Reaper vs. Studio One?

[LawrenceF]

Did you ever hear deadmau5 ...

I see that (band?) name everywhere. I have no idea who they are are why so many people reference them like above in daw discussions, what they use, or like, or similar.

It must be an EDM/Electro thing.

[BMoore]

It was a joke.

[Gadget Fiend]

I don't know how many skins there are for Reaper. But every one I have ever seen (including the default theme) is hideous. That alone would rule out a tool that I intend to use every day.

Of course, Studio One certainly won't win any design awards. But its minimalist aesthetic is at least in keeping with its streamlined workflow. It's like someone else said, Studio One has very definite ideas about how a DAW should operate for maximum efficiency. It's similar to Apple's approach: The company (Apple) doesn't offer 20 different ways to accomplish the same thing. The designers/developers actually have the strength of their convictions to say "This is how we think it should work." You can't say that about Reaper (which goes out of its way to not make any decisions about how users should interact with the program and instead provides users with a gazillion options in the name of "flexibility").

[hibidy]

I agree with the idea that S1 is "minimalist" and that it works in favor

[digitalboytn]

I don't know how many skins there are for Reaper. But every one I have ever seen (including the default theme) is hideous. That alone would rule out a tool that I intend to use every day.

I guess that beauty is in the eye of the beholder with regards to both function and form....

I use Sonar X3 Pro most of the time,but when I'm playing around with Reaper,I find the Imperial Black Theme to be pretty cool...

Especially the mixer view...

I think it's great that there is a lot of user input into Reaper because there's some smart minds out there....

But it's like most things...

You can utilize what you want and just leave the rest of it out of the equation

[DarkStar]

I don't know how many skins there are for Reaper. But every one I have ever seen (including the default theme) is hideous. That alone would rule out a tool that I intend to use every day.

Fair enough, but can you define what "hideous" means to you? And, more importantly, what sort of skins would not be hideous.

Of course, Studio One certainly won't win any design awards. But its minimalist aesthetic is at least in keeping with its streamlined workflow. It's like someone else said, Studio One has very definite ideas about how a DAW should operate for maximum efficiency. It's similar to Apple's approach: The company (Apple) doesn't offer 20 different ways to accomplish the same thing. The designers/developers actually have the strength of their convictions to say "This is how we think it should work." You can't say that about Reaper (which goes out of its way to not make any decisions about how users should interact with the program and instead provides users with a gazillion options in the name of "flexibility").

To me, "flexible" means that I can choose which of the available methods to use, not that I have to use all of them. That seems like a good thing to me. Once i have chosen then I can forget about the alternative methods.

[lfm]

I don't know how many skins there are for Reaper. But every one I have ever seen (including the default theme) is hideous. That alone would rule out a tool that I intend to use every day.

The ones for download are usually drafts - and to get fully functional you have to donate to get them in a personal mail.

Incredible amount of work making a theme in WALTHER(or what interface is called). Plenty bitmaps and desisions to be made. And some designers are just designers - obviously don't know that much about daws.

To get all buttons wrap or disappear when resizing tracks etc - all is by theme designer.

I think Konzentration is really nice and well thought out in just about every aspect. Resizing mixer the right stuff go with it to make view more compact. And good clarity making it functional.

Other with good clarity is ProXTools Gold - but some flaws how mixer view is made.

I think it's hard to beat Reapers track folders in mixer view which is rather alone doing expand/collapse there too and having an integrated bus.

StudioOne to start with need to use tall mixer view to even get any kind of overview. And how extra outs on VSTi's are only visible in mixer makes clear spaghetti routing in StudioOne if you want a bus for all outs. To talk about workflow in S1 - I don't get it.

And having track templates in Reaper is a winnder compared to S1. You prepare all kinds of track setups and save as a template for reuse. In S1 you cannot even copy between projects properly.

If like and want ARA and VST3 - S1 otherwise Reaper.

[xbitz]

VST3 support is on the new features list of Reaper 5, http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=152250 ( v5.0pre1 is downloadable )

[Kalamata Kid]

For me right now Studio One needs a couple of small feature request implementations and it will become my exclusive DAW. It already has ARA.

On the other hand if Reaper adopts ARA it will become my one and only DAW.

I suspect that Studio One will get there first but will prefer by a small margin that Reaper wins out.

One feature that is very important to me is Multi-touch support so both Sonar and FL Studio are real contenders. I will likely know the outcome by early 2015.

Windows 10 multi-touch support will be a welcome feature.

I am curious if the VST 3.6 spec has been helpful to the Windows multi-touch support.

[Gadget Fiend]

One feature that is very important to me is Multi-touch support so both Sonar and FL Studio are real contenders. I will likely know the outcome by early 2015.

Windows 10 multi-touch support will be a welcome feature.

I think it's cool that some DAW vendors are going "all in" with their touch support while others are mostly ignoring touch. That provides real differentiation in the market.

I personally think that a touch interface is horrible on anything other than a tablet. A laptop screen, or worse, an upright/non-slanted monitor simply doesn't lend itself to a touch interface. Plus, touch controls are WAY more fiddly than their corresponding hardware controls. I would much, much rather use my knob-laden hardware synths than a lame touch synth interface (even on a tablet). And other than maybe moving a virtual mixer fader up or down with my finger, mixing doesn't work very well on a touch interface either. Inserting plugins, setting up sends, etc. is a lot easier and faster with a mouse.

But different strokes for different folks. I just hope Presonus hasn't wasted the last couple of years adding touch support when there are so many other features that would provide much greater value, IMO.

[GaryG]

I think Konzentration is really nice and well thought out in just about every aspect. Resizing mixer the right stuff go with it to make view more compact. And good clarity making it functional.

...

I think it's hard to beat Reapers track folders in mixer view which is rather alone doing expand/collapse there too and having an integrated bus.

StudioOne to start with need to use tall mixer view to even get any kind of overview. And how extra outs on VSTi's are only visible in mixer makes clear spaghetti routing in StudioOne if you want a bus for all outs. To talk about workflow in S1 - I don't get it.

Konzentration is the theme I keep coming back to, so simple and functional. One of the reasons I haven't really got onboard with S1 is the GUI; too stark for me, don't know if it's high contrast or the lack anti-aliasing or something but I just find it tiring. Find myself looking at a screen of rectangles and having to stop and think what's the mixer, tracks, inspector etc., little demarcation.

+1 on your other points. One of the reasons I'm particularly fond of Reaper is for most of my projects, I never even have to look at the mixer, can do everything I need from the tracks (old Tracktion-head... )

[GaryG]

A laptop screen, or worse, an upright/non-slanted monitor simply doesn't lend itself to a touch interface. Plus, touch controls are WAY more fiddly than their corresponding hardware controls ... Inserting plugins, setting up sends, etc. is a lot easier and faster with a mouse.

Have to agree with all these points. The thought of editing samples, automation curves etc with my less than precise fingers horrifies me.

[standalone]

A laptop screen, or worse, an upright/non-slanted monitor simply doesn't lend itself to a touch interface. Plus, touch controls are WAY more fiddly than their corresponding hardware controls ... Inserting plugins, setting up sends, etc. is a lot easier and faster with a mouse.

Have to agree with all these points. The thought of editing samples, automation curves etc with my less than precise fingers horrifies me.

You could use a pen for that. Better than a mouse, probably.

[hibidy]

EDIT!

DOH, I forgot about first rule of fight club