# Reaper Has Been Updated 19 Times in the Last Year



## robgb (Dec 20, 2020)

Hard to believe that this DAW gets so many free updates in the course of a year, the majority of them improvements on an already stellar piece of software. And if you go to the forum you'll see that they're still working, constantly striving to make it better and better.

All for $60 if you make less than $20K a year from your music. Astonishing.

Not to take away from any other DAW out there—we all have our favorite—but I personally can't think of one I'd rather use.


----------



## Markrs (Dec 20, 2020)

robgb said:


> Hard to believe that this DAW gets so many free updates in the course of a year, the majority of them improvements on an already stellar piece of software. And if you go to the forum you'll see that they're still working, constantly striving to make it better and better.
> 
> All for $60 if you make less than $20K a year from your music. Astonishing.
> 
> Not to take away from any other DAW out there—we all have our favorite—but I personally can't think of one I'd rather use.


Still use Reaper over cubase. I got Cubase this year as it is very highly recommended but so far not gelled with it. Reaper was intimidating at first and I wouldn't call it an easy DAW to learn for me personally, but the real benefit is if you want to do something you probably can do it in Reaper. The negative, is it probably involves a script and a fair bit of learning.


----------



## mcalis (Dec 20, 2020)

Yeah, it's pretty astonishing. Value for money is through the roof.

Just about the only thing holding me from switching to Reaper is that I'm too attached to the MIDI editor in Cubase, other than that Reaper is a better experience for me. In my experience it's more stable than Cubase (using 8.5 here still, don't intend to upgrade because I don't want the lose per-item MIDI history) and there is much more room to customize the DAW to my own preferred workflow. Editing raw audio files is a pleasure in Reaper and much less so in Cubase, at least for me.


----------



## Markrs (Dec 20, 2020)

I should add that I still get tempted to try Studio One as that get lots of positive comments, plus substantial update regularly. Also Cakewalk with its articulation manager is looking a lot better. So far I stick with Reaper (I also have Mixcraft 9 which I got very cheap but not used yet)


----------



## Synetos (Dec 20, 2020)

Owned Reaper for several years now, but I never quite am willing to put the time into learning it well. I have been a longtime Cubase user, but recently bought Studio One V5. There is much to like in Studio One. If I could run Logic on a PC, I would probably be running it. Logic was cheap, but the Mac hardware makes Logic stupid expensive, if that were the only reason to buy a Mac. 

Of all the updates to Reaper, it still has a horrible GUI to me. If I am going to stare at something all day long, it has to be somewhat attractive and interesting. Reaper may be a functional DAW, but it is not very appealing in the eye candy front. That is an unfortunate big negative, in my opinion. Not fiddling around with custom skins and all that. Even most of those dont look appealing to me.

That said, each DAW seems to have its peaks and valleys when it comes to features and functions. there are no prefect DAW, or perfect DAW makers. If you learn what ever DAW you choose, you can make music with it.

However, when I think about how much money I have dropped on Cubase updates since version 4, it isn't worth all that I have paid for it compared to the others, that is for sure.


----------



## AceAudioHQ (Dec 20, 2020)

I just started studying Reaper a few days ago, I'm on the other side, Renoise has had it's last full version update 8 years ago, we're at 3.2.4 and 3.1.0 came 6 years ago. Still doesn't support VST3. Any time signatures besides 4/4 are a pain in the butt to make.


----------



## joebaggan (Dec 20, 2020)

Updated 19 times in year? Every DAW including Cubase has had at least 19 changes in a year, given all the bug fixes, minor updates, and new features introduced every year. It's not the quantity of updates, it's the quality and significance of them that counts. Most people wouldn't notice a small bug fix that may affect a part of the program you never use. Most vendors bundle their updates into twice year updates, while Reaper seems to issue an update every time there's a bug fix.


----------



## robgb (Dec 20, 2020)

Synetos said:


> Of all the updates to Reaper, it still has a horrible GUI to me. If I am going to stare at something all day long, it has to be somewhat attractive and interesting. Reaper may be a functional DAW, but it is not very appealing in the eye candy front.



I had that problem until I started using themes. Maybe it's a different story on Windows, but on MacOS it looks quite appealing. The only exception are the built-in plugins. Not pretty, but still pretty great.



joebaggan said:


> It's not the quantity of updates, it's the quality and significance of them that counts.


Exactly. And, as I said, the majority of updates are improvements, not bug fixes. So having multiple updates with multiple improvements per update is pretty astonishing. Just when you think they can't make it any better, they introduce some new thing (sometimes several) that improves your workflow.

You can always see what they're working on by visiting the forum. They don't keep it a mystery.


----------



## shponglefan (Dec 20, 2020)

AceAudioHQ said:


> I just started studying Reaper a few days ago, I'm on the other side, Renoise has had it's last full version update 8 years ago, we're at 3.2.4 and 3.1.0 came 6 years ago. Still doesn't support VST3. Any time signatures besides 4/4 are a pain in the butt to make.



I'm surprised Renoise is even still a thing. I get the nostalgic appeal of a tracker-style DAW, having spent a lot of time with Scream Tracker and Impulse Tracker in my youth.

OTOH, for modern music making it just doesn't make a lot of sense to me...


----------



## tack (Dec 20, 2020)

joebaggan said:


> while Reaper seems to issue an update every time there's a bug fix.


That's hyperbolic. Each Reaper release has quite a number of fixes and enhancements. Release early and release often, but not so often as to get a release with one small bug fix (unless perhaps if it's fixing a recently introduced regression that's affecting a large number of users).

Here is the cumulative change log:

https://landoleet.org/whatsnew6.txt


----------



## AceAudioHQ (Dec 20, 2020)

shponglefan said:


> I'm surprised Renoise is even still a thing. I get the nostalgic appeal of a tracker-style DAW, having spent a lot of time with Scream Tracker and Impulse Tracker growing up.
> 
> OTOH, for modern music making it just doesn't make a lot of sense to me...



Well, it's dying bit by bit since Renoise isn't the devs main job and the updates are slow to come, support for some things have been asked for years and years. The forum community is getting pretty quiet, and some people are switching because of the lack of VST3 support since some plugins are dropping support for anything older. But it's still the best program for me if I'm going to make 4/4 electronic music, it's much faster to use than your ordinary piano roll, so even though I'm learning Reaper now, I'll keep using Renoise.


----------



## peladio (Dec 20, 2020)

Reaper is great bang for the buck surely..but honest question - why do you think (almost) none of the film scoring or media composer pros use it? Curious..


----------



## mcalis (Dec 20, 2020)

peladio said:


> Reaper is great bang for the buck surely..but honest question - why do you think (almost) none of the film scoring or media composer pros use it? Curious..


Because everyone likes the hammer they know the best and have been using for the past decade(s). Pro's probably just can't permit themselves the risk of uprooting their process by switching to another DAW.

I mean, people use all kind of mediocre or downright poor software because it's the industry standard. In the DAW world that would be Pro Tools despite it frankly being quite inferior to almost any other DAW on the market. In the 3D modelling world Maya and 3DS Max are still dominating the industry even though there are plenty alternatives that are more feature-rich and see more updates. In graphics design Adobe is still king despite the performance of their products dropping. I still use Photoshop because I know it inside out, even though I hate how much more sluggish the latest version is. To give one more example: Excel comes to mind, an absolute abomination of a program that is still very widely used.

People don't like change most of the time, not when you've invested years and years learning your software - and even less if the act of changing DAW could screw up your bottomline.


----------



## peladio (Dec 20, 2020)

mcalis said:


> Because everyone likes the hammer they know the best and have been using for the past decade(s). Pro's probably just can't permit themselves the risk of uprooting their process by switching to another DAW.
> 
> I mean, people use all kind of mediocre or downright poor software because it's the industry standard. In the DAW world that would be Pro Tools despite it frankly being quite inferior to almost any other DAW on the market. In the 3D modelling world Maya and 3DS Max are still dominating the industry even though there are plenty alternatives that are more feature-rich and see more updates. In graphics design Adobe is still king despite the performance of their products dropping. I still use Photoshop because I know it inside out, even though I hate how much more sluggish the latest version is. To give one more example: Excel comes to mind, an absolute abomination of a program that is still very widely used.
> 
> People don't like change most of the time, not when you've invested years and years learning your software - and even less if the act of changing DAW could screw up your bottomline.



