Wavelab audio editing vs Izotope RX

I’m looking for an audio editor to edit my samples. Is Wavelab overkill because it seems geared towards mastering rather than strictly audio editing. I’m also looking at Izotope RX. From an audio editing standpoint, what are the differences between Wavelab and RX? I know RX is better at cleaning up audio but what does each offer that the other doesn’t?

Izotope RX and Spectralayers are more analogous to each other in terms of basic operation. I’ve used both.

There’s plenty of information about the programs you’re interested in online. Steinberg has downloadable product manuals. I think Izotope does to. If you want to experiment, I’d suggest downloading the demos and testing them.

I’m looking to maybe have both later in the future if they compliment each other rather than overlap. So I wanted to know how Wavelab and RX compares to see which one to purchase first. I’m not too interested in Wavelab’s mastering features (although they may be useful at a later time). I’m more looking for a well featured, swiss-army audio software to edit all my samples. Wavelab and RX are the ones that came up constantly. Can RX do everything Wavelab can in terms of audio editing? Because if thats the case then I see no need in getting Wavelab at this time and am probably going to purchase RX.

Agreed download demos if possible to check out!

regards S-EH

I use Wavelab as my main sample editor. I hardly ever use the montage or other mastering oriented features. But the audio editing features are worth it to me.

Mostly use it for preparing samples for vst instruments. You can do all the basic editing like trim, gain, fades, loop markers, effect processing if needed. It has a powerful batch processor.

The other case I find it useful is with video editing applications. Open the audio in Wavelab, check and adjust the loudness, denoise either manually or using plugins. You can also use external editor from within Wavelab, for example RX or SpectraLayers. So I do the basic edits and clean up in Wavelab and then use RX or SpectraLayers if needed. This is very material dependent. Sometimes putting a denoiser plugin on master does the job. Other times it might be a short region that needs some noise removed.

So Wavelab is definitely not just for mastering.

I only have RX elements. I rarely use it as editor. But I find the plugins quite useful.

So do you suggest getting Wavelab first? What if you have a DAW already? Would RX then be a better choice?

I think that sums up Wavelab quite well.

No. When it comes to sample editing I think Wavelab can do more. It has very good metering tools, batch processing, file management, metadata support.

For spectral editing and restoration work RX has the edge.

Definitely get a trial if you can.

Like I said: download and try a demo. No need to accept second-hand info from complete strangers on a forum when you can play with the software yourself and make a first-hand evaluation.

BTW, you can edit samples with Audacity. You don’t have to buy an editing program to do that, let alone buy one that costs hundreds of dollars.

I don’t think that would be descriptive of RX whatsoever. It runs standalone, but it’s quite constrained as an editing platform compared even to WaveLab Elements. Check them out as mentioned, since the trials are available.

I agree with all of this.

That said, if budget is a concern, give Audacity a try as well as @anon4 suggested.