66
Replies
Hey MusicConductor friend,
I mean no harm in saying it, but In terms of my personal practical use, it's certainly a downgrade. As I've said, I absolutely love the improvements made, and I wish the functionality of 3.0 remained so that I could make use of them. In terms of speed, performance efficiency and a couple other cool features (particularly freq analysis in multitrack view), this is an upgrade. But if I bought a house that was bigger, with stronger walls, close to ammenities with a beautified interior - but entirely void of a kitchen, I really wouldn't feel like I was upgrading my home life. As much as CS5.5 is an improvement on performance - if it were to be used in my business - it lacks the means for economic survival.
When I got my latest computer with 8Gb RAM and and an iCore5 processor, I wasn't even aware that an upgrade to Audition would further improve performance through increased compatibility with this hardware. So hearing about the improvements made to Audition for the CS5.5 release was great and exciting! But such improvements made to a software that's been rendered useless for my personal purposes are as good as undelivered. So although that post of mine was created while I was fresh off of an aggravating experience with Adobe customer service, it is still a point of personal concern. To others whom may use this software for different means, this may be an upgrade. But considering I would have a far greater practical use for Audition 1.5 than for CS5.5; for anyone with similar needs to myself, this is most definitely a downgrade. That's the essence of my heated rant; the desire for the improvements to this software to be of practical use to people in my corner of the Audition market.
At this point I've read some of the other posts about development and I have some understanding and a lot of hope for the future of this product. I also believe that we'll all be happy with it in due time. And, of course, it's been great to see that there actually is a future for this product 
considering many of us thought it had been written off up until the announcement of CS5.5. The intent behind my initial post and any additional ones has been to provide Adobe with an idea of what's actually needed by the people who share a similar use of the product to my use of it. The blunt aggression of the post you've referenced is largely a side effect of the resentful experience I had with customer service when I tried to get my money back for a product I was led to believe would be an improvement for me to 3.0. I hereby happily revoke any and all undue aggression I've put forth. But I stand behind the bluntness and concern. The improvements have made aspects of the product more efficient, but the lost features were what made it effective.
Inity Arts & Music wrote: I think this release could have been a pleasant one if Adobe had just made clear the downsides to it, instead of presenting only it's new features and neglecting to notify it's potential buyers about missing features or upgrade issues like yours.
I hear your complaint and see where it's coming from, but I don't think it valid, particularly. There are no 'missing features' in 5.5. It is what it is. And if you're familiar with Version 3.0 and comparing the two programs, then you're not arriving at Audition new and uninformed - if you have AA3 and upgraded to 5.5 without reading the detailed and clear description of the new program and its development that Durin gave here, followed by the forum discussion of same, then you haven't done due diligence, have you? If you buy a program without informing yourself about what that program can do, you've got no one but yourself to blame. But you can complain about all that later on, of course. 
But yes, one thing that would have made the process easier for me and you and anybody considering buying the new program would have been a feature comparison chart on the Adobe page advertising 5.5.
AdChoices