Also, go read some of the posts on the SF forum. You may well read them and think one way or another. SF is a tool. A very excellent tool. If you don't do video and need the comprehensive analysis and rectification that SF can bring you - then use SF. Choose the tool you want/need.
But do go read the posts on the SF forum. Many very intelligent and audio savvy people there. Apart from anything else, it will give you a further "view" - if you can do that with audio! - as to what you COULD be doing with your audio streams.
I could also turn your question around and ask: "I have Sound Forge (and only do audio), why have Vegas?" . . . .
I have nothing against Sound Forge. It's obviously a staple of the audio industry and has been for years.
I guess, even though I own it, I don't "get" SF like I do Vegas. Vegas seems more intuitive somehow.
If I was doing voice overs or music recording instead of video I would probably use SF more.
I am doing a radio show that I record to three tracks on an Edirol R-4, then import, edit and encode to MP3 in Vegas as simple and as fast as I could ask for.
This weekend I helped a friend install SF Studio so he could edit a Spanish track to add a second language to his already-produced exercise DVD. After we got done it dawned on me that he was using the wrong tool. If he had been using Vegas, he could have ripped the DVD to get the reference video and English tracks, digitized the analog Spanish track into Vegas, edited the Spanish to fit the video, added Subtitles and exported the whole thing to DVDA for authoring.
There must be reasons to export audio to SF, as Vegas allows it seamlessly. I'll spend some time at the SF forum for more.
SF has a LOT more audio sweetening tools than Vegas does which, IMO, is why a lot of folks use it.
A co-worker who runs a recording studio in his spare time always uses SF as the final step for mastering any music CDs he produces at his place, no matter what software was used to produce it (Logic Audio, Cubase, Vegas, etc.).
SF is a VERY different tool to Vegas. If you're used to Vegas and its UI then you most likely will have a hard time getting your head around SF. After years of owning SF I think I finally understand it but understanding and using fluidily are two different things.
You can do almost anything in Vegas that you can do in SF. Once you get fluid with SF though it'll be a heck of a lot quicker. The real power of SF lies in being able to open multiple timelines and cutting and pasting between them. Jay Rose's book has some great tutorials to work though changing what someone has said into something else by slicing and dicing phonemes. Yes, you could do this in Vegas but handling large numbers of small audio fragments on the one T/L becomes a PIA.
Of course as well, SF has different and more powerful tools but that misses the point and I think accounts for a lot of these kinds of questions and why a lot of us don't get the real power of SF.
I had recorded several video takes of a song, and in the best take, the singer got a word wrong. Using Sound Forge, I took the word from another take and replaced the bad. This too, could be done in Vegas, but not as easily.
I have doctored a recording of a (very young) violinist who played unrhythmically and out of tune - so as to not embarrass her when the recording is played back years later. Could probably be done in Vegas, but not as easily.
In fact I had Sound Forge for years and only got Vegas Video (as it was then called) to get multitrack audio. That was long before I even thought about getting a video camera.
Tor
Image you're doing plastic surgery, and Vegas is a nice new Stanley craftknife, and SF is a set of specialist scapels. Whilst you're going to be able to get nice cuts with Vegas, and in the correct hands do a good job, it's easier to work with the tools designed for the job, and the results will be even better.
The 2 programs are very much differing in scope and whilst there is some similarity between the two, you don't work with audio like you do with video, and vice-versa. And as such, there are tools available in each program that do a specific job, that are not available within the other.
Go the opposite. You could open up video files in SF, and edit them together, but the Vegas method is much more effecient and ultimately more capable.
I would possibly state an answer to "if I have Vegas, why have Sound Forge?" something along the lines of, "if you need to ask, you probably don't have a need for Sound Forge". (hope that doesn't sound rude!)