Thanks for your thoughts..but Studio One is newer and there are many more pro users..There are plenty of them who switched from Cubase and Logic..

I think there's a reason for that and Reaper seems to be a better fit for those who are programmers and love endless customizations..I for one prefer more intuitive and faster results that I get with Cubase, Logic or Studio One..


----------



## antames (Dec 20, 2020)

Synetos said:


> Owned Reaper for several years now, but I never quite am willing to put the time into learning it well. I have been a longtime Cubase user, but recently bought Studio One V5. There is much to like in Studio One. If I could run Logic on a PC, I would probably be running it. Logic was cheap, but the Mac hardware makes Logic stupid expensive, if that were the only reason to buy a Mac.
> 
> Of all the updates to Reaper, it still has a horrible GUI to me. If I am going to stare at something all day long, it has to be somewhat attractive and interesting. Reaper may be a functional DAW, but it is not very appealing in the eye candy front. That is an unfortunate big negative, in my opinion. Not fiddling around with custom skins and all that. Even most of those dont look appealing to me.
> 
> ...



This is also a big thing for me as well. It shouldn't detract from the functionality and capability of the software, but it doesn't make me want to work in it either. Also the really basic plugins that it comes with. I like using the plugins that come with the DAW as much as possible before resorting to a 3rd party.


----------



## antames (Dec 20, 2020)

peladio said:


> Reaper is great bang for the buck surely..but honest question - why do you think (almost) none of the film scoring or media composer pros use it? Curious..



And professionals don't have the time to re-learn an entire DAW from scratch. They are under a deadline. Reaper hasn't been around that long compared to Cubase for example. I bet in 20 years it will be used more though as the new generation starts to come through.


----------



## merty (Dec 20, 2020)

I was ok with the main skin but using this one nowadays; https://forum.cockos.com/showthread...YPWvT-KEJt8F-vct6E0ViWOvz_18Prz_HdTgUnUmES4bg


----------



## Markrs (Dec 20, 2020)

merty said:


> I was ok with the main skin but using this one nowadays; https://forum.cockos.com/showthread...YPWvT-KEJt8F-vct6E0ViWOvz_18Prz_HdTgUnUmES4bg


Looks nice will give it a try 😊


----------



## twincities (Dec 20, 2020)

peladio said:


> bang for the buck


because people say this about it and potential users reading reviews think it's a budget piece of software  in all seriousness, in 10 years of using reaper, i've never run into a problem or limitation that i wrote off as "well what do i expect for $60". it has limits like every DAW does, but none are any worse than the type of limits competitors have, at least in my mind. if reaper cost me $400 it would still be my first choice over the competitors. zero of my decision to go with reaper is a budget one, maybe outside of the convenience of their licensing and being able to throw it on any remote machine i walk up to in seconds if i need it for my job.



peladio said:


> why do you think (almost) none of the film scoring or media composer pros use it?



for the same reason you see few composers sketching midi mockups in protools, and very few large tracking studio backbones based on logic, and probably nearly zero live DJ/playback rigs based on cubase. while the center of the venn diagram between DAWs is large, they do all focus more heavily towards different niches.

reaper excels at being a super flexible, audio editing / mix environment. it's why you _do _see a ton of it for game audio, podcasts, and remote work. it's routing capabilities and macro/scripting are absolutely second to none. for mixing, bussing and automation it bats with the big boys no problem. it's midi implementation falls a bit short of some of the more common DAWs on here (logic, cubase), and it's multitake playlist/comping abilities are among the worst of any major DAW.


----------



## shponglefan (Dec 20, 2020)

merty said:


> I was ok with the main skin but using this one nowadays; https://forum.cockos.com/showthread...YPWvT-KEJt8F-vct6E0ViWOvz_18Prz_HdTgUnUmES4bg



I don't understand why the Reaper devs don't just pay someone to make the default Reaper skin look like something like that (e.g. more modern/less fugly than the standard GUI).


----------



## AllanH (Dec 21, 2020)

I am impressed with the development team behind Reaper. They seem to move the product forward at a high pace. I have not trialed Reaper in ~3 years but even then it was snappy and functional.


----------



## joebaggan (Dec 21, 2020)

For my audio productions, Reaper is a good bang for the buck. But Cubase Midi functionality is second to none and sorry folks, Reaper doesn't match up in that department. Also, as a notation based composer, Reaper doesn't offer a credible pro notation product. Meanwhile, Steinberg has Dorico as well as Cubase so is going to be the front runner in integrating the best of pro notation and DAW. It's amusing to watch the OP repeatedly start these Reaper cheerleading threads, but after a while it starts to sound like a marketing guy trying to shove his product down your throat.


----------



## Trash Panda (Dec 21, 2020)

joebaggan said:


> But Cubase Midi functionality is second to none and sorry folks, Reaper doesn't match up in that department.


I see this generality a lot, but would really like to understand what other DAWs like Cubase and Studio One do with MIDI that is better. Care to elaborate?


----------



## Rapollo (Dec 21, 2020)

Trash Panda said:


> I see this generality a lot, but would really like to understand what other DAWs like Cubase and Studio One do with MIDI that is better. Care to elaborate?



I suppose it's a feel thing - Reapers MIDI is absolutely fine and usable etc and is used by a couple of top composers etc but not many. I use both Reaper and Cubase and I find it hard to describe but Cubases MIDI editor just feels much less finicky to work with, you don't need that external script to manage velocities etc. And then Reaper's audio handling makes me laugh at Cubase... :/


----------



## blackzeroaudio (Dec 21, 2020)

joebaggan said:


> For my audio productions, Reaper is a good bang for the buck. But Cubase Midi functionality is second to none and sorry folks, Reaper doesn't match up in that department.



Agree...I started on Reaper then moved to Cubase after a few years. Haven't looked back. 

I will always be appreciative of Reaper but in my mind it's not what a lot of folks always hype it to be.


----------



## storyteller (Dec 21, 2020)

peladio said:


> Reaper is great bang for the buck surely..but honest question - why do you think (almost) none of the film scoring or media composer pros use it? Curious..


You might be surprised who actually does use it... I've gotten to see that first hand when I released OTR...

That said, you have to consider how incredibly hard it is to change over a piece of software in any corporate or team environment - especially with so many deadlines and productions in progress. It's even difficult for one person to make a transition especially when they are being depended upon by major studios. Just some food for thought. Your question is a bit of a logical fallacy since you have to be constantly working to be a big name, yet constant work makes it almost impossible for core software changes affecting workflow to happen. I think you will see Reaper more likely being used by newer rising stars rather than established ones. But your question is certainly a good one to discuss since I'm sure many people may wonder the same thing.


----------



## TomislavEP (Dec 21, 2020)

It seems that one of its biggest advantages - an affordable price - is also the biggest foe for REAPER at the same time, as many perceive it as a non-professional DAW in comparison to the big players. But the truth is entirely different, at least if you ask someone like Kenny Gioia or any advanced composer or producer who uses REAPER daily. 

I was a Pro Tools user for many years before I've finally made the switch, mostly due to more and more expensive licenses. However, I find REAPER far superior to PT in every aspect. I can't say that I have much experience with the other DAW's, but in my book, nothing can match the level of flexibility that REAPER has. Also, no DAW has such an active development. If you "desperately" miss a certain feature, chances are you'll see it in REAPER sooner than anywhere else.


----------



## Ndee (Dec 21, 2020)

i changed DAWs this year after 15 years of Ableton Live (and before to and parallel with that, Pro Tools), because editing audio in Live is not great and that's what i do most of all nowadays, unlike before. I has two choices, S1 and Reaper.
It's been suuuuuch a slow process, where after purchasing the new DAW, i would still fall back to Live because I was under a deadline that i couldn't pull off while watching tutorials. I went with Studio One, finally, because it seemed easier and its MIDI capabilities more to my liking, but obvoiusly I couldve picked Reaper just as well.
After 6 months, the transformation is close to being complete and I'm ready to sell my Live Suite (pm if interested, ha!), since the updates for Live 11, as good as they seem, didn't include anything for editing side of things (which_is_so_strange).

I'd say 60% of my sound design and recordist friends use Reaper in a professional capacity, so yeah I think it'll be an industry standard sooner or later.


----------



## merty (Dec 21, 2020)

If one is happy with the midi features in their DAW, they should only consider Reaper when they feel the need to render those tracks for further edit/mix.


