Big suggestion for saving poor SF5 -Sound Forge - PC

Sound Forge - PC

Subject:Big suggestion for saving poor SF5 Posted by: sreams Date:2/7/2001 3:55:30 PM Even if it is an unsupported option, PLEASE allow CD Architect to attach to Sound Forge 5.0. There really aren't enough differences between SF 4.5 and 5.0 to justify the explanation that this is not possible. We are not asking for a new version of CDA, just the ability to use it from SF5. Without this very simple ability, most SF users will be forced to jump ship. Don't let this happen! Just because CDA is no longer officially supported (no new versions), it doesn't mean that extreme efforts have to be made to kill it. -S
Subject:RE: Big suggestion for saving poor SF5 Reply by: Ted_H Date:2/8/2001 6:01:35 PM Hello, Since it is not possible to have CD Architect as an option in the tools menu, Sound Forge 5.0 has been designed to coexist on the same machine with Sound Forge 4.5. Ted
Subject:RE: Big suggestion for saving poor SF5 Reply by: sreams Date:2/8/2001 11:29:57 PM While it is nice that SF5 won't absolutely kill CD Architect, isn't having two versions of Sound Forge installed kind of redundant? Wouldn't it be a lot simpler to just do what I suggested. Sound Forge 5.0 IS Sound Forge 4.5 with a couple of extra features that do not impact CD Architect's ability to co-exist with it. I can't imagine why this would be made impossible. Even if it is, making CD Architect a standalone application should be quite simple, since it mostly acts as a standalone app anyway. -S BTW, Some explanation as to why CD Architect is being dropped in the first place would be quite welcome here, as I'm sure most of us would agree. There really are very few alternatives out there. It is difficult to fathom why such a useful and unique application would be thrown out. I'm sure a heck of a lot of time went into creating what CD Architect has become, and it blows me away that it's functionality would not simply be incorporated into the next version of Sound Forge. That is all that would have to be done to allow Sound Forge to compete successfully with Wavelab (I really don't like Steinberg products in general). As it sits now, Sonic Foundry has all the work done to have a superior product, but for some reason refuses to utilize it, and, in fact, seems determined to be sure that Sound Forge is NOT superior to its competition. Who made this decision and why?
Subject:RE: Big suggestion for saving poor SF5 Reply by: Rednroll Date:2/9/2001 12:24:12 AM I think everyone in this forum, who supports these products couldn't agree with you more. It is ludichrist, the steps Sonic Foundry has taken to not support CD architect any longer. The user interface on CD architect is far superior than any software available and they continue to abandon the backbone of their superior product. I imagine, they saw CD architect as a money losing investment, but you're right, it should have been incorporated directly into SF 5.0, this is why wavelab is the choice over Sound Forge. Why would I spend $350 on Sound Forge and then another $250 on CD architect when, I could get all these features in Wavelab for $375? If they just incorporated it into SF 5.0 as an all inclusive program and price matched it to wavelab, everyone would buy it. Is anyone listening in the marketing department at Sonic Foundry!!!!! Like everyone here, I hate to see a good product go to waste.
Subject:RE: Big suggestion for saving poor SF5 Reply by: Ted_H Date:2/9/2001 10:59:54 AM Hello, Here's the official statement: Sonic Foundry has been directing recent product development efforts to produce content creation tools for web-based media. The Web is quickly becoming an alternative distribution medium for music, and we anticipate that this will continue to evolve with broadband video and interactive television on the horizon. Sonic Foundry regrets that these new media development efforts have resulted in the discontinuation of CD Architect. We sincerely hope that our loyal customers and music enthusiasts are able to benefit from the superior audio mastering and streaming media conversion capabilities of Sound Forge, or the outstanding productivity of our new Vegas Video non-linear video editing products, in creating their content and distributing it on the Web. Ted
Subject:RE: Big suggestion for saving poor SF5 Reply by: sreams Date:2/9/2001 1:58:41 PM Thanks for the official reply, Ted... My take on this: This is like Ford saying they are going to stop making cars now because they see that everyone will have hovercrafts in the future. Music distribution may be slowly making its way to the web, but it is not there yet. CDs are still the overwhelming market leader, and will be for some time. Maybe CD Architect should be discontinued, but the timing is horribly wrong. I am a 1st engineer at a premier recording studio in Sacramento, CA that relies on CD Architect. NONE of our clients ever ask for a web-based final product. They ALL ask for a CD master for duplication. Don't jump a ship that isn't sinking. -S
Subject:RE: Big suggestion for saving poor SF5 Reply by: sreams Date:2/9/2001 2:00:20 PM ...and it's time to fix your darned apostrophes!
