Hi, Lou,

I think Cedar and Algorithmix make fine products. I think the 
experience of the operator and the sensitivities of the operator have 
almost more to do with the final outcome than the product. Parker 
Dinkens who has Cedar Cambridge and I exchanged a raw file and 
compared. He and I took different approaches to the cleanup (i.e. 
different tradeoffs) and the outcome was different. I think either 
product can do a very competent job. He actually liked one of my 
passes on DC6 Live/Forensics (which I didn't like as much). It's all 
what you're going for.

I don't know SoundSoap - perhaps I should. I can tell you that there 
is light years of difference between Algorithmix's NoiseFree Pro and 
their Sound Laundry version. I suspect the same is true for the 
de-scratch product. I was very impressed with Graham Newton's 
demonstration of the Cedar Cambridge DeClickl (sp?) tool and I think 
it's substantially better than the Sound Laundry version, but I have 
not tried the Algorithmix Pro version of the scratch/click tool -- 
and won't because I don't do grooved things and don't need it.



At 10:35 AM 9/8/2005, Lou wrote:

>There is a quality of scale, too - SoundSoap 2 fills my simple needs 
>and budget. Algorithmix looks amazing. Have you compared it with Cedar?
>>>The thing that makes it profeessional is 35 years of analog work 
>>>with tape. THAT is priceless...

Richard L. Hess                           email: [log in to unmask]
Media                           web:
Aurora, Ontario, Canada             (905) 713 6733     1-877-TAPE-FIX
Detailed contact information: