Oh, for heaven's sake - haven't you read any of the other posts on this forum at all? This isn't exactly news... ... View more

Mel Davis. wrote: I hear you.  I know it's a sore spot that the original designated FAQs on the forum and great work done by Ozpeter and you and others was taken down, and you're absolutely right. Well they're not really lost - it's just that Ozpeter and I decided that there was a much safer place for them, and that's where they all are - tidied up a bit. So you will find them all (recategorised to suit the forum format) here. ... View more

Mel Davis. wrote: The inability of a new installation of Adobe Audition to do "stream recording" a.k.a. "what you hear" recording is an FAQ on this forum. That might have been true at some time in the past, but it certainly isn't an FAQ now, because this forum simply doesn't have any of those any more. ... View more

Not just a bounce... MusicConductor wrote: All the newcomers about are not going to be aware of how busy and thought provoking the company forums have been in the past. Of course they won't. Adobe's policy isn't to keep any sort of historical record of forum activity at all; after a while it just falls off the bottom of the heap unless it's actively kept alive by artificial means.... ... View more

MacEachaidh wrote: Prizm4 wrote: Adobe Audition has already been dumped and a pro version of Soundbooth will take over. Really?! Has that actually been announced, or is this speculation on your part?  Where does this info come from? It's not info at all, and it's certainly not reasonable speculation, because like most of these statements, it's completely unresearched. Like it says earlier in the thread, Adobe will indicate the 'no further development' state if it ever occurs, and they haven't. What you should take rather more notice of is Lawson Hancock's blog. He is Audition's product manager, after all, and this is from 19th April - just a few days ago: "As you mentioned, the launch of CS5 was the main focus for us at the  show this year.  However, we are actively working on the next release of  Audition.  Nothing specific to share yet, but your feedback is  appreciated." You also said: "I thought Audition and its previous incarnations -- I've forgotten its  name in its former life -- were well-established and well-regarded as  professional tools?" Yes they are, and that's the other reason that they won't be disappearing overnight. And back in the good old Syntrillium days it was called Cool Edit Pro. ... View more

How on earth do you conclude that? ... View more

MacEachaidh wrote: And unless I'm wrong, AA has never been part of any Creative Suite so far anyway.  Hasn't that been Soundbooth's role, and Audition was left as a specialist pro-level app? I'm afraid that history didn't work quite like that, but for your edification (and the fact that from your last post you seem to have an eminently sensible approach to upgrades), I'll relate the later chronology for you: Audition was put into CS development after 1.5. And this resulted in what could only be regarded as some sort of late beta that got accidentally released - AKA Audition 2. What happened was that corporate planning and code development didn't coincide at all, and as a release it was rushed out with unseemly haste to meet the corporate deadline. All the other progs in the suite only needed a bit of tweaking to meet that particular release date, but Audition was getting a complete rewrite, so this really wasn't fair on the developers at all. End result - Audition got out of the CS cycle, and Audition 3 was created and released as a separate entity again - but only when it was ready. Being in CS in itself doesn't matter - but being in the corporate release date structure certainly does. Anyway as a sort of compromise, when Audition got out, the developers agreed to create a cross-platform app that would be in the suite permanently - and that's how Soundbooth came to be. End result is that one development team has to develop both products, so major releases of either inevitably take longer to achieve. This does make commercial sense, because the apps are different in their stated intentions and to an extent, their operational approach, but being developed by one team each product 'informs' the other to a degree. And from a corporate POV, I suppose that managent is happy, because they get extra leverage from the team. But as far as releases in general are concerned, Audition 3 works fine. Audition 1.5 works fine, and for some applications has advantages. You can use the software, and it doesn't need constant updates to keep it working without regular disasters. There's a comment on AudioMasters that attempts (in a tongue-in-cheek way) to suggest that software development should all be done the Microsoft way, where they have to keep releasing bugfixes for their bugfixes, and Adobe have sensibly not gone down that route at all. They get it pretty much right at the initial release, and don't issue any service packs until either there is a pressing need for a particular fix (rare) or a cumulative pile that can be done in one hit (also rare, but has happened with 3.0.1). If you are using this software as any sort of a revenue generator, and have clients around, then the last thing you want is software that you have to keep updating, and you aren't really sure of the status of. And that's why the Audition release model is the way it is - and long may it continue like that. ... View more