Subject:RE: Big suggestion for saving poor SF5 Reply by: mcm Date:2/9/2001 11:11:54 PM Ted, I am a huge fan of Sonic Foundry, have been for years. I make my living from Vegas, Sound Forge and CDA. I was looking forward to down loading the beta of SF 5.0. The original comment from SF was yes CDA is being discontinued but it would be included in the new SF 5.0, ok, makes sense, I guess. But now that it's not and after looking at the the new SF 5.0 has to offer (or not) I can see no reason at all to down load the beta let alone buy it. I just don't get it. How are you going to convince people to fork out money to upgrade to 5.0 with the other products that are out there? Your company is acting very weird here. A week doesn't go by that a client doesn’t comment on how cool CDA works. You already have a fabulous product completely developed (a huge time investment) and not support it just makes no sense at all. Are your investors aware of the lam decision being made here? To bad you had to go public. I am extremely disappointed. mcm
Subject:RE: Big suggestion for saving poor SF5 Reply by: Szep_X Date:2/11/2001 3:09:47 PM Hi, I wonder if Sonic Foundry has considered how SF-5.0 is going to be received by the press when it is released official. I'm sure that they(the press)are going to talk about the same short comings of the program. Brian
Subject:RE: Big suggestion for saving poor SF5 Reply by: MikeOlson Date:2/12/2001 2:21:44 PM My impression is that there are more products and upgrades than there is column space to review them, so that usually the vendow is in the position of encouraging/pushing the publication to review. If that's so, if SF chose not to push 5.0's review, there probably wouldn't be many. The other sad reality is that not all publications have a stong division between the editorial side and business side, with the result that sometimes good advertisers enjoy favourable reviews, even when they aren't necessarily justified.
Subject:RE: Big suggestion for saving poor SF5 Reply by: Ted_H Date:2/13/2001 11:06:51 AM Hi MCM, I just wanted to clarify on one point. Sonic Foundry never said that CD Architect would be integrated into Sound Forge version 5.0. There is a general misunderstanding that the products were supposed to be combined and released as one product, but this seems to have originated as a rumor. Ted
Subject:RE: Big suggestion for saving poor SF5 Reply by: emorbius Date:2/13/2001 4:17:52 PM >> The CD architect situation is hardly the only thing here. As a long time Sound Forge user (but mostly Wavelab the last year or so) I was looking forward to SF 5.0 "catching up" to Wavelab. SF has "some" features that I prefer, espcially it's general look and feel. However I am very dissapointed by what I see. I think, in reading thread, that it's apparent what has happened. Sonic Foundry IS, as they have stated publically, going for the web-streaming market and SF 5.0 has all the look and feel of a 4.5 that was cobbled together to get it's old customers off their back. A few spruce-ups bundled with applications that used to cost extra and there it is. I simply am amazed that non-destructive editing, such as Wavelab has, is not in this program in any meaningfull way nor can the direct-x plugins be streamed the way wavelab does. Pulling OUT the ability to use CD architect is madness (It REALLY is guys!). I own and run small studio that is nontheless constantly busy with small lable release-demo type stuff and they don't give a hoot about web streaming. They want CD's burned and architect is the way to go. If one has to have a duality of programs (like 5.0 coexisting with 4.5) one might as well just go wityh a wavelab/4.5 combo instead. If this is sonic Foundry's real opinion of a vamped up state-of-the-art program then I think your management needs to look at what the heck is going on in the real world. If this is what I think it is, basically a cosmetic improvement to 4.5 to get all those "where is 5.0" people off your back I think you're going to get more complaints with what you produced then you had when people were waiting. You guys USED to be THE audio editing company for PC users and I think most of us cut our teeth and learned to do it on your products. You guys have either lost your way or don't care anymore but either way forge 5.0 really does blow. Bob
