what CANT adobe audition do?

[Chris Lago]

Originally Posted by caan't deciiide

IS there a way to get the metronome to count-in 2 bars before the recording starts?! can't figure this out! 1 must be highh!! ooh oh yea

can summmwuunnn tell mehh?

I mean like I want the metronome to click for 2-bars before it starts recording, that is all.

Also to chris i heard your song about mastering, and it sounded masterful, atleast the mixing and mastering part...alright it was a lil catchy too;

Hey, first of all, glad you like the song, I spent a lot of time working on it in Audition to get it sounding right.

I personally don't know how to do the 2 bars before it starts recording. I usually put the starting line at 4 bars before so I can come on time when it's time to record vox, guitars, synths etc.

Yes you can have track independent loops easily. I'd have to show you in person, in fact, a lot of what you ask is a bit hard for me to explain on the web. I'm much better in person to show how to do things.

A lot of your concerns though are holes in audition... Some of the stuff you're asking, to my knowledge, cannot be done (unless other people are able to). I usually set the automation, build the track etc in Fruity Loops, and then I record vox, guitars, bass, synths etc in Audition.

You don't really loop, you just copy paste all the files to the length you want, so the song keeps going, and if you put it in bars instead of minutes, you will be able to just get 1 loop going, then right click, create duplicate and it'll multiply itself.

For the MPC, you can do either or. I know that it shows Analog 7 only, but it does count Analog 8 in there. When I record in stereo with my mini-me, it only says SPDIF 1 (S) but it actually records both channels.

Also, I never do the same exact edits on files, I just do the edits one at a time and they eventually become the same.

I hope some of this answers your questions? It would be better to show you in person. I like to use the chorus and Reverb in Audition, as well as the echo and Analog Delay too.

[RasCricket]

All the music posted on my link below was done with Audition 3.0 and Reason 4.0. The tracks "Ska One" and "Human Nature" are the ones I recommend. Those were both complex mixes that sound quite nice. And thats after having the program for two months. Both of those songs, actually. "Human Nature" was an incredibly complex mix and it has me up for "song of the year" at a website. Audition 3.0 is awesome.


To caant deciide, of course Ive seen your posts but I cant really help ya ~ yet. You might still be in that "diggin' in" phase which just take alot of "trial and terror" to get through. Assigning the "outs" so you can actually hear the audio, for example ~ we've all been there. A lot of things ya gotta do on your own before they make sense. Feel free to use this as your think pad and we'll chime in if we can ~ Cricket

(listen to those tunes! )

[Illmo]

AA is a great WAV editor program, however it SUCKS as a multi tracking program.I find the multi track o be unnatural, and cumbersome. The work flow is not smooth and the tools are not intuitive(like PT, cubase, or Record).

[caan't deciiide]

Originally Posted by chrislago

Hey, first of all, glad you like the song, I spent a lot of time working on it in Audition to get it sounding right.

I personally don't know how to do the 2 bars before it starts recording. I usually put the starting line at 4 bars before so I can come on time when it's time to record vox, guitars, synths etc.

Yes you can have track independent loops easily. I'd have to show you in person, in fact, a lot of what you ask is a bit hard for me to explain on the web. I'm much better in person to show how to do things.

A lot of your concerns though are holes in audition... Some of the stuff you're asking, to my knowledge, cannot be done (unless other people are able to). I usually set the automation, build the track etc in Fruity Loops, and then I record vox, guitars, bass, synths etc in Audition.

You don't really loop, you just copy paste all the files to the length you want, so the song keeps going, and if you put it in bars instead of minutes, you will be able to just get 1 loop going, then right click, create duplicate and it'll multiply itself.

For the MPC, you can do either or. I know that it shows Analog 7 only, but it does count Analog 8 in there. When I record in stereo with my mini-me, it only says SPDIF 1 (S) but it actually records both channels.

Also, I never do the same exact edits on files, I just do the edits one at a time and they eventually become the same.

I hope some of this answers your questions? It would be better to show you in person. I like to use the chorus and Reverb in Audition, as well as the echo and Analog Delay too.

yea no what I was saying was that's the same thing you have to do on the Mpc2kxl if you want independent loops on each track. So you create the loop you want, then you copy it 500 bars or whatever however long you wanna practice your vocals, but then for each loop you have to copy it if you want multiple loops.

I was just asking for an easier way, like on one of the Triton old sequencers (I Never owned don't like the triton but tried it at gc) and you can make each track loop for a different amount of bars so you don't even have to copy/paste like that, I think it would save a little time and help the workflow but I can just work around for now, I use the MPC for all sequencing and song creation (aside from vocals).

Thanks for all the answers and that's exactly what I'll do just start the recording after 4 bars, easy workaround.

That would be kool as sh1t 2 learn some Audition techniques in person haha, I used to live in Cali too, but now I'm back on the east coast (da bean right now).

That "mastered by chris" track or whatever idk what it's called but it sounds pretty ****ing amazing for a bedroom studio with fruity loops and adobe audition. I mean, it sounds better then alot of commercial releases, although I have to say the vocals don't quite sound like a commercial release because of the cheap condenser (but I like them as well).

