version of your 845. He's probably right...

So I, on my limited budget (a curse in this endeavor), must pick a direction and GO! Me and the guy building this piece for me are basically having an experiment. I'm getting tired of the experiment, though, and need to make some music, which is the happy end of all this business, I hope. Seems like it's taking a long time... So maybe it's the new board.

I'm going to take your 845 note, along with the 865... to the drawing board, and see what we can do. Thanks again for the light on this, SJdude.

Peace,

Rog.

[sjdude]

Hi Rog,

I think the upshot of my experience was twofold:

1) I got my good guidance on hardware from the vendor of the audio interface. The advice was considered (the support tech described the system he personally used and had been tested by the vendor, Aardvark). This one phone call was worth the price of admission.

The bundled software, Cakewalk Pro 9, was unreliable with the hardware with which it was bundled(!). Aardvark learned its lesson and bundles something different now (Steinberg Cubase LE). Cool Edit Pro was -ROCK SOLID- with the Aardvark Q10 running on a good hardware base, running XP Home Edition.

2.) Adobe Audition 1.0 crashed within 5 minutes of my first use of it on the exact same platform. It was repeatable.

That's it. I'll give Audition another try once my album is done, but not a moment sooner. As I posted way earlier, I'm troubled by the "big company" effect on Cool Edit Pro based on my own experience. I hope Adobe reads this stuff and gets Audition to be as solid as it was when it was called Cool Edit Pro.

Cheers, Rog, and everyone else!

--sjdude

[Stewbone]

Sjdude,

You did your homework, way to get what you need.

I've been using a Tascam US-428, but am looking for a way to get more simultaneous ins to record and I've seen that Q10. Looks nice! I'm understanding you're getting along with it...

I've also looked at the E-MU, but that'd leave me out for mic pre's. So the research goes on for now. Actually a band wnts me to record their demo, maybe for the price of an 8-ins soundcard, and this might work nicely! So I'm taking your testimony as recommendation.

Talk to ye, and thanks, Sj,

Rog.

[sjdude]

Hi Rog,

At the time I purchased the Q10, I considered a Terratec product for about 1/2 the price. But since my needs were for mic recording of acoustic instruments, I went with the Aardvark Q10. This was 2 years ago. Now Terratec has an 8 input offering with mic preamps and phantom power. However, if you're considering this kind of rig, I can tell you the Aardvark connector configuration is better because all the inputs are on the front of the outboard box (a 1U rack mount box, both Aardvark Q10 and Terratec EWS Mic8 Plus).

I also note that the Q10 is now selling for $699, previously $849. I bought mine from Bayview Pro Audio who throw in a pretty nice large diaphram mic for the same price as you'd pay from Musician's Friend. Service from Bayview was great, too. Here's a URL to their Q10 page: http://www.bayviewproaudio.com/customer/product.php?productid=17385&cat=0&page=1

If you or anyone else have questions about the Q10, I'd be glad to answer. I'm very pleased with the Q10 and the support I got from Aardvark. Perhaps this is better discussed in another thread topic, too.

Cheers,
--sjdude

[lpdeluxe]

I have found AA 1.5 to be very stable on my machine (XP, P4, 512MB). In fact I just returned from a recording trip to the Austin area: I carried my computer, digital mixer, US428, headphone amp etc and set up nearly my complete studio in a living room and everything ran like a freight train. No crashes, no glitches, I almost forgot I was using a computer! I now have 14 songs on the hard drive and expect to get started mixing today or tomorrow. I am a believer in Adobe, having been a skeptic in the beginning. My computer is nothing special (2 40gig hard drives, Plextor Premium CD burner) but it is something no other setup I have had has been, which is STABLE. There's nothing like hauling your gear 200 miles, setting it all up, and spending 10-hour days recording instead of tracking down glitches, dealing with crashes and freezes, and apologizing for losing that perfect take.
J

[sjdude]

lp,

Glad to hear a pro-active "it is stable" report from someone. I have to note that you mention AA 1.5. The repeatable crash I experienced was with AA 1.0. Now I wonder if Adobe will offer 1.5 free or cheap to people who experienced persistent crashes with 1.0? (Yeah, right.) But in any case, its nice to hear that 1.5 seems solid. Gives me hope for when I eventually have time to make the transition.

Thanks,
--sjdude

[lpdeluxe]

I'm not sure whether 1.5 is more stable than 1.0, because I ran 1.0 on a Win98SE that had a P3, 256MB, and was slower overall than the current one. In February I was recording a now-finished CD and I found that 10 or 11 tracks was the max before the computer froze up and I had to reboot. I can't say for sure it was the difference between 1.0 and 1.5, since I was using 4-year computer that was running out of horsepower. After an involuntary upgrade (apparently the power supply failed, and I lost EVERYTHING inside the box) with the current configuration, I ran 1.0 with no problems for a couple of months before I did the 1.5 upgrade. I tend to believe it was the computer, not the software, especially the amount of RAM. I just lately converted my graphics computer to essentially the same specs as the recording computer (changed to XP and added a hard drive) but with 256MB of RAM it is noticeably slower on graphic files of any size.

I just re-read the previous posts and I don't see anything particularly different between my machine and y'alls', to use a Texasism. I could dig out the spec sheet on mine to find out what MB was used (the shop that built it is owned by a computer recording type and I trusted him to make the call) but whatever it is, it does the job. One issue that hasn't come up is the way we record. I use NO effects, not even compression: I record acoustic instruments and vocals, no reverbs, no trick EQ etc, and I wonder if that's the difference. Since you haven't specified I don't know your method, but it would seem that higher CPU hits would translate into more problems. [Just so you know, I do EQ etc after the recording is done.]