How good is Sound Forge ?

Hi,
After looking at a couple of threads, how good is Sound Forge for mastering, I use T-Racks deluxe, and, as I'm 
always looking for a better finish to my songs, I was wondering just how good this is ?
 
Thanks
John

Sound Forge is a program and T-Racks are plugin effects (VST's). There is no Comparison as one is an apple and one is an orange. A more likely comparison is comparing Sound forge to WavLab, as both are programs or T-Racks to Ozone as both are plugin effects.
 
As for SoundForge (I own it),  its just like any other mastering program and its only as good as the person using it. It can put out great sounding professional masters.
 
As for T-Racks, my opinion is that I think their a bit harsh and more geared for rock and metal music. 
 
CJ

lawp
Such a shame v11 isn't x64 :(

Yeah, I was hoping for that too, but it still works fine under Win 64-bit. Maybe next version...
 
Scott

--
Scott R. Garrigus - http://garrigus.com - SONAR X2 Power! - http://garrigus.com/?SonarX2Power
* Author of the Cakewalk Sonar and Sony Sound Forge Power book series: http://garrigus.com/?PowerBooks
* Author of the Cakewalk Sonar ProAudioTutor video tutorial series: http://garrigus.com/?ProAudioTutor
* Publisher of the DigiFreq free music technology newsletter: http://digifreq.com/?DigiFreq
* Publisher of the NewTechReview free consumer technology newsletter: http://newtechreview.com/?NewTechReview

"I still don't like the plug-in chain." thats the thing i dont like about it either

brconflict
However, it's destructive editing. I still don't like the plug-in chain. It's very old-school and out of date.

Actually, if you use the Project File feature, you can work on audio files nondestructively in Sound Forge. A project file is created containing all your editing actions and you then render a new file keeping the original intact.
 
Scott

--
Scott R. Garrigus - http://garrigus.com - SONAR X2 Power! - http://garrigus.com/?SonarX2Power
* Author of the Cakewalk Sonar and Sony Sound Forge Power book series: http://garrigus.com/?PowerBooks
* Author of the Cakewalk Sonar ProAudioTutor video tutorial series: http://garrigus.com/?ProAudioTutor
* Publisher of the DigiFreq free music technology newsletter: http://digifreq.com/?DigiFreq
* Publisher of the NewTechReview free consumer technology newsletter: http://newtechreview.com/?NewTechReview

I run Soundforge 9 on a Win 7 64 bit system, which it reportedly does not like, works fine apart from the Ozone stuff, which ain't a problem if need to Ozone I can go to my old XP machine.  CD Architect is a great tool.  Highly recommend personally.

Is anyone using the cheaper versions of Sound Forge or Wavelab? ie Sound Forge Audio Studio 10 or Wavelab Elements?
 
I'm using Adobe Audition at the moment - just like some of you, for audio file editing, top and tailing, sample rate conversion etc, and I run Ozone 5 from it to "master". Audition 3 is getting a little old, but I refuse to upgrade to the new Adobe "subscription model".
 
I'm sticking with Audition 3 for now - bu tjust thinking when the dy comes that it doesn't run any more on the latest 64 bit OS ;-)

I use Sound Forge Audio Studio 10, the lite version of full Sound Forge.  It was way way cheaper than SF 10.
 
I use it for audio conversions FLAC to Wav or MP3, simple zoom and fix audio clipping etc.  Its quick and even though it's 32bit it runs and works fin in my Win 7-64bit.
 
Here is the v10 comparison to SF 10
http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/audiostudio/compare
 
 

lawp
Since v11 wasn't x64 I took a look around and it seems there are only 2, wavelab and audition, both expensive :-S

Exactly!

To explain the subscription model is actually a safety net, depending on how aggressive it is. If you're "renting" the software for less than the purchase price for 3-5 years, about the life of your speedy hardware, it may be a worthwhile cost if you take into consideration that purchasing software outright usually entails paying for the incremental upgrades over time. The difference is only that the initial purchase/rental price is lower, while the upgrades are the same cost vs. purchasing the software up front at a large cost and playing less for the upgrades.
 
Subscription models do work for some companies, because it keeps the income steady for that company, and they end up laying off fewer talents over time. The product can remain on the edge v.s. having to slow down advancements or bring in new, younger talent to replace old masters--or charge more for the software. There's a balanced way of looking at that. There's also the precedence that once everyone owns your software, how do you maintain income? You have to keep evolving the software, and either charge more for new features, or just keep working on the subscription money. Magazines have done this for a century, right? We accepted that.
 
Business who use Adobe products tend to like the subscription model, because their employee count may change drastically, or upgrade costs are expensive to get everyone on the next version. It's also easier on the finance books each year/month. 
 
If Waves instituted a Subscription platform, and would allow you to drop bundles or plug-ins that you once paid for (but didn't use), that would be pretty awesome. I could save some money, and Waves will see which plug-ins are used by the masses. If Sonar offered a subscription model, where you purchased X3 Producer, but later realized Studio does everything you need at the time, you aren't out as much of the money you paid for Producer. Cakewalk could see how many stick with Producer, and there'd be more incentive to create features that people are more likely to need/want. The feedback is in the pudding.
 
Want to use Cubase Version 8 vs. Sonar X3 for a year? Go for it! You can always come right back at a much lower cost to you in the end (assuming Steinberg and Cakewalk both went to a subscription model)
 
With all that said, I don't particularly "like" the subscription model, but then, I don't "like" that technology just HAS to keep evolving because there's consumers out there that will buy anything new with an Apple logo on it. I'd be perfectly fine if advancements stopped, and we just floated for a while.
 
 

bitflipper
Sound Forge is a great tool to have for lots of reasons, but mastering would be low on that list. If that's your primary motivation, get Ozone instead and do your mastering within SONAR. And maybe just buy the CD Architect component for burning CDs.

I'm with bitflipper, I'd rather spend money on really good mastering plugins and do it in Sonar than spend the money on SF.
I do own SF and it does come in handy for some things but not Mastering, for that I go with sonar and "Mastering grade" plugins (waves) not the sonar plugs.
I do like CD Architect also!

I love Sound Forge, but I can't say I'm a fan of the way they upgrade.  IMHO it is not worth the upgrade for SF10 users but is still a damn good editor for those who don't already own a previous version.  The lack of 64-bit bothers me but but is more nuisance than deal breaker.  I use audition as well, but I usually go back to SF for my detailed editing.  As mentioned by bitflipper, I would not buy it just for mastering since the best mastering tools(the ozone mastering suite) can be purchased separately and used within other programs.  It would be like buying a car strictly because you liked the stereo it came with.

I'm still on SF8 and see no need to upgrade vs the pricing model. It's also easy to create an audio editor project template in X2 and use that instead. IMO, I lose the easy zooming and navigation SF offers when I do that, but not much else.

AA3 gets daily use here, too. Always been rock-solid and has every feature I need in an audio editor for detail editing, noise removal, amplitude and spectral analyses, remedial EQ, format conversion and MP3 encoding.
 
Too bad you can't buy it anymore.