To me, with your vocals on that track I can tell it's a cheap condenser (maybe a chinese one, or a rode nt2a?) because the mic itself is so ultra-sensitive and just a bit sibilant (even though for this particular application it works great!)...I mean personally, for that particular track, I really like the ultra-sensitivity of the cheap condenser on your vocals: amazingly detailed and cuts throught but sits just right in the mix, but I think on a commercial release they might make the vocals sound just a bit more smooth on the s's for example maybe because they would use a neumann or something expensive, plus alot of times they still record to tape as well (for vocals) then transfer them...I used to have a Shure KSM44 condenser and it sounded similar, they all do, they're good mics but definetly not as smooth as the $3k neumann, to my ears.

All those cheap condensers are a little on the ultra-sensitive and bright side except if they're made not to be like some of the oktava and cad's,

For some reason I want to hear how it would sound if you did those vocals on a sm7b just to hear the difference, also because I can't decide which I like better the cheap condeners or mid-level dynamics like the sm7b, re-20, pr40

But Audition is an amazing program, and that track sounds crystal I mean crystal clear all the levels are perfect, I would try your mastering services based on that if I was going for an ultra-clean pop type sound heard on commercial releases, which is difficult to achieve, although in my situation not always desirable. I love the way music recorded in the late 60's and early 70's sound better then todays best engineered projects.

There's alot to be said for the engineering done on some of those older albums as well, but also the analog recording equipment they used sounded amazing back then with the reels, tubes, analog eq's etc...even if technically the "technology" was inferior and sound wasn't as clean and clear.

Haha, I've been smoking sorry.


To Illmo: I disagree, Pro-Tools is more "buggy" and it doesn't sound as good, although when I've seen people use it who are well accustomed to PT it works well for them. It does seem to have a decent interface for multitrack recording...But Audition does everything else better, and is a capable multitracker especially if you don't need tons of tracks.

Also, there's people who use pro-tools, but because it lacks some of Cool Edit Pro/Auditions capabilities without using plugins (which are inferior to Audition anyway) They have to switch to Audition to use the "multi-band compressor" for instance, or to edit the audio file with a better interface.

If you simply learn how to multi-track record in Audition, you won't have to switch back and forth, Also, Auditions mix/sound engine simply sounds BETTER THEN PRO-TOOLS, unless you're on an HD system: Audition blows Pro-Tools out of the water, you really should make the switch, illmo.

I only tried Cubase for a few days but it seemed more cumbersome workflow wise, it has a ton of power to accomplish just about everything, and is better with midi...but not nearly as intuitive as Audition, the user interface makes all the difference in the world...but different strokes.

If you work mainly with audio files there can't possibly be a better program then Audition.


RasCricket, I'm going to check out your songs tomorrow when I get back to the pad, thanks!

You're right, I'm still diggin in, the learning curve is thankfully less painful with Audition then other programs, but still painful in some instances, I'm going to post later about some of the pain to try to help others (couple simple things that had me ripping my hair out).


talk to yall thumbsup


I gotta dfegad

[caan't deciiide]

Listening to "Human Nature" ahhh love this!

SWV's "Right Here (Human Nature Mix)" is one of my favorite songs...so was that a remake or did you remake SWV's song? I imagine SWV remade that song which I didn't know.

Did you use any samples, or did you use reason to replay it with synth sounds, I can't really tell cos I'm tired and intoxicated! I feel GOOD, 'm goint to listen to hte other track now.

I don't hear too many Bedroom producers making mixes that sound as good as these with protools le or mpowered dat fo damn sure.

Originally Posted by RasCricket

All the music posted on my link below was done with Audition 3.0 and Reason 4.0. The tracks "Ska One" and "Human Nature" are the ones I recommend. Those were both complex mixes that sound quite nice. And thats after having the program for two months. Both of those songs, actually. "Human Nature" was an incredibly complex mix and it has me up for "song of the year" at a website. Audition 3.0 is awesome.


To caant deciide, of course Ive seen your posts but I cant really help ya ~ yet. You might still be in that "diggin' in" phase which just take alot of "trial and terror" to get through. Assigning the "outs" so you can actually hear the audio, for example ~ we've all been there. A lot of things ya gotta do on your own before they make sense. Feel free to use this as your think pad and we'll chime in if we can ~ Cricket

(listen to those tunes! )

[caan't deciiide]

"Ska one"

I can't judge reggae that well, when it comes to reggae I don't have an understanding of hte different styles "dub" "dancehall" "ska" etc...

But I listen to Sister Nancy, Sister Carroll, and Old-School Bounty Killa from time to time, as well as Tiger's work with the Brand New Heavies "Whagaboutdat".

But alot of that stuff doesn't have the best engineering I don't think(aside from da heavies), def lots of bass, your mix sounds good "to good" my ears lol just not what I'm accostmed to with reggae, I guess i thought reggae is supposed to have exaggerated bottom and slightly muted top end but probably just my old tapes sister nancy are worn out lol...or I think maybe i just don't like the continuous open hi-hat in that type of reggae idk why.

