REAPER's resource efficiency is unparalleled

[Windows]

The inserts/effects window is pretty crap to use, and there isn't a single theme out there that rivals Cubase; particularly the mixer. You can't customize enough of the mixer to make it enjoyable to use.

If you love Cubase Mixer that much, there is a Cubase Theme for Reaper out there that looks exactly like Cubase.

[whyterabbyt]

The inserts/effects window is pretty crap to use, and there isn't a single theme out there that rivals Cubase; particularly the mixer. You can't customize enough of the mixer to make it enjoyable to use.

If you love Cubase Mixer that much, there is a Cubase Theme for Reaper out there that looks exactly like Cubase.

Does it behave and function exactly like Cubase? If not, you missed his point.

[Windows]

The inserts/effects window is pretty crap to use, and there isn't a single theme out there that rivals Cubase; particularly the mixer. You can't customize enough of the mixer to make it enjoyable to use.

If you love Cubase Mixer that much, there is a Cubase Theme for Reaper out there that looks exactly like Cubase.

Does it behave and function exactly like Cubase? If not, you missed his point.

So?

[Medenka]

The OP's point was not about file size, but about efficiency when running projects. Two very different things. Reaper doesn't have any built-in instruments, its effects are as simple as possible. Other DAWs come as a full suite of instruments/effects. Of course they would be bigger in size! And about efficiency when running projects... IDK, I think most of that depends on the instruments/effects being used, not on the DAW itself. Haven't made 'scientific' experiments to compare, benchmarks, etc. There are other people for that. But what use is DAW efficiency, if one instance of e.g. the new Zebralette maxes out my computer's CPU (with some presets), so that audio starts to glitch?

One thing valuable about Reaper, to me, is that it still works on older Windows versions. I don't think they will ever drop compatibility with those! Whereas for e.g. Cubase, or Reason, etc. - they don't work on Windows 7. Exclamation mark! Why?! (OK, I know why but still...)

[Danilo Villanova]

The inserts/effects window is pretty crap to use, and there isn't a single theme out there that rivals Cubase; particularly the mixer. You can't customize enough of the mixer to make it enjoyable to use.

If you love Cubase Mixer that much, there is a Cubase Theme for Reaper out there that looks exactly like Cubase.

Does it behave and function exactly like Cubase? If not, you missed his point.

Yes, I missed his point.

The point is workflow matters. Cubase mixer is best in class and REAPER doesn’t have a workflow. No amount of scripts, optimizations, or customization will ever come close to a well designed program. REAPER doesn’t hire talent in this regard. They hire White Tie.

[Amberience]

Yeah, unfortunately, themes don't fix a lot of what is wrong with Reaper. I've written my own custom Reaper scripts using the built in Lua functionality, and you certainly CAN do a lot of stuff that way.

But the barebones mixing and automation experience in Reaper is pretty poor compared to some other DAW's.

In Cubase you've got the ALT+SHIFT modifiers which allow you to control a bunch of stuff all at the same time, add the same plugin to multiple channels, change a selection of tracks and their routing, etc etc. Reaper can do that stuff, but it's just in a slightly different way and doesn't really feel great to me.

I've even installed things like the Quick-Adder addon, which is pretty good for emulating the plugin add menus you get in Studio One and Cubase, where you can press a key command and just start instantly typing to filter down to the plugin you want. Much nicer experience than browsing for plugins IMHO.

But all told, for the last however many years, I've just spent so much time tweaking the DAW, fine-tuning it, and it never seems to end. I also remember how resistant they were to adding things like razor editing and good comping behaviour. That stuff is coming along quite nicely now, but it took years.

I love the team. Love the spirit. Just don't particularly like having to be a DAW tweakist rather than an engineer or musician.

I actually did start a thread over at Gearspace on this kind of topic:
https://gearspace.com/board/music-compu ... rison.html

You can definitely see that Reaper is capable of utilising more of my CPU than the other hosts. And Studio One has some really weird stuff going on with its low latency monitoring hybrid buffer system, and Cubase seems to give up on using a bunch of the CPU due to their threading model.

Ultimately for me though, workflow is way more important than efficiency.

I really couldn't care any less if the program is 15mb versus 500mb versus 5gb. That just isn't a factor for me.

[Amberience]

The inserts/effects window is pretty crap to use, and there isn't a single theme out there that rivals Cubase; particularly the mixer. You can't customize enough of the mixer to make it enjoyable to use.

If you love Cubase Mixer that much, there is a Cubase Theme for Reaper out there that looks exactly like Cubase.

I know the theme you mean, and it doesn't really cut the mustard. There's a lot of UI interaction built into the Cubase mixer that Reaper simply cannot do, and the bits it can do, it is pretty clumsy. Like having to use track layout templates to change where the meters sit, or change the visible options per-track.

Whereas in Cubase I can turn on the meter bridge if I want high resolution metering. I can fold away the built in EQ when I'm not using it, but still see the EQ curve in its own dedicated window if I wish.

There are lots of small differences and examples I could bring up. But I won't derail the thread too much.

[lfm]

The inserts/effects window is pretty crap to use, and there isn't a single theme out there that rivals Cubase; particularly the mixer. You can't customize enough of the mixer to make it enjoyable to use.

If you love Cubase Mixer that much, there is a Cubase Theme for Reaper out there that looks exactly like Cubase.

Reaper is unrivaled so far AFAIK having track folders also in mixer view.
- expand/collapse track folders in track view and mixer view
- this is brilliant approach IMO

So having really appealing theme in Reaper would be great. Personally I am not that fond of dark on darker. Protools is a good balance.

Reaper is really economic on resources and made by very skilled programmers. But programmers are not graphic designers.

So it's hard to understand why Cockos team, 20 years later, did not hire graphic designers, maybe some that make the best themes, to allow a user experience that make you stay in front of it all day without eyes hurting.
- themes that really goes through the full daw, not just the front face

But themes are fashionable it seems, and cannot stand dark themes where you have to squint eyes to read what is says.

I kind of liked Cubase up to 9 that I ran, and praise my good old Sonar with that grayish look where everything looks great and easy to read.

Cubase 13, not so much.

[sQeetz]

Even if true (resource efficiency), user unfriendliness and general ugliness is also unparalleled

[whyterabbyt]

Reaper is really economic on resources and made by very skilled programmers. But programmers are not graphic designers.

and graphics designers are not UI designers. pretty pictures dont make a better UI. there are tons of sets of pretty pictures for reaper, (in amongst the horrible ones) but most are just pictures, they they do nothing to improve the UI.

[eLawnMust]

There are others still available apparently 'away from the public eye' as many laser focused on Reaper, which is pretty good-

Bremmer's MultiTrack Studio - Very efficient, been around since 2000, don't care for the workflow...

Zynewave Podium - Very efficient, created by one of the TC Works/TC Electronics dudes very stable & bug-free & very clean & simple install an EXE plus a few other folders... Prefer it over Reaper...

Making Waves Studio - Still for sale but has not been updated for some time as genius developer passed in 2011... You could still use this on windows 95 with 16 MB RAM... Workflow is awesome & makes for musical diverse ways of composing... VST-VSTi-DX-DXi has it's own preset system when browsing presets just click on a preset of anything & it will quickly sound it in the BG, drag preset onto track area or simply a sample as well. Automation is ingenious... Reaper can't touch this one for efficiency...

http://www.makingwavessoftware.com/






Having done some tests years ago with DAWs now defunct no longer alive or in limbo also as efficient or more than Reaper-

-Massiva/EnergyXT
-IoNeo Aero Studio
-Delta SP/Oscillastation
-The old Cubase VST24/VST32 line
-BUZE Tracker (qualifies as DAW & has piano roll)

I imagine that the older Jeskola Buzz builds before they became dependent on NET Frame also would be...

Renoise NOPE!... MuLab NOPE!

[sQeetz]

Just seeing the Windows XP window UI candy makes me hurl a little

[sQeetz]

Renoise NOPE!... MuLab NOPE!

What you mean?

[jens]

Reaper is really economic on resources and made by very skilled programmers. But programmers are not graphic designers.

and graphics designers are not UI designers.

This.

Which is why White Tie isn't to be blamed. Given the material he has to work with, he does quite a good job, I think.

[jens]

By the way, talking about efficiency:

If I am not entirely mistaken Samplitude is about on par with Reaper.