Talk:Comparison of digital audio editors

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Professional sound production (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Professional sound production, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sound recording and reproduction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Added file import/export list for logic. Said logic only supported AAF. Who is editing this and what planet do you live on?

Answer: Plenepticor —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:01, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Adobe Audition[edit]

What's with Adobe Audition? Isn't that a multitrack software, too? (talk) 10:00, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

That's exactly what I was thinking. Adobe Audition can probably do more or less everything that things like Pro Tools can do. I'm not a recording engineer but I doubt most artists would struggle to find something they needed in Audition 1.5, let alone later versions. It's non-inclusion in the list is rather odd. Psyklax (talk) 21:57, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Audition 1.5 is definitely able to import and export AIFF and AAC (among other lesser-known formats), and I don't see why they would've dropped the support in later versions, so I updated them in the table. Audition is also able to read and write FLAC with a third party plugin, is this worth mentioning? Jakce (talk) 02:22, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


I don't see:
Sony ACID Pro
Ableton Live (doesn't operate as a tracker but well...)

What about Logic and Nuendo? They are the primary alternatives to using protools. it is unfair to compare protools to 'everything else'.

merging pyramix[edit]

added info about merging technologies pyramix. i don't work for them, but as a sound editor i use the software on an extensive daily basis. i'm no wikiwizard, so let me know if i've done something wrong :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:32, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


Added Reason to the article. As of version 6 it's possible to record and edit audio just like in Record, which was already included. Jakce (talk) 00:06, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

ASIO Support[edit]

It would be quite useful to add a column indicating whether the application supports ASIO (e.g. Wavosaur: YES, Goldwave: NO, Audacity: YES/NO (because official version is not built with it due to licensing issues, but it can support ASIO if you compile it by yourself). — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:55, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

How many DAWs listed in the article support ASIO? Ftiercel (talk) 18:58, 23 April 2014 (UTC)


This is confusing Digital Audio Editors and then also list among them Digital Audio Workstations.

To avoid further confusion I suggest to redo this and have comparison pages one for each.

Comparison Of Digital Audio Editors

Comparison Of Digital Audio Workstation this could be split again for Hardware and Software Digital Audio Workstations

Looking at there is no link for comparison but some of those DAW have been dumped or placed here wrongly. In amongst tools that have very distant relation to a small part of a DAW such as audio split tool. Please revise and update make Wikipedia better in doing so. (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:43, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Comparison of digital audio editors. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Question? Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:07, 21 January 2016 (UTC)