----------



## JeffvR (Dec 21, 2020)

I changed from Cubase to Reaper this year. Couldn't be happier. A way more stable and light platform. It seems that the 0.01 updates in Reaper introduce the same amount of new features as the 0.5 $$$ Cubase updates.


----------



## Tremendouz (Dec 21, 2020)

I often see people shitting on Reaper's piano roll but I have no idea why. I honestly wouldn't be able to move to any other DAW simply because I'd lose my custom toolbars and action macros.

Reaper lets me decide my own workflow instead of forcing one upon me.


----------



## AudioLoco (Dec 21, 2020)

Ndee said:


> I'd say 60% of my sound design and recordist friends use Reaper in a professional capacity, so yeah I think it'll be an industry standard sooner or later.



That's interesting....
Anything sending to early retirement the old, cumbersome, expensive, buggy Pro Tools as a standard would be welcome.
Avid is so short sighted they are only interested in the market they own, and presume pros will not slowly realize they are getting the short side of the stick. They have a monopoly and are playing that card without shame. 
The stupidest thing they have done is to alienate basically a whole new generation (if not a couple already) of producers and engineers. (Their entry level, affordable versions of PT were always too limited and unusable, 24 tracks max, no plugins latency compensation and other stuff like that etc)
Not only with their crazy unrealistic pricing, but lacking any extra feuters that would benefit young producers and modern composers. 

They know that if you do video based work, PT is your only choice in terms of compatibility. 
If you have a commercial studio, you are tied with it for compatibility and "standard".
Do not get me wrong. It's audio editing capibiities and mixing workflow is still excellent and probably even "the best". (Even some composers use it, somehow)
But honestly the only real advantage (not replicable eleswhere) is the PT HDx hardware latency-free recording and monitoring with plugins. Period. 
(If someone relies on that a lot I guess PT makes sense) 
The rest is comparable or worst then other platforms.
And the the prices of HDx honestly are just silly.
(raaaaaaant oveeeeeer!!)

I have tried Reaper briefly, it looks logical and flowing. I get why people like it so much.
If I started now it would probably be the first thing I would look at.

But I would never change Cubase for anything in the world. 
It's a pleasure to use, it gets great updates, it excels both in the audio and MIDI departement, it is stable as f....k, and we have known each other for 20 years...


----------



## Tremendouz (Dec 21, 2020)

AudioLoco said:


> They know that if you do video based work, PT is your only choice in terms of compatibility.


Never used PT so I don't know how it compares but Reaper can do basic video editing


----------



## Ndee (Dec 21, 2020)

hey maybe someone here would know (this is somewhat hard to look up with an internet search)*: *

in Reaper, is it possible to move the cursor around on the timeline with shortcut commands by jumping between clips and then selecting time between the end of one clip to the beginning of the next one?

I can't underline how much I've missed this feature from Pro Tools, esp with its shuffle and non-shufflemode shortcuts. S1 has shuffle which is great, but at least I haven't figured out how to select the empty bits between clips which, if it really doesn't exist as a feature in S1, seems bizarre.


----------



## AudioLoco (Dec 21, 2020)

Tremendouz said:


> Never used PT so I don't know how it compares but Reaper can do basic video editing


The whole production will have everything going in a PT project for the final dub mix, and also expect the composer to hand in a PT project of mixed stems so PT will be used at one point even if let's say Nuendo has similar capibilities when it comes to audio/video.


----------



## tack (Dec 21, 2020)

Ndee said:


> in Reaper, is it possible to move the cursor around on the timeline with shortcut commands by jumping between clips and then selecting time between the end of one clip to the beginning of the next one?


I don't think so out of the box. But this would be a pretty easy script to write (or script*s* as you'd want one for previous and one for next), and in all probability if you asked on the Reaper forum someone would produce something for free. (Though you would need to more clearly define the behavior.)


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Dec 21, 2020)

merty said:


> If one is happy with the midi features in their DAW, they should only consider Reaper when they feel the need to render those tracks for further edit/mix.



No. Just wait for a sale on Mixbus32C. Think I paid less than $99 for it. Easy to use and sounds great.


----------



## twincities (Dec 21, 2020)

Ndee said:


> in Reaper, is it possible to move the cursor around on the timeline with shortcut commands by jumping between clips and then selecting time between the end of one clip to the beginning of the next one?



yes and yes. look for "loop points: set start/end point", and "item navigation: move cursor/select and move to next item" actions. you'll be able to figure out a work flow with a combination of those to fit your needs i'm sure. 

"select and move to next/previous item" can be great navigational tools in general.


----------



## merty (Dec 21, 2020)

vitocorleone123 said:


> No. Just wait for a sale on Mixbus32C. Think I paid less than $99 for it. Easy to use and sounds great.



I used Samplitude regularly before jumping Reaper. 

It has something called "object editor" which I used a lot (at first mainly for mastering, later on mixing too). It's a DAW feature most engineers can't even imagine how to integrate into workflow or simply what its for.

Game Audio designer friend of mine (who also used Samp. for editing, composes mainly in logic) gave me the heads-up on Reaper item approach which is actually a step-up from Samplitude, and as I got into the actions rest was history.

So its really about possibilities rather than a good/bad sound argument.


----------



## Trash Panda (Dec 21, 2020)

Rapollo said:


> I suppose it's a feel thing - Reapers MIDI is absolutely fine and usable etc and is used by a couple of top composers etc but not many. I use both Reaper and Cubase and I find it hard to describe but Cubases MIDI editor just feels much less finicky to work with, you don't need that external script to manage velocities etc. And then Reaper's audio handling makes me laugh at Cubase... :/


External script to manage velocities? How is Reaper's finicky? Again, I'm genuinely curious here as I used Pro Tools before moving to Reaper, so it was actually an improvement in MIDI editing to make the switch.


----------



## kitekrazy (Dec 21, 2020)

Markrs said:


> Still use Reaper over cubase.* I got Cubase this year as it is very highly recommended but so far not gelled with it.* Reaper was intimidating at first and I wouldn't call it an easy DAW to learn for me personally, but the real benefit is if you want to do something you probably can do it in Reaper. The negative, is it probably involves a script and a fair bit of learning.



I just can't get into Cubase and maybe because the way it looks and opening and closing it is annoying. Reapers licensing is superior.


----------



## Ndee (Dec 21, 2020)

twincities said:


> yes and yes. look for "loop points: set start/end point", and "item navigation: move cursor/select and move to next item" actions. you'll be able to figure out a work flow with a combination of those to fit your needs i'm sure.
> 
> "select and move to next/previous item" can be great navigational tools in general.



thank you so much twincities! god i hate myself even more now for buying (into) the S1


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Dec 21, 2020)

merty said:


> I used Samplitude regularly before jumping Reaper.
> 
> It has something called "object editor" which I used a lot (at first mainly for mastering, later on mixing too). It's a DAW feature most engineers can't even imagine how to integrate into workflow or simply what its for.
> 
> ...



Well, it actually can be about a good/bad sound argument in this case, because a sound is intentionally built into Mixbus23C, specifically. Whether one likes that sound or not is a matter of preference.


----------



## Markrs (Dec 21, 2020)

vitocorleone123 said:


> No. Just wait for a sale on Mixbus32C. Think I paid less than $99 for it. Easy to use and sounds great.


I recently notice a YouTuber who uses Reaper has moved to mixbus32c for mixing, so your comments has got me wondering, what are the benefits of Mixbus32c over Reaper?


----------



## Markrs (Dec 21, 2020)

Ndee said:


> thank you so much twincities! god i hate myself even more now for buying (into) the S1


This is the thing with Reaper you can do nearly anything audio related with it, but you have to find the command/script/JS plugin to get it to work. It is something you can massively customize but out of the box it can seem very intimidating as you have to learn so much to unlock or add the needed features.

The advantage is, if there is something you want to do that "x" DAW can do then with some customisation with the right command/script/JS plugin Reaper can do it.


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Dec 21, 2020)

Markrs said:


> I recently notice a YouTuber who uses Reaper has moved to mixbus32c for mixing, so your comments has got me wondering, what are the benefits of Mixbus32c over Reaper?



First, a caveat. I'm not experienced with Reaper, so can only speak to Mixbus32C. That aside, I found it a lot easier to get started in Mixbus32C than in Reaper.

Biggest negative: Mixbus32C is NOWHERE near as efficient in terms of CPU usage and latency as Reaper, AND it's best if you plan on doing most of your basic mixing moves using the built in EQ and compression (because you're already taking some of the hit on the CPU). It's also best if you have at least a 27" monitor or larger because it's laid out like an analog mixer.

