6 Reasons why Cool Edit Pro is better than Wave Lab

[duane]

Let me state at the onset that I use each program 50% of the time. And what CEP does poorly Wavelab excels in---and vise versa. I’ve just gotten tired of hearing people on this forum saying Wavelab pails in comparison to Cool Edit. If anything I’m a little perturbed with Steinberg selling their product with relatively fewer effects (poorer effects?) and expecting the consumer to make up by buying more of their product.


1. Better wave file drawing. In the previous Post, “cool edit vs wavelab” I can’t believe no one brought this up. I find myself struggling to see minute details in Wavelab that are clearly visible in CEP. Small clicks and quick transients are a hit and miss proposition in wave lab. A wave that has been run through a digital limiter has a definite squared off absolute look in CEP. It isn’t nearly as obvious in Wavelab.

2. Better choice of effects. Previously Anita wrote, “WaveLab gives you endless profesional tools above the competition in every single task you will do with your audio files.” I have got to ask what the heck she is using for an EQ? Steinberg included a crappy little three band EQ that has only one fully parametric band and two shelving bands. CEP comes with an enormous array of Filters including one tool that changes dynamically from one end of your selection to the other.

3. Ok, now the meters in CEP are nothing to write home about, but they are WAY better than the meters in Wavelab. You can configure the CEP meters to be peak-hold, adjust for DC; you can change the range etc. Wavelab’s are only several segments and relatively small. (I’m talking meters used for editing waves, not the Montage meters!)

4 Noise reduction in CEP is great. I have performed some real magic with these functions and have had to leave the Wavelab environment many times just so I can run my work through CEP’s de-clicker. In the same previous post papario wrote, “I agree. WaveLab is the power horse for mastering.” Ok, maybe you should define mastering, but often times when remastering old recordings I need noise reduction of some variety and Wavelab does not have any.

5. Wavelab has the worst sounding Reverb I have ever heard. Again, remember I’m talking about effects that come stock with the software. Wavelab’s verb has got the twangiest thinnest verb in any software package I’ve heard. I’ve spent a lot of time tweaking that thing to make it sound smooth and have had poor results. Hell Wavelabs’s verb isn’t even a VST effect so you can’t use it in their multitrack environment. CEP’s verbs are the definition of lush; smooth trails that decay into air and can be tweaked to emulate almost anything. (Ok CEP’s not real time but at least it has a useable sound)

6. Wavelab’s 3d frequency analysis tool draws a real pretty picture. In fact my jaw dropped when I saw it for the first time. When I want to impress the lay folks I simply pop up that 3D rainbow colored graph. It looks nice, but now try to interpret the data and use it----It pails compared to CEP’s. Cool Edit has a cursor that wipes across its rainbow colored graph AS IT PLAYS. You are not given some abstract numerical time scale but rather you can see what frequencies are being played back in real time. Useable and practical.

flame me

duane



[This message has been edited by duane (edited 10-18-2001).]

[papario]

Hi: My god!! I am sorry but I am laughing at you as wild. You have no idea about what you talk about. Talk things with more fundaments. I will not comment on your post becasue I can´t talk to a blind wall.

papario

[xanto]

WaveLab is the most profesional Mastering, Editing, Audio Montage and CD burner you would get. Like it or not, it is so and it is used on the biggest and most well known Studios around the world. Probably, yes the pluggings are cheap, but Wavelab is not made specially to use them but third party pluggings. So, I totally disagree with your cheap compararion and bad taste. But, that is your opinion and I respect it.

xanto

[Cristina]

I love WaveLab. Absolutly a must to edit and make audio montages. I learn also to use it as my main CD Writer software. Great. Yes the plugins are not good. Who cares? I use Waves, TC and Sonitus and use them inside WaveLab to edit and to manage my music. I think this is what the most do concerning the FXs.

cu
Cristina

[duane]

Papario:

If you have such strong opinions, back them up with reasons. Take one of those six points and refute them with factual evidence.

Quote:
Talk things with more fundaments.

Now I realize English may be a second language for you but what the hell are you trying to say? I think I was pretty clear on my previous post.

Quote:
I will not comment on your post becasue I can´t talk to a blind wall.

OK…I’m a wall and I can’t see. But I really am interested in why you don’t agree with the points I made above. Again, please back up your opinion with reasons not just more opinions.

Xanto:

Quote:
“WaveLab is the most profesional Mastering, Editing, Audio Montage and CD burner you would get”
clip
“…it is so and it is used on the biggest and most well known Studios around the world.”

Wait a minute, Just because it is used in the, “most well known Studios around the world.” does not make it the “most professional.”

A more apt argument for you may be to EXPLAIN what makes Wavelab professional and why CEP is not.

Quote:
“Probably, yes the pluggings are cheap, but Wavelab is not made specially to use them but third party pluggings.”

WTF are you saying? Steinberg throws in a lot of effect and transform functions but doesn’t REALLY expect you to use them?

One of the points I was trying to make is that Wavelab’s plugins are poor and CEP’s are much better, thus making CEP a better buy. Sure I could buy Wave’s Direct X plugin bundle for $300 but I just dropped $420 for Wavelab and all the while CEP only cost $300. ...and it has a decent EQ.


Christina:

Thank you for an intelligent response. Yep I burn all of my CD’s from the montage view also. But if you want to grab a single sample (let’s say a click) and move it up or down you aren’t going to be using Wavelab. Hell it’s difficult to even see single sample clicks in Wavelab. This is just one reason CEP is a better editor.


Thanks




[This message has been edited by duane (edited 10-13-2001).]

[papario]

duane.

I will not waste my time to discuss bull**** with you. I regret to spend my time in stupid comparassions made by you. So, sorry for having answer to your blindness. Talk whatever you wish is the best for you. ciao.

[resistor man]

Gawd, I love reasoned, logical debates.

Anyhow, I had to chuckle about moving single samples... I hope I never have to go that far in, and can't imagine a circumstance that would require it, though it's nice to know you can, isn't it?

[mborz]

Originally posted by papario:
I will not waste my time to discuss bull**** with you.

Then why bother chiming in at all? If you're not willing to discuss it, why did you respond to his original post?

[Cristina]

Hi.

I think I will quit from this forum. So much turmoil and the main thing to be discuss is bypassed. I thought I was in a Forum with matured guys.

Cristina

[papario]

I am sorry Cristina. I am also sorry "duane". Now and then I react wrongly, I know. My deepest apologies to all.

papario

[jecahn]

I have to chime in here and agree. I'm not all that impressed with Wavelab. I'm more comfortable with Cool Edit Pro and I think that it's more flexible and gives me more information to work with. Also, on a petty note, it doesn't look or feel like Steinberg software. Someone should tell those guys that they aren't just making "million color Atari" software.

But really, it's not how it look but what it does.

[Heavens to Betsy 2]

CoolEdit Pro is blue-ribbon material. It's powerful, flexible, competitive--even without realtime effects. I am unfamiliar with Wave Lab, though it most likely does have its strengths over CEP...however few. http://www.audioforums.com/forums/smile.gif

At any rate, CEP is a formidible app and quite worth anyone's time and money.

[Tim Z]

Can someone please tell me what the purpose of this post is? What does it accomplish other than confuse those who are in the market for mastering software. I'm not trying to further this debate, but I use Wavelab and CEP daily, and they both have their strong points, although with a good set of plugs, Wavelab really doesn't have any weaknesses, whereas CEP does, IMHO. I could just as easily make up a post outlining 6 reasons why Wavelab is better than CEP. I will say that when I have a serious mastering job, I will choose Wavelab everytime over CEP. Simply the best written piece of software I have used to date (and I have used them all). That being said I still love and use CEP for certain applications.

Now let's go make some music and stop all this bickering. http://www.audioforums.com/forums/smile.gif

TZ

[duane]

Originally posted by Tim Z:
Can someone please tell me what the purpose of this post is? .

