Subject:SF XP 4.5 vs. SF 5

Posted by: DjXSoundz

Date:2/24/2002 3:55:46 PM

i've got sound forge 4.5 XP right now. works great and never crashes..........is Sound Forge 5 really that much better?

Subject:RE: SF XP 4.5 vs. SF 5

Reply by: dbarry

Date:2/24/2002 8:06:46 PM

I wish I knew the same. I was thinking of upgrading from 4.5 to 5.0 to get the free Vegas LE also. Also I am hoping that the new CD ripping and burning built in might be worth it. Wave Hammer looks just like doing an RMS normalize but if it save me time then it could be worth it. Did you know if any good plugins come for free?
db

Subject:RE: SF XP 4.5 vs. SF 5

Reply by: SHTUNOT

Date:2/25/2002 2:51:43 PM

I think that the upgrade was awesome. You get wave hammer and acoustic mirror. IMHO acoustic mirror is one of the most amazing fx plugins you could buy. Really amazing reverb sounds...try it! Wave hammer never failed me either. If you loved 4.5 then 5 will not dissappoint...at least it hasn't to me.

Subject:RE: SF XP 4.5 vs. SF 5

Reply by: VU-1

Date:2/25/2002 6:05:24 PM

5.0 is a HUGE dissapointment as compared to 4.5. Best benefit realized in 5.0: 24-bit. Biggest loss: CDArchitect integration.

If you really, Really, REALLY want to get into 24-bit audio, get Vegas and keep 4.5. You can load-in and work with hi-res audio AND do NON-DESTRUCTIVE editing in Vegas & then render it down to 44/16. Then open it up in CDA & burn away. The CD burning in 5.0 is an absolute JOKE. It is strictly TAO (Track-at-Once) CD burning (CDA is DAO - Disc-at-Once) and the ripping is just like that in CDA.

Also, there are MUCH better plug-ins out there than WaveHammer.

If its strictly a budget issue, its worth it to get 5.0 IF AND ONLY IF it comes with Vegas Audio LE. In this case, use LE to do all your editing and processing, but keep 4.5 as your main 2-track program. LE won't do 24-bit however.

JL
OTR

Subject:RE: SF XP 4.5 vs. SF 5

Reply by: Chienworks

Date:2/25/2002 6:25:16 PM

OTR: you seem to be focusing totally on the CDA issue. If your primary use for Sound Forge is something other than simply preparing CDs with little editing beyond "making a mix", then Sound Forge 5 is a big improvement beyond 4.5. And quite frankly, if you do want to just burn CDs, i think the free Roxio Easy CD Creator i got with my CD-RW drive runs circles around CDA anyday. I prepare my tracks in Sound Forge, save them as separate .wav files, and burn the disk with Easy CD Creator. It's very painless and easy.

Subject:RE: SF XP 4.5 vs. SF 5

Reply by: VU-1

Date:2/25/2002 9:24:15 PM

Chienworks wrote: If your primary use for Sound Forge is something other than simply preparing CDs with little editing beyond "making a mix", then Sound Forge 5 is a big improvement beyond 4.5.

In what way??? (besides 24-bit)

JL
OTR

Subject:RE: SF XP 4.5 vs. SF 5

Reply by: dbarry

Date:2/26/2002 11:24:23 PM

Hey,
I've been using 4.5 since it came out and I never realized it could burn cds, or OTR seems to be saying that is does. Anyway I bought Roxio and except for the silly skins it seems to work pretty well. What is this CDA that we lost with 5.0?
Thanks

Subject:RE: SF XP 4.5 vs. SF 5

Reply by: rraud

Date:2/27/2002 12:14:05 PM

SF 4.5 will not burn CDs by itself. CD Arcitech (CDA) was a separate program that would integrate with 4.5 . There are a lot of plus's and minus's on the 4.5 vs. 5.0. 5.0 comes bungled with a lot of nice plug-ins and is 24 bit compatible. However performance wise, in terms of speed and not crashing, 4.5 (full version) blows 5.0 away. Anyway that's my opinion and on my PC.
Getting back to the original post, I would definitly up-grade from 4.5XP to 5.0. full version.