Sure, there are basic stereo audio editors built into most multitrack audio apps, but for most of us, nothing can replace a trusty stereo waveform editor and batch processor. In that spirit, my review of Peak Pro XT 5 is up on Macworld.com:


Peak Pro XT 5: Sound-editing software bundles great restoration, mastering, and CD-creation software
(4.5 mice)

. . . when it comes to day-to-day work with stereo files, you’ll have a hard time finding a better tool than Peak Pro XT 5. Most users will be well-served by Peak LE 5, but the Pro and Pro XT 5 versions are worth consideration for their batch-processing abilities, and XT is one of the best values on the Mac for processing bundles.





I was particularly impressed in this release by the tape scrubbing features and the quantity of sound tools if you can shell out the grand for the full XT bundle. Peak had some rough spots when it first made the leap to OS X, to the point that I stopped using it for a while, but it’s back in force. The folks at BIAS have also demonstrated that it can deliver superior audio quality when resampling, matched according to their tests only by Adobe Audition on Windows. (If anyone wants to take issue with their tests, though, please feel free.)


Of course, I believe there’s never a one-size-fits-all tool. These days, it’s been Audition on Windows and a combination of Soundtrack Pro and Peak on the Mac, depending on the job. So, Mac users, what are you using for your waveform editor audio needs these days? Or do you use one at all? One premise of my review was that a stereo editor goes well with a multitrack program for day-to-day chores, but I know not everyone works that way.

  • Symbiotic

    Peter – Care to draw a comparison to SoundForge 8 for PC? I'm still undecided between these two…

  • admin

    Honestly, I'm really impressed by Audition and where it's going . . . and note that it was the one PC app that equaled Peak for resampling audio fidelity.

    Basically, though, SF seems to be the way to go for bread and butter editing, while Audition is by far more feature-rich. I'm just not in love with Audition's cluttered interface.

    Maybe it's time for a shootout? :-) Can ask the parties involved at NAMM.

  • Symbiotic

    Let's do it! I haven't seen one recently – just DAW shootouts.

  • niall

    i use dsp quattro on the mac and audition on the windows box. neither of them have pencil tools, and this frustrates me.

    the forthcoming version of dspQ will have a pencil, though.

  • velocipede

    I read this article originally on Macworld.com. Please check out DSP Quattro. Although it may not be as sophisticated as the software you mention in your article, it should be included in the comparison. You write,"Peak Pro 5 also shines for its plug-in capabilities: it’s the only Mac waveform editor that supports both VST and Audio Unit (AU) plug-ins," but, in fact DSP-Quattro does this too.

  • admin

    That's indeed an error on my part. DSP-Quattro has VST, AU, and virtual instrument support. Mea culpa; thank you for catching it. (Authors tend to prefer to be the ones to catch errors, but we don't always succeed.) I'll add a comment to the article. And certainly, at its price point, DSP-Quattro must be considered; it has more functionality than the low-end Peak (though depending on what you need, you might prefer one or the other for other reasons).

  • velocipede

    Thanks!

  • bucky

    contrary to the review, peak has had window tiling and stacking since the 20th century, and POWr dithering for quite awhile too. it's also been full of bugs in every version, though i haven't got v5.

  • admin

    According to BIAS, window management has indeed changed. The Sample Rate Conversion engine is new, not dithering.

    I have seen bugs in past versions, as the program made the OS X transition; this one, for me at least, was rock solid. (Sometimes bugs don't crop up while you're reviewing, of course!)

  • Morgan

    I just wanted to say that DSP-Quattro is total vaporware. Buggy, completely unstable. I cannot believe that someone would have the audacity to sell such an untested peice of crap as a professional tool. I wasted $100 and plenty of time trying to get this pathetic software to do even simple edits without freezing up. No thanks to the stupid bloggers who raved about how wonderful is was based upon five min. of browsing the interface.

    Do not waste your time on DSP-Quattro.

    A check of DSP-Quattro's License agreement reads:

    THE SOFTWARE AND ACCOMPANYING ELECTRONIC AND WRITTEN MATERIALS (INCLUDING INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE) ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND.