I still use Cool Edit 2000, for editing recordings (usually mono) and
analysing sonograms. Is there any good reason why I should go to the
expense and hassle of upgrading to Audition?
Jeremy
>Good news.. If you know Cool Edit Pro than you know 95% of Adobe as they are
>one in the same.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From:
> On Behalf Of
>Sent: Sunday, December 11, 2005 9:26 PM
>To:
>Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Editing Software
>
>Dear All:
>
>I still use Cool Edit Pro for editing. Does anyone know how it compares to
>Adobe Audition. I actually have the latter, but have not installed it
>because I am too lazy to relearn things.
>
>Thanks,
>
>John
>John V. Moore Nature Recordings
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get
>fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
>http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/PMYolB/TM
>--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
>"Microphones are not ears,
>Loudspeakers are not birds,
>A listening room is not nature."
>Klas Strandberg
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>"Microphones are not ears,
>Loudspeakers are not birds,
>A listening room is not nature."
>Klas Strandberg
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|