The regular Mixbus DAW doesn't have any "analog sound" baked in, only the 32C.

The MIDI and hardware part of Mixbus isn't as intuitive or fully featured as other DAWs - it's really best to use it for audio and mixing.

Biggest positive: if you just go with it, and let go of some of the other plugins you might normally use (esp. if you've done some sound design in your main DAW), then it really speeds things up. I also find it has a nice heft to it - though you can get that with using top-end console plugins consistently in other DAWs. I end up using fewer plugins once I'm in the mixing stage. In a small part because of reduced efficiency, but mainly because I don't feel the need. I don't think the built in EQ and compressors are "the best", but they are good and they're easy and integrated. So a lot of it is the workflow.

I still use 3rd party plugins for more problematic or detailed sculpting work, but that's usually done before hitting the mixing stage. I kind of think of Mixbus32C as a giant console plugin that can host other VSTs. I've saved money on console plugin hunting because of it (though I've still accumulated three or so).


----------



## Markrs (Dec 21, 2020)

vitocorleone123 said:


> First, a caveat. I'm not experienced with Reaper, so can only speak to Mixbus32C. That aside, I found it a lot easier to get started in Mixbus32C than in Reaper.
> 
> Biggest negative: Mixbus32C is NOWHERE near as efficient in terms of CPU usage and latency as Reaper, AND it's best if you plan on doing most of your basic mixing moves using the built in EQ and compression (because you're already taking some of the hit on the CPU). It's also best if you have at least a 27" monitor or larger because it's laid out like an analog mixer.
> 
> ...


Thank you so much for that reply. I will keep it in mind as it has been on offer at a good price recently of $69. Which is about the cost of one decent plugin


----------



## twincities (Dec 21, 2020)

Markrs said:


> This is the thing with Reaper you can do nearly anything audio related with it, but you have to find the command/script/JS plugin to get it to work. It is something you can massively customize but out of the box it can seem very intimidating as you have to learn so much to unlock or add the needed features.



yep, that's part of what i love about it. i'm a tinkerer, and not scared of needing to dig around for 3 minutes to figure out how to make my editing life easier every time i open the program for years to come. 

i get that there's a simplicity/beauty to finding a program that's already set up in a way you'd want to use and not need to touch a hotkey customization list ever, but frankly i've never found another DAW where that doesn't become a big limitation almost immediately. realistically i think it's that people become complacent with the tools offered in one program, and turn that into their workflow, rather than making the tool work for them. the command Ndee was looking for is not something i'd ever use/want in my work flow, and if it was prebound to a key it would just be a waste of space for me.


----------



## Ndee (Dec 21, 2020)

twincities said:


> yep, that's part of what i love about it. i'm a tinkerer, and not scared of needing to dig around for 3 minutes to figure out how to make my editing life easier every time i open the program for years to come.
> 
> i get that there's a simplicity/beauty to finding a program that's already set up in a way you'd want to use and not need to touch a hotkey customization list ever, but frankly i've never found another DAW where that doesn't become a big limitation almost immediately. realistically i think it's that people become complacent with the tools offered in one program, and turn that into their workflow, rather than making the tool work for them. the command Ndee was looking for is not something i'd ever use/want in my work flow, and if it was prebound to a key it would just be a waste of space for me.



yeah no you're on the money there a 100%. I was handed down a DAW a long time ago during my studies and so it went. And now that I'm jumping boats, I'm also learning other new things, building a batchbay, and, eh, should also get some work done  Hope I'll find the time to pick up Reaper come the next pandemic  This one has been mostly about analog gear inferno.


----------



## vicontrolu (Dec 21, 2020)

I tried Reaper different times and MIDI just wasnt there, plus it was very ugly and not very intuitive. So i skiped it. 

About 3 years ago i had a beef with Steinberg support and i tried again and noticed midi improved but most importantly i saw the potential for sound design, which i regularly do as well.

So i learned it, little by little, and in about 3 months I quitted using Live for sound design. Basically all of my keycommands are ported from Live plus everything I wished Live could do i can do now in Reaper with the mouse or a keystroke.

Because I am curious, i started looking into scripts and eventually learned lua and python while Reaper included more and more features, extensions and scripts with the never ending updates.

I (like many other users) am at a point now where basically every feature i can think of I can kinda do it. There are a couple things in the midi editor which I still prefer in Cubase and the look might be not very appealing but those are just tiny things if you compare it with the full picture.

Imo if you put the time into it there's no coming back. But that depends a lot on the type of person you are i guess. Then there s the whole philosophy of cockos about it which also makes it a special DAW.


----------



## robgb (Dec 21, 2020)

peladio said:


> Reaper is great bang for the buck surely..but honest question - why do you think (almost) none of the film scoring or media composer pros use it? Curious..


I suspect it's because people tend to believe the nonsense that something that costs so little can't possibly be any good. A kind of unintentional elitism, I suppose, that plagues us all in one way or another. The gaming and post production sound industries, however, have embraced Reaper for all of its capabilities.

But, honestly, I could not care less whether other film scoring or media composers use Reaper. They're missing out, as far as I'm concerned, but everyone makes their own choices. Doesn't mean they have to be ours.


----------



## robgb (Dec 21, 2020)

joebaggan said:


> But Cubase Midi functionality is second to none and sorry folks, Reaper doesn't match up in that department.


I hear this a lot, but no one ever says WHY this is true. What can you do with Cubase midi that you can't in Reaper? It's possible that none of these will matter to me, but I'm curious to know what these functions are. Because, personally, I use Reaper almost exclusively for midi recording and editing and I can't for the life of me figure out what might be missing.


----------



## robgb (Dec 21, 2020)

As for Reaper being ugly, I just don't see that either. I think cubase is ugly and I think Pro Tools is a visual abomination, so I'm not sure why Reaper gets all the hate in that department. The theme I use looks pretty nice.


----------



## MartinH. (Dec 21, 2020)

robgb said:


> I hear this a lot, but no one ever says WHY this is true. What can you do with Cubase midi that you can't in Reaper? It's possible that none of these will matter to me, but I'm curious to know what these functions are. Because, personally, I use Reaper almost exclusively for midi recording and editing and I can't for the life of me figure out what might be missing.



Iirc @Daniel James talked in a video or stream about why he switched from live to cubase, and gave a few examples, and I totally thought "I whish I could do that as easily in Reaper". I'm sure if I set my mind to it I can find scripts that kind of do the same thing, but as others said, it's a bit daunting and sounds like work. I'm happy I'm on team Reaper, but if I was playing for team Cubase you'd have a hard time convincing me to switch too I guess. So I totally can see why not many of them switch to Reaper. It needs to be more than a little bit better and in the right areas to justify the friction of switching.


----------



## lucor (Dec 21, 2020)

Reaper's midi capabilities are FAR superior to Cubase, it's not even close IMO. And I say this as someone who's been using Cubase as his main DAW for years.


----------



## shponglefan (Dec 21, 2020)

robgb said:


> As for Reaper being ugly, I just don't see that either.



I think when most people are referring to the ugliness of Reaper, they're referring to the stock UIs. Re-skinning it definitely helps. Which again makes me wonder why the Reaper devs don't just pay someone for a better default UI.

The UI is also inconsistent. Things like the Track Manager, FX manager, etc., are all plain jane in their appearance. This is in contrast to things like the mixer, track controls, transport controls, that all have more elaborate graphics applied.

If Reaper had a more aesthetically consistent UI, it would look better.


----------



## ReleaseCandidate (Dec 21, 2020)

robgb said:


> The gaming and post production sound industries, however, have embraced Reaper for all of its capabilities.


That's also because they (actually everybody except DAW users  are used to heavily modify their used programs and need a ton of scripting to get to the workflow they need. And Reaper is great for that. Either you use a program that is already included in your workflow (like Avid does with PT, don't forget that they are mainly a video company) or you use a program that you can easily adapt to your needs.


----------



## robgb (Dec 21, 2020)

shponglefan said:


> The UI is also inconsistent. Things like the Track Manager, FX manager, etc., are all plain jane in their appearance.


Sorry. I still don't see it. Maybe I just like simplicity over gaudiness.


----------



## shponglefan (Dec 21, 2020)

robgb said:


> Sorry. I still don't see it. Maybe I just like simplicity over gaudiness.