To further the discussion of Cool Edit Pro in regards to other software. Now I Know it got bogged down with people getting their nose bent out of shape, but the point seemed pretty obvious to me.


What does it accomplish other than confuse those who are in the market for mastering software.

On the contrary, it makes it clearer to people in the market for mastering software, that CEP should be a strong contender for their money and that Wavelab isn't all that it's cracked up to be with it's deficiencies. (Like the ones I pointed out on top. I wish someone would take issue with them so there would be some intelligent discussion).


I could just as easily make up a post outlining 6 reasons why Wavelab is better than CEP.

I think I could too when it comes to the montage, but I'm talking about the editing half. Come on, that meter on the master output section is really poor.


Now let's go make some music and stop all this bickering.

What you call bickering I call discussing and that is the purpose of this forum.

Duane

[XenosoniK]

I must agree that this is not bickering but a discussion instead. Some people take things way too hard/personal when really this is just a way of expressing one's feeling as well as (and especially for me) a way to learn about various audio applications.
Getting to the discussion part...This discussion directly addresses an ongoing issue that has been addressed many times in the few other forums that i have participated in (as well as with myself). After testing out wavlab, I couldn't understand why people liked it so much. I assumed that I was just ignorant and that I couldn't understand the program. From trying it out, I couldn't find very many plugins and more importantly to me, the built in effects processors, that were better than CEP. CEP was easier for me to read and apply effects with. So, if anybody can convince me why Wavlab whoops CEP, please feel free. I am on a seemingly endless voyage on seeking the best audio programs.

Just my two yen.

-X

[This message has been edited by XenosoniK (edited 10-16-2001).]

[earlgray]

Can one monitor with effects in real time in cooledit pro? Or is there just a preview button? Seems to me you can't but I might be wrong. Or then maybe I’m not. If you are making music, and I stress the word music, than Wave Lab is the place to be. And by the way internal plug in's are nothing but sales tools for the ignorant.

Gray

[duane]

originally posted by earlgray:
Can one monitor with effects in real time in cooledit pro?

No you can’t.

Or is there just a preview button?

Yep, a preview button. I suggest this isn’t such a bad thing because the wave doesn’t need to be rendered and as you tweak the parameters you hear the changes immediately. Work flows pretty quick.

And by the way internal plug in's are nothing but sales tools for the ignorant.
Gray

Originally posted by duane:
One of the points I was trying to make is that Wavelab’s plugins are poor and CEP’s are much better, thus making CEP a better buy. Sure I could buy Wave’s Direct X plugin bundle for $300 but I just dropped $420 for Wavelab and all the while CEP only cost $300. ...and it has a decent EQ.

No, I don’t think it’s for the ignorant, I think it’s for the cost conscious. People that think over their buying decisions and weigh pros and cons will find you don’t need that expensive plugin bundle to get the same work done in CEP as you would in Wavelab. (Work, like your higher calling of, "making music".)

Duane

[Dags]

I much prefer working with CEP but the thing that bugs me the most is that to my ears Wavelab has superior sound quality.

Cheers

[duane]

And speaking of making music…

One of the CEP functions I use allot is the beat finder. You know, where you hold down the shift and bracket key and the cursor jumps to the next beat or rhythmic part. For me, one of the rhythmically inept, this has saved a lot of time when creating loops or in/out points. If Wavelab has something this cool let me know.

Originally posted by resistor man:
Anyhow, I had to chuckle about moving single samples... I hope I never have to go that far in, and can't imagine a circumstance that would require it,

Ya at first glance is seems a little anal tweaking 1/44,000 of a second of sound, but I have a coaxial to optical SPDIF adaptor that I use to dump mini disk data into the editor and it leaves behind single sample clicks at the top and bottom of the track. It’s fast to zoom WAY in and grab that one sample and return it to it’s proper place. Also if there is a single peak in the program material that clips, just pull the samples down (usually only a couple) instead of reamplifying or putting it through the limiter.

