Topic: Adobe Audition CS5.5

[kirk97132]

Yeah I had that same crap happen too.  The other thing is that you cannot load previous sessions you have to start over and that blows.  How hard would it be to make it backward compatible?  So now I dunno got new machine and not sure what I wanna do.  The trial period is a month right?  I wonder if you can run both on the same machine without conflicts?

[Fried Chicken Boy]

Yeah I had that same crap happen too.  The other thing is that you cannot load previous sessions you have to start over and that blows.

Absolutely agreed.  The only upside to those crashes (for me, at least) was that it forced me to document how I was processing the tracks/files so I could recreate exactly what I was doing after restarting AA3.  A pain in the ass but helped immensely in quickly getting back to the point I was at when the program froze up.

As far as running both on the same machine, I'm guessing that they might use the same folder in the directory so there could be a potential conflict.  You won't know until you try it out.  I would suggest doing a system backup first in case things go haywire and you have to revert back to the "pre-both versions" state.

[kirk97132]

I've loaded the new CS5.5 version and am gonna see how it does with 8gb of ram behind it.  I loded the whole suite because you only get one shot at a trial so what the hell why not.  Odds are I'll only get the Audition.  But then again I can get scholastic pricing.  I'll keep AA3 on my older machine for now.  More reports back on actual working pros and cons.  since it's a new machine I think I'll set a partion and maybe then I can keep the two versions away from each other?  I'll let you know if I do a dual install and if it works.  Maybe the'll set a patch to allow loading the ses files, how hard can it actually be?

[Fried Chicken Boy]

Cool.  Thanks for the heads up and please keep us posted on what you come across while using it, kirkd.

[kirk97132]

Funny I was just gonna post initial impressions.  I am loading 34 tracks at 5.5 hours each.  Yes that is not a typo. A very very long benefit show for a friend.  all in 24/48.  Believe it or not everything...everything loaded and into multitrack for working in about 15 minutes.  15 mins is HOURS less than it used to take.  And with only 3GB of ram before I could not even play all the complete tracks.  I used to cut them into hour long chunks.   Normal load time before of 34tracks in hour long chunks was about 80 minutes or more .  Will also do playback without any hitches.  I am sure that the 8gb of ram has everything to do with that.  I am so glad I got it, originally was only gonna get 6.  Still working thru the visual display options.  They seem slightly different and will take a few days to tweak where I like them.  eye strain kills me after a while so I wanna play with things.    Effects look and handle the same as expected.  It seems like the operations run smoother.  BUT I am comparing a new machine to an old machine, and a new version to an old version.  Not all comparisons will be equal.  More later as I go along

PS I thought I should post machine specs.  Intel i5 2310  2.90GHz w/8GB ram running win7

[acidjack]

Funny I was just gonna post initial impressions.  I am loading 34 tracks at 5.5 hours each.  Yes that is not a typo. A very very long benefit show for a friend.  all in 24/48.  Believe it or not everything...everything loaded and into multitrack for working in about 15 minutes.  15 mins is HOURS less than it used to take.  And with only 3GB of ram before I could not even play all the complete tracks.  I used to cut them into hour long chunks.   Normal load time before of 34tracks in hour long chunks was about 80 minutes or more .  Will also do playback without any hitches.  I am sure that the 8gb of ram has everything to do with that.  I am so glad I got it, originally was only gonna get 6.  Still working thru the visual display options.  They seem slightly different and will take a few days to tweak where I like them.  eye strain kills me after a while so I wanna play with things.    Effects look and handle the same as expected.  It seems like the operations run smoother.  BUT I am comparing a new machine to an old machine, and a new version to an old version.  Not all comparisons will be equal.  More later as I go along

PS I thought I should post machine specs.  Intel i5 2310  2.90GHz w/8GB ram running win7

Kirk, I'm thinking about ante-ing up the $400 for this, mostly due to the improved multitracking.  I guess you think it's worth it?  My only question is, can you actually do tracking in Audition the way you can in Audacity, where you insert labels and it then exports based on them?  Or do you have to go to a separate program?  Also, I don't see a function to simply Amplfiyi (not normalize) to -.1dB.  Does everyone using Audition just use the Normalize function, then?