Subject:RE: Big suggestion for saving poor SF5 Reply by: BrentA Date:2/13/2001 7:09:53 PM >> You guys USED to be THE audio editing company >> for PC users and I think most of us cut our teeth >> and learned to do it on your products. You guys >> have either lost your way or don't care anymore... Sadly, I think there is quite a bit of truth here. I was just watching the Bloomberg interview with CEO Rimas Buinevicius ( http://www.sonicfoundry.com/news/default.asp? pageid=803 ) and it's clear from listening to him that Sonic Foundry has been gradually shifting focus from consumer-oriented audio/video tools to service and system components aimed at helping content companies (IE record labels, TV & Film companies) create internet content. Mr. Buinevicius said Sonic Foundry is "innacurately" thought of as a music software company and he wants to see them diversify into service-related industries. Of course, that interview took place at the beginning of 2000 when stock was on the rise and the internet bubble had not quite burst yet. Like many other internet-focused companies, the stock took quite a beating for the rest of the year, resulting in a 40% staff reduction at end of year (which, coincidentally (?), was when CD Architect was quietly discontinued. I still think CD Architect was not marketed effectively which let to its ultimate demise.) Moral of the story...you tell me.
Subject:Wake up and smell the coffed Sonic Foundry!!! Reply by: Rednroll Date:2/14/2001 12:10:32 AM My view on this nonsense reply of discontinuing CD architect. Look at Adobe Photoshop. This for years has been a Pro user Image editing program. Photoshop's development has incorporated many web based features as far as streaming media for the internet, but they still haven't abandoned the aspects of being able to use this for video editing graphics. It started off as a Pro image editing tool and has upgraded into an internet streaming media program and has lost none of it's initial pro features and continues to develop them. Now why can't us pro audio people have our cake and eat it too, like pro image editing people? Maybe Adobe needs to develop audio editing software to compete with sonic foundry, quite the same way sonic Foundry has targeted Vegas Video for Adobe Premiere users and Viscosity after Photoshop. I know I would be the first to buy it because I like Adobe's ethics a lot better than SF. Besides the money aspect, I think what everyone here is upset about, is wasting all the time they have spent in mastering their audio software, only to find out it will no longer be developed to meet the changing demands of audio and having to start over with another program that does. Amen!!! Brian Franz
Subject:RE: Wake up and smell the coffed Sonic Foundry!!! Reply by: sreams Date:2/14/2001 4:24:58 AM You know, someone earlier questioned whether or not we would see many reviews of SF5 in the various publications... reviews that might bring the truth out about how Sonic Foundry is crippling Sound Forge. Maybe we can do this ourselves. I encourage everyone to write letters to the editors of any publications that they can think of. I know most of them will have no problem posting these in their "Letters" section near the front of their magazines. I've had letters posted in EM in the past, and I feel another one coming on right now. I don't take this stance with the intention of harming Sonic Foundry's sales, but rather with the intention of forcing them to listen to their customers, which is something they apparently need help with. Forgive my ignorance, but which customers asked Sonic Foundry to pull CD Architect and it's capabilities from Sound Forge? Believe it or not, your customers' needs far outweigh those of your stockholders. Wake up and listen to the people that buy your products. -S
Subject:RE: Wake up and smell the coffed Sonic Foundry!!! Reply by: MikeOlson Date:2/14/2001 7:08:23 AM Probably worth the effort, but frankly, I don't see Sonic Foundry surviving as an intependent entuty long enough for that to make a difference. I was reviewing their financial statements for the quarter ending in Dec 2000, and it looks pretty grim to me. It they are n't shopping the company around by now, I would expect to be shortly. Here's an excerpt: Revenues grew $1.4 million or 28% to $6.5 million during the December 2000 quarter, compared with $5.1 million reported for the similar period ended December 31, 1999. Revenue from software sales accounted for $4.0 million while revenues from Sonic Foundry Media Services contributed $2.5 million. The Company posted a net loss of $19.7 million or $0.90 per diluted share for the quarter ended December 31, 2000 compared to $2.2 million or $0.16 per diluted share for the prior year quarter. The current period loss included a non-cash charge for amortization of goodwill and other intangibles of $7.0 and a restructuring charge of $3.8 million. Restructuring charges consist primarily of 1)severance costs resulting from recently announced layoffs, 2)write down of assets no longer required in our operations and placed for sale and 3)excess facility operating costs currently marketed for sub lease. Excluding such amortization and restructuring charges, the net loss for the quarter ended December 31, 2000 would have been $8.9 million, or $0.41 per diluted share. The Company also reported total cash and equivalents for the quarter ended December 31, 2000, of $12.9 million.
