How does REAPER do it?

[Astromann]

[koolkeys]

I didn't even read everything he said. I have no idea who he is or even specifically why he was banned. And I'm not discussing the content of his posts even. I know there was religious conversation, but you went back like 15 pages to find that and tried to bring it back up for no apparent reason. I just don't get the purpose.
Brent

Ok OK Sorry about that!! But to be honest you are coming across a bit like a cop or a self appointed judge...and assuming things that are not at all correct.

Think what you want about me. Seems a bit hypocritical for you to tell somebody how to post and then say that about me when I observe it.

But you went back like 15 pages to find that

This is where you are totally off track tho....I read the thread from the beginning...thats the way you do it (from page 1)...most people dont read backwards you know.
So I posted an answer when I saw his posts 7 pages later (is that a good enough explanation for you?)
I did not read from the end and page back to find something suitably off topic or whatever it is you are suggesting.

Ok, smarty. I meant that it's been 15 pages since that was posted, and the conversation moved on. What's the purpose of bringing it back up? It shouldn't have been brought up in the first place in a Reaper thread. So why bring it back up? He's banned. It's over, eh?

and tried to bring it back up for no apparent reason.

See this is where you are (conciously or unconciously) putting yourself in the role of "judge"
Now correct me if I am wrong but the way you are putting it is that I was reading from the last page and then whimsically decided to "try" and bring that post in for no real reason other than maybe disrupt "your" current theme...well thats definitely slightly accusing.
You see the way you used the word "tried" suggests some kind of purpose or even ulterior motive or something...which is way off track.
Read your post with an open mind and you will see what I mean

I know completely what I meant, so no need for you to rewrite it for me. You can think I'm trying to be a judge if you want. No harm done to me. Just observing. Not doing anything you weren't doing by bringing it back up in the first place.

And stop the silliness of pretending that I said you read BACK into the thread. Of course you read it from the beginning. I just wondered what purpose there was for dragging it back into a thread that wasn't about that, and had moved on. Take that personally if you want, and pretend that I'm somehow twisting your words if you want. But you are reading way too far into my post.

Brent

[Hink]

HAHA...yeah seriously. Reaper this Reaper that...it only got to be where its at because there's a free version. I guarantee if from day one it would have cost a certain amount, it wouldn't be as popular. It's a piece of shit work environment and those who get anything done with it more than likely write self indulgent noise.

Wow!! What incredible insight!
I'm waiting with bated breath to hear one of your obviously masterful pieces of musical work?

I have to say that as much as he tries to instigate he is very talented and his work is often masterful pieces I woudn't give him the time of day, but I woudn't want you to end up eating crow.

[Astromann]

[koolkeys]

I'm not telling you how to post...you asked what my response had to do with anything, I replied nicely...even apologized.

I didn't tell you how to post either. But you claim that I did. I asked what the purpose was of bringing something like that back up. Your reasoning of "that's as far as I had read and I didn't realize he was banned and the conversation had moved on" would have been a perfect answer, and would have avoided all this. But instead, you made assumptions about my post and made up your own version of what I said.

That wasn't enough so you took it further and asked why I posted a reply to an earlier post and said "I tried" to bring up an earlier post.
As if you have the right and the thread is yours or something.
So I said you are trying to act like a self appointed judge and you are...simple as that.

Is it? Just because you say so, eh? You told the guy how YOU thought he should post and act. I just asked why you brought it up. Nice job at twisting what was actually said though.

Ok, smarty. I meant that it's been 15 pages since that was posted, and the conversation moved on. What's the purpose of bringing it back up? It shouldn't have been brought up in the first place in a Reaper thread. So why bring it back up? He's banned. It's over, eh?

I explained that...I did not read to the last page...my answer came thru to the last page, I read to page seven or so at that time.

And that would have been sufficient, no? Why create more out of my post than what I actually said?

So why bring it back up?

You know what...I am not answerable to you...you are not "lord of the thread"

More self-created drama from you, based on something I never said.

And stop the silliness of pretending that I said you read BACK into the thread. Of course you read it from the beginning.

Well then perhaps you could figure this out, instead of assuming again, as I explained that above... I did not read to page 15.
Happy now?

As I said above, that's not how you responded.

I just wondered what purpose there was for dragging it back into a thread that wasn't about that, and had moved on.

For Gods sake...the whole current topic is off topic, in fact most of the thread is off topic, if I want to post an answer to something that is also off topic...I can and will.
And I dont really have to explain to you why...as I have done.

