Subject: | Re: editing software |
---|---|
From: | "Thomas Ashcraft" heliotown27 |
Date: | Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:32 am ((PDT)) |
Martyn Stewart wrote: > Raven is more expensive than Audition and works on memory alone, Raven > has no advantage over Audition. Audition is not "thousands" more than > Audacity. > Try to structure your comments a little less misleading. > Audacity is a good program for beginners for both the Mac & the PC. > You would never be able to bring in files longer than 5-10 minutes > into Raven without it sending out messages that demand more memory. > Raven was basically made for spectral analysis. > When I bought raven a few years ago t cost $400. Audacity will cost > you $300. > > > > For what it's worth: You can use Raven in demo mode for free and it gives you ten minutes of working time before automatic shutoff. It is especially useful for creating intricate spectrograms of short specimens. The Canary version is free but I have found it to be too limited. - TA |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: editing software, Martyn Stewart |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: editing software, Rob Danielson |
Previous by Thread: | Re: editing software, Martyn Stewart |
Next by Thread: | Re: editing software, Rob Danielson |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU