Heresy alert: You left REAPER and went to...

[tomg]

Possibly. There is just a lot of need to customize things that intuitively should be convenient, but there are a bunch of built in things on right-click that do not seem to be as urgent. It makes me feel stupid. I get enough of that from my children.

There it is, right there.

If there is a focus on Reapers development other that throwing every minor feature anybody could ever want in there somewhere but totally ignoring major things like midi-editing and making things easy on the user, I've got no idea what it is.

Shame really. There is a LOT of power under the hood but it's a major pain to use or even find the little everyday tools. Justin has said there would never be midi-tools. Why such a smart guy would do such a dumb thing is a mystery to me.

I've said that Reaper was a tank, compared to sports cars. It's really a high powered but incomplete audio hacking tool compared to highly focused music production software.

[deleted]

DELETED

[koolkeys]

If I leave Reaper for any period of time it will be to learn Cubase (for midi), but Reaper will always be my go to standby for recording audio (with some midi sprinkled in). I guess some people prefer eye candy/"workflow" to actual basic audio functionality.

?????? Eye candy? How so? And what audio functionality is missing in other apps like Cubase?

Brent

Can you use an audio track as an LFO to modulate a plug in parameter sitting on another track in Cubase, hm?

I don't consider that "basic audio functionality", which is what he said was being missed for the sake of "eye candy". I can't think of any audio host that doesn't have SOMETHING unique. And even the feature you mentioned can be done with plug-ins anyways if you happen to need it. But he said "basic audio functionality", so I asked what he meant.

But seriously, I think you're a bit defensive for no reasons; that Yatmandu say app "x" has all the audio feature he needs does not necessarily means app "y" is lacking.

Just quoting what he said and asking him what he meant. Whatever else you got from my post is your own misreading of what I said. I just asked him what he meant. Nothing more.

Brent

[bullshark]

Justin has said there would never be midi-tools. Why such a smart guy would do such a dumb thing is a mystery to me.

I honestly think he's surprised by how far the MIDI functionality has come already. He certainly did not intend for Reaper to be, or become, a MIDI sequencer when he started that app, he just wanted something to replace Vegas(which he was using at the time and which has no MIDI at all) with something as straightforward but more flexible to record and mix audio with.

At least that was the wisdom at the time. There even was heated argument about whether Reaper should be called a sequencer at all on the forum back then.

[warp x]

I tried Reaper of couple of times, on PC and Mac. Came to my senses quickly, and deleted it.

[tomg]

Justin has said there would never be midi-tools. Why such a smart guy would do such a dumb thing is a mystery to me.

I honestly think he's surprised by how far the MIDI functionality has come already. He certainly did not intend for Reaper to be, or become, a MIDI sequencer when he started that app.

You are absolutely correct and I want to change my earlier statement to agree with that.

I've said that Reaper was a tank, compared to sports cars. It's really a high powered audio tool compared to highly focused music production software.

That's much better.

[bullshark]

Just quoting what he said and asking him what he meant. Whatever else you got from my post is your own misreading of what I said. I just asked him what he meant. Nothing more.

Brent

Fair enough. Was the multi ???? that made me think otherwise.

[koolkeys]

Just quoting what he said and asking him what he meant. Whatever else you got from my post is your own misreading of what I said. I just asked him what he meant. Nothing more.

Brent

Fair enough. Was the multi ???? that made me think otherwise.

Perhaps. It really was just me being curious though. I figured you just misunderstood. Tough to get people's intentions over the internet sometimes. Sorry about that.

Brent

[glokraw]

I left Reaper and went to the 'fridge, and stopped by the
coffee maker while I was up. I'm back.

[headquest]

If there is a focus on Reapers development other that throwing every minor feature anybody could ever want in there somewhere but totally ignoring major things like midi-editing and making things easy on the user, I've got no idea what it is.

That comes out of the community ethos that REAPER had from the start. At the time everyone who was into it raved about how responsive the developer was, etc.

