The other day, I downloaded Audacity v3.2*, curious about its addition of live effects (not applying them to the audio itself but to the output thereof) and non-destructive editing. I have been hanging back on v2.1 because versions thereafter deprecated some of the built-in effects that I've been using since I'd started using Audacity in 2008. The live effects feature is a nice addition, but though it's something I'd kind of wished for in Audacity, I've used Audacity for intentionally-destructive usage, altering sounds irrevocably, as part of my creative process. Aside from the few built-in effects, I've had OcenAudio, available for free, and frequently updated, for quite some time. The "dark" theme of the GUI of recent versions of Audacity is rather lame; it could at least adopt the system's dark theme, which isn't uncommon for developers to effect. The "Audio Setup" button leads right to all of the audio routing and levels, which is a nice tidying-up from previous versions's archaic situations around the control bar.
The main thing that struck me about the latest version of Audacity is the "Share Audio" button. Its sole option is to upload audio right from Audacity to Audio.com, for which one must have an account to do so. No choice of sharing service; just this proprietary option. The main page of that site seems to presume its market to have never heard of Soundcloud, and bedroom musicians new to "this music thing." (None of the stock photos depicting its targeted users is performing onstage, for example.) The user-end of the site itself is pretty sparse – or, alternately, rather unencumbered by "social" features, "similar artists" in a sidebar, and other complications as on Soundcloud. However, there is no capability to embed audio files for sharing, no ability to make playlists (and to embed them), and no specific place to indicate copyright and type thereof (such as, "all rights reserved") except in a lone Description field. No "Buy" link, either. I suppose that Muse Group (which owns both Audio.com and MuseScore, and now, Audacity – wresting it from the hands of the open-development community which had given it form and reputation over many years) presumes that its target market isn't yet at the point where matters of copyright and profit are of any concern.
However, what usually occurs with services like this one is that they start as free-to-use, but once they take off, they get into offering paid “extra” stuff and “pro” features on the pretext that such will help one present oneself as to be taken seriously, that these are conducive to “growing” one’s audience, and/or that one should expect to have to pay for things which cost the developer nothing extra to implement (such as disabling comments or enabling bulk-uploading). Audio.com is currently presenting itself as a gateway service for neophyte bedroom producers who “just want to share their music,” but such is how both music “producers” and the online services that appeal to them start out. It remains to be seen if Audio.com might resist the innate tendencies of such platforms' models for sustained success by diddling musicians' aspirations.
Just as I don't need the new version of Audacity, I can take or leave Audio.com. In fact, there is great danger in relying upon one sole means of sustenance – as was the case with the Irish Potato Famine.
Addendum, 7 Oct 23:
Although I had since updated to Audacity 3.3, both of these versions insist upon scanning all of one's audio plug-ins upon opening the application, with no selection in settings to prevent this, and necessitating three mouse clicks to stop the process before one can use the application. Not even any menu to select which species of plug-in (VST, AU, et al.), nor to differentiate between effects, MIDI effects, and virtual instruments (the latter two being unusable in Audacity). I rolled back to version 3.1.3, which doesn't pull this stunt. I tried complaining about this annoying feature, but of course developers can do no wrong – and besides, at this price, why you complainink?
Imma jump on Audio.com to host a bazillion files, however, while the storage offered is "unlimited" and before it starts charging for tiers of capacity and features, whilst adding a bunch of irrelevant, distractive "social" features out of which one cannot opt – if not also trying to get into the music-licensing and -distribution fields. This is to say, before it flouts the egalitarian promise of the Internet ends up like Soundcloud.