Originally posted by dags:
I much prefer working with CEP but the thing that bugs me the most is that to my ears Wavelab has superior sound quality.

dags, I think you pretty much drilled that point home is two other separate posts. Your point can’t be argued because it is your personal perception. Go troll someone else’s topic.

Duane out...



[This message has been edited by duane (edited 10-16-2001).]

[Tim Z]

Hmmm, this isn't bickering???

"Hi: My god!! I am sorry but I am laughing at you as wild. You have no idea about what you talk about. Talk things with more fundaments. I will not comment on your post because I can´t talk to a blind wall.
papario"

"Like it or not, it is so and it is used on the biggest and most well known Studios around the world. Probably, yes the pluggings are cheap, but Wavelab is not made specially to use them but third party pluggings. So, I totally disagree with your cheap compararion and bad taste"

"I will not waste my time to discuss bull**** with you. I regret to spend my time in stupid comparassions made by you. So, sorry for having answer to your blindness"

"Gawd, I love reasoned, logical debates.
Anyhow, I had to chuckle about moving single samples... I hope I never have to go that far in, and can't imagine a circumstance that would require it, though it's nice to know you can"

"Then why bother chiming in at all? If you're not willing to discuss it, why did you respond to his original post?"

"I think I will quit from this forum. So much turmoil and the main thing to be discuss is bypassed. I thought I was in a Forum with matured guys"

I thought I was being kind with that analogy. If that's not bickering, I don't know what is. Whatever, here's my scoop on the comparison of the two programs.

Wavelab's Master section makes it FAR superior just by that feature alone. You can have six plugs running in real-time and turn on or off any combination of those plugs in REAL-TIME. That is worth it's price in gold right there. HUGE advantage over CEP. There is no better program than Wavelab for instant comparisons between plugs on and off. I can't stand it in CEP when I process a wave and then can only undo the effect but if I want to redo it I have to process all over again. Which, BTW, takes WAY TOO LONG IN CEP!

Unlimited UNDO and REDO. Again this is a must have if you want to A/B the effects while you are Mastering a project.

Way faster processing engine in Wavelab. Which can be a huge factor when you are charging by the hour.

The Batch Processing in Wavelab is invaluable. You can also assign different processing to different files in the batch processor. Another awesome feature.

Built in CD programs and CD writing. Another very useful feature for an all in one Mastering Program.

Audio Montage! Need I say more.

IMHO a WAY better user interface than CEP. Contrary to Duane's post I MUCH prefer Wavelab's wave form view and multiple features for customizing it. I have no problem at all in working in Wavelab down to one sample, and I prefer the way it views in Wavelab.


Wavelab can assign any function to a key tab. Also a VERY useful function in a pro mastering environment.

I can't even get the re-sample function in CEP to work, but the re-sampler in Wavelab works VERY well.

You can open up a bunch of wave files in Wavelab and tile them for easy viewing and copying and pasting.

Wavelab can rip files from a CD into wave format (not sure if CEP can do this or not).

Wavelab has much better recording meters and level info.

You have choices for different wave scrolling settings in Wavelab, which makes for more comfortable viewing.

I do like the hiss removal and some of the other noise reduction features in CEP, but those could easily be reproduced in Wavelab with a bit of tweaking of plugs.

So there you have it; speed, multiple undo/redo, master section (love it), instant A/B of effects and plugs, etc. etc. make Wavelab a far superior mastering package.

I'm writing this from work today and I am sure I have missed out many other reasons why I much prefer Wavelab, but I'm sure you get my points.

TZ


[This message has been edited by Tim Z (edited 10-16-2001).]

[Bob Cain]

Originally posted by resistor man:
Gawd, I love reasoned, logical debates.

Anyhow, I had to chuckle about moving single samples... I hope I never have to go that far in, and can't imagine a circumstance that would require it, though it's nice to know you can, isn't it?

I do it all the time. Besides simple audio, I use CEP as a DSP processing tool with Angelo Farina's Aurora set of CEP plugins and Matlab. I do a lot of convolution and impulse response manipulation and for example I often have to convert a linear phase impulse response with 1025 samples to one with 1024 samples and a zero'ed last one for FFT reasons and I thank G-- for one sample deletes. I also use a few sample deletes and inserts for adding and removing delays in the impulses.

