Demo remastering with Sound Forge

B

Boogie Fever

Guest
Alright, so I'm recording a brand-spanking new demo for myself... BUT this time, I've decided to clean things up a bit with Sound Forge 5.0. There's a little problem, though, I have NO idea how to use this program.

So, to all you nice people out there, could you give me the basics of what I'd want to use in this program (and how)? I'm not looking to overhaul my live mix, just want to make things sound just a little more crispy clean.

Maybe add a couple effects here and there, who knows... always good to know the power of yer program.


Thanx.
 
Its should be just like any other wave editor. It was some time ago when I did some mastering works, like 2 years ago. Ive tried SF but totally moved to Wavelab as SF is a joke as compared to WL. I don' t know with todays versions.
You have to learn each of the effects essential for mastering and writing it down all heard would be a real pain. I think there are lots of forums here that could help. I learned a lot on the Alesis site. There's a tutorial on effects there. I don't have the link anymore. For sure you cant hurry things up. You have to learn all of them one by one to have an effecting mastering work.
 
Hey, Icomeinpieces!

Can you explain why you like WL over SF? I am very interested, because I have both progs, (I haven't done any mastering, only editing) and I feel that SF is easier to navigate, but I am clueless as to all the functionalities of both.
 
Ok, I can only speak of the versions I used then. Well I haven't upgraded so I would still use 'em these days.
Wavelab is coded much better. It can do more FX than Soundforge for a given processor. WL mastering effects are really hot, its got its own set of FX(fantastic compressors/dynamic processors, 3D and level enhancers) and can use both VST and DX while SF can only use its own and DX (which we all know are processor hogs). Wavelab does everything in real time;
you can play a file while saving, this is unimaginable with SF.
SF is only better for editing small snipets of WAVs but for mastering its really a toy compared with WL. Check the 2 out. Even CoolEdit does not compare with WL.
 
Before wavelabs recent update, the only reason I EVER used SF was to draw waves (editing out glitches)- Wavelab is rock solid, very accurate, and more elegant than SF. For all I know they are identical, but I have a particular bias against soundforge and their pricing/upgrade scheme (they basically sell subscriptions to their software). I dunno... there is nothing objective about my opinion other than the fact that SF feels 'rough'- and btw- you can now draw in wavelab as well- but they also added a wave restore feature that takes the tedium out of manually drawing...
 
. . .so anyway, I recorded a set into WL ~65min, and applied the 'stereo expander' function to the whole file. WL is 10x more smoother than SF, w/ clean effects.

my problem is friggn virtual memory. I can't save the file post-effects, cuz I get the winblows error message about not enough virtual mem. I go choose to determine my own, it asks me if i'm sure, I tell it "yes, goddamn it!" , it says "okey-dokey", then reverts back to 'let windows choose'. Anyone know what da dealion is?
 
Sound Forge

Boogie,

I also use SoundForge and like it. If you're having problems you might want to find a copy of the book "Sound Forge Power" by Scott R. Garrigus published by Muska&Lipman (I found it at a Borders bookstore for $30 but you can probably get it at Amazon, etc.)

tim
 
PopD said:
. . .so anyway, I recorded a set into WL ~65min, and applied the 'stereo expander' function to the whole file. WL is 10x more smoother than SF, w/ clean effects.

my problem is friggn virtual memory. I can't save the file post-effects, cuz I get the winblows error message about not enough virtual mem. I go choose to determine my own, it asks me if i'm sure, I tell it "yes, goddamn it!" , it says "okey-dokey", then reverts back to 'let windows choose'. Anyone know what da dealion is?
Click to expand...



You need to be real careful when missing around with virtual memory. I had the same problem once and after changing the virtual memory setting, my computer wouldn't bootup because it said it didn't have enough memory. The fact that your computer is resetting is probably it's way of protecting you from this grave error.
 
My 2 cents

I have both Soundforge and Wavelab, and I use Wavelab for everything except recording. I use Soundforge for that so I can take advantage of cd Architect. Wavelab just flows easier and out performs Soundforge in terms of speed. Computer Music Magazine gave Soundforge a 7 or 8, but they gave Wavelab a 9.
 
The advantage of Soundforge over WaveLab only becomes apparent in a pro environment where you have a massive workload.

Soundforge allows the creation of batch scripts which allow you to set up a whole bunch of processes on a whole bunch of files , hit go , and leave it to get on with it for a couple of hours.

To me this makes Soundforge worth 50 wavelabs.

But I run a Commercial Studio , so for at home I guess it is your personal prefference.
 
um.... Wavelab does the same thing... and wavelab allows you to do other things within wavelab while processing and saving files, which to me saves a ton of time.

It is really a matter of taste.
 
um.... Wavelab does the same thing...
Click to expand...

Oh really , must say I never kept up with wavelab after v.2 ... used soundforge instead ] :D

The big argument over the 2 used to be that wavelab could edit 24 bit files , but the new SF can too.

As you say it is really a matter of taste.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
well this thread seems way off topic at this point but thats fun...


I have used SF and WAvelab both alot profesionaly musicly and for animation. I found Wavlab to be far more powerful then SF simply because you can set up complexe effex chains and listento them without all that audition crap that SF makes you do. If effex are not important to you then it does not motaer what you use because they both tend to do the same thing.

For mastering you need eEQ and Limiter and Compressors all working together, its to hard to master something by eqing it then moving on to a compressor or a limiter, becaus going back to change things would be a pain.


just my thoughts

Taos
www.djtaos.cjb.net
 
Interesting Point.

That's an interesting point. I completely forgot that you can load all your processing effects simultaneously.;)
Besides, I don't know when it happened, but I just started using Wavelab more and more. It seemed faster and more to the point. Not to mention that it received a higher rating in Computer Music Magazine.:)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top