That doesn't look too bad, since it looks like there is some consistent theming between different elements.

The stock skin lacks that as not all elements are consistently themed.


----------



## Markrs (Dec 21, 2020)

Reaper question, I use the mpl enlarge track on selection, however I am struggling to set the unselected tracks to the minimum height (where it looks like a single line), any help appreciated

I want the unselected to be like track 4 rather than like track 1 and 2. At the moment I have to manually resize them to be smaller.


----------



## robgb (Dec 21, 2020)

Markrs said:


> Reaper question, I use the mpl enlarge track on selection, however I am struggling to set the unselected tracks to the minimum height (where it looks like a single line), any help appreciated
> 
> I want the unselected to be like track 4 rather than like track 1 and 2. At the moment I have to manually resize them to be smaller.


Try adding the action Toggle: track sizes to a hot key or your toolbar and you can toggle between the various sizes.


----------



## shponglefan (Dec 21, 2020)

Markrs said:


> This is the thing with Reaper you can do nearly anything audio related with it, but you have to find the command/script/JS plugin to get it to work. It is something you can massively customize but out of the box it can seem very intimidating as you have to learn so much to unlock or add the needed features.
> 
> The advantage is, if there is something you want to do that "x" DAW can do then with some customisation with the right command/script/JS plugin Reaper can do it.



This is kind of a blessing and a curse though. On the one hand, it is nice that Reaper offers the flexibility it does. But it can be a considerable time investment to try to customize it to one's taste.

This is one reason I've migrated away from Reaper, since I'd rather have a DAW that just gives me a workflow and feature set out-of-the-box. That might seem lazy, but I don't feel like working for my workflow.

(I think it's also a bit of the paradox of choice. Sometimes when you have too many options it can be tough to settle on one. Constraints aren't always a bad thing.)


----------



## robgb (Dec 21, 2020)

shponglefan said:


> This is one reason I've migrated away from Reaper, since I'd rather have a DAW that just gives me a workflow and feature set out-of-the-box. That might seem lazy, but I don't feel like working for my workflow.


It's just a difference in personality types. I actually really enjoy customizing Reaper and editing or writing scripts and creating cycle actions and don't consider it a waste of time at all. Especially when the rewards are so great. 

But the out of the box experience with Reaper is fine, too. It just works a little differently than a lot of DAWs (there's only one track type, for example, that can be midi, audio, instrument, fx, whatever you want it to be) and, like any adventure with a new DAW, there's a learning curve.


----------



## MartinH. (Dec 21, 2020)

Disclaimer: I'm still using Reaper 5 because it's so great, I never felt the need to update to 6. I have the license for 6, but I couldn't be bothered to catch up with the changes, like the new midi CC envelopes and re-configuring things to my liking - yet. There might be features in v6 that would answer my questions. Please let me know if that's the case.

And I have to admit, I think the v6 default theme is pretty ugly, compared to the v5 default theme. Good thing these can be changed and edited!




shponglefan said:


> The UI is also inconsistent. Things like the Track Manager, FX manager, etc., are all plain jane in their appearance. This is in contrast to things like the mixer, track controls, transport controls, that all have more elaborate graphics applied.


Careful what you wish for, or they might make everything look like the fx manager to be consistent Kind of like the "classic 1.x" theme:









lucor said:


> Reaper's midi capabilities are FAR superior to Cubase, it's not even close IMO. And I say this as someone who's been using Cubase as his main DAW for years.


How do I do the thing where you select a couple midi events (either velocity or CC) and slope them by draging them at the corner - without using external scripts? Would be fantastic if I just missed that among the stock features. To be clear, I mean something like a free transform in Photoshop, that keeps the relative differences between the events, not just conforming them to a uniform slope like shift dragging a line over selected events.



Markrs said:


> Reaper question, I use the mpl enlarge track on selection, however I am struggling to set the unselected tracks to the minimum height (where it looks like a single line), any help appreciated


Not being able to make the minimum track size as small as in some other DAWs is perhaps my biggest gripe with Reaper. I'd love to see some improvements there.




robgb said:


> Try adding the action Toggle: track sizes to a hot key or your toolbar and you can toggle between the various sizes.


Whats the exact name of the action in the list? I can't find it.


----------



## Sean (Dec 21, 2020)

I started on Reaper and used it for a few years before eventually buying Cubase. Now I'm using Studio One. I found Reaper to be great for me at the time due to its price but I like the default workflow of Studio One more, and now that I have a real job I don't mind spending money on DAWs.

Reaper will always have a special place in my heart though, and I still spin it up every now and then if I just want to mess around with a specific VST and don't feel like waiting for Studio One to start up.


----------



## pondinthestream (Dec 21, 2020)

peladio said:


> Reaper is great bang for the buck surely..but honest question - why do you think (almost) none of the film scoring or media composer pros use it? Curious..


It is not as good as the enthusiasts make it out to be - but it is good for some things particularly if you do the same sort of work over and over again and can set it up for that work. But for a strong generalised workflow where you might do very different things in different projects it is not particularly strong. For example there is little design coherence in Reaper - there is some - but to a reasonable extent Reaper is the agglomeration of many many many functions rather than a coherently designed piece of software. That makes the user experience comparatively clunky - none of which the user base will acknowledge or will claim any and every aspect of workflow as "subjective" despite hundreds of years of development in design principles. An example would be CC automation. When first mooted long long ago to switch that to spline/curve representation (maybe even by me) there were howls of derision by the vocal userbase on the forum. The reason given was that CC's were discrete data so could not possibly be shown as continuous curves. Dumb as, but that held the software back for CC editing until quite recently. 
Also there is little restriction on dependencies breaking with changes - you can change something and that will affect something else with zero feedback about that. An update might have unforeseen consequences and something no longer works as it used to - all of these problems I experienced on a regular basis for years until switching to Bitwig and S1. I have not gone back to Reaper for any compositional work since although I probably will use it for mixing stems in any spatial audio projects next year.
Honestly I am very happy to no longer be using it, way too much grief for me


----------



## robgb (Dec 21, 2020)

MartinH. said:


> Whats the exact name of the action in the list? I can't find it.


My bad. Turns out it's a custom cycle action I created a few years ago. The file is attached. Just unzip and import the ini file it into your Cycle Actions Editor. Edit it to your own specifications.


----------



## Ndee (Dec 21, 2020)

tbh i'd love to be able to not use computers at all. I'm really bad at them, whereas with samplers, analog effects, and mixers is where I feel most confident.
There was a time I intensively disliked hardware for its clunkiness and cable pasta, but as I recently got back at it, I realized what a *joy *it is to noodle around with, and yeah, move about around the machines. I try to create all my music and sound this way, by standing up, playing, feeling the sounds and usually recording everything on one take while doing the neccessary editing on PC. And anyways, most of my digital work takes place inside dedicated software - rx7 for restauration, clean-up, and out-there sound design, for example - with editing increasingly becoming the only thing I need a DAW for. (edit - and virtual instruments of course, although I like to do stuff inside komplete kontrol and just recorded it on one take as I don't do detailed orchestral thingies). Which is why I don't see myself sitting down and learning scripts, as I try to keep my screen time to minimum.

But obviously I'll say the opposite come 2030


----------



## pondinthestream (Dec 22, 2020)

Ndee said:


> tbh i'd love to be able to not use computers at all. I'm really bad at them, whereas with samplers, analog effects, and mixers is where I feel most confident.
> There was a time I intensively disliked hardware for its clunkiness and cable pasta, but as I recently got back at it, I realized what a *joy *it is to noodle around with, and yeah, move about around the machines. I try to create all my music and sound this way, by standing up, playing, feeling the sounds and usually recording everything on one take while doing the neccessary editing on PC. And anyways, most of my digital work takes place inside dedicated software - rx7 for restauration, clean-up, and out-there sound design, for example - with editing increasingly becoming the only thing I need a DAW for. (edit - and virtual instruments of course, although I like to do stuff inside komplete kontrol and just recorded it on one take as I don't do detailed orchestral thingies). Which is why I don't see myself sitting down and learning scripts, as I try to keep my screen time to minimum.
> 
> But obviously I'll say the opposite come 2030


other than using Kontakt/Komplete, Reaper is pretty good for what you describe - sounds like all the editing you need is just audio, and RX links as an external editor to Reaper beautifully. As long as you are just playing Komplete direct into the DAW and not doing midi editing or more than basic automation then Reaper is very good and you wont need scripts at all probably.


