If you had to stick to one DAW, which one would it be?

[BONES]

Do you actually believe Justin would implement features into Reaper that served no purpose?

I was around when it first came out, I watched him do exactly that.

I personally don't use comping

You're ahead of me, I don't really know what "comping" is. Assuming it is short for "compositing", then it applies to the overall mixing process because that's what mixing is - compositing all the tracks into a single output. But that doesn't seem to fit the context here, so maybe it's the equivalent of a "Pre-Comp" in After Effects, where you group several layers together, either to simplify your main comp or because you want to be able to easily re-use it, and they are rendered before the main comp is rendered. But it's not a term I've come across in music and can't see what application it might have. Whatever it is, I'm sure it's a waste of time that just complicates the process for no advantage.

Bloat seems to address features that create problems for simpler features to continue to function simply as so. After using Reaper for 9 years, no newly added features have ever got in the way or modified anything that was already prior to the daw's feature list (in fact I'm getting faster and faster at using Reaper).

Reaper has been around for a long time, my guess is that it was already bloated when you started using it.

Reaper functions in a modular fashion and uses the action list to perform actions you setup to your personal liking.

Who can be arsed doing that? I just want to install and start working straight away. If I have to set it up to my liking, then that means it's not to my liking by default, so why would I bother bother? The only thing I've had to set up to my liking in S1 is the colour theme (Dark, if you're interested). Everything else is fine the way it comes out of the box.

If anything, Reaper is like the most slimmed down daw there is even if you don't customize it. You can use it straight out the box and modify as you go and in time it will be 10× faster than anything else on the market hands down.

I can't imagine anything being faster than S1 is, certainly none of the other DAWs I've tried have been. So if you can get 10x faster with Reaper, it must be hideously slow to start with. In S1, you learn a handful of keyboard shortcuts, which are mostly completely intuitive anyway, and away you go. The only time I want it to be faster is when it's rendering and that's down to the plugins I use and my hardware.

[Trancit]

I personally don't use comping

You're ahead of me, I don't really know what "comping" is. Assuming it is short for "compositing", then it applies to the overall mixing process because that's what mixing is - compositing all the tracks into a single output. But that doesn't seem to fit the context here, so maybe it's the equivalent of a "Pre-Comp" in After Effects, where you group several layers together, either to simplify your main comp or because you want to be able to easily re-use it, and they are rendered before the main comp is rendered. But it's not a term I've come across in music and can't see what application it might have. Whatever it is, I'm sure it's a waste of time that just complicates the process for no advantage.

Let´s leave out how it´s called and what might be the real translation...

How do you deal with multiple vocal takes/guitar recordings/ Drum parts/ etc... on i.e. the same phrase or passage traditionally?

I can only imagine you do cuts and mute unwanted parts while leaving the ones you want playing...

"Comping" is doing exactly just that but in a much more streamlined way without having the need to do multiple work steps by just "swiping" with your mouse over parts of a take and this mutes the same time span on the other takes while the resulting audio is "put toghether" and played back via a kind of "group track" (top empty layer)...

This is pure simplifying of a natural convoluted process and I cannot imagine how this could be just "waste of time that just complicates process with no advantage"...
It´s exactly the opposite... making out of a minutes-process a seconds-process

You said you like videos of Joe better... well here you go... and listen carefully right at the beginning... I think you could be one of those people he mentions right there...

[EnGee]

Audio comping is only useful when you are recording audio. If you use only midi recording, midi comping is redundant IMO as you can easily edit midi notes however you want.
Even the audio comping, you don't have to use it if you are just playing/singing the part right. You can record takes and choose the best one. The more you practice, the better the part would be IMO. Also, I believe in continuous playing/singing the whole part as it gives the whole feeling of smoothness and unity.

[enCiphered]

Declaring something a waste of time immediately after admitting you don’t know what it is is epic..! An observation of primate behavior, definitely.

Nice to see Bitwig holding strong near the top, well deserved.

[VOODOO U]

I was around when it first came out, I watched him do exactly that.

To each their own but strictly for curiosty's sake, what feature(s)?

You're ahead of me, I don't really know what "comping" is.

Don't worry about it you don't need it.

[BONES]

Mate, is was 20 years ago, I honestly couldn't tell you now.

How do you deal with multiple vocal takes/guitar recordings/ Drum parts/ etc... on i.e. the same phrase or passage traditionally?

We find the best take and use it. Sometimes we might end up with good bits from a couple of takes, in which case we just cut the bad bits from the main take and drag the good bits from other takes into the right spots, all in a single audio track. Then I go in and edit the shit out of it to make it work.

