Polarized opinions about Reaper

[ariston]

Just to chime in - I use Ableton for decidedly electronic music and Reaper for "traditional'" recording and mixing. I don't customize, I don't dig in, I don't spend hours bending Reaper to my will. Like braj said, you can add things as you go and when you need them. And that's the thing: whenever I needed something, some convenient shortcut, some specific editing, weird routing, whatever, Reaper gave me a cheerful "hi there" and made it possible.

[braj]

It seems to me Reaper is kind of mythic: people hate it based on fantasy and ignorance. I can definitely see preferring something else, but the amount of ire and rage leveled against it can be really damn silly. I get if some Reaper fans have been overboard about it and annoying, but that's on them, and the same can be said for other DAWs and most products, ideologies, or whatever. The psychoanalysis some people give to Reaper users is pretty appalling.

[Jace-BeOS]

Early on, the vocal proponents of Reaper round here tended to be, erm, well, a little overenthusiastic. Think of everything pejorative associated with 'fanboy.' Reaper was the best thing ever, everyone who disagreed would eventually wind up seeing the light and using it anyway yada yada yada. The more obnoxious end of proselytising, to be honest, which of course immediately put people's backs up.

In the end, that's become saner, because Reaper won its subsequent audience share on being a decent solution, not because of the early adopters who insisted at the drop of a hat it was the bestest solution ever ever ever. There was even an odd 'Im the rebel who knows the real truth' vibe to it; I actually remember one guy who managed to roll it into his obvious inferiority complex regarding what he kept referring to as 'conservatoires,' and mainstream studios.

So it basically became a standing joke that you couldn't ask a question round here without someone proposing Reaper as the solution. Technically, though it isnt that universal a solution, and its implementations arent always best-of-breed, and its feature set tend to be the iteration of other developer's ideas, etc etc so that kind of thing wasnt well received in this community, that had a pretty broad spectrum of DAW users. Way back then it had fairly atrocious MIDI editing for example, and was hardly a viable replacement for someone MIDI-centric, but that didnt stop the reccomendation.

And as I say, that put people's backs up; the polarisation came, not Reaper-versus-whatever, but Reaper-fan-versus-whoever. That's mostly a thing of the past now, though, but the Reaper-in-every-thread joke remains.

As a bit of software, the mixer-centricity and second-class track controls, the focus on surface UI (skinning) instead of useful interaction (routing or plugin interfaces), things like that are still my main bones of contention regarding useage. But it was more the narrowminded of the 'evangelists' that put me off in the first place.
These days, though, there's at least one theme that isnt bloody awful. We've come a long way baby.

This covers what put me off it. I tried it out, after all the fanboy hype, and didn't like the GUI (regardless of skin; it was behavior and design of bitmaps, not just colors). i deleted it and moved on, but continuously saw people hyping it, especially being dismissive of legit GUI and usability complaints ("you can skin it however you want!" was a common ignorant dismissal of legit criticisms). It reminded me of Linux evangelists (and i have some tolerance for that, due to my former life as a BeOS evangelist, but the arrogant dismissal of legit complaints really put me off).

Today, i just ignore it. I don't have hate for it. Reaper is on Windows, I'm on Mac OS. Maybe if i had never left Windows, i might consider trying to move my Sonar projects to today's Reaper (in light of the termination of Cakewalk). Or, maybe I'd grudgingly buy the expensive upgrade to Cubase from my v4.5 i abandoned almost immediately for similar reasons (the GUI and menus)...

[braj]

Reaper is on Macs too, FWIW.

[Jace-BeOS]

Reaper is on Macs too, FWIW.

Thanks for that note. I was sort of aware of this, but i really like Logic, so...

[braj]

Reaper is on Macs too, FWIW.

Thanks for that note. I was sort of aware of this, but i really like Logic, so...

Logic is such a bargain too, I use Express when I had a Mac, I can't argue with your preference. I guess they don't sell that version anymore.

[ghettosynth]

Just to chime in - I use Ableton for decidedly electronic music and Reaper for "traditional'" recording and mixing. I don't customize, I don't dig in, I don't spend hours bending Reaper to my will. Like braj said, you can add things as you go and when you need them. And that's the thing: whenever I needed something, some convenient shortcut, some specific editing, weird routing, whatever, Reaper gave me a cheerful "hi there" and made it possible.

My experience is similar. Unless you count choosing a few options in the configuration that are non-standard, I don't customize either.

[braj]

I also use the default theme, frankly most of the themes available are atrocious, and the ones that I like like White Tie's are for huge screens. The default is clear and economical.

[VariKusBrainZ]

All I'm seeing here

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apologetics

[ghettosynth]

This covers what put me off it. I tried it out, after all the fanboy hype, and didn't like the GUI (regardless of skin; it was behavior and design of bitmaps, not just colors). i deleted it and moved on, but continuously saw people hyping it, especially being dismissive of legit GUI and usability complaints ("you can skin it however you want!" was a common ignorant dismissal of legit criticisms).

Yeah, I agree. For the longest while I was sticking to the 3.x theme as I hate the icon design in the latest versions. I gave up precisely because I like to minimize how much crap I have to do to configure things and they took the 3.x theme out of the latest versions.