[caan't deciiide]

So, there IS some things that Audition can't do!

I haven't necassarily hi-jacked this thread because in actuality my post led to the discovery that there ARE things that Audition can't do! Although, most things can be done.

But it does more in one package then any other program unless you're heavy into midi with 10,000 plugins per track, but AA is working on that as well, the last release was just a minor upgrade from 2.0 because the developers said they had mad other sh1t on their plate and will probably make significant enhancements next time around! But I don't need them!

I'm excited to have finally settled on a piece of software that is so intuitive! I almost decided to say **** software and buy one of those yamaha digital recorders because I couldn't find the right program, but everthing will be more intuitive and quicker with audition as long as the computer continues to cooperate but I'm going to buy a 2nd harddrive and put current projects on the outer edge, then use the rest to backup for when the inevitable occurs.

[keylay]

I have never used this software. I will have to try it out. does adobe offer full demos for a time trial, or is it locked down?

[RasCricket]

Pretty sure theres a demo.

[Chris Lago]

Wow I don't even remember the "Mastered by Chris" sample, and I doubt it was me on vox, I'll send you a track of mine, you'll hear the difference... No Sibilance! Oh He got banned?

[RasCricket]

Originally Posted by chrislago

Wow I don't even remember the "Mastered by Chris" sample, and I doubt it was me on vox, I'll send you a track of mine, you'll hear the difference... No Sibilance! Oh He got banned?

Caaaant deciiide very likely did get banned and I cant argue with it at all. He was full-auto blasting the K word around like he had sotck in the word and got paid every time it was used.

It was highly ugly. I thought at the time of reading it "Ummm, thats not a word you throw around..."

He might have dug his own grave sadly.

[McLies]

Originally Posted by dfarness

Also, the clip editor is not intuitive. I've tried to use it several times but always ended up back in Sound Forge.

If you go into the settings and change the way the right click functions, you can get the editor to work just like the old CoolEdit versions before the pro version. That makes it it VERY! intuitive, and, was the reason the old Cool Edit was so COOL! Try it, you'll love it.

[DEZEA]

I use Audition a lot, I couldn't find a software more precise for EDITING waveforms. But, to replace a DAW, it has a very very long way to go. Besides, Adobe's current support for this product is very poor.. Audition currently has some really serious bugs that Adobe is aware of but they haven't released any patches or updates.. actually, I think they might drop this product for good as they realized the daw softwares available today are far too advanced to catch up using the dusty code of the old Cool Edit.

[McLies]

Originally Posted by DEZEA

.. actually, I think they might drop this product for good as they realized the daw softwares available today are far too advanced to catch up using the dusty code of the old Cool Edit.

I really hope they do sell it off. Hopefully to someone of the 'old school' who will turn it back into the best WAV file editor on the planet, which it once was for sure.

[Chris Lago]

Originally Posted by McLies

I really hope they do sell it off. Hopefully to someone of the 'old school' who will turn it back into the best WAV file editor on the planet, which it once was for sure.

No complains with Audition here. I mixed tons of songs on it and sounds perfect for what I do.

[Lawrence]

I personally don't care for AA as a main DAW but it's as capable an application as most any other across the board I think.

The must have "can do" preference based debate stuff usually resides in things that are specific to certain situations. Most any pro daw can track and mix any pro band or group of perfomers. When you get into genre specific "digital tricks" that are designed mostly to make some things easier in electronic music production, then the daw wars begin.

[Moraha]

I love Adobe Audition but I have a few issues with it.

1. As far as I know, making beats within the program just does not work right. A lot of VSTi won't even load on mine. I'd love to have an all in 1 program.
2. I may be doing this wrong but when saving a session, a lot of junk gets saved with it and it sometimes gets confusing when it asks "would you like to save this" for a million different files. This is when working with a lot of files.
3. This may not be an issue for the people with supercomputers, but on my comp (dual core 2.4GHz, 2GB memory), anything more than 20 tracks with a few VSTs in each causes a lot of skipping and st uttering. Literally impossible to work with sometimes.
4. Loading new VSTs is slow as shit when you have a bunch already loaded up, especially when you have waves.

Besides that though, I honestly think NO other program beats it in editing. I could do alot of crazy editing in it. The noise reduction, center channel extractor, and FFT filter to me shits on the plugins that come with other editing programs. As far as I know, there is no plugin like Center Channel Extractor (maybe Waves Center, but I haven't tried it to know). I wish there was a way to take the plugins in here an use it with Reaper.

When mixing a track, Reaper by far destroys everything on Audition. I've loaded about 70 tracks on the same computer with 5 VSTs in each and it didn't have 1 skip. Everything is so easy and customizable too. I've actually customized mine to function exactly like Audition.

Chris Lago...what song about mastering is caan't deciiide talking about? I'd like to check it out. I'm getting more serious with mixing and I heard a few of your tracks and I was impressed. You def got the sound that I'm trying to get.