----------



## Rapollo (Dec 22, 2020)

Trash Panda said:


> External script to manage velocities? How is Reaper's finicky? Again, I'm genuinely curious here as I used Pro Tools before moving to Reaper, so it was actually an improvement in MIDI editing to make the switch.



Finicky = window focus and management for one, whenever you're over in say the MIDI editor or media explorer and you have other functions keybound (eg metronome) you can't activiate them without having the main arrange window in focus. Otherwise you get a glorious windows sound which if you have any musicians with headphone mixes cranked... not a problem in Cubase, can activate the metronome from any window. This is of course, unique to my situation.

The external script is required to compress and expand MIDI velocities, or ramp whilst keeping the variation. Last I used Reaper which was 6.16 this still wasn't possible natively without an external lua script.

Like I say, Reapers MIDI editor is absolutely fine and definitely a step up from Pro Tools, but editing MIDI constantly is just easier work in Cubase for me personally, this could also be down to the default keybinds and drum editor.

But having BOTH Reaper and Cubase at my disposal... is just the best :3


----------



## R.Cato (Dec 22, 2020)

The beauty of Reaper is that you can design it to your own workflow. It can do everything Cubase can in regards to Midi functions and more. Same with audio. It's all up to you.

Personally I consider the ability to import or script any feature you would like to have a huge plus compared to all the other Sequencers out there.

This came out yesterday. https://github.com/lemerchand/lemerchand/tree/master/MIDI Selector Tool

Yes you can do something similar in Cubase with the Logical Editor. But it's not as easy and hands on.

And then you have the LBX Stripper, but let's not go there


----------



## AudioLoco (Dec 22, 2020)

R.Cato said:


> The beauty of Reaper is that you can design it to your own workflow. It can do everything Cubase can in regards to Midi functions and more. Same with audio. It's all up to you.
> 
> Personally I consider the ability to import or script any feature you would like to have a huge plus compared to all the other Sequencers out there.
> 
> ...



May I ask a genuine question about that, out of curiosity?

When you go to different "Repaered" studio and you find all the settings, skins, scripts etc are completely different then the one you have, isn't it daunting and feels like a different DAW altogether? Do you have a preference file or something like that you bring with you?
The extreme customization seems like a double edged sword to me, especially in the case more then one person working in the same studio, (and also for software developement and updates and direction) but might be a non issue....

Again really a genuine question...
Cheers...


----------



## MartinH. (Dec 22, 2020)

AudioLoco said:


> When you go to different "Repaered" studio and you find all the settings, skins, scripts etc are completely different then the one you have, isn't it daunting and feels like a different DAW altogether? Do you have a preference file or something like that you bring with you?



You can just copy your reaper portable install on a USB stick and use it anywhere because it has no DRM that would get in the way. You only need to update the vst folders and audio devices in the preferences once you're at the new rig. 



robgb said:


> My bad. Turns out it's a custom cycle action I created a few years ago. The file is attached. Just unzip and import the ini file it into your Cycle Actions Editor. Edit it to your own specifications.



Thanks a lot! I'll try it tomorrow.


----------



## Jonathan Moray (Dec 22, 2020)

I've been a Cubase power-user for quite a while now - or rather, was.

The last couple of years I've been using Reaper for all my audio oriented workflow, mixing/mastering, sound design, foley, etc, and Cubase for my midi work. The way audio is handle in Cubase has always been it's worst feature. Moving away from Cubase for all my audio work was because the demands/project I had become bigger and because I really like the way Reaper handles audio. It was also because a lot of studios use Reaper, at least in the game, mixing, sound design, foley studios. I guess most those who say Reaper isn't an industry-standard don't work or know too much about the industry. Sure, it might not be as big as ProTools was at its peak, but it's quickly gaining ground.

I never really like Reaper for midi, especially since I was so used to Cubase. It's never been worth the hassle to move, even if I would have like to. Cubase updates are very infrequent. You get two, maybe three, updates a year and those are only bug fixes with barely any features. Then once a year you get the privilege to pay them somewhere between 50 and 100 bucks for a few new features and bug fixes... great. Then you have to deal with the dongle, which you should replace every few years to be safe.

All of this has been on my mind for a while and it's been nudging me to move daw, but it's just such a daunting task when you've become extremely comfortable and proficient with a certain workflow and setup.

Either way, this year I moved and my dongle with my licenses got buried somewhere in one of the many boxes and since I had no major ongoing projects I decided this was the perfect time to try and move all my work to Reaper. It took me about two weeks before I was comfortable and it's been great. I've learnt some basic Lua and JSFX so I can create my own scripts. Reaper as a whole, especially with its scripting capabilities, is MUCH, much more customizable than the Logical Editor in Cubase. Lua is not as simple as the Logical Editor but much deeper which also means it's harder to wrap your head around.

Getting pretty much the same type of workflow in Reaper as I had in Cubase was quite easy. There were a few things Reaper was missing that I found scripts for and they work pretty well. There's still a few quirks but not more than Cuabse had.

Getting it to look good can be a pain and is not the easiest, but after some time I've found a skin and setup that I think looks alright, or maybe I've just gotten used to it.


----------



## jadedsean (Dec 22, 2020)

robgb said:


> Sorry. I still don't see it. Maybe I just like simplicity over gaudiness.


I am also a Reaper user and love it dearly, although this is not Reaper out of the box, did you have to script something to allow the GUI’s to be greyed out. I thought I read somewhere that this is achieved in windows. Am I completely wrong?


----------



## robgb (Dec 22, 2020)

jadedsean said:


> I am also a Reaper user and love it dearly, although this is not Reaper out of the box, did you have to script something to allow the GUI’s to be greyed out. I thought I read somewhere that this is achieved in windows. Am I completely wrong?


This is on a Mac. Mac is in dark mode. Reaper is set in preferences to follow Mac's dark mode.


----------



## jadedsean (Dec 22, 2020)

robgb said:


> This is on a Mac. Mac is in dark mode. Reaper is set in preferences to follow Mac's dark mode.


Ah okay, just tried that with windows 10 but no luck. Ah well Reaper is still amazing to me and its not a matter how it looks, i'll take function over aesthetics any day.


----------



## Akarin (Dec 22, 2020)

As a software developer, when a 14 years old app needs 19 updates within a year... it doesn't make me that confident 😬


----------



## Markrs (Dec 22, 2020)

Akarin said:


> As a software developer, when a 14 years old app needs 19 updates within a year... it doesn't make me that confident 😬


Most of it is improvements, they run pretty much on a 2 week Sprint model from what I can tell, with each sprint being then shipped. This is a very common model in the mobile world (phone apps often update every 2 -4 weeks)

Plus Reaper really is rock solid, it is not an app that breaks easily


----------



## Trash Panda (Dec 22, 2020)

Akarin said:


> As a software developer, when a 14 years old app needs 19 updates within a year... it doesn't make me that confident 😬


My company's app is older than that and we update once per month (sometimes twice per month). It's not that uncommon unless you're a behemoth-sized corporation.


----------



## Akarin (Dec 22, 2020)

Markrs said:


> Most of it is improvements, they run pretty much on a 2 week Sprint model from what I can tell, with each sprint being then shipped. This is a very common model in the mobile world (phone apps often update every 2 -4 weeks)
> 
> Plus Reaper really is rock solid, it is not an app that breaks easily



I know 😁 I was making a joke.


----------



## Markrs (Dec 22, 2020)

Akarin said:


> I know 😁 I was making a joke.


Lol, that is the second time I have totally missed a joke on here in the last couple of days and subsequently gave a serious reply 😂


----------



## robgb (Dec 22, 2020)

Akarin said:


> As a software developer, when a 14 years old app needs 19 updates within a year... it doesn't make me that confident 😬


It's not a matter of need. It's a matter of innovation.


----------



## Trash Panda (Dec 22, 2020)

Akarin said:


> I know 😁 I was making a joke.


Bob talks a lot of smack about people who don't use Cubase, so it definitely whooshed over my head.


----------



## Akarin (Dec 22, 2020)

Trash Panda said:


> Bob talks a lot of smack about people who don't use Cubase, so it definitely whooshed over my head.



Hahahah... but seriously, come on: if you are serious about this whole scoring thing, use a proper DAW (yes, there's currently only one!)