I have tried some of the external skins. I have not found a one that didn't have something annoying about it that almost approached bug status from my point of view.

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

I have tried to use Reaper several times but have never bounded with it. For me it is like the LEGO version of DAWs. When other DAWs adds features they integrate it in the UI and adds the buttons in the most obvious place and when you have learned it you know where you can find it.
In Reaper you often get a function made available but have to add it to the interface by adding a buttom, choose an icon and bind an action/macro or whatever.
This just kills the usability of the DAW for me. Yes it is customizable but this also means that Reaper does not look the same or work the same way on two computers.
I believe this is part of the love hate relation people have to Reaper. I imagine that they who just want to install a daw and have all functions placed in the UI ready to get used just don’t like Reaper because you will have to spend some time to customize the user interface in Reaper before it feels right or usable.
My observation is that people who like to be able to customize UI and put down some time on that loves Reaper.
Personally I hate tinkering with a programs interface. I prefere using a DAW over the years and learn the UI and just use it. The functions is always on the same place in ghe UI, even after a reinstall or on another computer etc.
Functionality wise Reaper is up there with the best and maybe it is the best but the UI is just killing it, for me.

Reaper fans don’t seem to understand that not everyone wants to spend time tinkering with programs userinterface. ”You can make it appear just how you want...” is often mentioned. Well, some people just might think that maybe a professional UI designer is more competent to implement functionality into a GUI than them self.
When actually programming functionality into the GUI the DAW company can also use more creative ways to implement features than a row of square buttons with a script attached to them. Makes the whole UI experience more inspiring and often more intuitive to use.

If they kept the customization options as is but also built a more fully functional UI out of the box I believe Reaper would be even more loved. Functionality wise Reaper probably kills most other DAWs but the user experience is lacking big time. IMO
I already hear the Reaper fanbase voices sayin ”but you can customize it however...”.
Well I don’t want to
Just my personal opinion and thoughts on Reaper. I have a license and have supported them by updating it regulary.
Respect to them who use Reaper but it is not for everyone. Just like Cubase is not for everyone or Live or Logic or.......

This, this, and...THIS ^^^

Having a great core functionality/design/ui out-of-the-box is the right way to get people up 'n' running. Then, of course, the more flexible/customisable you can allow it to be, after the fact, the better.

Any time I have been tempted to really get into Reaper, I have been put off by a couple of things: Firstly, the themes are too superficial/cosmetic, and the minute one dives into the submenus etc., it all starts to look a bit too 'Windows 98' (even more depressing as a Mac user ). It's not that I need a flashy gui (I've used a ton of different Daw's, and not had an issue with any one of the interfaces), but Reaper feels like a disjointed mess; more so, when you consider everyone's different take/offering on what they feel is the best core functionality.

The bigger problem, which does extend from the first, is that as a Reaper newbie I had no idea which of the millions of presented options would end up being useful to me. As someone who has used many Daw's it might seem to make sense to bring your normal workflow with you, and customise to those specific ideas. While that is an option, I much prefer the idea of a new workspace presenting a workflow concept that is new to me, and with options that might inspire me in ways that would not have been possible had i just tried to bend the workspace to make it act like Logic, for example (Of course, with the 'convincing' Logic Pro theme ). I'd imagine this issue be even more problematic for a Daw virgin

[ghettosynth]

The bigger problem, which does extend from the first, is that as a Reaper newbie I had no idea which of the millions of presented options would end up being useful to me. As someone who has used many Daw's it might seem to make sense to bring your normal workflow with you, and customise to those specific ideas. While that is an option, I much prefer the idea of a new workspace presenting a workflow concept that is new to me, and with options that might inspire me in ways that would not have been possible had i just tried to bend the workspace to make it act like Logic, for example (Of course, with the 'convincing' Logic Pro theme ). I'd imagine this issue be even more problematic for a Daw virgin

Yep! But, this is why I never recommend Reaper as a first DAW but that I think that it's the best second DAW, period. Over time, you learn these things. I've been using Reaper since about 2009 but it took a long time before it was something that I used as much as I do now. It's still not my first DAW, but there are things that it just does better. Routing is one of them and so it's become my first choice for mastering and some mixing tasks. Another thing that it does really well on Windows is integrating other programs without using rewire. The virtual ASIO driver is fantastic.

If you do any kind of contemporary "concrete" music, e.g., assembled from clips in a linear form, it really stands out because you can put FX chains on each clip. I do a lot of stuff like this so Reaper is my first DAW for ambient stuff unless I'm constructing from loops and then I prefer Live, but, usually, Live rearouted into Reaper. Then I loop with live and use Reaper as a multitrack recorder.

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

Yep! But, this is why I never recommend Reaper as a first DAW

Yes! But many do. And, at the price, it makes sense to recommend that someone new to the game not invest a ton of money from the outset.

Of course, it's important to also point out that there are many newbies who are going to get on fine with it. I'd imagine having no expectations playing a part in this.

If you do any kind of contemporary "concrete" music, e.g., assembled from clips in a linear form, it really stands out because you can put FX chains on each clip.