I looked deeply at Wavelab. Relative to CEP it's a toy in nearly all regards. I do like that it has sample resolution time stretching and resampling, though, but that's about it.

Oh, it doesn't have a (gag) fixed, robin's egg blue background either. That almost made me use it despite its being a toy. :-)


Bob

[duane]

Originally posted by Tim Z:
Wavelab's Master section makes it FAR superior just by that feature alone.
Maybe this never struck me as such a “gee-wiz-bang” thing because the Wavelab effects are nothing to get excited about. You got to have some great third party plugins to make that thing shine.

There is no better program than Wavelab for instant comparisons between plugs on and off.

I think you’re right when comparing it to CEP. But doesn’t Digital Performer handle plugins similar? It’s not the most unique thing to hit the world of audio. Maybe I’m a little off topic.

I can't stand it in CEP when I process a wave and then can only undo the effect but if I want to redo it I have to process all over again. Which, BTW, takes WAY TOO LONG IN CEP!

I’ve gotten use to hitting the F3 key. A nice short cut, but it doesn’t address the issue of rendering.

Unlimited UNDO and REDO. Again this is a must have if you want to A/B the effects while you are Mastering a project.

Your right, but the number of undo levels in CEP is user definable. Technically not unlimited, but you can set it for 99 levels of undo, and then undo things for a long long long time.

Way faster processing engine in Wavelab. Which can be a huge factor when you are charging by the hour.

I’m not sure if you are talking about the functions that Wavelab needs to render, like CEP, (and there are a number of them like normalize, EQ, global analysis, etc.) Or the way it processes data when it uses a Direct X plugin. In that case, is there that big a difference? Or if you trying to make the point that Wavelab has real time effect capabilities, you all ready said that above.

The Batch Processing in Wavelab is invaluable.
Batch processing is always invaluable! CEP has got it and IMHO both are cumbersome.
You can also assign different processing to different files in the batch processor.

I haven’t had a use for that but it sounds cool.

Built in CD programs and CD writing.

Now I’m still talking about the editing half, the same as I did in my original post, that “CD Program” way of burning a CD, via a text list, is a real pain. It’s similar to Goldenhawk’s Cdrwin. To burn CD’s in a more intuitive manner (GUI) you need to leave the editing half and use the Montage.

Audio Montage! Need I say more.

No.
[feeble voice]But you can’t assign individual sound card outputs to tracks. [/feeble voice] In the whole scope of both of these multitracks, assignable outputs may not be such a big deal. I know the Montage is not what they consider part of the editing half, but it does kick booty.

IMHO a WAY better user interface than CEP.

I’ll give this to you because it’s a personal perception and there may not be a right answer. At the risk of wandering off topic… I ordered Digidesign’s Protools Free and I have to say that is one wacked GUI. For me it’s got a learning curve I have to work real hard to get over. You get what you pay for.

I have no problem at all in working in Wavelab down to one sample, and I prefer the way it views in Wavelab.

What the…! Open up two or three waves in each editor and try to tell me they don’t look different. Why is that? In CEP, view a one-minute clip all the way out and then zoom WAY WAY in. You will always be able to see spikes of several samples in width. As you zoom in and out in Wavelab the spike appear and disappear. Often I think to myself, “I heard a peak, but I don’t see a peak.”

Wavelab can assign any function to a key tab.

This is not unique to Wavelab. In CEP it’s called, “Keyboard Shortcuts”. It’s kept under |options| |keyboard shortcuts|

Also a VERY useful function in a pro mastering environment.

I think I could write an entire treatise on that word, “pro”. But anyway… shortcuts are useful in EVERY environment!

I can't even get the re-sample function in CEP to work

I’m going to work under the premise you are talking about converting sample rates. Or maybe I’m wrong? I’m looking at CEP’s here and it has four parameters to change instead of Wavelab’s one. You don’t need to tweak to all four, just one to make a change. But… you better know what bit depth and sample rate are if you are working with digital audio. One person’s flexibility is another’s learning curve.