Subject:RE: Wake up and smell the coffed Sonic Foundry!!! Reply by: emorbius Date:2/14/2001 7:56:47 AM Reply >> Post New Topic >> Back to Sound Forge Family >> Subject: RE: Wake up and smell the coffed Sonic Foundry!!! Posted by: sreams (Ignore This User) Date: 2/14/2001 4:24:59 AM >> Any publication that does an ehtical and honest review cannot escapt the conclusion that SF 5.0 was cobbled together and is just 4.5 with a bunch of formerly seperate plugins and 24 bit support. It's lack of being even able to utilize CD architect is an absurdity I cannot explain. I decided to pass with the lack of a quick non-destructive editing feature was not added. Trim 1/2 second off the start of a the minute file in wavelab and it takes a fraction of a second. Do it with Sound Forge, and well, you know the result. I really thought after all this time we were going to see a major redesign. But then this seems to be following a pattern. I don't think Vegas is anywhere close to being the program that samplitude 24/96 or Nuendo is either. The days when SF was setting the pace with sound forge, acid, cd architest, etc seems long gone. Bob
Subject:RE: Wake up and smell the coffed Sonic Foundry!!! Reply by: Ben Date:2/14/2001 11:30:29 AM Absolutely agee Bob. What Sonic Foundry should have done - which wouldn't have pissed everybody off - is call this version 'Sound Forge 4.6', as it is such a minor update. Things such as 24bit support and pretty(?!?) graphics don't constitute a major update by any means. Meanwhile, they should have worked on a full update and rewrite of the software to release at a later date. Maybe this thread should be a sort of petition and everyone who has a gripe about SF 5 should post? But then again, whether the company will take a blind bit of notice is another matter... Ben
Subject:RE: Wake up and smell the coffed Sonic Foundry!!! Reply by: sreams Date:2/14/2001 12:38:35 PM Ben has a good point. I suggest we keep this thread alive and at the top for as long as possible. BTW, in Sonic Foundry's defense (I hate taking this position, but...) Vegas is actually pretty great and no other app can do what it does quite so well. Multitrack video with smooth jog shuttle and 100% non-destructive editing. Also, the ability to simply drag in any file format (8-bit, 16-bit, 24-bit, 44.1KHz, 32KHz,MPEG, AVI, etc...) for audio or video and have it converted to the output format in realtime. If you spend more than a few minutes working on dialog/sound effects placement for film, you simply can't deny this. It's pretty great. Sound Forge 5.0 is the big gripe here. -S
Subject:RE: Wake up and smell the coffed Sonic Foundry!!! Reply by: MikeOlson Date:2/15/2001 7:16:16 AM I have to agree. Vegas is the best in class for multitracking, as long as you don't need midi. For me, that's just one more aspect that makes this whole situtaion so confusing and frustrating. Even in Version 1.0 Vegas was pretty good, and it's best steadily improved since. All it lacked was a powerful wveform editor. I can't count the number of times in the early days of Vegas that people on this forum asked about an editor, were told by SF employees "Use Sound Forge", were corrected by other uses that "Sound Forge doesn't do 24 bit", and the conversation ended. With Vegas, SF obviously knew 24 bit support was important. With the develop leadtime for Vegas, they've probably had 2-3 years to upgrade Sound Forge. And yet, here we are, 2-3 years down the road, with a superb multitrack product (Vegas), and a pathetic kludge (Sound Forge). It's almost too sad for words.
