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

[Trancit]

nevermind...

[BONES]

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...

By a strange coincidence (or because Google is always listening), this Joe Gilder video turned up in my feed today. It kinda says what I think - that comping is too much work and there are better ways of doing things. He outlines three ways of recording vocals and thinks the comping method is the worst -

[BONES]

Take a peek at the poll. Reaper leads for many clear reasons.

Yeah, because people are clueless f**king idiots. This is not news to me.

It's THE most streamlined/'trimmest' of DAWs out there leaving all the processing power and memory for the work at hand.

Yeah, that's not what I care about. I rarely see my CPU use go above 50% and I've got more RAM than I know what to do with. I care about workflow and too many tools, too many menus, too many long lists get in the way. I like things to be simple because simple is easy. If I have to resort to a million keyboard shortcuts or if I have to use macros or templates or stuff like that, just so I can get things done, then I'm not interested. I've never seen a screenshot of Reaper that made me feel like it would be good to work in. People will tell me that I just need to set it up the way I want it but why the f**k would I want to fart-arse about doing admin when I want to be getting shit done?

OTOH, I immediately liked the Studio One interface and, coming from Cubase, I could start working in it pretty much the first time I fired it up after installation. I didn't have to go looking for things, everything was mostly where I expected it to be, and I could get on with my work straight away. If you look at my GUI, you'll see something that is pretty much out of the box standard, except maybe that you can't see the Inspector (because it is a useless waste of space in every DAW). If you open any of my projects, you'll see that each one is almost exactly the same, GUI-wise. That consistency allows me to work efficiently. When I look at the way my bandmate uses Cubase, it gives me nightmares.

Bugs are dealt with quickly. It's the most stable daw I've seen to date.

I'm not sure I've ever encountered a bug in Studio One, so I have to think it is the same. It's very specific plugins that can make it crash but, apparently, I'm the only user they have with these problems.

What I don't get is why you're commenting otherwise in regard if you haven't even used it.

For the same reason I didn't have to go and watch Barbie at the movies to know I'd f**king hate it. The same reason I'd never even bother to look at the cover of a Barbara Cartland novel.

Just for shits and giggles, how long did you spend testing Studio One before you decided Reaper was better?

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).

Yeah, again, 9 years is less than half the product's lifespan so it's likely the damage was done by the time you started using it. The world was a much simpler palce in 2006 and we were using Orion because we didn't want to deal with a full-blown DAW, which is what Reaper became very early on. Truthfully, I'd still rather not deal with a full-blown DAW but there seem to be no alternatives any more, so we're stuck with it.

There only is an action list.

Well, there's your first bit of bloat, right there. The fact that someone thought it needed something like that says a lot, don't you think?

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

You don't have to change anything.

Maybe you didn't but I'd have to make some serious changes to the way it looks before I could be happy using it.

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.

I can do all that in Studio One, too, but I don't need to because it's fine the way it is. That's why I like it - it just works.

No I meant Reaper is faster than and 10x so more than other daws you have to navigate a system they setup.

There is nothing at all to navigate in Studio One, it is very straightforward. You seem to be thinking about problems or issues that simply don't exist for me.

something that took 5 seconds to accomplish in another daw only takes .5 seconds in Reaper.

Name five things.

One I mean, for instance is something like side-chain compression. In S1 I believe it to be built into the mixer?

Dunno, it's not something I've ever wanted to use. I do know it's built into the native EQ but I'm not sure how it does or doesn't work elsewhere. It's handy to be able to duck effects but I use plugins with ducking built-in when I need it.

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.

That's easy in Studio One because you can drag individual channels from any project into the project you're working on from the Browser. It's a feature I asked Rich to put into Orion a long time ago, something I found very useful in 3DS Max. I was chuffed to see Studio One had it built in. It can be a huge time saver and you don't have to go to the trouble of saving it as a macro or a template or anything. At work, if I want to do those kinds of things I have to save a stripped out version of the original project with just the thing I might want to re-use in it. It creates a lot of extra work but it can save my arse when time is short.

[BONES]

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

No menus? No toolbars? No tools? no mixer? No piano roll? No sequencer? No arranger? No browser? No Inspector? You have to create all that stuff? Then how come so many screen shots I see are full of those kinds of things? I mean, I see screenshots like this one and I can't imagine why I'd want to work in an environment like that

Screenshot 2026-01-06 225553.png

There's shit everywhere and it's all so ugly and uninspiring (and I chose this screenshot because it was a lot less ugly and less cluttered than most of the others that came up in my search). I could have gone for something like this, but that would have been too easy -

Screenshot 2026-01-06 230005.png

But when you look at this, you can see how much slicker and cleaner it looks. By comparison it is a thing of beauty, the others are a dog's breakfast.

Screenshot 2026-01-06 230526.png

There aren't any programs like Melodyne, Splice integration, Project Page or any of that trash fad crap to bog you down.

None of that stuff actually bogs me down, I just object to paying for things I won't use. Working in Artist, without any of those things, felt exactly the same as working in Pro. Maybe there were one or two extra visible buttons but that was about it.