pavlos22 wrote: Definitely we need help on Audition's scripting language from the people in Adobe. Why don't they produce a scripting language documentation?!    Dunno - it's always been like that. Even though it's possible to reverse-engineer some of what's there, I always get the impression that there may be very simple ways of issuing commands to do things that you simply don't get by using the 'learn a sequence' method of doing things. For instance, the settings for selecting absolute time at the start of a file weren't discovered like that at all - ryclark only discovered this by experimenting. Same thing applies to my 'mode' table. For a start, I really would like to know what all of the available commands are - along with lists for each one of the parameters you can vary. Somebody somewhere obviously has this information, so why shouldn't we have it as well? I mean, it's us that are trying to use it, for heaven's sake... what's the big secret? ... View more

The progress report on this is that all of the bits work individually, but trying to get them to work correctly in a single sequence is a whole different matter! One of the snags is that whilst it's relatively easy to select an absolute time at the beginning of a file (we discovered how to do this a while back), the same technique simply doesn't work at all at the end of it. The only solution to this that I'm aware of is to reverse the file as an integral part of the top and tail operation, which then gives you the opportunity to do the same operation at both ends - you just reverse the file again when you've finished. Well, that's what should happen when you get the parameters right... but Audition's scripting language is, to say the least, rather arcane and completely undocumented (despite promises from the developers), so there's rather a lot of trial and error involved in getting this to work properly, I'm afraid. I've so far tried two completely different sequences, and one of them nearly does - but it's still screwing up the reversing when combined with another function in the sequence. I shall persevere, because now I want to know what the hell's wrong with it! ... View more

I'll look at the options over the weekend. ... View more

You may have to play around with the length settings to get this to work, but by and large how well it works overall is very dependent on the material you have in the files. With music, it generally works quite well, but I could certainly see a few potential problems with speech. The other thing you may be able to do (and I haven't tried this, so I don't know how practical it would be) would be to have the delete silence operation in a batch file with some selection parameters. So you'd only operate it over the first n seconds of a file (you can select this quite easily) where n is slightly longer than the largest gap you have to detect. In fact, if this works, you could combine all of the operations necessary for both parts of your problem into one script, I think. I might have a look at the possibilities later if I get time... ... View more

Audition is not in the Creative Suite, so no. ... View more

Suite Spot wrote: But its British summer.... ROTFLMAO - It's going to snow again next week! ... View more

You might well be correct about the Audition Windows Driver not coping with what Sound Recorder does now in W7. In the past (1.5) Audition used the internal sound recording capability of the OS to record, and this is obviously what Sound Recorder uses. But not any more, unfortunately. But it still seems a little strange that some sources should be seen and not others. The one thing that you might try, if this is the case, is ASIO4ALL (free). It's the same principle as the Audition Windows Driver, but has better diagnostics, and as far as I'm aware, has been upgraded for the new OS. And this is known to work fine with Audition. Might be interesting to see if it finds anything different to record from... ... View more

