KVR Audio

do_androids_dream · Post by **do_androids_dream** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 5:06 pm

AegisPrime wrote:I think the size of the executables (assuming the product has decent functionality) is a good barometer of the efficiency/optimization of the code.

As much as that seems like something logical... it's complete rubbish.

AegisPrime · Post by **AegisPrime** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 5:12 pm

do_androids_dream wrote:As much as that seems like something logical... it's complete rubbish.

Care to elaborate why?

*Edit* for Reaper fans, I just got this article in my inbox

:

http://www.asoundeffect.com/the-rise-of-reaper/

do_androids_dream · Post by **do_androids_dream** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 5:36 pm

AegisPrime wrote:
do_androids_dream wrote:As much as that seems like something logical... it's complete rubbish.
Care to elaborate why?

*Edit* for Reaper fans, I just got this article in my inbox :

http://www.asoundeffect.com/the-rise-of-reaper/

The burden of proof should lie with your side of the argument. Think of all the apps you've ever used - ranging from a few mb's to gb's.. Are they vastly different experiences that correlate to the size of the app?

LawrenceF · Post by **LawrenceF** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 5:38 pm

AegisPrime wrote:I think the size of the executables (assuming the product has decent functionality) is a good barometer of the efficiency/optimization of the code.

I think that might only be true if the apps did the exact same things, otherwise, maybe apples to oranges. Does Reaper do all the same things as Cubase? Not really.

Not to say there's not some bloat in the Cubase code, there probably is, but that's not the only reason why the exe file is bigger.

We're mostly just guessing.

I look at my Nuendo 5 directory and the exe is 33mb, and it does a heck of a lot of things Reaper doesn't do, even with extensions and add-ons and scripts. I assume that code takes some space. Reaper is just "slim". I mean, it had a lost of plugins (JS especially) but none of the have GUI's or anything really so that saves a bit of size also I would guess.

Mutant · Post by **Mutant** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 5:45 pm

LawrenceF wrote:Does Reaper do all the same things as Cubase? Not really.

Can Cubase do at least half of the things REAPER can ?
Not really.

Because it will crash at the worst possible moment.

LawrenceF · Post by **LawrenceF** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 5:50 pm

Mutant wrote:
LawrenceF wrote:Does Reaper do all the same things as Cubase? Not really.
Can Cubase do at least half of the things REAPER can ?
Not really.

Not a daw war. More saying...

"If Reaper adds all of the post features Nuendo has to it's exe, it will get bigger also?"

It used to be 5mb. Now it's 8mb. 14mb on Mac X64. Stick around, one day it will probably be 20-30 mb ... if he keeps coding it for 20 years.

AegisPrime · Post by **AegisPrime** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 5:51 pm

do_androids_dream wrote:The burden of proof should lie with your side of the argument. Think of all the apps you've ever used - ranging from a few mb's to gb's.. Are they vastly different experiences that correlate to the size of the app?

Haha! Way to pass the buck! And yes, since you ask in my considerable experience of working with creative software since the ZX Spectrum days, the bigger the footprint of the application, the more likely it's been badly optimized.

And yes - that's a gross generalization but not an altogether unfair one I think. And I'm specifically referring to typical creative tools that have some kind of GUI and an extension or plugin system. Of course, as noted above it's frequently apples to oranges as feature-sets differ (Tracktion for instance is somewhat light on features in comparison to Reaper).

I will say I'm (clearly) not a programmer though so if we've got any here that want to weigh in on the technicalities of this debate then I'd love to know exactly *why* I'm wrong to have formed this general impression over the last 33 years

LawrenceF · Post by **LawrenceF** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 5:55 pm

Bitwig wins. It's exe file is 210kb.

Honestly guys, Cubendo has like, 3-4 separate mixers and 5-6 completely different midi editors. Don't you think that takes up some code lines?

do_androids_dream · Post by **do_androids_dream** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 6:11 pm

AegisPrime wrote:Haha! Way to pass the buck!

Well, it's not passing the buck because the burden of proof lies with whoever believes something different to the accepted norm. I haven't ever seen any evidence of this whole concept of app size or 'bloat' (whatever that means) actually slowing down an app. As regards the thread being about Reaper.. If anything Reaper's general 'feel' and day to day running (I use it everyday in my work) I would describe as clunky/clumsy/ropey at best. It's certainly the least slick feeling of all the DAW's even if it's among the best for cpu efficiency. It feels like it's been stuck together from lots of different parts rather than a cohesive organism.

Mutant · Post by **Mutant** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 6:12 pm

AegisPrime wrote:I will say I'm (clearly) not a programmer though so if we've got any here that want to weigh in on the technicalities of this debate then I'd love to know exactly *why* I'm wrong to have formed this general impression over the last 33 years

I'm not a programmer either, even though i coded like 20 small programs in C for my own use long time ago and a game or two in BASIC even longer time ago.

It is like building from individual atoms for machine code and assembly language versus building from grains of sand for any medium level language (for example C and all its variants) versus using LEGO blocks for high level language like BASIC.
The lower the level the more skills you need and the higher possibility of writing perfect code that can't be improved any further and doesn't have any unnecessary parts.

AegisPrime · Post by **AegisPrime** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 6:31 pm

Well, there's also the issue of cross-platform code - some applications seem to do it very elegantly (Tracktion uses JACE) and some don't. Also, I guess some operating systems (looking at you, Windows) need more support in terms of dlls, .net support and Visual C redistributions.

Undoubtedly there's a whole bunch of stuff that I'm completely ill-equipped to comment on that goes into making a robust and fully-featured application but it really seems to me that many of the incumbents (and I mean generally, think Photoshop, MS Office, 3D Studio Max) are far more bloated than they have any need to be.

I suspect this is partially due to large development teams spread across the globe and a tendency to make small, safe incremental changes rather than any pressing desire to create something efficient and optimized (again, CPUs are 'fast enough' and HD space is cheap...)

EvilDragon · Post by **EvilDragon** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 6:33 pm

AegisPrime wrote:Also, I guess some operating systems (looking at you, Windows) need more support in terms of dlls, .net support and Visual C redistributions.

Not necessarily. .NET or Visual C redistros are only needed IF the developer decided on using .NET or a VC version that uses DLLs that don't ship with vanilla Windows.

Reaper didn't do that so no such support is necessary.

Numanoid · Post by **Numanoid** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 6:37 pm

When is the reApp'er coming for iOS ?

chk071 · Post by **chk071** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 6:38 pm

LawrenceF wrote:I guess SAW Studio is amazing also, being 8 mb.

Hm, that's 0,31 € per kb then!

AegisPrime · Post by **AegisPrime** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 6:38 pm

EvilDragon wrote:Reaper didn't do that so no such support is necessary.

Yeah, I wasn't specifically referring to Reaper but I seem to have a bunch of plugins that won't run without their included Visual C Redists...

REAPER is amazing.