Is SF ACL 2 worth the upgrade price if you already have SF ACL 1?

Former user wrote on 4/9/2020, 7:38 PM

I currently have Sound Forge Audio Cleaning Lab version 23.0.1.21(DP3) on a Windows 10 64bit, 16gig i5 4670 CPU PC.

Is there any compelling reason to update to Sound Forge Audio Cleaning Lab 2, other than WaveColor waveform display?

I know that Audio Cleaning Lab 2 comes with Ozone Elements 9 and iZotope RX 7 Elements. However, I already have Ozone Elements 8 and iZotope RX 7 Elements.

Comments

emmrecs wrote on 4/10/2020, 4:22 AM

@Former user

An interesting question!

I now have SFACL2, having previously had SFACL1 as an "update" to "Video Sound Cleaning Lab". Apart from the items you list there is little difference if I'm honest, though I must say my impression is that the new version processes the output rather more quickly than the old one. And, arguably, the interface is a "little" cleaner.

All the above is entirely my own opinion!

HTH

Jeff
Forum Moderator

browj2 wrote on 4/10/2020, 8:35 AM

@emmrecs

Hi Jeff,

I have not upgraded to 2. Has the Mono selection radio button shown up in the recording parameters? In 1, there is only stereo. I mentioned this in a post to Ralph, and nothing came of it.

John CB

emmrecs wrote on 4/10/2020, 8:47 AM

@browj2

Hi John.

I think this is what you wanted to know about??

Hence, I think the answer to your question is, Yes.

HTH

Jeff

browj2 wrote on 4/10/2020, 9:49 AM

@emmrecs

Hi Jeff,

Thanks for confirming.

Here is what is in SFACL1:

I can't see anything that would compel me to upgrade. I don't have iZotope RX 7 Elements, but the Magix tools do the same thing, do they not?

Even going from AML to SFACL I did not find going to 64bits worth the price - and then finding that I could not record in mono made it even less attractive.

I would have thought that Magix would at least throw in the new CoreFX bundles.

I feel that the Upgrade price is too expensive for what you get.

John CB

emmrecs wrote on 4/10/2020, 11:23 AM

@browj2

Hi John.

Thanks for that screenshot. Although I previously had SFACL1 I never noticed that setting because I never used it to actually Record anything.

I can't honestly comment about the usefulness, or otherwise of iZotope RX7 Elements because I actually have the full RX7 Advanced, which is quite superb and is my Goto for "treating" audio "noise" problems. I tend to use SFACL2 only for "very quick fixes" on video that has simple noises I want to remove. I have it as the designated Audio Editor from within VPX.

HTH

Jeff

johnebaker wrote on 4/10/2020, 11:30 AM

@browj2

Hi John

In your image you are set for 24 bit depth, in Jeff's image is set for 16 bit depth - does the mono option appear if you select 16 bit depth audio?

John EB

browj2 wrote on 4/10/2020, 11:59 AM

In your image you are set for 24 bit depth, in Jeff's image is set for 16 bit depth - does the mono option appear if you select 16 bit depth audio?

@johnebaker

Nope, still only Stereo in SFACL1.

@emmrecs

I have AML set in VPX because the Edit in external editor does not show up when I right-click on the audio part of a video, as per one of the bugs on the bug list. It only shows up when the external editor is set to AML. I wish they would fix this. Another reason to not upgrade to SFACL2; I can't trust that it would show up in VPX.

I have Samplitude Pro X3 Suite with its Cleaning and Restoration Suite, so I would use that if SFACL or AML failed me. The C&R tools in Samplitude Suite are more advanced that those in SFACL/AML. Magix should just give the full tools in SFACL, not the stripped down versions.

John CB