Polarized opinions about Reaper

[woggle]

whereas reaper costs money and people make nothing from support and extensions as far as the reaper company is concerned.

Well, people doing extensions and scripts almost always have a Donate button somewhere, I'm sure it gets clicked from time to time...

I hope so, it is good when everyone who contributes gets paid, not just some people

[kmonkey]

Me personally i was very disappointed with Reaper on first run. Then i had some time and i kept coming back asking myself what the hell these guys expressing Reaper is amazing - are smoking...

I truly wanted to give it chance. So..this is my short observation.

Even today i don't use it often. I am still baffled by automation i don't know how to write it. I still scratch my head when doing routing. I mean i am sure this is simple for someone who gets it but i am type of person which run app and if i can't get it and understand it just by looking at it and if options for simple task are hidden in some item menu i find this as a bad design choice.

However...during these forced "i am giving you a chance" trials i was reading forums and browsing and i noticed and see MASSIVE potential in Reaper. It occurred to me i can modify and customize Reaper to my own liking to some degree.

So as it stand out i believe Reaper is actually quite amazing, and people using it aren't smoking bad weed. It's just at this version it is not for me, maybe it is but i don't have time and energy to adapt it to myself + some features which are obvious in every other DAW i tried here are hidden.

But..yeah Reaper is indeed amazing and Reaper community is amazing. But reason i don't use it is because it is convoluted (for my taste) and basic logic driving Reaper and internal workflow is different then other apps.

I am looking forward in the future to give it even more time.

[EvilDragon]

I am still baffled by automation i don't know how to write it.

1. Click the parameter you want to automate
2. Press the "Param" button in Reaper's plugin header, for last touched parameter "Show track envelope"
3. Set track envelope mode to Write (there's an envelope button on each track, click it and the automation mode is right there, or right-click it, same option is there in a more compact menu/not a new window)

How's this baffling?

There are other ways to do it, like enabling option Preferences->Editing Behavior->Automation->[x] Automatically add envelopes when tweaking parameters in automation write modes, this will automatically create envelopes for any parameter you touch if a track is in one of write modes (or you have global automation override mode set to one of write modes). Write modes are touch/latch/write.

[Bereket]

To me people complain about Reaper cause it makes their beloved DAW a useless junk. Tell me a DAW capable of freezing UA plugin and recall it at anytime? Just for that feature I can't live without REAPER and time after time as time goes by it is becoming my mixing DAW. About automation,
https://giphy.com/gifs/l0HUcEbM18WIwUWIM/fullscreen

[VariKusBrainZ]

Reaper - the cock blocker of DAWs

[woggle]

"To me people complain about Reaper cause it makes their beloved DAW a useless junk. "

possibly this sort of attitude polarizes a few opinions about Reaper - All software has jerks using it, but Reaper does seem to have more jerks mouthing off online than any other. Which is a shame as the developer comes across as a nice guy

[Guenon]

All software has jerks using it, but Reaper does seem to have more jerks mouthing off online than any other.

In a similar vein, it's an often expressed view that it seems to have more rude people mouthing off against it than any other DAW, too. The fact that these observations seem so familiar fits well with the "Linux of DAWs" parrallel as well . It depends on your own viewpoint, and maybe ultimately the bias underlying that viewpoint, if you feel like the ones mouthing off for it or against it are behaving the way they are as a reaction and response to the other group "who started it" or "who deserve it", and are thus more justified in behaving rudely than that other group. Only by noting that all of it is rude behavior all the same, and making up your own mind about your own chosen tools based on how well they fit your own goals, can there be a constructive stance on the actual product, regardless of these sorts of meta discussions.

[do_androids_dream]

I still think “Linux of daws” is the best way to think of Reaper. It can be endlessly tweaked to get what you want which is great for some people and a waste of time and bother to others.

Having used Reaper for the last 11 years both before and after becoming a professional mixing/mastering engineer - it really isn't the Linux of DAW's and it can't be endlessly tweaked - it's not as 'deep' as some people make out. It just offers more control than most other DAW's for some things. The reason I use is it mainly because it allows me to work how I want to work moreso than any other DAW. It's extremely robust as regards stability and cpu usage too. The only crashes I've ever experienced are due to plugins - the DAW itself is easily the most stable I've ever used - a huge consideration when working professionally. I can use any other DAW if I have to but I have the least 'problems' if I use Reaper.