----------



## Trash Panda (Dec 22, 2020)

Akarin said:


> Hahahah... but seriously, come on: if you are serious about this whole scoring thing, use a proper DAW (yes, there's currently only one!)


Have you heard the drivel I put out? What makes you think I’m capable of serious composition?


----------



## Akarin (Dec 22, 2020)

Trash Panda said:


> Have you heard the drivel I put out? What makes you think I’m capable of serious composition?



Only because you are using Reaper. Cubase would automatically make random notes sound as smooth as a baby seal.


----------



## NeonMediaKJT (Dec 22, 2020)

I switched from FL Studio to Reaper years ago. I only wish Reaper's midi editing was a bit less finicky. Sometimes I'll try to draw a swell on cc1 for example, and not all the green points will respond if that makes sense.


----------



## Tremendouz (Dec 22, 2020)

Composing the Call Of Duty WWII Score - Interview with Wilbert Roget II | The REAPER Blog


Composer Wilbert Roget II shares his experience using REAPER for the Call Of Duty WWII game soundtrack.




reaperblog.net





Just wanted to drop an example of Reaper being used by a professional composer. Creating a full AAA game soundtrack in one single project file isn't a small feat


----------



## AudioLoco (Dec 23, 2020)

Just sayin...


----------



## joebaggan (Dec 23, 2020)

19 updates to fix all the bugs Reaper introduced over the last year. But when you rely on your users to find bugs because you don't have enough QA engineers, that happens.

Here are some Cubase features released over the last year, and this doesn't include all the minor updates and fixes that Reaper calls "features" :

Spectral comparison EQ mode, Video renderer, Multi-tap delay, Padshop 2 plugin, Colorizer mixer channels, Import tracks from other project, Retrospective MIDI recording, Combined selection tools, Score editor fixes, Easier macro recording, LUFS normalization, Start in Safe Mode, Various workflow improvements

Advanced Audio Export, Sampler Track 2, Scale Assistant, Advanced Key Editor, Global Tracks, Frequency 2, Squasher, Score Editor, New Samples, SuperVision, Imager, MultiTap Delay Surround Support, Windows 10 Variable DPI, Multiple Side-Chain, Cubase Artists/Elements Upgrades, VST Connect SE 5, Workflow and UI Improvements, Apple Metal Acceleration, SpectraLayers One


----------



## NeonMediaKJT (Dec 23, 2020)

AudioLoco said:


> Just sayin...



What Reaper themes are they using?


----------



## twincities (Dec 23, 2020)

not that it matters, but anyone happily using kontakt while complaining about reaper visuals might be suffering from selective perception.


----------



## shponglefan (Dec 23, 2020)

twincities said:


> not that it matters, but anyone happily using kontakt while complaining about reaper visuals might be suffering from selective perception.



Just because one uses Kontakt does not mean one enjoys its horribly out-of-date UI.


----------



## AudioLoco (Dec 23, 2020)

NeonMediaKJT said:


> What Reaper themes are they using?


I don't know about Reaper themes, but you might have heard some of the musical themes they wrote 
Ta ta ta ta - ta ta taaaahh!


----------



## Jonathan Moray (Dec 23, 2020)

AudioLoco said:


> Just sayin...




You're not saying anything or did I miss it? I guess you are implying that Cubase is the be all end all of DAWs because those two behemoths in the composing world are using it and that all other daws are there for null and void? Hans has been using Cubase before REAPER even existed, not sure about Allan. Cubase is still somewhere in the top of the industry standard when it comes to DAWs for composing and film work, no one is denying that. Honestly, I think if Hans had to start over he would love REAPER because of his very customized workflow and all the crazy ideas he has, but the day Hans doesn't have a major project going and decided to switch daw will be a day to behold.



joebaggan said:


> 19 updates to fix all the bugs Reaper introduced over the last year. But when you rely on your users to find bugs because you don't have enough QA engineers, that happens.
> 
> Here are some Cubase features released over the last year, and this doesn't include all the minor updates and fixes that Reaper calls "features" :
> 
> ...



You mean most things that REAPER already does? Yes, people are probably very excited that Cubase is catching up. For me at least, REAPER has been a lot more solid than Cubase, but I don't even have the version I'm half a version behind and I heard that the new one is supposed to be a bit better with its stability.

No one is really bashing any other daw, whatever gets the job done is good enough. It's more of a thread to praise REAPER great and consistent updates, nothing more.


----------



## AudioLoco (Dec 23, 2020)

Jonathan Moray said:


> You're not saying anything or did I miss it? I guess you are implying that Cubase is the be all end all of DAWs because those two behemoths in the composing world are using it and that all other daws are there for null and void? Hans has been using Cubase before REAPER even existed, not sure about Allan. Cubase is still somewhere in the top of the industry standard when it comes to DAWs for composing and film work, no one is denying that. Honestly, I think if Hans had to start over he would love REAPER because of his very customized workflow and all the crazy ideas he has, but the day Hans decided to switch daw and doesn't have a major project going will be a day to behold.
> 
> 
> No one is really bashing any other daw, whatever gets the job done is good enough. It's more of a thread to praise REAPER great and consistent updates, nothing more.



I only have positive stuff to say about Reaper from my little experience with it (if you read my earlier post about it, I said that if I was starting out I would probably look at Reaper first)
No silly DAW wars from me!  
Having said that, the sheer love and enthusiasm these guys and countless other top people in the industry show towards Cubase can't be ignored.
I personally enjoy Cubase, am happy with it, and don't intend learning a new workflow, but Reaper looks certainly interesting.


----------



## robgb (Dec 23, 2020)

NeonMediaKJT said:


> I switched from FL Studio to Reaper years ago. I only wish Reaper's midi editing was a bit less finicky. Sometimes I'll try to draw a swell on cc1 for example, and not all the green points will respond if that makes sense.


I've found that it's fairly smooth, but even so, I use envelopes instead. More control.


----------



## Jonathan Moray (Dec 23, 2020)

AudioLoco said:


> I only have positive stuff to say about Reaper from my little experience with it (if you read my earlier post about it, I said that if I was starting out I would probably look at Reaper first)
> No silly DAW wars from me!
> Having said that, the sheer love and enthusiasm these guys and countless other top people in the industry show towards Cubase can't be ignored.
> I personally enjoy Cubase, am happy with it, and don't intend learning a new workflow, but Reaper looks certainly interesting.



Didn't see your earlier post and never took any offence by your remark, obviously, since we are talking about something as silly as our favourite software to play with our fake orchestras and synths, not much to take offence at. I thought it was made kind of tongue in cheek just didn't see what you were trying to say.

And the statements that REAPER looks ugly I agree with. I didn't want to mess with skins and try and get it to look good, felt like I would spend a lot of time getting it just right. That's why it took me such a long time to start using it, but it started showing up more and more and I would sooner or later have to at least get familiar with it. Then when I finally started using it, it turned out to be pretty damn good. I think v6 is looking alright out of the box and with a few customizations to the standard skin, you get something really nice. And skins make it so that if you want to spend some time you can really make it fit your preference - something that took me a LONG time in Cubase and I never was totally satisfied in the end. My memory might betray me, but I remember liking the older Cubase better and I remember people being in an uproar when they changed to the more dynamic and "plastic" theme.

I do agree. I find Hans is especially enthusiastic about Cubase, seems like he often talks about it in interviews and even agreed to do the short little interview-type video you linked for Steinberg. It's always insightful and informative to see how the big fish are using the same tools that we mortals have. He's also running a power-house of a film scoring company and I would guess most there, as stated in the video, has to learn Cubase. It's hard to break away from standards when used as widely and many times they are kept as standards just because they are too ingrained in both the people and studios to switch and see no reason to.


----------



## vicontrolu (Dec 23, 2020)

@robgb


joebaggan said:


> 19 updates to fix all the bugs Reaper introduced over the last year. But when you rely on your users to find bugs because you don't have enough QA engineers, that happens.
> 
> Here are some Cubase features released over the last year, and this doesn't include all the minor updates and fixes that Reaper calls "features" :
> 
> ...



I love to see Cubase getting up there with those features. Besides the vsti and effects stuff, Reaper has had those for a while now.


----------



## robgb (Dec 23, 2020)

Jonathan Moray said:


> I didn't want to mess with skins and try and get it to look good, felt like I would spend a lot of time getting it just right.


You're assuming it's a difficult process. All you have to do is download the theme you like, click on it, and Reaper instantly changes. I have about forty themes. When I get tired of looking at one, I go to Options > Themes and choose a new one. One click it's done. No faffing about.


