One of the many great functions that 2.0 has, is the ability of saving a CD
list, for someone like me who compiles many, I don't have to keep loading
tracks and rearranging them.
Martyn
****************************************
Martyn Stewart
Bird and Animal Sounds Digitally Recorded at:
<http://www.naturesound.org/> http://www.naturesound.org
Redmond. Washington. USA
N47.65543 W121.98428
e-mail:
Tel: 425-898-0462
Make every Garden a wildlife Habitat!
*****************************************
_____
From:
On Behalf Of macmang4125
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 4:31 AM
To:
Subject: [Nature Recordists] Re: Audition 2.0?
--- In naturerecordists@ <naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com>
yahoogroups.com, Marty Michener <> wrote:
>
> In the last week two friends have asked me about Audition 2.0, and have
> read bad reviews of it, as compared with the previous edition and to
Cool
> Edit Pro, its forerunner. What is the consensus of this group? Is it
worth
> $350 or should I tell them to procure a copy of 1.5 for $100?
> One wants to use it for multi-channel music mixing, the other for
bird songs.
> (I still use Cool Edit Pro).
>
>
> -- best regards, Marty Michener
> MIST Software Assoc. Inc., P. O. Box 269, Hollis, NH 03049
> http://www.enjoybir <http://www.enjoybirds.com/> ds.com/
>
> "I am strongly induced to believe that as in music, the person who
> understands every note, if he also possesses a proper taste, more
> thoroughly enjoy the whole, so he who examines each part of a fine
view,
> may also thoroughly comprehend the full and combined effect. Hence, a
> traveler should be a botanist, for in all views plants form the chief
> embellishment." Charles Darwin, The Voyage of the Beagle
>
I would go for the 1.5 version myself, one feature missing which is
very useful in the field I work is the playlist function, completely
missing in version 2. It also seems somewhat slower than 1.5 as well.
Phil
|