[glokraw]

Just to stir the pot, in my experience, the best linux daw for running windows plugins,
is the windows Reaper run in wine-staging, followed by the
linux version of Reaper hosting windows plugins that are wrapped by
LinVst or Airwave, as native linux vsts. Add in some extra versatility
by using linux as the daw, with a Reaper as one of the elements,
and it's great fun not being saddled by win/mac duopoly,
badman and robbin' make quite a team to compete with.
Cheers

[Azura]

Going back to OP's question (oh! that's me!), I read an interesting post on Reaper's forum today. Here it is: https://forum.cockos.com/showpost.php?p ... tcount=172

The root of the problem that people have with Reaper (and this is something I've been blind to until just last year), in general, people want decisions to be made for them.


This is a propensity that creates cognitive dissonance in me, I couldn't understand that reality until recently. Reaper doesn't make any decisions for you. You can change and alter almost everything. This creates a problem:


People have to decide on functional processes that they may not have a strong opinion about (except that they don't want to have to do it);

People *rely* on .... rolling about between things that have been chosen for them.



Me of just 2 years ago would not have understood that truth, and would not have seen any value in it. But it does have utility that Reaper ignores.

There is a comfortable medium. That comfortable medium allows creativity and production to flow as seamlessly and quickly as possible - which is the ultimate goal. HERE IS THE CRUX OF THE PROBLEM WITH THE STATE OF DAWS IN THE YEAR 2018:


The philosophy of the granularity of choice at the different levels of retrievability are misapplied in all cases. Reaper's core philosophy is effectively



"(capability) it's all in there".


It's diametric opposite is Garage Band:

"here's just the basic elements, nothing else is in there".




I believe the long term winner is going to be Logic. Not because it's better, but because it's the closest to bridging the comfortable medium between those two disparate philosophies.

Which I say are both wrong and flawed, half-baked (sorry Justin).

I'm gonna say it again - I was right, blast it, GB IS how 95% of every new recording artist is introduced to the process because Apple has it built in, and Logic is the (in reality, super cheap) natural successor.

I claim there is no way around that, unless MS comes out with an equivalent set of programs as equally developed.

But the aggravating thing is I *know* Logic is flawed, and Reaper, because in reality their "philosophies" are being applied monolithically to each product.

Here's where everyone is wrong:

The Logic/Apple way is actually superior *only from a first order of retrievability stand point*.

When you're doing something creative/productive, the first level of menuing should be simple. And this is what I've learned as a human as a truth: ultimately it's smart to let go of trust to a decision made by by someone else prior.

It used to be what Apple was best at - they make decisions for you. I hate that! BUT - in reality, it's practical and pragmatic. Apple has completely lost track of that as their prime selling point post Steve Jobs. It's never going to be exactly the decision you would want if you through it through.

Which is a completely, resolutely illogical and wasteful effort on the first order level.

Reaper gives you Home Depot when all you need most of the time is a screwdriver and duct tape. Apple says "here is all of the stuff you probably need at the front of the store". Reaper puts the duct tape on the same aisle as the tile cutters and weed wackers.

Apple may or may not sell ceramic tile cutters. 8" lag bolts may not be in the store. Which works out; maybe or .01% of the customers that come in need them.

I want a DAW that has a very hyper-well thought out 1st level of menuing, Apple/Logic like, that then increases menu choices at the 2nd level with a hybrid-approach, and then on the 3rd level gives you the "Reaper like" granularity.

The frustrating thing about Reaper is that the 1st level of menuing is kind of incoherent and scatter shod, over kill in most areas but lacking obvious things in others. But everything is there - somewhere.

Logic actually has a menuing hierarchy, and you can tell thought went into it. The problem is that when you need "moar", and enter the 2nd level of menus -

... they're still making decisions for you. "Here is a pictogram of some of your options instead of all of the options", and to get to the 3rd level... you've got to figure out what someone else decided before hand. Dumb.

In both cases there is a philosophical approach that doesn't win on all levels, BUT...

each appeals to a particular mindset.

People that are perfectionists, auto-didacts, self-starters and independent will always prefer Reaper.

Everyone else will not.




Both ways of thinking are flawed and ignorant of their internal logic.

Cockos, though, as a problem, in that I say the later group is orders of magnitude larger. Additionally, the first group will be able to cope with the second group's dominance in the future - it will just be aggravating. Highly vexing, annoyingly aggravating<g>.