[kirk97132]

Funny I was just gonna post initial impressions.  I am loading 34 tracks at 5.5 hours each.  Yes that is not a typo. A very very long benefit show for a friend.  all in 24/48.  Believe it or not everything...everything loaded and into multitrack for working in about 15 minutes.  15 mins is HOURS less than it used to take.  And with only 3GB of ram before I could not even play all the complete tracks.  I used to cut them into hour long chunks.   Normal load time before of 34tracks in hour long chunks was about 80 minutes or more .  Will also do playback without any hitches.  I am sure that the 8gb of ram has everything to do with that.  I am so glad I got it, originally was only gonna get 6.  Still working thru the visual display options.  They seem slightly different and will take a few days to tweak where I like them.  eye strain kills me after a while so I wanna play with things.    Effects look and handle the same as expected.  It seems like the operations run smoother.  BUT I am comparing a new machine to an old machine, and a new version to an old version.  Not all comparisons will be equal.  More later as I go along

PS I thought I should post machine specs.  Intel i5 2310  2.90GHz w/8GB ram running win7

Kirk, I'm thinking about ante-ing up the $400 for this, mostly due to the improved multitracking.  I guess you think it's worth it?  My only question is, can you actually do tracking in Audition the way you can in Audacity, where you insert labels and it then exports based on them?  Or do you have to go to a separate program?  Also, I don't see a function to simply Amplfiyi (not normalize) to -.1dB.  Does everyone using Audition just use the Normalize function, then?

Well,  After using it for a while, I am missing some features that were no carried forward.  The amplify is still there thou not sure what you're having a problem with finding it.  I have not ever used this for tracking, so I can't answer that one.  the little reading I've done about it says the new version is supposed to run in background more and make things run smoother.  I can't really tell since I switched computers the same time I switched programs.  The puter I have now has shitloads of ram so all programs will run way faster on this machine.  I've got 8GB of ram.  If it was me and I had to pay full list for the new version I'm not sure what I would do.  I gt an education discount so I will most likely get the new version and just keep the old one on my old machine.  IF it does run way faster than the old one and is more stable when running large stacks of effects in multitrack then I guess it's worth it.  If you are only mixing down a set of audience mics and a SBD feed then I dunno.  Sorry I can't help you out more.  Any other questions feel free to ask, Kirk

[Brian Skalinder]

Kirk, I'm thinking about ante-ing up the $400 for this, mostly due to the improved multitracking.

I always liked CEP / Audition fairly well when I used it, but if $400 is too rich for your blood (it is for mine), you might consider Reaper. 

[acidjack]

^^ All I really want is the smooth multitracking functions, simultaneous monitoring of effects (i.e., you hear EQ changes in real time) and those izotope compressors.  For everything else, Audacity does what I need it to do pretty well.  Is there a less costly program that can do those three things?  Because yes, $400 seems like a lot to pay for something that I don't really need all that functionality for.

[Brian Skalinder]

I haven't used it after an initial trial (resolved my problem with SAM SE), however I'm pretty sure Reaper has smooth multitracking functions and real-time effects monitoring, but it definitely doesn't have bundled Izotope compressors, though.  That's going to be the hard part, I think.

[kirk97132]

if you really want the Iztope stuff it'll cost ya.  You could try getting a student or someone who works at a school to buy the discounted educational price on Adobe for ya. 

[kirk97132]

Been using it hard fo a couple weeks now and I have had about 6 shutdown errors at least they were only during uploads of files.  But still, brand new computer and fresh instal should be happening

[acidjack]

Kirk,

What I meant re: Amplify is the only "Amplify" I can find in Audition allows you to tell it how much to Amplify in dB, but there doesn't seem to be the handy feature that there is in Audacity where you go to "Amplify" and direct it to amplify until it peaks out at -0.1dB.  With Audition's function it seems you just have to guess, or use normalize. Or am I missing something?  I'm still playing with the program; not claiming to be an expert...

[kirk97132]

wouldn't be the same as normalize?  I just read the help file on match clip volume...read that then try it I think that is what you are looking for.   I am not a real fan of Audacity, except it is free so I do use it as multitrack example for teaching students at the college about mixing basics.  I know in AA3 there was an edit favorites but I have not found it in CS5.5 yet

[Cheesecadet]

You could always use the hard limit function too where you specify how much amplitude you want and then just limit it at -0.1dB.