KenWF wrote: There appears to be no active Stereo Mix in Windows7.  ghost zero said he has no Stereo Mix in his selection; I have a Stereo Mix option, but it is identified as a USB Multi Chanel Audio. DOES ANY ONE KNOW IF WINDOWS 7 HAS A STEREO MIX (LIKE VISTA HAS) that should give "what you hear" recording? I don't know. What I do know though is that manufacturers are quite capable of modifying the windows mixer control panel to either include or exclude anything they want, and that this has happened before. Ask Dell laptop users - on some models they got well and truly shafted when it came to monitoring, because Dell, in their infinite wisdom, decided that if you were using the microphone input, that you'd get feedback from the internal speakers if you were daft enough to turn the volume up. So they excluded it as an option, which annoyed a lot of people. So ask yourself another question - why would Microsoft want to prevent you doing this? Well, they screwed the sound over on Vista (ask Wild Duck), almost certainly because of DRM, and this was supposedly based on being 'got at' by Hollywood, or was it the RIAA? Who knows what they've done this time? Nobody seems to... It does seem a little strange though, that you can clearly hear stuff from remote sources on the internet (which effectively puts a 'what you hear' option in the playback section of the mixer), but if you go to the the record control preferences, there's really no option to record this there that hasn't been enabled? ... View more

I don't have Windows 7 here, so I can't comment personally, but I did find a part of a blog from Ron Day about this, in connection with both Audition and Soundbooth. Since it's not so easy to reference, I'll just reproduce the whole thing here - I'm sure Ron won't mind. This ought to be in the Knowlegebase, but the indexing of that appears to be a law unto itself, and I simply can't find it - well, not in the short time I looked before starting to lose the will to live, anyway. It may be of some help - but no guarantees: Ron Day wrote: We have been contacted by several users reporting that they have been unable to record properly into Audition or Soundbooth after switching to Windows 7. In every case thus far the cause has either been improper configuration in the Windows OS, incorrect input devices specified in Audition/Soundbooth, or making use of older sound card drivers or drivers not suitable for use in Windows 7 (32 or 64 bit). One reason for the confusion in Windows 7 is the fact that the operating system now gives you much more control over the inputs and outputs. You must make sure that you have the correct device and input chosen in Windows 7 before any software application can record input. Audition and Soundbooth must also be configured properly, but the operating system settings will always control the input (unless you are using a higher end sound card that has a control panel of its own). Follow the steps below if you are having trouble recording in Audition or Soundbooth. Configure Windows: 1. Start > Control Panel > Sound. 2. Click to the "Recording" tab. 3. Choose the input you want to use for recording and click the "Set Default" button. 4. You can also click the "Properties" button to configure your levels for the input. 5. Click OK to accept the changes. Note: If you are using a higher-end sound card you may also need to adjust properties for the device through a separate control panel provided by the manufacturer of the sound card. Configure Audition: 1. In Audition go to Edit > Audio Hardware Setup. 2. Choose the Edit View, Multitrack, or Surround Encoder Tab (for the view you want to record into). 3. Choose the "Audition 2.0 Windows Sound" or "Audition 3.0 Windows Sound" Driver. 4. Click the "Control Panel" button. 5. Check the boxes for any inputs you want to use in Audition and click OK to accept the changes. 6. Make sure the "Default Input" drop-down is set to the input you want to record from (must match what is set within Windows). Note: If you are attempting to record audio playing through your speakers (like streaming web audio) your default input should be set to "Stereo Mix, "What U Hear", "Wave Input" or the correct input for your specific device. 7. Click OK in the Audio Hardware Setup dialog and start recording into Audition. Configure Audition using ASIO drivers: 1. In Audition go to Edit > Audio Hardware Setup. 2. Choose the Edit View, Multitrack, or Surround Encoder Tab (for the view you want to record into). 3. Choose the appropriate ASIO driver. 4. Make sure the "Default Input" drop-down is set to the input you want to record from (must match what is set within Windows). 5. Click OK in the Audio Hardware Setup dialog and start recording into Audition. Configure Soundbooth: 1. In Soundbooth go to Edit > Preferences > Audio Hardware. 2. Choose the "Soundbooth 2.0 WDM Sound" Driver. 3. Click the "Settings" button. 4. On the "Input" tab, check the boxes for any inputs you want to use in Soundbooth and click OK to accept the changes. 5. When you hit the "Record" button in Soundbooth, make sure you have the correct device selected along with the correct port you have audio coming in through. Note: If you are attempting to record audio playing through your speakers (like streaming web audio) your default input should be set to "Stereo Mix, "What U Hear", "Wave Input" or the correct input for your specific device. Configure Soundbooth using ASIO drivers: 1. In Soundbooth go to Edit > Preferences > Audio Hardware. 2. Choose the appropriate ASIO driver. 3. When you hit the "Record" button in Soundbooth, make sure you have the correct device selected along with the correct port you have audio coming in through. Still having trouble? 1. In Windows go to the Start button and type "sound recorder" into the search field. 2. Start recording in Sound Recorder (you will not see the input while recording). 3. Stop recording and play to see if you can hear what you recorded. If recording in Sound Recorder does not work, this tells you that something is incorrectly set within Windows or the sound card driver is not working correctly. At this point, make sure your Windows sound settings are correct. If all Windows settings are correct and you are still unable to record, you should download and install the latest Windows 7 drivers for your sound device (We have seen many cases where manufacturers do not yet have Windows 7 drivers available). If you already have the latest drivers installed you should contact the manufacturer of your particular sound device and alert them of the issue. Ron Day Quality Engineering Lead ... View more

Suite Spot wrote: And yes some daws were injured in the making of this software 🙂 PT was injured well before you started doing that! ... View more

I can see why you might want to convert a PT session to run in Audition, but the other way around sounds like - well, I'm not sure but it isn't going to be good - PT's mix engine is crap! But congratulations on your success - perhaps you can get some sleep now! ... View more

Ned43 wrote: (audiomasters) aka audio(forum)slaves no longer exists? AudioMasters does - whatever you called it never has. and if this wasn't the informations main home to begin with, why get your panties in a bunch about it? Information has a home now? And nobody - except perhaps you - has got any part of their underwear rearranged at all. This was a simple strategic decision made to keep a load of useful information in the public domain without having to worry about it - what's the issue? Let the developers work on the product for christ sake who cares about if the forum nuances suit your taste. What the hell has it to do with the developers? They play virtually no part in the running of this, or any other, forum at all. Yes, they are appreciative of our efforts (which is more than can be said for some people, clearly) but that's as far as it goes. They have more interaction with the helpdesk than anything else, and that's only because it's in such a pisspoor state, but as far as the forums are concerned, nada. You really don't seem to understand the first thing about how any of this works at all. ... View more

Ned43 wrote: OooOOookkk, did he or did he not, salvage the information and place it over at "audio(forum)slaves"? Since the place you've mentioned doesn't exist, then 'he' couldn't have. But the general answer to the question is that the decision to move the FAQ material was made by the two people who hold the majority (but not all) of the copyright of it, and it has all been revised during the transition. The demise of its previous home was merely the catalyst to move it; the main reason was that the person here who maintained it and wrote a lot of it was going to retire, and wanted a more secure* home for it. Obviously someone was alerted because they decided to save it, which is probably a good idea when they're revamping the forums as it could get lost in the shuffle, amirite? Still so 'obvious', is it? It would never have been lost, because the vast majority of it didn't originate here at all. *Adobe corporate don't care one way or another about what gets kept on U2U forums at all. The developers, on the other hand, appreciate that efforts are made to archive material about both present and past versions of the software. And so do most users, when it comes down to it. So we kept it available, in just the same way that we've kept the original Syntrillium archive available. ... View more

Ned43 wrote: I believe people were alerted to the fact that the information was not going to be on the new forum and thus where able to salvage it. You can believe what you like, but it wasn't like that at all. ... View more

aomahana wrote: Check out SciFi Deluxe at  .... www.hyperdynelabs.com Download the demo and confirm it works with Audition 3, as this program dates back to CE2K. I'm pretty sure that it won't work at all, even vaguely. There were reports on AudioMasters 5 years ago that the basic SciFi (I don't know about the other bits) wouldn't even work with 1.5, never mind anything after that. What it says about compatible versions on the website is true, and apparently there's no money in updating it, despite what they claim to the contrary. They rather give the game away by admitting that they haven't even tried it on CEP 2, never mind later versions. It's a shame, because it was a good plugin, and did indeed create very usable robot voices. ... View more