The second group - which is the bulk of the population, the people that aren't conscious of their processes beyond "this initially seems easier" will never, ever, ever, use Reaper.

In this "fictional" movie, the Pragmatic Know-Nothings win over the Perfectionist Boffins. In *my* movie, Reaper gets it's first order menuing together, ala Logic - with the additional *necessity* of a "graduate from Garage Band" mode. I can imagine the scale of how incredibly messy that could be to do, but.. it's necessity.


It's simply the way everyone will work. There was a window when, if Reaper had incorporated a "faux Garage Band" mode on install, people could have been weaned from the Apple-centric way. But that only would have stuck if the first-order menuing had been coherent. There is a window though - maybe just a year, 2 years - where if the top level menuing of Reaper were streamlined ala Logic/Garage Band, the future could be different. The Pro Toolers who are jumping ship could make that decision for everyone. But they're no different; they don't want to make decisions, either.


It's very simple: I have set in Reaper "S" to split tracks. S=split. Makes total sense to me. I don't have to hit shift, click the mouse, or anything other than hit "S".


In Logic, it's what - Command T? "T"? Idiotic non-sense to me, but here's reality:

People don't really care, they want someone to have decided for them. Apple has already done that, and it's not going to change. If the first-order menuing is thought out, if simplified in reality it could be good for you. If someone decides for them without any consistency, they will balk.

Regardless, those two groups will still be there. The larger group will win. 10 years from now, on this course Logic inherits the Pro Tools mantle, and I don't know where Reaper is in that. I'll go further to say that 10 years from now, they'll call it "Premiere Logic", both will be one program and will be $200. Pro Tools will be maintained by a small company for file-legacy purposes, no development.

The only thing that changes that is if Microsoft buys Cockos and fights it; or if Cockos bends to snagging new users on install with faux-Garage Band and Pro Tools menu conventions.

I'll still be using Reaper, because it IS the most logical functionally.

What I learned from the 2016 election cycle:

This isn't planet Vulcan, this is Idiocracy. Literally. The middle of the bell curve is a mountain farther in the distance than I could see. I have operated on the notion that since I could not see the mountain it wasn't there, it was a level plain. It's not; a Dunning-Kruger paradox for those on the far right of the Stanford-Binet scale.


/$.10
// no apologies for obtuseness.
/// apologies to Adam Savage for abusing "order of retrievability"
//// no, it's not as simple as making analogies to tool boxes.
__________________
]]]>- guitar lessons - http://www.chipmcdonald.com-<[[[
Experiencing Guitar: Essays from Teaching by Chip McDonald https://www.amazon.com/dp/1521877823..._QZJxAbA4GVDC1

Marc

[woggle]

Going back to OP's question (oh! that's me!), I read an interesting post on Reaper's forum today. Here it is: https://forum.cockos.com/showpost.php?p ... tcount=172

\
People have to decide on functional processes that they may not have a strong opinion about (except that they don't want to have to do it);

People *rely* on .... rolling about between things that have been chosen for them.



Me of just 2 years ago would not have understood that truth, and would not have seen any value in it. But it does have utility that \


"(capability) it's all in there".


It's diametric opposite\
I'm gonna say it again -\

It used to be what Apple was best at - they make decisions for you. I hate that! BUT - in reality, it's practical and pragmatic. Apple has completely lost track of that as their prime selling point post Steve Jobs. It's never going to be exactly the decision you would want if you through it through.
\
// no apologies for obtuseness.
/// apologies to Adam Savage for abusing "order of retrievability"
//// no, it's not as simple as making analogies to tool boxes.
__________________
]]]>- guitar lessons - http://www.chipmcdonald.com-<[[[
Experiencing Guitar: Essays from Teaching by Chip McDonald https://www.amazon.com/dp/1521877823..._QZJxAbA4GVDC1

Marc

More realistically, Design is important and there is no reason that a well designed DAW cannot offer all the functionality of Reaper (actually the functionality of Reaper plus all the work others have gifted) within a much more useable package.
Reaper's strengths, to me, are where they jettisoned existing ideas based on analog recording and just went computational. eg the routing is fantastic and easy to use but is not based on the old mixing desk metaphor, the quantising and grid settings are not restricted to a few basic tuplets (often so basic in other programs that you can't even program Chopin!)
Good design would have a bunch of keystrokes and mouse settings that make sense and that allow for customisation. Poor design just has a shitload of arbitrary keystrokes available without any underlying grammar and can only be learnt by rote. Good design has a consistent visual language, poor design doesn't. Good design minimises cognitive load, poor design increases it. etc etc. Reaper has great design in terms of flexibility, but poor design in a lot of other areas. That's frustrating.

