wasapi vs mme

nomenomen · Post by **nomenomen** » Thu Mar 31, 2016 3:48 pm

hi
on my laptop i have windows 10 , and about wasapi vs mme , i read it's much better wasapi

but may i know the real gain/profit of wasapi compared to mme

thanks

Post by **kozikowski** » Thu Mar 31, 2016 4:29 pm

MME is built in, but it will not do all jobs. If you have a job that MME will not do, then you should try WASAPI. Many times WASAPI is the only way to make a self-recording—to record YouTube or on-line sound.

Koz

Post by **Gale Andrews** » Thu Mar 31, 2016 4:57 pm

Also see http://manual.audacityteam.org/o/man/de ... .html#host.

Gale

nomenomen · Post by **nomenomen** » Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:08 pm

kozikowski wrote:MME is built in, but it will not do all jobs. If you have a job that MME will not do, then you should try WASAPI. Many times WASAPI is the only way to make a self-recording—to record YouTube or on-line sound.

Koz

hi
i read that wasapi is best choice , for user is asio is no avaible
thanks Koz

nomenomen · Post by **nomenomen** » Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:12 pm

Gale Andrews wrote:Also see http://manual.audacityteam.org/o/man/de ... .html#host.

Gale

hi
thanks
i read it
in an audio expert forum , they talk about the best audio editor
can't understand why sound forge is so popolar ,it's still 64bit and it's not cheap , once i used wavelab and i guess it's the best
don't know about audition cc how good is it
my favorite is Audacity !!!
by the way in this forum , they talk about many laptop with built in soundcard and they say that wasapi is the best way , again if asio is not present
mme is very old , and wasapi come close to asio

thanks Gale

cyrano · Post by **cyrano** » Thu Mar 31, 2016 7:17 pm

nomenomen wrote:can't understand why sound forge is so popular ,it's still 64bit and it's not cheap...

It's been around for a long time, so lots of professionals are used to it. And it comes with a suite of very expensive professional plugins (iZotope), which explains the price. The plugins cost more than SF if you need to buy them separately for a different DAW. And they don't work in Audacity as they are 64 bit.

For the vast majority of users, Audacity simply is better. If you need to do real audio restoration, SF is the cheapest professional solution around.

When it comes to noise (hiss) removal, which is what 99,9% of us do, Audacity is as good as SF. When it comes to click removal, SF's iZotope plugins win.

And "it's still 64 bit", is as far as it goes, atm. There are no 128 bit computers as yet...

Post by **kozikowski** » Fri Apr 01, 2016 4:20 am

if asio is not present

And it won't be. Audacity does not directly support ASIO without compiling a custom version of the software.

Koz

nomenomen · Post by **nomenomen** » Fri Apr 01, 2016 5:11 am

cyrano wrote:
nomenomen wrote:can't understand why sound forge is so popular ,it's still 64bit and it's not cheap...
It's been around for a long time, so lots of professionals are used to it. And it comes with a suite of very expensive professional plugins (iZotope), which explains the price. The plugins cost more than SF if you need to buy them separately for a different DAW. And they don't work in Audacity as they are 64 bit.

For the vast majority of users, Audacity simply is better. If you need to do real audio restoration, SF is the cheapest professional solution around.

When it comes to noise (hiss) removal, which is what 99,9% of us do, Audacity is as good as SF. When it comes to click removal, SF's iZotope plugins win.

And "it's still 64 bit", is as far as it goes, atm. There are no 128 bit computers as yet...

Hi,ops i wanted to say 32bit!! sound forge is still in 32bit
audition cc and wavelab are 64bit (wavelab is really super optimazed)
sorry for the typo error
thanks

Audacity Forum

wasapi vs mme

wasapi vs mme

Re: wasapi vs mme

Re: wasapi vs mme

Re: wasapi vs mme

Re: wasapi vs mme

Re: wasapi vs mme

Re: wasapi vs mme

Re: wasapi vs mme