There is a workflow in Studio One that allows you to put all your takes into a folder as you record them but we just save each take as a separate file and do all the takes on the same audio channel. I don't see any advantage in having all your takes in the project at once because you always know which take you're going to use when you're recording, so there is little need to keep it all in the project at once. Also, we record vocals into a different version of the song to the one they will end up in, a stripped-down mix specifically for headphones that will minimise bleed-through into the recording, so setting up that comping environment for mixing would mean extra steps after recording.

This is pure simplifying of a natural convoluted process and I cannot imagine how this could be just "waste of time that just complicates process with no advantage"...

As I said, we know which take we're going to use when we're recording. We make those decisions during recording so I always have a good idea which is the primary take, where I might need to swap something out and where I'll get it from. I don't need to f**k around with it, it's all in my head, and in my bandmate's notes, before I sit down to mix the vox into the song. As I said, I've looked at that workflow in Studio One and see no advantage in it for us.

You said you like videos of Joe better... well here you go... and listen carefully right at the beginning... I think you could be one of those people he mentions right there...

Without watching it, it probably has the same content I looked at years ago and dismissed. We've been at this for a very long time, we have found a lot of really good workflows for us that are simple, easy and get the job done with a minimum of fuss. OTOH, a lot of people seem to want to make every process as complicated as they can, often for little or no benefit.

I can see how comping would be very useful in a commercial studio, where you do all the recording, then the producer sits down with the artist(s) and goes through it all but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense when you're doing it all yourself.

Audio comping is only useful when you are recording audio. If you use only midi recording, midi comping is redundant IMO as you can easily edit midi notes however you want.

What I've discovered is how easy it is to edit audio in Studio One. I sometimes get down to separating individual syllables - to align them with the track, stretch them to fit better or change their volume - to get exactly the performance I'm after. It's a lot less work than trying to get the perfect take in the studio and it allows us to prioritise performance over precision.

We don't worry too much about getting one good take, we often use the same chorus take for every chorus in the song. The only time we might have a problem with it not sounding "smooth" is when we use takes from different recording sessions, where maybe we didn't set the mic up in exactly the same spot or use exactly the same settings, so we try to get everything we need in a single session.

[fatprice]

FL Studio

[jojoB3]

"Good people"? You think that's what we're talking about when I said "best dev team in the game"?
No. This is a seasoned development team and their product is a direct reflection of that.
I'm saying this bit of info should be taken into consideration for anyone looking for a better DAW.

I've used Studio One. It's fine, use whatever you like and have.

Reaper because best dev team in the game and that's ultimately what matters most in a DAW application.

So you're saying that it doesn't matter if the application itself doesn't meet your needs, as long as the devs are a good bunch of people? My problem with Reaper is that it has been basically crowd-sourced, with every stupid feature request from every clueless idiot being implemented. Of course, over time they have all gone down that path, trying to be all things to all people at the expense of actually being good at any one thing. That's why I was using Studio One Artist for several years - it had everything I needed with minimal bloat to make things more awkward than they needed to be.

When they discontinued it, I went back to my full license, only because I was hopeful some of the bugs I encounter daily might be fixed, which has mostly worked out. I still think I'd be much happier with something a lot more basic but I am yet to find anything that offers what I need without all the bloat. At least it's easy enough to ignore the bloat and keep things simple. There are big parts of Studio One that I simply haven't installed, like Melodyne, Stem Separation and the sample content it comes with.

[BONES]

This is a seasoned development team and their product is a direct reflection of that.

Not from where I'm sitting, unless they've trimmed it down a bit in the last 15 years. Like pretty much every DAW these days, it's trying to be all things to all people, which stops it being as good as it might be if development was more focused.

Studio One is the same, every new version gets worse in some way or other, as they seek to broaden the application's appeal. Sure, we get little improvements here and there that work for everyone but, honestly, if it wasn't for stability issues I'd have felt no reason to upgrade since I bought it 5 or 6 years ago, when it was at version 5.0. In fact, I'd be perfectly happy using the stripped down Artist v5.0 if it didn't have issues with certain plugins. It has all the features I need and decent workflow.

My choice is the least bad option but, as I said, there are lots of features I don't install, like Melodyne and stem separation. I've never even looked at Splice integration or any of the other outboard connectivity. I tried the Project Page but found it a useless waste of time. Ditto for the Scratch Pad and even patterns. I've not looked at whatever it is they call Session View in v7, either, having rejected Live and Bitwig because there was too much focus on that workflow. But it's all there and I have to pay for it, whether I will use it or not. It makes me feel like one of those 7 seat SUVs you see with just one person in it. If I didn't have so much invested in Studio One now, or if I found a decent DAW that allowed me to queue up songs and play them in order, I'd happily jump ship but they are all ultimately the same.

