naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Sound Editing Software

Subject: Re: Sound Editing Software
From: "Jez" tempjez
Date: Sun Jun 2, 2013 12:05 pm ((PDT))
well, I always keep a copy of the original recording anyway & certainly I t=
hink most folks would advise that. One often returns to tracks & sometimes =
any editing (even the simple top & tailing) decisions change with time.


--- In  umashankar <> wrote:
>
> there is now very little difference between destructive and non destructi=
ve editing. if you save the file with a new name, your original file is not=
 touched at all, in any editing program. and you can always make a copy and=
 work on that.
> =C2=A0
> umashankar
>
>
> ________________________________
>  From: Peter Shute <>
> To: "" <>=

> Sent: Sunday, June 2, 2013 12:11 PM
> Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Sound Editing Software
>
>
> Reaper does non destructive editing, doesn't it? If so, it's a very diffe=
rent beast to Audacity, even if it ends up delivering the same results.
>
> I've been meaning to give it a try.
>
> Peter Shute
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 02/06/2013, at 12:46 AM, "Jez" <<>> wrote=
:
>
>
>
> Reaper is one of the best suites around - the paths & processing software=
 is top level & unlike Audacity, it's built & maintained by folks who are c=
ommitted to providing a very high level service. Audacity is 'ok' but the f=
act that you can't monitor while making adjustments (if you do that with yo=
ur recordings) is a major & bizarre, problem.
>
> Reaper is actually really easy to use once when gets past the basics & th=
ere are lots of video's online showing basic set up of tracks etc.
>
> --- In <naturerecordists%40yahoogr=
oups.com>, NICK DANDO <nick.dando@> wrote:
> >
> > That's good to know. I hadn't looked at Audacity for a few years, being=
 happy with Soundtrack Pro. I'll have to give it another go to see if it's =
easier than the somewhat baffling Reaper.
> >
> > Nick
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Peter Shute <pshute@>
> > To: "<naturerecordists%40yahoogr=
oups.com>" <<naturerecordists%40yaho=
ogroups.com>>
> > Sent: Thursday, 30 May 2013, 21:24
> > Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Sound Editing Software
> >
> >
> >
> > =C3=82
> > On 31/05/2013, at 4:37 AM, "Nick Dando" <nick.dando@<nick.dando@=
>> wrote:
> >
> > Alternatives are Reaper, which is cheap, and Audacity, which is free, b=
ut doesn't have the ability to deal with 24/192 recordings.
> >
> > Is that correct? A quick Google search says it's been able to handle 19=
2kHz recordings since at least 2011. (See http://forum.audacityteam.org/vie=
wtopic.php?f=3D16&t=3D61803)
> >
> > Peter Shute
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> "While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
> sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause.
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>








<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

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