I don't care if you explain it or not. But at least quote me properly and don't make something out of my post that isn't there. YOU were the one who told the guy how you thought he should post and act. I asked why you brought it back up. Nothing more.

Take that personally if you want, and pretend that I'm somehow twisting your words if you want. But you are reading way too far into my post.
Brent

Defend as much as you like...actually I dont have to pretend anything.
You asked for answers, I replied...you continued with a smart arse attitude...now you are getting this.

[/quote]Getting what? A fabricated version of what I said?

Go back and read my post again. I asked what the purpose was of bringing it back up. Why? Because that's the type of topic that gets threads thrown straight into HPC most of the time. So I asked. Everything else you CLAIM that I said is of your own imagination, not truth. It seems to me(maybe incorrectly) that you are taking this all personal, but it never was. Just stop claiming I said things I didn't.

I never once told you what to post or not to post(though you did to that guy). That's a fact. Of course, you are welcome to quote where I said such a thing.

Brent

[Astromann]

[koolkeys]

Your reasoning of "that's as far as I had read and I didn't realize he was banned and the conversation had moved on" would have been a perfect answer, and would have avoided all this.

Ok I'll accept that

And this all could have ended there. Perhaps some misunderstandings have caused it to go much further than it had to?

Is it? Just because you say so, eh? You told the guy how YOU thought he should post and act. I just asked why you brought it up. Nice job at twisting what was actually said though.

You just asked? OK I said this exactly
"Perhaps then you could try adopting a little humility"
Sounds like a suggestion not a demand or an order of any kind.
If you bothered to read his posts you may have seen why I even said this much.
I didn't twist your words any more than you are trying to twist mine, by trying to make out I was telling him how to be.

I did read a little of what he posted. I'm not saying that he was right or wrong to post them. But you said "Perhaps then you could try adopting a little humility when posting to others...TBO...some of your earlier posts are pretty over the top."

So I asked why you brought it up. That's it. I definitely didn't say what you could or could not post. Not even close.

It seems to me(maybe incorrectly) that you are taking this all personal, but it never was. Just stop claiming I said things I didn't.

Well perhaps its your vocabulary or something...when you use words like "drag this back" and "tried to" it has a certain vibe to it..and yes I take offense to your attitude on this.

Then you need to stop taking it so seriously. It's the internet, full of misunderstandings because you can't hear tone of voice or inflections. That's why discussions start becoming about semantics so much around here.

I never once told you what to post or not to post(though you did to that guy). That's a fact. Of course, you are welcome to quote where I said such a thing.
Brent

Bullshit...for one who is so guarded about being misquoted, misrepresented and so on, you certainly are misquoting me when it suits you.
I said "Perhaps then you could try adopting a little humility" since when is that telling him what to post or not to post.
I also said "TBO...some of your earlier posts are pretty over the top" that was a observation of how I thought his posts were, nothing more.
I am sure you have done this on occassion...and its not telling someone "what to post" either, its an observation nothing more.

So how did I in any way tell you what to post? I didn't. You made the claim that I was being a "judge" of what to post, so I pointed out that nowhere did I say anything of the sorts, and your words to him were everything you were accusing me of doing to you. To be honest, when I read your post and replied, I didn't even think you were telling him how to post. That only came to light when you accused me of doing that to you. Just like you, it was an observation on my part. You took it personally though, and there was no need to since it wasn't intended that way.

I'm going to chalk it up to a misunderstanding and the internet being a sucky place to have discussions. I would bet that if we had this discussion face to face, it would have been over before any of this started.

Cheers.

Brent

[Astromann]

To be honest, when I read your post and replied, I didn't even think you were telling him how to post. That only came to light when you accused me of doing that to you. Just like you, it was an observation on my part. You took it personally though, and there was no need to since it wasn't intended that way.
I'm going to chalk it up to a misunderstanding and the internet being a sucky place to have discussions. I would bet that if we had this discussion face to face, it would have been over before any of this started.
Cheers.
Brent

Cool Brent...most of your posts regarding other subjects are pretty even handed, along with Lawrences and others.
However when you reply after my intial apology with...
"What purpose is there to bring it back up here? And he's banned, so he can hardly respond or defend himself."
That sounds like a non acceptance of my statements of why I responded in the first place, and further questioning of motives to me (thats why I said you are acting like a judge)...and...your exact words.(below)
"but you went back like 15 pages to find that and tried to bring it back up for no apparent reason."
See that is more or less a direct accusation, and assuming I read all 23 pages or so of the thread without even asking.
I did not read anything into this at all (as you accused me of)
I basically got accused of several things ..none of which were true, your whole stance came across right from the beginning as totally pugnacious, questioning and accusing to me TBH.
Never any questioning of your own attitude, only questioning of mine all the way..which made me think...how does that old saying go?
"its easier to see others faults than ones own"

My exact post to the guy when I had read to page 7,after the guy had ranted at several people was
"Perhaps then you could try adopting a little humility when posting to others...TBO...some of your earlier posts are pretty over the top"
That personally does not sound demanding to me or aggressive...especially when started with perhaps.

But!! we'll put it down to I must have misread your attitude on this
(although it seemed very clear to me) so lets chalk it up to a misunderstanding.
So anyway I'll delete my earlier posts.
Cheers
Harvey

[Astromann]

I woudn't give him the time of day, but I woudn't want you to end up eating crow.

Yeah...saying that others can only create self indulgent noise on Reaper is ...well lets just say...superior.
I have to say tho,right now most of my complex arrangement work is still done in Logic...but Reaper is really looking better and better, I like their direction, but I understand that not everyone else does.
And thanks for the advice...crow definitely wouldn't go down that well, as I am a vegetarian LOL!
Cheers

[captain caveman]

Yeah...saying that others can only create self indulgent noise on Reaper is ...well lets just say...superior.

I agree, I for one am capable of creating self indulgent noise in any host.

[Polybius]

I've been eyeballing this software for a while, not only because of the price, but also because of its controversial status. If a host software discussion generates into a 24-page DAW-WARS thread, there's gotta be something about it which you'll either love to bits, or hate to the bone. Alltough i must say, as an outsider/observer, most of the nay-sayers come off as a bit arrogant IMO. Almost as if they are mad at the fact that a $60 host can be as good as a $500 host.

Gonna check this out next weekend.

*puts on "don't fear the reaper", cue cowbell!*

[captain caveman]

Almost as if they are mad at the fact that a $60 host can be as good as a $500 host.

Audacity is a great DAW too and is free. The features that Reaper has that Audacity doesn't are just bloat anyway. You can see by the size of the installers - the Audacity installer is only 2.1MB, whereas Reaper's is nearly 100% more bloated at 4.1MB.

An complaints from Reaper fans about this post will be because a free host can be as good as a $60 host.

[strangedogs]

I'm actually using Reaper on my Windows 7 Laptop more and more although on my Mac it's still a BETA and flaky. Seems like a nice DAW.

[Stargard]

so let us sum it up:

on the "YES" side:

- Reaper is arguably (really?) the most efficient host out there

- The routing, API and workflow are great, once you get used to it

- The developers, community and the speed of development are unmatched

- If you like to tweak, you find an almost "modular" host to play with

- The developer doesn't need the money, but he likes the fun aspect of
creating something he, his team and the customers/users like and want to use




on the "NO" side:

- Reaper is different and not as easy to get into as say Live or FL

- Because it is different, you are less likely to join the team, unless you
are new to the DAW world

- Reaper is a DAW, accent on "Audio". The MIDI side is in some aspects still
not as advanced as the competition's. There are many interesting features
you will find in other big DAWs, but the way you access them is often
un-intuitive in Reaper. Example: awesome slicing for audio parts, but no
way to extract grooves from files and use them on other files in the
project? Give me a freaking break.

- It lacks originality and features that would really set Reaper apart from
other hosts

- It's 2010 ladies and gentlemen, Reaper could really look better than it does


All in all, Reaper is "up there", no doubt and in many ways the best DAW out there. But there is still a lot of room to improve, though looking at the
update/upgrade pace, in a year or two, Reaper will probably be ahead of the
competition. I find myself using Live and FL less and less, which I think
tells more about Reaper than the two other's mentioned.

I give it an A- on a good day and a B+ on a bad one.

[captain caveman]

- Reaper is a DAW, accent on "Audio". The MIDI side is in some aspects still
not as advanced as the competition's. There are many interesting features
you will find in other big DAWs, but the way you access them is often
un-intuitive in Reaper. Example: awesome slicing for audio parts, but no
way to extract grooves from files and use them on other files in the
project? Give me a freaking break.

The facts of the matter are that Reaper doesn't have the feature set of any of the hosts that have been around for many more years. Groove Quantize is a really useful standard feature (which is used for quantizing MIDI and audio or a combination of both btw) and all hosts have the "awesome slicing" capablilities of Reaper.

I'm sure Groove Quantize will be "awesome" too when it's implemented, although at the moment it is clearly unneccessary - like icons once were in the Nethertime-of which-we-do-not-dare-speak.

Reaper's really good and if you don't miss the missing extra features then you don't need them. The same goes for Audacity.