Is REAPER the current best long term choice?

[Danilo Villanova]

Reaper seems to me to be shareware that you have to spend all your time modding to make it usable, instead of writing music.

Right out of the gate, the plugin menu looks like it’s straight out of 1998, and it only gets worse from there.

Studio One, on the other hand takes zero setup time and your audio track is created with plugin-chain in place, and ready to record in one click. So if you’re more interested in getting on with making music than in customizing UIs and writing scripts, then Studio One is going to be a better time.

That’s not true at all, REAPER takes way less to open and you can assign keyboards to open instruments with FX chain included with one button, or setup default FX chains. Studio One does not add an FX chain automatically. You can set it up like in REAPER, but with way less flexibility. I have both and do this for a living. REAPER gets me there way faster.

[GaryG]

So if you’re more interested in getting on with making music than in customizing UIs and writing scripts, then Studio One is going to be a better time.

I found the frequent crashing got in the way of making music more than a little customization.

[digitalboytn]

So if you’re more interested in getting on with making music than in customizing UIs and writing scripts, then Studio One is going to be a better time.

I found the frequent crashing got in the way of making music more than a little customization.

Get rid of the porn on your computer

Reaper runs perfectly in my world and so much more efficiently than any other DAW out there...

[Unaspected]

So if you’re more interested in getting on with making music than in customizing UIs and writing scripts, then Studio One is going to be a better time.

I found the frequent crashing got in the way of making music more than a little customization.

It's been rock solid here. Found one bug after hours of audio editing but couldn't work out what had actually happened. The horizontal scroll function seemed to break in some way. Never managed to replicate it and the file wasn't corrupted so no issues.

There's no need for customising visuals or functionality if you don't want to. The potential is there if required - and the latest skin doesn't look that bad. I know it all used to look horrible.

I've customised a few things when relaxing - like now. So Reaper might also help limit forum posts.

[Danilo Villanova]

The only crashes I get are with Sforzando, sometimes while changing libraries. I solved it bu using track templates. Other than that, I push it pretty hard with plugins that crash Studio One. Sometimes I can put Ozone advanced in the Master at 64 bit buffer lol

[jinotsuh]

OP, to answer your question . . . the short answer is, No. The long answer is, No, it isn't.

As for Studio One, I have found since 2015 when I started using it after ditching REAPER and SONAR Platinum, that it has been with a doubt the most stable DAW I have used, partly the reason why I am still using it. For me it has been ROCK solid, throughout 3,4,5 and now 6, that'll do me

[digitalboytn]

There's no need for customising visuals or functionality if you don't want to. The potential is there if required...

It's a bit like having a race car...

You can get in there and tune it up a little if you want to,but it's going to go like a rocket anyway ..

I've tweaked a few things to get the workflow the way I want it,but I've barely even scratched the surface...

Like I said before,I use a few templates and spend my time making music,not farting around with things that have no bearing on the musical output...

I am amazed at the efficiency of Reaper...

I compared a few identical projects in Studio One Pro v4.5 and Reaper was always running around 65 % more efficiently than Studio One...

I'm not trying to convert anyone who is happily making music with their preferred DAW and I used to be one of those peeps too...

Reaper was the poor cousin that we were too embarrassed to talk about...

One day I decided to sit down and spend some time getting to understand it and I'm so glad I did

[umd]

Using Mixcraft, I'm beginning to feel it's limits, mostly with how (not well) it handles large projects. I love the simplicity of it and overall I'm happy with it, but I'm tired of it performing like I'm using a PC from 2002 when using lots of tracks with lots of plugins.

SO...I'm slowly looking to introduce something else. I'm trying out Studio One and it's okay so far, but I'm seeing a lot on Reaper and honestly my gut feels better about Reaper.

I haven't read many downsides yet about Reaper, being stable and low cpu are big ups for me. I may get into the customization and personalization features, especially with tweaking it's interface. I really just want something simple and intuitive.

