They have, the v4 interface is very basic



In the UK we have a saying "Horses for courses" If XT with it's capabilities and workflow fits you as your main host, then Reaper never actually will.



I do warn a lot of people that Reaper is very much a DAW for the more experienced/geek user out there, if you are the kind of person who needs manuals then maybe not the best app for you.

I am one of the lucky ones who has never needed the manual even once in Reaper and find it very easy to help people who get stuck with it
Keep in mind that if you do decide to try it then one of the best things you can do is jump into the IRC channel with any questions, we will always have a quick answer for you

Hold your horses!
v2.6 was just released and they said that the next update will be 3.0. So expect something good because Jorgen is a really brilliant developer and that little gem of his is really one of those tools that let you focus on what YOU WANT TO DO rater than allow your bad habits and the Need For More to get lost in Features.... and pagges and pages and pages and pages while I finished a project, started another one and have my Cabernet while listening my own music.

Try MuLab. More Modular than XT, more routing possibility then Reaper and you can build your own synths and effects from scratch and much much more. Interface is totally skinnable and there are custom shortcuts for every single command. Piano roll as XT but better integrated with the mouse. Audio engine freaking Impeccable. Developer on the daily basis. Get the "M4 BETA" for test. Be patient because its workflow is quite unusual BUT extremely flexible. Just Right Click anywhere and the context menu will show you some neat tools. Good luck.
But remember to explore the Modular areas and the Modules deep editors!

Competent Engineers know how great of a product Reaper is.

Its a fine product.


When you see someone complain about the GUI, considering how custom it can be, that person is completely inexperienced and simply should not be listened to since they obviously know very very little about the program at all.

Someone said "maybe they get a bad rap because of how they started".


Do you mean offering a great DAW at a mere fraction of what some people haven been getting charged for DAWs over the last however long? Theres nothing wrong with Reaper and never was. Yes, theres better DAWs for working with MIDI than Reaper. Well guess what, theres better Tools for editing Audio in general in Adobe Audition than Pro Tools. When people say "Oh yeah? Well X-DAW doesnt do this!!" its more of a reflection of what the person really knows about the industry and the tools available than anything else.

DAW's are NOT like Lord of the Rings - there is not one DAW to rule them all. Never will be.

The most "wrong" thing about it was the price. You should realize this is what kept Waves plugs at the top for so long before people wised up. It was its price point.

High price points are the bane of stupid people. It automatically makes a certain type of person ascribe more value to the object.

Reaper's an excellent DAW. Period.

Now, I can't be sure but I have this feeing I have read a discussion like this before..
Where could it have been?

I wouldn't go quite that far... ... but I certainly would agree that some of the complaints are... well... for lack or a better phrase... borderline silly. Especially various complaints about the particular graphics on various theme buttons or whatever... stuff that can be changed at will.

There actually are some (subjectively) legitimate problems with the overall GUI but nothing that diminishes it's value in the marketplace or anything that would stop anyone from making their next big hit.

As relates to Reaper or any other host for that matter, one thing (complaints or suggestions about something that could be done better) often have nothing to do with the other thing (how well it actually functions for you overall as a tool).

If people could kinda separate those two things internally we'd probably be visiting Disneyland much less often.

Reaper can be a great DAW and also have legitimate (subjective) UI issues. The two things aren't mutually exclusive there or with any other product really.

I admit that when I see any conversation about which DAW has a better or worse interface, I wonder who the poster is trying to convince.

If the workflow works for you, if the audio is good, if the fonts and colors are not too obnoxious (or if you can change them), then it works for you. If not, it doesn't. That's why there are different products out there.

Said the Reaper/Band In A Box user.

(I used to run Acid Pro and Vegas. I've tried Ableton, Cubase, FL Studio, and Samplitude. None of 'em did much for me -- Ableton in particular felt more like a game interface than a DAW, and not in a good way. Reaper, on the other hand, I configured quickly and easily, and I get stuff done with it. So, hey. It works for me.

(And, in fact, someone posted on the PG music forums today, asking why someone else wanted a DAW other than RealBand, which comes with Band In A Box. I haven't thrown my .02 in yet, but I find RB's interface cluttered and the workflow annoying. Not to mention how tricky it is to set up for ASIO, and how it handles, or doesn't handle, VSTs. So, same thing. That doesn't work for me.)

I will give you an award, sir, for sticking with Band in a Box long enough to work well with its interface.

But thats where necessity breeds prowess. You gotta put the time in to figure any tool out, if in fact you need that tool. And all it takes is gettin' under the hood. I wouldnt get hired to do flyers and graphical work on the side if I ever whined and said "wahh, I dont like Illustrators interface". I never had a class. Never watched any tutorials. I just worked at it till I "got" it.

Its funny. From a POV of someone who makes music, Id argue a competent musician already has an firm idea of what they need to get done. They need tracks for bass, drums, etc etc - pan the mix yada yada yada. Know that for the people who actually need to get work done, they are FLYING with Reaper. Why? Because they have a vision of what needs to be accomplished and are already halfway done mixing their song while Im posting this, haha.

Many complainers are complaining while theyre not making music. Reaper by NO means will impede someone from creating something incredible. I think I see some people check out a DAW, and then want it to do things for them. Or, since theyre not charging headfirst into their project they need to get done because their a dedicated musician who needs to record all their new songs NOW, they have time to sit and balk about missing feaures from one DAW to the next.

exactly my thoughts. Sorry, Reaper folks. I love everything about Reaper except actually using it, which is incredibly frustrating, and the GUI just feels a little bit 'Windows 3.1' for me, no matter how I skin it.

a lot of the windows feel like using a spreadsheet. definitely not the slickest DAW experience.

I don't get it either, but then I don't like the direction a lot of modern software is going in GUI-wise, so I guess maybe I wouldn't.

My beef with the GUI is that the corners aren't rounded. I think this would make a HUGE difference to the look and feel. Believe me curves sooth the savage beast.

And I'm not even joking...

Shut up and make some music for pete's sake

This is one of the most important points: Any one that knows what he/she wants gets the job done, and usually without going to fancy with The "TOOLS".
That's why I do more work in MuLab and XT than even Live or FL. Orion it's cool too but it needs to improve the pianoroll navigation system. We need a tool that gets out of its own way. Honestly, even though I'm not fully into Reaper (yet) it allows you to use it from a superficial to a deeper level but at the same time it's not as fluid as those little powerful gems as MuLab and XT for doing your thing IN and OUT.

I'm not joking either but those little Seq Parts in XT feels good indeed because of those rounded corners!