One thing that might also help with the 'robotic' feel would be the automatic part of the pitch corrector. Chances are that you can find a setting on this that would stop a voice sounding 'human' quite effectively. Works on a lot of singers, anyway... and edit the pauses between words randomly, shrinking some of them a bit. ... View more

(sharp intake of breath...) Ooh, they don't like being taunted like that! They claim it's not true, either. Certainly used to be, though. Personally I have several digits on my hand, and I really can't see the point of having to restrict myself by only using one of them, and that's a fundamental limitation of the thought processes involved in the creation of their OS in the first place. Let's face it - Audition without a right mouse button is going to be severely restricted in what you can do rapidly. Why they like their kiddie OS is beyond me - I couldn't get on with it at all. I did try, honest... Personally, I blame the idiot who read Piaget and actually believed that it had anything to do with adult thought processes - because it doesn't, really. And that's what they claim their OS is based on. ... View more

Yeah, it's amazing - the entirety of noisy Mac users who want Audition on their beloved machines all on one thread! I bet they meet once a year in a telephone kiosk... You'll also notice if you go through the whole thing that just one person actually told the truth about the 'Mac is wonderful, Windows is sh*t' situation. But as to the main point, it's like I said before - if Adobe aren't going to continue to develop Audition, they'll tell you. ... View more

jdmack01 wrote: With Adobe Audition, when I'm running the script I described, I see the processing being bounced from core to core and the CPU usage is around 25%. I'm sure that Audition could, with some work by the developers, be made to be more efficient from this POV. I think that a lot of people have noticed that if you really load the program up with tracks, especially with effects on, that you need to lock as many as possible if you want to get a reasonable level of replay - rather more so than with other software doing comparable things. This doesn't generally affect me, because I rarely run more than about 8 at once, and generally don't need to do any channel processing at all (classical mixing), but for anybody doing larger mixdowns, this can become something of an issue. Time alone will tell what happens, though. ... View more

jdmack01 wrote: I would *love* to see all four of my processors chugging away in the task manager when running these scripts, cutting that time down significantly. I don't think you would - because at that point your computer's OS would stop functioning! The RAM issue doesn't have any direct bearing on how many processors are running - that's not it at all. Audition isn't actually a particularly heavy user of RAM; it's video software that tends to eat this up. And I'm pretty sure that this is where Matt is coming from; what's the real need for being able to address RAM that the processors won't use anyway? The processes that really benefit from multiple-processor operation are FFT-based ones, which only really get efficient when the processing load is shared, but even they don't use huge amounts of RAM either. ... View more

Lost Weekend wrote: I have some amazing virtual instrument plug-ins from EastWest and Steinberg that I can't use on Audition, because they're not compatible. I have to go to my old version of Cubase, which I'm really not crazy about, but it's my only choice for now, in order to use these instruments. It would be so much easier for me to do all my recording on one DAW instead of importing and exporting files from one to another. On quite a regular basis it's been found that plugins that aren't compatible have actually been at fault rather than Audition. And we're not talking small names either - Waves had to rebuild quite a few of theirs so that they actually met the laid-down criteria. Apparently there are some regular shortcuts that programmers take that will work - sort of - with some software that could be perhaps described as 'not very particular', but these plugins all seem to come unstuck with Audition unless their authors get it exactly right. Nowadays more do than don't, fortunately. ... View more

Bob Howes wrote: I can't think of any competitor that isn't "out of the frying pan and into the fire". I can think of a couple - but I'd describe them as jumping out of the frying pan staight into my bank balance, and digging huge great holes in it... ... View more