Subject:RE: Wake up and smell the coffed Sonic Foundry!!! Reply by: studioman3 Date:2/15/2001 11:03:55 PM I've enjoyed beta testing 5.0 as I've always used Wavelab (steinbergs stuff does seem more efficient with the processor). 5.0 as compared to 4.5 does seem to run more smoothly with more RAM (512k). Like butter. But, even without having CD architect on my own computer, I've always preferred its versatility over any other program. I use it in the studio and it reduces time and increases efficiency. I see no reason CD Architect should not be included as it was actually one of the MAJOR selling points to begin with. I prefer Sound Forge as a mastering utility because it crunches the way I tell it to and doesn't do things I don't expect it to. The software was well written, and I do believe some improvements were made as far as the innerworkings are concerned. I do recall Older versions and their Klunky-Style of processing and just running in general. Certainly, as a beta tester, I can say that there is definitely potential here, but not enough to boost sales with the current design. No real selling point here. Without CD archtect, It would probably seem like a downgrade from the previous. If not CD architect, how about something just as useful and even exciting like a SF version of the Waves C4. Something really high end. I don't spend more than $300 unless it's worth it as a long term investment. Thank you for your time.
Subject:RE: Wake up and smell the coffed Sonic Foundry!!! Reply by: cbeck715 Date:2/16/2001 10:50:04 PM I agree with studioman3 regarding beta testing 5.0 and cda.I'm not going to get into specifics because a lot of folks seem to have really taken a good hard detailed look into 5.0 beta.In the past 3 years soundforge 4.5, and cda have been a pure pleasure to use, more then wavelab, more then steinburg, I know a LOT of people using soundforge, and the majority seem to be very confused as to why cda may not be included in 5.0. As a SHAREHOLDER, I am very concerned that with the ommision of cda from 5.0, this will make programs like steinburg more attractive then soundforge.We all know that the suits at sonicfoundry are reading our postings as well as tech support, and r&d, I just hope these same people reconsider a few details in 5.0, before they piss their customers off, and send them away to other programs.
Subject:RE: Wake up and smell the coffed Sonic Foundry!!! Reply by: ATP Date:2/22/2001 9:56:31 AM bump :) Nothing much for me to add, you guys said it all. Sound Forge 5 is a joke. Right now I use 4.5h for editing and Wavelab for ripping, mastering etc. Fortunately CD Architect works fine with 4.5h, so I have the best of both worlds. Nevertheless I'm quite dissappointed. I had expected SF 5 to be something completely new, with new features and the works (non destructive editing comes to mind). After trying the beta I know I will not get or need the full version. I too remember the days when Sonic Foundry was a real competitor in the audio industry. Steinberg must be laughing their asses off...
Subject:RE: Wake up and smell the coffed Sonic Foundry!!! Reply by: Itna Date:2/26/2001 5:52:24 PM SonicFoundry : give us back our CDA support in SF 5.0 !!! Even if there's no more updates, it's non-sens not to have incorporated it ! Itna
Subject:RE: Wake up and smell the coffed Sonic Foundry!!! Reply by: Tman Date:2/27/2001 10:32:46 PM Scary to read this chain, I bought the 5.0 upgrade 'cause the price was right and I still use 4.5 even if it's redundant, so I don't have a problem. My son uses CDA a lot and doesn't like the loss of support for that product. After reading this line of chat I worry about the continued quality of support and if the company will be around in a year, doesn't seem likely unless those who are left can listen AND respond appropriately. Too bad. I'll still use their products but may start trying out the competition also.

Go Back