I use SpectraLayers Pro, which I just upgraded to version 11 from 10, to restore audio tracks. Typically from aged, damaged, or badly recorded tapes (R2R).
Addressing your questions:
1 ----------------------------------
Any signal alteration based on spectrum analysis necessitates a solid understanding of electronics and audio signal processing. Given the depth of this field of study, etc., a lot of users are looking for tools that can inject predetermined changes into the signal. This is where tools like iZotope RX originate. They are designed with the understanding that the average consumer knows very little to nothing about signal engineering. As a result, algorithms have to perform a lot of computation to figure out the user’s purpose, etc.
Another subset of users is well-versed in the audio stream itself, including its processing. Those users might search for a tool that will enable them to intercept the signal and modify it precisely as desired. This is the origin of SL. As a tool, it transforms the signal into its spectrum visual representation, allowing users to precisely operate on the visual aspects of the signal. Put another way, SL is like to Photoshop except for audio.
In conclusion, SL and iZotope RX are distinct tools that are challenging to compare with one another. SL is an outstanding spectral manipulation software that can perform all the functions of iZotope RX. This can be accomplished manually or with the use of integrated algorithms that assist in editing a spectrum.
De-noising, for instance, is a very complicated subject. This can be achieved by equalising particular ranges and thresholds in conjunction with selective gates for narrow frequencies. Static noise that obscures the valuable information might be filtered out since, regrettably, this type of de-nosing can harm a signal’s useful portion.
The fact that the noise is mingled with useful information makes this an actual issue. At this point, the spectrum subtraction algorithm becomes essential, etc. By profiling the isolated noise to feed the subtraction algorithm, this can be a very effective way to eliminate static noise from the substance of the valuable signal.
Thus far, SL and iZotop RX have both made good use of these methods. However, what happens if there is a noise fluctuating over time? I’m not aware of any efficient adaptive algorithms that really work. Not even sophisticated AI-powered systems with an abundance of highly trained algorithms can do the task. In this case, undesirable noise portions can only be masked (but not eliminated) by manual intervention into the signal. To do this, I haven’t come across a better tool than SL.
Since SL relies on a visual representation of a signal, a graphical toolkit is offered. For example, using the same technique as brush masking in Photoshop and other tools, it is simple to mask a very particular area (on a function graph, this area is frequency, time, and energy) by dimming the visible information which translates directly to the signal energy in that area.
Additionally, SL simplifies semi-3D visualisation; yet, a list of predefined colour palettes is incredibly helpful, in my opinion. Analogue noise (which comes from the transport mechanism and analogue topology), magnetic noise (occurring when a tape head begins to read magnetic domains), and any other noise (due to recording) are easily distinguished. All by simply observing the spectrum and incorporating brightness, contrast, and colour.
To sum up, SL has some built-in algorithms as iZotope RX provides, but it is more just that. SL is a very specialised tool which produces outstanding results of manual and precise signal modifications.
2 ----------------------------------
The community beyond Steinberg’s products is knowledgeable and very helpful, and I’ve found this forum to be an excellent place to ask questions. Remember that many of the people here have extensive expertise in their fields. Because of everything above, I have not needed to post directly to the support.
3 ----------------------------------
There have been a lot of complaints regarding Steinberg’s gradient of the offer (which refers to variations between a specific product versions, etc.), but I believe that it have been well tailored. Because a use case is the main focus, it is not about any particular feature. There are individuals who pursue features that, from the standpoint of the use case, they do not really need. For my signal engineering work, I also use Cubase in Elements edition, which is perfect for such projects. If I were a composer, I would most certainly choose the Artist version. If my music became profitable, I might even upgrade to the Pro.
For this reason, I found Steinberg’s licensing is suitable and appropriate. The procedure is simple and all licenses are managed from a single application. To activate your license, purchase, redeem the code, then use Licensing Manager.
