Emacs is essentially a Lisp-machine. Yes, I understand that this deviates from the traditional notion of a "Lisp-machine" since it's not hardware-based; nonetheless, it still fits the bill.
If you're eager to learn Lisp (not just Common Lisp, but any dialect), why not take advantage of a Lisp machine for that purpose? When you say, "I don't want to learn Emacs," you're basically saying, "I don't want to learn Lisp." You need to know Lisp to grok Emacs, you need to write it, you need to embrace it; otherwise, you're not using Emacs, you're just a passenger.
i wrote several projects in CL and overall disagree. and thats ok!
i prefer rackets batteries-included and library system, nice local docs, ide from this century (albeit basic editing capabilities) compilation options etc for my personal projects
i certainly understand the appeal of cl and even use lispworks in embedded work. but some tools have better ergo for me depending on time/effort/whatever
Given that you said you had lots of friction with the IDE (equating development in Common Lisp with using Emacs) I'm curious what Common Lisp projects you managed to complete in that state. I also use Racket, and I think it is a fine language, but for my use cases it doesn't really come close to the experience with Common Lisp. Still, alot of interesting projects in that community. Also, curiously, previously said you totally gave up on Common Lisp, but now you say that you use Lispworks, and for embedded of all things. How interesting! Would love it if you shared what you do.