I guess I just feel like whatever daw I pick and invest myself into, I want it to last and I want the community to be growing and the company to be on the rise. And from what I'm seeing, Reaper is that.

I do not work mostly with synths. I use them but only lightly, I'm more into traditional composing, instrumental, piano, pads, etc. Reaper may not be the best choice for this type of composition, but that is also something I guess I'm asking about here. Is the piano roll/midi editing one of the best with Reaper?

I do want something more traditional, basic, yet on the rise and has the potential to be the "go to" daw a decade from now, with a large community base and great support hub and continuing features and updates.

Simple ( and fast ) to install, no activation, great backward compatibility, cross platform, full of features, stable ( for me ), good price. Complex ( yes, it has to be with all the features it has ) but I don't need to learn every feature, I just use what I need. For me it was a no brainer.

[GaryG]

So if you’re more interested in getting on with making music than in customizing UIs and writing scripts, then Studio One is going to be a better time.

I found the frequent crashing got in the way of making music more than a little customization.

It's been rock solid here. Found one bug after hours of audio editing but couldn't work out what had actually happened. The horizontal scroll function seemed to break in some way. Never managed to replicate it and the file wasn't corrupted so no issues.

There's no need for customising visuals or functionality if you don't want to. The potential is there if required - and the latest skin doesn't look that bad. I know it all used to look horrible.

I've customised a few things when relaxing - like now. So Reaper might also help limit forum posts.

I think I phrased that badly; I meant Studio One crashed a lot for me which was more of a hinderance to me than tweaking Reaper a little.

I've had one or two repeatable crashes with certain plugins but other than that Reapers been rock solid for me. I do sometimes spend too much time tweaking themes but that's not because I have to to be able to work, more like a secondary hobby.

[jamcat]

Simple ( and fast ) to install, no activation

They say those first 2 minutes are the most important you will ever spend with your DAW.

Even more important than the hours you will spend customizing it.

[syntonica]

Reaper seems to me to be shareware that you have to spend all your time modding to make it usable, instead of writing music.

Right out of the gate, the plugin menu looks like it’s straight out of 1998, and it only gets worse from there.

Studio One, on the other hand takes zero setup time and your audio track is created with plugin-chain in place, and ready to record in one click. So if you’re more interested in getting on with making music than in customizing UIs and writing scripts, then Studio One is going to be a better time.

I always have to delete all the tracks the DAW so helpfully creates on starting a new project. They always have zero to do with what I'm doing.

As for Reaper, I think it's matured to the point where you install it followed by a new menu and a skin and you're ready ro go. The drawung system no longer seems to have the little glitches which made roll-your-own skins act kind of dodgy. The JS plugins are serviceable, so all you really need is a couple of synths. I do think it helps if you've had some previous DAW experience, though. It's not built to be beginner friendly like most of the pricier DAWs. But if you're coming from FLS, it probably seems a revelation in minimalism.

[Guenon]

Whether it is the best long term choice depends on what your long term goals are. That might sound really obvious, but that's what it boils down to, anyway. For me, these days Reaper has been my main choice for linear production workflows for a good number of years now.

For my needs, Studio One was lacking; I loved the streamlinedness of it all, but in the end it prevented me from doing everything I wanted to do, especially on the technical side of things. In turn, I've considered myself lucky that I chose Reaper right after that. The choice did come from experience and knowing what I need, but still, in around 2015-2016 I couldn't foresee how much of a de facto go-to DAW Reaper would actually become in the games industry. Sound and music in interactive contexts, that's my jam, and if that happens to be your long term interest as well, then at least in that case I wholeheartedly recommend checking out Reaper.