[jojoB3]

Trimmed it down? You sure you've used Reaper?

Again, use whatever you prefer.

This is a seasoned development team and their product is a direct reflection of that.

Not from where I'm sitting, unless they've trimmed it down a bit in the last 15 years. Like pretty much every DAW these days, it's trying to be all things to all people, which stops it being as good as it might be if development was more focused.

Studio One is the same, every new version gets worse in some way or other, as they seek to broaden the application's appeal. Sure, we get little improvements here and there that work for everyone but, honestly, if it wasn't for stability issues I'd have felt no reason to upgrade since I bought it 5 or 6 years ago, when it was at version 5.0. In fact, I'd be perfectly happy using the stripped down Artist v5.0 if it didn't have issues with certain plugins. It has all the features I need and decent workflow.

My choice is the least bad option but, as I said, there are lots of features I don't install, like Melodyne and stem separation. I've never even looked at Splice integration or any of the other outboard connectivity. I tried the Project Page but found it a useless waste of time. Ditto for the Scratch Pad and even patterns. I've not looked at whatever it is they call Session View in v7, either, having rejected Live and Bitwig because there was too much focus on that workflow. But it's all there and I have to pay for it, whether I will use it or not. It makes me feel like one of those 7 seat SUVs you see with just one person in it. If I didn't have so much invested in Studio One now, or if I found a decent DAW that allowed me to queue up songs and play them in order, I'd happily jump ship but they are all ultimately the same.

[BONES]

Trimmed it down? You sure you've used Reaper?

Of course I haven't used it, I watched how it developed and it put me right off. I was using Orion then and, honestly, if it wasn't a decade out of development, I'd probably still be using it.

[jojoB3]

??? "watched how it developed"?
Take a peek at the poll. Reaper leads for many clear reasons. Others know this.
I'm only explaining why I choose it (this Dev team and the importance of this in regard. It's really what matters most with a DAW).

It's supported by an incredible dev team that cares, something that's truly beyond rare today.
It's THE most streamlined/'trimmest' of DAWs out there leaving all the processing power and memory for the work at hand.
Bugs are dealt with quickly. It's the most stable daw I've seen to date.
It doesn't require much in regard to marketing mainly because it does everything and so well the product has spoken for itself for years.
It's incredibly affordable to boot.

What I don't get is why you're commenting otherwise in regard if you haven't even used it.
The only thing clear to me here is what you don't know. Please move along, use whatever you like.

Trimmed it down? You sure you've used Reaper?

Of course I haven't used it, I watched how it developed and it put me right off. I was using Orion then and, honestly, if it wasn't a decade out of development, I'd probably still be using it.

[Alchemedia]

Bitwig

[twal]

Do you actually believe Justin would implement features into Reaper that served no purpose?

I was around when it first came out, I watched him do exactly that.

I personally don't use comping

You're ahead of me, I don't really know what "comping" is. Assuming it is short for "compositing", then it applies to the overall mixing process because that's what mixing is - compositing all the tracks into a single output. But that doesn't seem to fit the context here, so maybe it's the equivalent of a "Pre-Comp" in After Effects, where you group several layers together, either to simplify your main comp or because you want to be able to easily re-use it, and they are rendered before the main comp is rendered. But it's not a term I've come across in music and can't see what application it might have. Whatever it is, I'm sure it's a waste of time that just complicates the process for no advantage.

Bloat seems to address features that create problems for simpler features to continue to function simply as so. After using Reaper for 9 years, no newly added features have ever got in the way or modified anything that was already prior to the daw's feature list (in fact I'm getting faster and faster at using Reaper).

Reaper has been around for a long time, my guess is that it was already bloated when you started using it.

As far as bloat, Reaper mitigates bloat. There only is an action list. There is no confined way of doing a task. In fact, if there is something you don't want to use or do, but some how need to, you can do the task once and save it and never have to ever do it again. The extra additions do nothing to the program to get in the way like they added X so now Y is tougher. There is no slow down or extra steps because they add on stuff "all of the time". This is not a buffet with extra walking, it's a space station buffet where I can teleport to any dish on available. And, Reaper is the most light weight daw, I can save all this stuff stick it on a thumb drive take it to someone's laptop and navigate like a feather...

Reaper functions in a modular fashion and uses the action list to perform actions you setup to your personal liking.

