Reaper 6.0 Is Live

[jethrobull]

My name is Jethro and I'm a ReaperHolic.
I really like some of the new features. Especially the option to embed some of the ReaFX in the track and mixer channels.
Never been crazy about the default theme but the new one is definitely better.
Thanks.

[LawrenceF]

I don't understand how people don't understand that people don't understand. I for one find some things hard to understand and there are people that just don't understand that I don't understand. Then again, it could just be a misunderstanding. Would it be fair to say that if you like Reaper and the way it looks then that is great but you may not actually be able to convince anyone to have the same opinion as you have? Or maybe you can, but even if you can, what is the point? How is that of benefit to anyone? Isn't it just wasted time that could have been better spent using your favorite DAW?

Your reply above was (unwittingly I suppose?) to a guy who is likely one of the most hardcore and knowledgeable Reaper users out there. His opinion is not from a "hater" but from a longtime user. Afaik, Reaper -is- his favorite DAW.

Just to put that in proper context, EvilDragon, a longtime loyal Reaper user and professional sound designer wrote...

And then there are people who don't understand how people DON'T think it's ugly. Or inconsistent. Or lacking contrast. Or just objectively breaking design rules for no good reason.

I agree with him. There are inconsistencies and design issues but that obviously doesn't stop people from making good music with it. Those things are not mutally exclusive.

[Obsolete236871]

...while the other application requires one to "figuring out" basic functionality in a tedious process first because the application is designed so poorly that nothing makes immediate sense...

Yeah, that is called learning and practicing. It is quite rewarding as well.

Would you say that Ableton Live, Logic, Cubase or Studio One do not require some form of practice and learning before you are able to make proper use of them?

My point: a well designed application that takes into consideration the user experience aspect and not only the amount of functions that should be crammed into that software, would try to avoid inconsistencies and idiosyncrasies for the user who operates that software. Ableton Live has much less idiosyncrasies than say FL Studio, which still has much less idiosyncrasies than Reaper. A software that requires me to more often open menus or click the mouse to the exact same thing that would 'cost' me just one mouse click in a comparable software, is simply less well-designed regarding the user experience. Reaper has no clear operational paradigm, it just allows you to do anything you could think of, but not in a streamlined, well-thought out and straightforward manner.

Hence I prefer a DAW that is less hackable and customizable, but focusses on the core workflow for the task it's intended to. Another person, as I said, prefers to be able to access and customize every aspect and parameter of his DAW (for whatever reason) and might be less interested in the process of music composition itself. That's totally okay!

You make it sound as if Ableton users are all some dumb kids who just "play around with sounds" and if lucky by coincidence create a melody or even more comprehensive piece.

Well, how many Ableton users actually have any music theory training? Or any training in composition? Because if you are trying to create music without even the slightest understanding of it, then yes, you are just playing around with sounds and getting lucky.

Without even the basic understanding of how to construct music, it would be like trying to bake a cake without a recipe. You might know what goes in a cake but without the recipe, you have no idea of the quantities or the baking time so you will most likely end up with a mess.

Obviously, one should have a basic grasp of music theory irregardless of the DAW and approach you use, if you want to compose music that doesn't sound trivial or disharmonic. So that's not exclusive to Ableton Live. The essentials of music theory, such as the difference between major and minor scales and what keys the various scales are composed off are actually quite easy to understand to anyone investing a little time to study those basics. Also, regarding our discussion of Reaper: I don't think that Reaper users are more likely to have a thorough understanding of music theory then say Live, Logic or Cubase users. So what justifies a claim that Ableton Live users were all clueless kids, while Reaper users are all trained

[Obsolete236871]

Tycho uses Reaper elusively, and his albums are tight AF. Deadmau5 has been seen messing with it in one of his videos he posted a while back. Its so stupid to say pro artists dont use it. If you are into Metal, I bet lots of bands have used it to record albums. If you are into electronic music, well....theres Tycho for example.

You can always come up with one or two anecdotal examples, like the one of Deadmau5 having "messed with it in one of his videos" at some point some time ago or Tycho. But having "messed with it" doesn't mean they are consistenly and exclusively using Reaper.

You can always come up with such anecdotal pseudo-evidence. I'm sure there are popular artists out there creating great music exclusively on a Roland looping pedal. Does that mean that a Roland looping pedal is the best tool for music creation?

Even I as a Reaper hater can see how Reaper could have advantages in the mixing stage, not in the compositional stage when you use a lot of virtual instruments though.

So let's leave this anecdotal evidence and put things in perspective: how many professionally produced songs by career artists are really made in Reaper? My guess: less than 0.1 % ?

BTW: Metal is not music. Anyone can record heavily distorted guitars that sound like sh*t over a robotically static sounding generic metal drum loop and make disharmonic, horrible sounding 'music'.

[EvilDragon]

BTW: Metal is not music.

Well you're horribly wrong there, my friend (and plenty of it is quite harmonic rather than disharmonic... methinks you're singling out some certain underground genres to make it seem like you have a point, but you don't).

[elassi]

A software that requires me to more often open menus or click the mouse to the exact same thing that would 'cost' me just one mouse click in a comparable software, is simply less well-designed regarding the user experience.

