Talk:Adobe Audition

message: CoolEdit Pro 2.0 was basically the same program as Adobe Audition 1.0.  The only real difference was the substitution of Adobe in the help and information areas.  Most in the pro audio industry consider CoolEdit 2.0 and Audition 1.0-1.5 to be the same program.  75.120.83.193 21:48, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: CoolEdit Pro 2.0

message: This article says that the last version of Cool Edit Pro was 2.0 but several sites such as Softpedia distribute 2.1
216.86.120.252 09:49, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: CoolEdit 2.1 was the same as 2.0.  The only difference was to include more flexability to sample from and writ eto the more modern versions of the MP3 format.  This was possible under 2.0 with a patch.  A few other plug-ins were included (which were seperate downloads in 2.0).  75.120.83.193 21:48, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about Cool Edit Pro 2.1? 

message: I note that Adobe Soundbooth is being included in Adobe Master Collection and Adobe Production Premium.  The last version of Production Premium included Adobe Audition.  Does this mean that Adobe Audition has been renamed to Adobe Soundbooth? TerraFrost 19:40, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Audition 3 came out after Soundbooth. http://www.adobe.com/products/soundbooth/compare/ --Jhartmann (talk) 12:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adobe Soundbooth 

message: I can't get a straight answer out of Adobe whether Soundbooth is replacing Audition or not. Here is the latest I got from an Adobe chat agent:
:Visitor: Is Audition going to be in any suite package?
:Clark: I will be glad to help you with that information.
:Clark: I'm sorry that Audition is not included in any of our Creative Suites.
:Visitor: Will new versions of it have dynamic link?
:Clark: Instead of Audition, we have included SoundBooth CS3 in the Creative Suite 3 Production Premium.
:Visitor: I need the multi-track tools when I do animation
:Clark: Sure, SoundBooth will meet your needs and expectation.
:Visitor: Is audition going to be continued to be produced?
:Clark: Adobe Audition allows you to record, mix, edit, and master digital audio files with powerful tools that bring flexibility and control to your desktop studio.
:Clark: Audition is a standalone product and it is available for $349.
:Clark: Are you ready to add the item to your cart?
:Visitor: I have Audtion 2.0, is there a newer version?
:Clark: SoundBooth is the new version.
:Clark: We don't have any upgrade for Audition.
:Visitor: Is adobe going to make new versions of audition eventually or is Soundbooth replacing audition?
:Clark: SoundBooth have replaced the Audition. We are not going to release any new version for Audition.
I don't want to change it based on this because for all I know this guy was in some God-forsaken 3rd world country and has no clue. Can we confirm with a citation that Soundbooth is not replacing Audition? I know there is a page on the Adobe site that compares the two, but that's not concrete proof. Ryratt 01:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Confirmed here: http://blogs.adobe.com/hartshafer/2006/10/introducing_ado.html#more I don't know how to cite. 76.86.0.31 06:23, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Adobe will release Audition for Mac with new features soon, so is much likely it's not going to dissapear. --Peroyomas (talk) 21:01, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Replacing Soundbooth or not?! 

message: :Image:Audition.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 14:23, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Audition.png

message: :Image:Audition.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 13:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Audition.png

message: :Image:Audition.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 16:48, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Audition.png

message: :Image:Audition.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 20:21, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Audition.png

message: How do I make it have the box saying that it's a stub?
WIll someone tell me?  Or at least do it themself?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by TangLab (talk • contribs) 21:13, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is a stub 

message: I think the early part on CoolEdit requires more information, particularly regarding years and time frame. The only years mentioned regarding CoolEdit so far are "the early 1990s" as for when Syntrillium was founded, and 2003 when Syntrillium sold it to Adobe. There's no mention whatsoever of most of the things that happened between the founding of Syntrillium and the sale of the program to Adobe, and especially not when it happened.
In other words, an own timeline for CoolEdit would be nifty: When did the first (crippleware) release come out? When did they release CoolEdit96 (presumably in 1996; it's the version I've been using next to CoolEditPro until Audition came out)? When did they release CoolEditPro? Etc... --2003:71:4E6A:B457:9D64:FBFA:3880:5109 (talk) 05:51, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Please also note cooledit-3.12.0] and cooledit. This cooledit is a text exitor and is related to Midnight Commander (try git log --author='Paul Sheer' after cloning mc). Perhaps the only resemblence with Adobe Audition/Cool Edit Pro/Cool Edit is the name. Leen 94.212.249.212 (talk) 20:36, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  More CoolEdit history 

message: "Audition CS6 ...It included faster and more precise editing"
What is more precise than editing to the single sample, to the actual 16-bit or 32-bit integer or floating-point number, which Cool Edit had before Adobe bought it? Likewise for "faster" - can anyone quantify this, or is it just sales talk?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.126.109.118 (talk) 21:29, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  It reads like an Adobe sales brochure 

message: Heyo, I just wanted to say that I slightly improved the article, but not significantly. The sources must be independently verified. —Jamesluiz102— (talk) 03:12, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need cleanup and bring verified sources... 

message: I've been using the program ever since it was still called CoolEdit96, and the only "destructive" thing about it was that you had to hit the undo button rather than turn effects on and off, while the files on the HDD stayed the same. That's not called "destructive", that's simply called "not in real time". --2003:DA:CF39:B891:75A8:AC28:3C40:AB12 (talk) 09:49, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Destructive"