Wavelab can rip files from a CD into wave format (not sure if CEP can do this or not).

No you can’t and Wavelab has got that down in spades.

Wavelab has much better recording meters and level info.

That’s true because Wavelab has those Montage-esque meters. But unlike Wavelab, CEP draws out the waveform while audio is streaming to the drive. That in it self is information packed, plus you have CEP’s regular meters.

You have choices for different wave scrolling settings in Wavelab, which makes for more comfortable viewing.

I’m glad you brought this up. I have Wavelab loaded on a dual PIII 850 and a P233. My favorite way of working is to have the wave move under the cursor, instead of having the cursor jump from one end of the window to the other. I keep a CPU usage meter open at all times and when the wave is set to scroll across the screen in Wavelab, my usage hits the ceiling. CEP has lower CPU overhead for its display.

I do like the hiss removal and some of the other noise reduction features in CEP, but those could easily be reproduced in Wavelab with a bit of tweaking of plugs.

What plugs? You’re not talking about hacking off part of you audio bandwidth with the EQ, are you? Or maybe you’re talking about the gate function in that VST Dynamic thing. It’s pretty sweet (really) but it won’t remove a click in the middle of a wave.

…Wavelab a far superior mastering package.

CEP, a superior editing package.

I think I’ve drug this through the dirt and there’s not much more to say, but thank you. Thanks Tim Z for posting a great response and for not turning it personal. Also thanks for not posting any of my quotes in your “bickering examples” ;-)

Also, I don't think the blue color is that bad.

Duane out…


[This message has been edited by duane (edited 10-18-2001).]

[Sonic Valley]

At the end of the day kiddies it all comes down to the hands and ears and talent behind the keyboard and console.

Nothing beats experience, valued judgements and talent. These little programs are simply tools....a hammer...If you can't forge a great creation in CEP then it's time to pack it in.

There are no magic buttons...

[Buckwheat]

Amen Sonic Valley,
It is a futile arguement since judging the "best" software is highly subjective. And it really depends on what type of audio work you do. Music, sound design, audio books, video, telephony, radio spots, scientific testing... the needs for all these types of projects are hugely different. We are fortunate to have so many choices for good solid editors these days, and for so cheap.

[duane]

Buckwheat,
I agree with you when say, “…judging the ‘best’ software is highly subjective”. But the argument you spoke of is not futile. Definite quantitative points can be gathered and compared. The same way one might compare vehicles. If you note in my original post, I stayed away from subjective features and concentrated on the quantitative, number of EQ bands, resolution of meters, noise reduction vs. no noise reduction and etc.

And it really depends on what type of audio work you do. Music, sound design, audio books, video, telephony, radio spots, scientific testing... the needs for all these types of projects are hugely different.

Absolutely, but if we are to even have a forum there are some very basic qualifications that need to be met. We want a display of the wave, we want to hear the sound we are editing, we want to cut copy and paste, EQ is handy etc. These are basics that apply to everyone. Cool Edit and Wavelab do some of these different than each other and they can be measured, they are not subjective. Comparing and contrasting is not a vain pursuit, it makes one think about their tool, increases ones knowledge when making a purchase, and hopefully, the end product will be better.

Duane




[This message has been edited by duane (edited 10-20-2001).]

[Buckwheat]

Good points Duane - I will retract the term "futile" since I see what you are saying. I guess what bugs me most is that most post opinions assuming that eveyone uses the software for the same thing - usually music based tracking/editing. I of course have no statistics, but would not be suprised to see that editors such as CEP, WaveLab and Sound Forge are probably actually used more in other areas. I know radio stations buy these things in multiple licenses of hundreds of copies! So it is important to keep in mind that the design and performance of a software may need to be much broader than what one customer thinks is most important. Personally I have made much more income on non-music based tasks with software than I have with other multimedia projects. So this too puts a whole different light on what you want to consider a "pro" software.