Lol, you talk about Ableton Live that requires to insert a new track for every damned extra MIDI channel you want to route from your VST(i) to somewhere?

Oh, and hold your breath: I'm using both programs. Guess I'm an amateur Pro (or vice versa).

[Obsolete236871]

Lol, you talk about Ableton Live that requires to insert a new track for every damned extra MIDI channel you want to route from your VST(i) to somewhere?

Actually, it requires only one click of a shortcut-key and yes, an additional MIDI channel being the equivalent to an extra track is the best practice approach and the best DAWs follow this paradigm (Reaper obviously not, because it's not designed with best practice user experience in mind).

[Obsolete236871]

BTW: Metal is not music.

Well you're horribly wrong there, my friend (and plenty of it is quite harmonic rather than disharmonic... methinks you're singling out some certain underground genres to make it seem like you have a point, but you don't).

Evil, I have to admit this is mostly a matter of personal taste. I'm simply not so much into metal in general, even though I once recorded my former neigbours metal band and helped them, after they found out I had a home studio setup at my place...

[EvilDragon]

yes, an additional MIDI channel being the equivalent to an extra track is the best practice approach

No, it's not. One MIDI file contains up to 16 channels, that's how MIDI items in DAWs should be represented (MIDI item = MIDI file, not MIDI file = 16 MIDI items). In Live, you have no other way to use MIDI channels, which makes it worse than Reaper in that regard, whereas in Reaper you can do both ways - as in Live, and as it's supposed to be. MPE editing would be a chore if every channel were a separate track. Oh wait, Live doesn't support MPE at all, because it cannot record multiple MIDI channels to a single track at all, like a lot of other DAWs can (not all of them, though - S1 also doesn't support MIDI channels in a single item IIRC).

[ekral]

Well, how many Ableton users actually have any music theory training? Or any training in composition? Because if you are trying to create music without even the slightest understanding of it, then yes, you are just playing around with sounds and getting lucky.

Without even the basic understanding of how to construct music, it would be like trying to bake a cake without a recipe. You might know what goes in a cake but without the recipe, you have no idea of the quantities or the baking time so you will most likely end up with a mess.

I have to confirm this, there are so many middle-aged guys playing the same 4 beats loop again and again on the Youtube. FL Studio and trackers are great because you can play notes using a PC keyboard, that helps me a lot when I was young. I have quickly discovered, that I can play triads on white keys and it always sound good. I was able to combine bass line with triads and sometimes very basic lead melody in C major and A minor. And that was it, I could not do anything more complex without understanding music theory.

Reaper is the best for audio recording. I can very quickly add a new track, arm it for recording, record multiple takes and select the best take using just one hand while holding the bass guitar in the other hand. And the the recorded takes are frequency independent. I can freely switch different sound cards (usb audio 24-bit/192 kHz or built-in 16-bit / 48 kHz sound card) without any offline irreversible audio conversion.

[chk071]

Just my opinion, but... the GUI was already not the best in the world, and now, it's very ugly. For the reasons already stated here.

Anyway, the appeal of Reaper never was its GUI, it always was its flexibility, and the barebone approach. So, yeah, I guess the people who always used will hardly be scared off by the new GUI now. The people who want to get into, but can't, because of the GUI, will still not get into it.

Not sure why they don't give one of the talented alternative theme creators a chance, pay him, and have at least a halfway decent GUI then.

[elassi]

Actually, it requires only one click of a shortcut-key

That's not true and you know it. Forgot the two dropdown menus?

[Obsolete236871]

yes, an additional MIDI channel being the equivalent to an extra track is the best practice approach

No, it's not. One MIDI file contains up to 16 channels, that's how MIDI items in DAWs should be represented.

You mean one MIDI track being able to address 16 MIDI channels simultaneously or being able to address either one of 16 MIDI channels?

Since I guess we are talking about the former (the latter is obviously possible in Ableton and any other DAW), I never had a scenario which required it and I can not see how that would work? How would the DAW know which MIDI channel each one of multiple notes being played belongs to, if they all play within the same track? I have no issue admitting that I'm clueless regarding scenario, since I never faced a situation which required it!

[JJ_Jettflow]

Without even the basic understanding of how to construct music, it would be like trying to bake a cake without a recipe. You might know what goes in a cake but without the recipe, you have no idea of the quantities or the baking time so you will most likely end up with a mess.

thats a bad compare. because if you create a new cake, there is no recipe for it. music need touch the feel should not sound as existing and should be exiting. it is usefull to know music theory because it can reduce the trail time. At end music is trail and hear if it sound good for you.

But you can only bake a new and different cake if you have the understanding of how to bake a cake to begin with. Other than that , it would only be possible through trial and error.. something similar to Deadmouse's painful display in the instructional video ad where he is just throwing random notes together because he doesn't understand basic chord structure. Even when he was finished, it sounded like crap.

[magicmusic]

BTW: Metal is not music. Anyone can record heavily distorted guitars that sound like sh*t over a robotically static sounding generic metal drum loop and make disharmonic, horrible sounding 'music'.

I dont know what you think is metal. but there is symphonic metal or metal ballads that are not disharmonic. I like maybe only 5% of metal songs but i am happy to hear this 5%.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrJvKZNEh7g

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsKbtvGF4IY