----------



## NeonMediaKJT (Dec 23, 2020)

robgb said:


> I've found that it's fairly smooth, but even so, I use envelopes instead. More control.


How does one do that?


----------



## Jonathan Moray (Dec 23, 2020)

robgb said:


> You're assuming it's a difficult process. All you have to do is download the theme you like, click on it, and Reaper instantly changes. I have about forty themes. When I get tired of looking at one, I go to Options > Themes and choose a new one. One click it's done. No faffing about.



I'm using REAPER now, so yes, I quickly learnt of my erroneous belief. Although, I've not found a skin that I'm perfectly happy with so there's always some tweaking needed and doing those tweaks are not always the most intuitive. Luckily, REAPER gives you the tool to do those tweaks, but the tools could use some work to be more intuative. The Theme Tweaker is a step in the right direciton.


----------



## robgb (Dec 23, 2020)

NeonMediaKJT said:


> How does one do that?


It's a slightly involved process the first time around. It involves using CCEnv or ReaMidiCC at the top of each track. I will do a tutorial on it after the holidays.


----------



## vicontrolu (Dec 23, 2020)

You can do it without envelopes in the CC lane, using JS_Multitool which smokes any editing on Cubase or any other daw that I know.

But its ugly


----------



## robgb (Dec 23, 2020)

vicontrolu said:


> You can do it without envelopes in the CC lane, using JS_Multitool which smokes any editing on Cubase or any other daw that I know.
> 
> But its ugly


A useful tool, but not really the same as using envelopes. What I like about envelopes is that you can reduce the number of points down to a minimum, then shape the curves however you like. I wish the CC lanes had this ability. You can draw them in by hand, but that's not quite the same as playing them in, then reducing the point count.


----------



## tack (Dec 23, 2020)

robgb said:


> What I like about envelopes is that you can reduce the number of points down to a minimum, then shape the curves however you like. I wish the CC lanes had this ability. You can draw them in by hand, but that's not quite the same as playing them in, then reducing the point count.


There's an action to remove redundant CC events (js_Remove redundant CCs.lua), and since Reaper 6 introduced the same CC shapes as available in automation (linear, bezier, slow/fast start, etc.), aren't these more or less equivalent now from that perspective?

Admittedly there are probably more mature third party scripts for manipulating automation curves than CCs considering this capability was only available in Reaper 6, but with respect to what you mentioned (performing it in, removing redundant events, and shaping the curves), what are the remaining gaps?


----------



## vicontrolu (Dec 23, 2020)

Funny you mention this rob, since I am using the multitool to edit envelopes too.

I'll wait for your tutorial in case I ve missed something


----------



## NeonMediaKJT (Dec 23, 2020)

Just a quick question: Is it a bad idea to upgrade to Reaper 6 in the while in the middle of finishing a project? I really want to try the new midi functions in Reaper 6 but I don't want to corrupt my project.


----------



## tack (Dec 23, 2020)

NeonMediaKJT said:


> Just a quick question: Is it a bad idea to upgrade to Reaper 6 in the while in the middle of finishing a project? I really want to try the new midi functions in Reaper 6 but I don't want to corrupt my project.


I didn't run into any compatibility issues with the upgrade myself, and although you will definitely want to keep a pre-upgrade backup of your project just in case, I've been able to open Reaper 6 projects in Reaper 5, although Reaper6-specific features were not recognized.

That said, this is never going to be zero risk.


----------



## MartinH. (Dec 23, 2020)

NeonMediaKJT said:


> Just a quick question: Is it a bad idea to upgrade to Reaper 6 in the while in the middle of finishing a project? I really want to try the new midi functions in Reaper 6 but I don't want to corrupt my project.



My recommendation: Try v6 with a portable install, keep your old v5 as is. I'd never switch like this mid project if it's not a super-relaxed deadline (the kind of which seems to be very rare in music jobs).


----------



## robgb (Dec 23, 2020)

tack said:


> There's an action to remove redundant CC events (js_Remove redundant CCs.lua), and since Reaper 6 introduced the same CC shapes as available in automation (linear, bezier, slow/fast start, etc.), aren't these more or less equivalent now from that perspective?


With envelopes you can reduce the number of points down to a handful and retain the CC curves. In the CC lane, removing redundant CCs only reduces a small number of points. You could obviously erase everything and draw in using bezier points, etc., but then you lose what you recorded.


----------



## robgb (Dec 23, 2020)

vicontrolu said:


> Funny you mention this rob, since I am using the multitool to edit envelopes too.
> 
> I'll wait for your tutorial in case I ve missed something



Here's CC1 Lane followed by the CC1 Envelope version of the same midi recording. Both were played in. The envelope version has far fewer points, is easier to manipulate, and creates smoother dynamics.


----------



## tack (Dec 23, 2020)

robgb said:


> With envelopes you can reduce the number of points down to a handful and retain the CC curves. In the CC lane, removing redundant CCs only reduces a small number of points.


Ah yes, I see what you mean, because the script takes the naive approach of considering only adjacent CCs with identical values as redundant.

A cleverer script would consider different CC shapes, finding which shapes and bezier parameters best fit to the intermediate points (perhaps within a configurable tolerance), and then consider _those _intermediate points as redundant.

I might take a stab at this. It's definitely doable. I understand the appeal of it.


----------



## robgb (Dec 23, 2020)

tack said:


> I might take a stab at this. It's definitely doable. I understand the appeal of it.


You are a king among men.


----------



## Trash Panda (Dec 23, 2020)

robgb said:


> Here's CC1 Lane followed by the CC1 Envelope version of the same midi recording. Both were played in. The envelope version has far fewer points, is easier to manipulate, and creates smoother dynamics.


Why go through all the effort for ease of manipulation when it’s way easier to draw in a few points and just manipulate the curves type in the CC lane?


----------



## robgb (Dec 23, 2020)

Trash Panda said:


> Why go through all the effort for ease of manipulation when it’s way easier to draw in a few points and just manipulate the curves type in the CC lane?


Because I like to play my CC info in, not draw it. I play, then adjust. It's much easier to adjust when you have fewer points.


----------



## Dex (Dec 23, 2020)

robgb said:


> Here's CC1 Lane followed by the CC1 Envelope version of the same midi recording. Both were played in. The envelope version has far fewer points, is easier to manipulate, and creates smoother dynamics.


How do you have the envelope showing in the same grid as the notes in the picture on the right?


----------



## robgb (Dec 23, 2020)

Dex said:


> How do you have the envelope showing in the same grid as the notes in the picture on the right?


Use the "Show in Media Lane" command.


----------



## robgb (Dec 26, 2020)

Okay, by scouring the Actions list I've found a way to create a custom action that takes a selected envelope and applies its points to a CC lane in the midi editor, which is a workaround to being able to reduce points. 

Basically, you have to add ReaControlMIDI to the top of your instrument track and set it up for the mod wheel (or whatever you prefer). Arm the Mod Wheel envelope, use "Learn" to wed it to your actual Mod Wheel, set the track to Write or Touch or Latch, then record your instrument. 

Once recorded, use the Reduce Number of Points command to get the points down to a workable few, then make sure that envelope is selected and all points are selected, then double click the midi take to open the midi editor. Click on the CC lane you want to convert. Use the Midi Editor Action "SWS/BR: Convert selected points in selected envelope to CC events in last clicked CC lane (clear existing events)" to do exactly what it says. This will create a duplicate of the CC envelope but with linear points, which do you no good. Use the Action "Set CC Shape to bezier," then close the editor and clear the ReaControl envelope.

Now, I know that sounds like a lot of work, but if you save your instrument as a track template, most of these commands can be put into a Custom Command and done in a couple steps, without having to really think about it.

Most people won't care, but it works for me.


----------



## robgb (Dec 27, 2020)

Here are the scripts in action:


----------



## JeffvR (Dec 31, 2020)

joebaggan said:


> 19 updates to fix all the bugs Reaper introduced over the last year. But when you rely on your users to find bugs because you don't have enough QA engineers, that happens.
> 
> Here are some Cubase features released over the last year, and this doesn't include all the minor updates and fixes that Reaper calls "features" :
> 
> ...


Well... Reaper fixing really minor bugs is better than not fixing bugs at all in Cubase. Video render in 2020, wow! And only one file format. A film composers dream DAW...


----------