Who can be arsed doing that? I just want to install and start working straight away. If I have to set it up to my liking, then that means it's not to my liking by default, so why would I bother bother? The only thing I've had to set up to my liking in S1 is the colour theme (Dark, if you're interested). Everything else is fine the way it comes out of the box.

You don't have to change anything. The first year or so, I didn't add any shortcuts or custom actions. It works out the box right away, but gives you the option to add said things... If anything, you can remove anything you want to, and make it sleeker. I've used S1 before, its real estate takes up a lot. In Reaper, its like legos, I can remove the toolbars, the buttons, the side sh*t, and have an empty canvas that took little effort to manufacture. There are no heavy plugins because you import your own. You don't get bells and whistles, you get options and shortcuts. After learning Reaper out of the box, any other daw became the ultimate chore, because once I learned the basics of Reaper I fine tuned it enough for it to be something I didn't want to change; and I did this with little effort, in fact. For some things that took longer, it was a pleasure to do so even if I had to sit some nights listening to Kenny. Learning FL Studio and Reason were much more arduous and annoying.

If anything, Reaper is like the most slimmed down daw there is even if you don't customize it. You can use it straight out the box and modify as you go and in time it will be 10× faster than anything else on the market hands down.

I can't imagine anything being faster than S1 is, certainly none of the other DAWs I've tried have been. So if you can get 10x faster with Reaper, it must be hideously slow to start with. In S1, you learn a handful of keyboard shortcuts, which are mostly completely intuitive anyway, and away you go. The only time I want it to be faster is when it's rendering and that's down to the plugins I use and my hardware.

No I meant Reaper is faster than and 10x so more than other daws you have to navigate a system they setup. It's not sophisticated in concept, Reaper is fine out the box but once you realize you have a complete toolbox of scalpels and such, modifying becomes a joy because you find out something that took 5 seconds to accomplish in another daw only takes .5 seconds in Reaper. I know you prob don't even use most of S1's extra bloat here, nor are interested in Bitwig's Grid/Max For Live or system trash that lags other daws. You don't worry about that in Reaper.

I know you probably don't care, although perhaps you may one of these days, -but most importantly- someone else may come along and read this; because there is one thing I will say and that will turn you off the most from what you've said previously. One thing I do submit to, is there aren't any built in "shortcuts" in Reaper (besides key commands as mentioned). One I mean, for instance is something like side-chain compression. In S1 I believe it to be built into the mixer? In Reaper, I will have to take my bass track for instance, add a compressor, change it to auxiliary, route my kick track to it, and turn off the midi. But, once you do it once, you can save it and never have to do it again (I can do it in seconds so it doesn't matter too much). Heck, if you want to save these tracks routed with Union on a specific bass patch, Spire keys, eq cutting the lows, compression, perhaps a midi loop, routed with another track containing reverb, delay, automation on top having your favorite cutoff escalating one bar, already looping with a side of fried rice accompanied by an egg roll garnished with parsley next to a ramekin of sweet n' sour, you can do that. Just have to take the laundry out afterwards. But, we chatted about this before. No premade automation lines for you...

[twal]

This is a seasoned development team and their product is a direct reflection of that.

Not from where I'm sitting, unless they've trimmed it down a bit in the last 15 years. Like pretty much every DAW these days, it's trying to be all things to all people, which stops it being as good as it might be if development was more focused...


My choice is the least bad option but, as I said, there are lots of features I don't install, like Melodyne and stem separation. I've never even looked at Splice integration or any of the other outboard connectivity. I tried the Project Page but found it a useless waste of time. Ditto for the Scratch Pad and even patterns. I've not looked at whatever it is they call Session View in v7, either, having rejected Live and Bitwig because there was too much focus on that workflow.

Yeah, you have no clue about Reaper. That's ok though. jojoB3 hit the nail on the head. There isn't any bloat at all. There are no "additions", there aren't any things at all just actions and custom actions when you press a button or click a mouse trigger the program to compile an action; unless you load a third party plugin doing so. There aren't any programs like Melodyne, Splice integration, Project Page or any of that trash fad crap to bog you down. What you are calling "additions" are just lightweight executables. They aren't trying to please everyone, they hand out easy ways to do things. This is why people hate Reaper so much (not saying you), they see that it is extremely efficient and call it for coders because you can alter your workflow instead of the daw choosing every path and they don't want to do anything for themselves and praise their fiddly, corporate crap (Reaper has a path out the box still).

People complain about Devs aiming to a specific audience, trickling in rigid additions and implementations to keep people coming back to updates, and hooking people on slowly rolled out programs as a marketing method- the very opposite of Reaper...