You just need to be experienced enough to know what you want, be familiar with the methods you will be applying in your production workflow, and start out by configuring this DAW accordingly. Don't half-ass that part, put in some serious time (don't just go "ohh this and this action works all wonky out of the box", and then begrudgingly keep using everything like that; that's missing the point if you go this way), learn it and configure it thoroughly. There's an absolutely terrific amount of power in there, and it's extremely stable and efficient (at least on a dedicated DAW system; personally I run it literally continuously on my main workstation for weeks sometimes - as in, computer uptime and Reaper running constantly with projects loaded), more than is usually realized even, but yeppp you need to put in the work to make it work for you.

In my opinion, Reaper isn't the optimal "first DAW", although it gets recommended a lot for that (I'd recommend something like Studio One) - or the optimal "I just want to make music, the less I need to directly deal with technology the better" DAW. Note I'm not saying it's not the optimal "hobbyist DAW" because there are many kinds of hobbyists. Anyway, these days it has specialized stuff available like integration with FMOD and Wwise, things like that, and that's just scratching the surface. For example, it offers so much in project handling and audio rendering pipelines/automation/batching and so on, that it's pretty crazy. Personally, I wrote an in-house importer for it, which encapsulates material straight from the project into specific types of custom audio objects that are used inside a game engine.

The most important thing, though: while receiving comments on preferences for and against (of anything, not just a particular DAW or working environment or whatever), take everything with a grain of salt, this included, and just note, okay, something has or hasn't worked in an individual case, which ever the background and workflow and expectations etc. of that person might have been. And if something someone says resonates with you, then in any case try it yourself and see how it works for you when you actually use it yourself and make it your own.

Good luck

[Michael L]

And if something someone says resonates with you, then in any case try it yourself and see how it works for you when you actually use it yourself and make it your own.

Jacob Collier (5 Grammys) says "Reaper is the best DAW"
(2019 Qwest masterclass, La Petite Halle, Paris)

I prefer MuLab because it is both modular and non-linear, and also MetaSynth.

[Unaspected]

There's no need for customising visuals or functionality if you don't want to. The potential is there if required...

It's a bit like having a race car...

I think I phrased that badly; I meant Studio One crashed a lot for me which was more of a hinderance to me than tweaking Reaper a little.

I've had one or two repeatable crashes with certain plugins but other than that Reapers been rock solid for me. I do sometimes spend too much time tweaking themes but that's not because I have to to be able to work, more like a secondary hobby.

Ah. Sorry. And yeah. There's a whole world of Walter out there.

Simple ( and fast ) to install, no activation

They say those first 2 minutes are the most important you will ever spend with your DAW.

Even more important than the hours you will spend customizing it.

I do think it helps if you've had some previous DAW experience, though. It's not built to be beginner friendly like most of the pricier DAWs. But if you're coming from FLS, it probably seems a revelation in minimalism.

It likely does. I've always opened DAWs with a purpose - already knowing what I need to do. And Reaper is something I had to ease myself into using: Took a couple of goes before fully switching to only using Reaper. My previous two of choice being FL Studio and Pro Tools. Also have a friend who started with Pro Tools as his first DAW and tried Reaper once - he switched straight away and hasn't looked back.


Also very much agree with Guenon's post. Many likely use Reaper for different purposes and have some transferable experience from working with other DAWs. Though I think it says a lot regarding those of us who have gone through such a process to ultimately settle on Reaper.

[NAD]

One thing that you have to keep in mind about REAPER is that it's for the most part it's just two developers working on the actual software and a handful of other contributors doing other stuff. You get the impression that they really don't care about making money. Presumably, Justin is still swimming in winamp cash (not that that's any of my business) and Schwa seems to be semi retired from what I can tell (also none of my business). Anyway, and as a result they don't seem to be focused on making REAPER competitive. They just do it because they like it, I guess. As far as I'm aware, I don't think any other DAW is run by such a small "boutique" operation. That by itself makes REAPER unique, although whether that's good or bad is up to you. I personally think that's very cool and I like it that way, but some may prefer to use software that's backed by a large company and that's fine.