One reason I had some doubts is that I've been on a few committees in my time, and "too many cooks" really do "spoil the broth" as the saying goes. Although not without fault, it's better imho where you have a small team of developers with real clarity of vision and originality - e.g. Ableton or Propellerhead - and users who choose to buy into the vision or not. That way there's a chance that the product will devlop with coherence and consistency.

With REAPER it was clear from the beginning that Justin had a fairly specific intention when he started out on it, that the growing community had a gazillion alternative visions, and that the community would prevail to a point where REAPER would become bloated and quite hard to use. Quite apart from the quote about how MIDI has outgrown what Justin could imagine... the reality is that REAPER is probably way beyond what Justin originally had in mind. Back in the day he started developing REAPER according to his own vision, interests and needs; but for some time now I'm guessing he devotes all his time to servicing the requests of the community.

[bullshark]

One reason I had some doubts is that I've been on a few committees in my time, and "too many cooks" really do "spoil the broth" as the saying goes. Although not without fault, it's better imho where you have a developer with real vision and originality - e.g. Ableton or Propellerhead - and users who choose to buy into the vision or not. That way there's a chance that the product will devlop with coherence and consistency.

I call bullshit on that. You think the original Steinberg programmers, to take the most notorious and partly the subject of this thread as an example, had a vision of what C5 would be today? I'd be willing to bet most of the original crew don't even work there anymore.

And listening to users inputs is NOT synonymous with designing by committee. Quite the opposite in fact, when you consider that other app are designed by committees of marketeers, lawyers and risk investors, most of whom know absolutely nothing about recording.

[headquest]

One reason I had some doubts is that I've been on a few committees in my time, and "too many cooks" really do "spoil the broth" as the saying goes. Although not without fault, it's better imho where you have a developer with real vision and originality - e.g. Ableton or Propellerhead - and users who choose to buy into the vision or not. That way there's a chance that the product will devlop with coherence and consistency.

....

And listening to users inputs is NOT synonymous with designing by committee. Quite the opposite in fact, when you consider that other app are designed by committees of marketeers, lawyers and risk investors, most of whom know absolutely nothing about recording.

Which of the two I mentioned - Ableton or Propellerhead - produce software that is designed by "committees of marketeers, lawyers and risk investors, most of whom know absolutely nothing about recording"...

No offence intended mate, but I think that suggestion is just silly.

I call bullshit on that. You think the original Steinberg programmers, to take the most notorious and partly the subject of this thread as an example, had a vision of what C5 would be today? I'd be willing to bet most of the original crew don't even work there anymore.

Well the thing with a company like Steinberg is that team members who lose the vision for the specific product can move on, and others will replace them. Hopefully the team continue to go in one direction with a clear vision and ethos. In fact Steinberg have been quite consistent over the years, and while they have certainly added a ton of features to their product line ovedr the last quarter century, their overall goals seem fairly similar so far as I can tell.

The difference with a one-man-developer like Justin - and Tracktion's Jules before him - is that if they lose the vision the main option is to either just abandon the product or sell the code to somebody else...

[deleted]

DELETED

[bullshark]

No offence intended mate, but I think that suggestion is just silly.

Not silly, entirely speculative, just like your two last post in this thread.

[headquest]

No offence intended mate, but I think that suggestion is just silly.

Not silly, entirely speculative, just like your two last post in this thread.

Speculative or not, I think your post was rather offensive towards the developers at Ableton/Propellerhead. Perhaps you didn't intend it as such, but I can't see how else you meant it TBH.

I can certainly assure you that the guys developing Live and Reason/Record are not at all as you misrepresent them. They are hugely committed to electronic music production in general and to the vision of their product in particular. There are people on this forum that know some of them of course, and on any professional music forum for that matter. In many if not most cases these developers are performing musicians who use their product in the real world. They also consult with their forum members about product development and testing, and with the professional artists who use their software. Now none of that is speculation: it's well known.

Note: I don't personally like everything these developers come up with (in fact I seriously dislike Record!) but that's not the point. I'm glad they have a collective vision and produce a coherent product - I think that makes them stand out. And I don't think your description of them as "committees of marketeers, lawyers and risk investors, most of whom know absolutely nothing about recording" is even remotely accurate