[Astromann]

I havent posted here for a year or so, but I thought I would add to this conversation.
Really nice to see that it hasn't turned into a slagging match (my software is better than yours type of thing)
This post is mainly in response to the long post about Logics approach as compared to Reapers approach.
Certain parts of that post I agree with, other parts I dont agree with.
I only really stopped using Logic about 2 years ago...I tailed off using it a few years before that, then a couple of years ago I did an upgrade and used it again for some unfinished projects.
Originally I started using Logic when it was C-Lab Creator on Atari (from memory)...before it even became Notator..
Yes I am that old LOL!!
After that when Logic grew into a more fully developed program, I wrote environments for it, many people didnt like to tackle the environment a few years back...so writing in certain midi functions in the environment was in a way quite rewarding.
Apple more or less hid it after that.
However on top of that I was using it for midi composing at least 5 to 6 hours every day as I had a studio and a lot of demand to arrange and sometimes write tracks for people.
I started running a PC much later to do 3D work, so I decided to look at more PC DAWs, then along came Reaper, so I tried it and decided I hated it (because of some of the reasons given in the long post).
Then about a year or so later for whatever reason I tried it again, this time I connected with the actions and flexible interface etc and a lightbulb went on...I realized I could make it my DAW, and use it the way I liked to work.
This was still a few years ago, the midi piano roll still left a lot to be desired...but I handled it, then it rapidly developed into quite a powerful editor, along with many other features that became very powerful, it still has a little way to go tho.
But in most cases Reapers flexibility and power are never really questioned, most agree its powerful and flexible, obviously the big issue is that seems to polarize people is the usability.
For me its not a problem at all, I rarely have to look at a menu (even tho you can create your own menus),
I rarely have to search for an icon or anything like that, and I dont do simple nursery rhyme type pop music, I directly write into the piano roll (even tho I play guitar) I often write orchestral pieces combined with some EDM, I also use routing, Automation, Automation items, extensive effects, multiple output VSTs  yada yada.
And the Automation items have made doing short bursts of automation extremely fast and efficient.
So for me Reaper very rarely gets frustrating...why?
Because if in the past I have had to search thru a menu to find something I need to do, then I find the action that does that (by searching in the actions menu) then I assign it to either a mouse action or a toolbar icon or a hotkey...easy as.
Then I save my updated version as a template and work with that, that way it grows with what I require.
Initially I took a few hours to create my very first template, then after that all I do is update it a little here and there,
and if I have a different set of demands I create a new template, its like having a totally different software if you want to take it that far.
Quite honestly I would struggle with Logic to do a lot of what I am doing now and the way I like to do it, so for me there is no going back.
The long and intellectual post brings up many good points, however although agreeing with some of the points I dont agree generally, its not rocket science, make some actions, apply them to a key command or icons or whatever else, find a theme that you like, make a Template, add things if you need to and Reaper becomes yours.
For all others that dont like this approach (as pointed out in the long post)...there is Logic, Studio One, and many other DAW's out there.
Have fun and make some music.
Cheers

   


 

[DrFolder]

Everyone has different requirements but for me I just open Reaper and start using it. I've never customized Reaper to do anything. Can someone actually list what is so difficult for them other than cosmetic or just simply watching a YT video that shows them how something works slightly differently than other daws? Yes this is a can of worms and I apologize in advance but alot of the complaints I read are people not taking a few minutes out of their day to learn new software.

[LawrenceF]

It's just human nature. If a Reaper user falls in love with Cubase next year he'll try to turn Cubase into Reaper in some ways, and vice versa. They tend to want it all everywhere but the reality is that you can never have it all everywhere and indeed, some seem to be completely clueless to the idea that not every product was actually created or is being designed with them in mind.

The daw world, users, are just kinda nutty in general.

Reaper is a great piece of software, but like literally anything and everything else on the planet for sale, it's not for everyone.

[inkwarp]

the quantising and grid settings are not restricted to a few basic tuplets (often so basic in other programs that you can't even program Chopin!)

phew, these forums are too high-brow for a knucklehead like me : )