I used to lust after Samplitude for that feature. Luckily, similar functionality is now also incorporated into Logic

The last time I downloaded Reaper to demo was yesterday. After seeing the spectral editing functionality referenced in another thread on kvr, I thought to give it another chance. That didn't last long

One of the reasons I still try is that I may end up having to use it, in the not-too-distant future. Current life situation, combined with Apple's current pricing, are hinting at a Windows laptop for me when my current Macbook dies. I may be stuck with my 'Live' intro license, and a copy of Reaper.I'm sure, if that day comes, that I will get used to it

[ghettosynth]

Yep! But, this is why I never recommend Reaper as a first DAW

Yes! But many do. And, at the price, it makes sense to recommend that someone new to the game not invest a ton of money from the outset.

Of course, it's important to also point out that there are many newbies who are going to get on fine with it. I'd imagine having no expectations playing a part in this.

I get that and I wouldn't suggest that anyone "invest a ton of money" without some evaluation. Reaper is very gentle there. I might have misinterpreted the license agreement when I started with it, but, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it if I did, but, I left it installed in demo mode for a couple of years before I bought it. I think that it's perfectly fair to answer the question "still evaluating?" with yes, if, in fact, you are still evaluating. I bought the 3.x/4.x licence on a sale at the end of 3.x and I upgraded with a new license sometime after 5.x was out for a while because I didn't need it at first.

I'm not convinced that it's such a great value at $225 if I'm honest. I think that part of what makes it a great DAW is that it is cheap for hobbyists. So, I guess, in a sense, I'm saying that my recommendation is also qualified by that. I think that it's the best second DAW for anyone who is not making a living with music. If you have to buy the high priced license, something else might be better for you.

One of the reasons I still try is that I may end up having to use it, in the not-too-distant future. Current life situation, combined with Apple's current pricing, are hinting at a Windows laptop for me when my current Macbook dies. I may be stuck with my 'Live' intro license, and a copy of Reaper.I'm sure, if that day comes, that I will get used to it

I think that the trick is to have it installed and find one or two of the things that it is strong in and use it for just those things. For example, it's my goto for testing new plugins because it loads so quickly.

Something that I use it for now, which is a bit convoluted and not something that I would recommend for most people is that combined with a private ninjam server it makes an awesome scratch/idea recorder linear recorder.

The idea is that you need a private ninjam server as an endpoint for the ninjam client, but that nobody else can use. You can comple/run the public code on os/x, but I currently use it on linux. In any case, the private server's only role in this is to be an endpoint for the client, it's not actually used to share music with others or any of the other features that ninjam is used for. So, you can even run the server on the same machine.

Now, I setup the ninjam client to have four tracks each coming from a different pair of inputs on an 8-channel track. I turn monitoring off on that track, I don't actually want to hear the ninjam client. I then can add new tracks of an instrument that I want to work with, maybe a Reaktor instrument or something. It's typically something that I'm just going to noodle with for a while, maybe hours. I route the output of this track to one of the ninjam client track pairs. Now, if I connect to my private server, it doesn't matter what I do in the local session, all of the audio that I create is captured in a second ninjam-session project that I can later reload when I'm done noodling.

This allows me the freedom to just experiment, looping things, adding new instruments, whatever, sometimes I fiddle with Reaktor for hours, and as long as I'm connected to the server, and I've routed to the ninjam track, it's all captured linearly in the second project.

This frees me from having to think about whether I want to actually record something, but also, from even having the transport running, which when using Reaktor, is often something that I want to just start and stop.

I've tried to find a setting which treats normal Reaper projects in this way, but I haven't found it, doesn't mean that it's not there, but this works great. I get a lot of material out of those exploration settings. At any time if I think that I would like to separate what I've been doing from what I'm going to do I just disconnect the ninjam session and then reconnect. That step causes reaper to create a new session project.

Combined with the cool little midi-capture utility that's available for os x, it works great. All of my audio gets captured by Reaper, and my midi gets captured by that little utility.

[sjm]

I think a big part of the whole equation is this:

Here's the thing: I don't (or better said, didn't) particularly like the way Reaper was set up out of the box. And I don't particularly feel like learning how to customise it

In other words, it's *personal*

So for some people, whether you like Reaper is more a combination of a) HOW you make music and b) what you personally find to be intuitive - rather than whether or not you are a Tinkerer/Cheapskate Type. At least this is the case for me, for sure!

Yes, and also how much music you've made on the computer before. It's hard to unlearn 10 years of habits. But as a newbie, you don't come with that baggage. I'd been using trackers (and notation software) for years before I ever used a modern DAW. FL Studio made sense to me, because I was used to the pattern paradigm. It freed me from many of the constraints of trackers while using a workflow that made sense to me, and the piano roll just clicked. A lot of people find the pattern thing highly confusing, which is understandable if you come from a different background.

I feel for the Sonar users who at some point will need to migrate to another platform. Whatever platform they choose is going to feel cumbersome at the beginning.


I quite liked Reaper for audio recordings, and used it a few times to record practice sessions. I just didn't click with it when I started diving deeper. At least back when I tried it (many years ago), the piano roll was pretty meh OOTB for my needs.