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

I think that, generally, it makes far more sense for the user to adapt to the application, rather than look for an application that you think you might be able to adapt to you. Obviously you look for something that you think will suit you to start with, but you learn how to adapt to it, in order to get the most out of it, rather than bombarding a developer with feature request in an endless and pointless effort to make it something it is not. FL Studio is a great example - Gol isn't a musician, or wasn't when he first made Fruityloops, which made Fruityloops, and later FL Studio, a really terrible environment. It started as a glorified drum machine and they've just kept bolting shit onto it, making the workflow ever more convoluted, to try and keep it competitive. It does look pretty, though, Gol is a great graphic artist.

People complain about Devs aiming to a specific audience

I don't, I think that's exactly the kind of DAW I'd like, as long as I was in the target audience. Which ones do they say that about?

[jojoB3]

My god. It's full of stupid.

"too many tools"

50% btw ???

Take a peek at the poll. Reaper leads for many clear reasons.

Yeah, because people are clueless f**king idiots. This is not news to me.

It's THE most streamlined/'trimmest' of DAWs out there leaving all the processing power and memory for the work at hand.

Yeah, that's not what I care about. I rarely see my CPU use go above 50% and I've got more RAM than I know what to do with. I care about workflow and too many tools, too many menus, too many long lists get in the way. I like things to be simple because simple is easy. If I have to resort to a million keyboard shortcuts or if I have to use macros or templates or stuff like that, just so I can get things done, then I'm not interested. I've never seen a screenshot of Reaper that made me feel like it would be good to work in. People will tell me that I just need to set it up the way I want it but why the f**k would I want to fart-arse about doing admin when I want to be getting

[VOODOO U]

Yeah, because people are clueless f**king idiots.

You are unable to use Reaper straight out of the box to do the basics of basics (no fussing about) and everyone else who uses Reaper to get work done is clueless?
You yourself only need the bare-bones basics from a DAW. Reaper does this - again - straight out of the box. You can't figure it out.
There is a vid on Youtube i watched a few years back where an S1 user decided to give Reaper a shot without looking at the manual. He figured out the basics - no problem - in minutes.
You can't.
Since you can't, that equals Reaper is bloated and anyone who successfully uses it is a clueless idiot.
Maybe they should spend hours making A.I. prompts to cone up with one idea.

I care about workflow and too many tools, too many menus, too many long lists get in the way.

Double click on the open area of the arrangement view where tracks go, that loads a track. Click the FX button to load an instrument. Right click the record button to arm any controller you like on whichever channel. Done.
Now use the mousy mousy to click the little play and record buttons and you can make all the lullabies you like.
CNTRL M opens/closes the mixer.
If that's not simple and easy enough workflow than go use a 4 track tape recorder.

People will tell me that I just need to set it up the way I want it but why the f**k would I want to fart-arse about doing admin when I want to be getting shit done?

You mean like spending hours making A.I. prompts to maybe get one good idea done?

OTOH, I immediately liked the Studio One interface and, coming from Cubase, I could start working in it pretty much the first time I fired it up after installation. I didn't have to go looking for things, everything was mostly where I expected it to be, and I could get on with my work straight away.

As.mentioned, there are S1 users who got the same results as you trying out Reaper so what that means is it's your incompetence that is failing you as opposed to any issues with a DAW.

If you open any of my projects, you'll see that each one is almost exactly the same, GUI-wise.

Couldn't that be the case using any DAW?

I'm not sure I've ever encountered a bug in Studio One, so I have to think it is the same. It's very specific plugins that can make it crash but, apparently, I'm the only user they have with these problems.

At the expense of sounding even more biased, i wonder if you would encounter the same issues using Reaper with those problematic plugins.
It's another reason i switched to Reaper because Live had issues where Reaper did not. Some plugs kept crashing Ableton where with Reaper there were no issues.

Truthfully, I'd still rather not deal with a full-blown DAW but there seem to be no alternatives any more, so we're stuck with it.

Digital recorders synced to hardware and/or a stand alone plugin host ie Bluecat Patchwork.

There only is an action list.

Well, there's your first bit of bloat, right there. The fact that someone thought it needed something like that says a lot, don't you think?

How is the Actions List within Reaper bloated compared to S1's action features? By action features I mean all the capabilities within S1 that can be set for keystroke or MIDI control.

I'd have to make some serious changes to the way it looks before I could be happy using it.

Welk there you go! The real and only issue you have with Reaper is it's look. That has nothing to do with it not covering your basics out of the box. You just need visual stimulation for motivation. May i suggest alcohol? It eliminates ugly.

something that took 5 seconds to accomplish in another daw only takes .5 seconds in Reaper.

Name five things

Transport controls:
1. Play
2. Stop
3. Loop
4. Rewind
5. Record

[seafire]

something that took 5 seconds to accomplish in another daw only takes .5 seconds in Reaper.

Name five things

Transport controls:
1. Play
2. Stop
3. Loop
4. Rewind
5. Record

Excuse my ignorance, but are they not in every DAW by default, usually in the toolbar at top/bottom?

Am I misunderstanding here?

[VitaminD]

Cubase, hands down, for me. I tried REAPER but it is too complicated in basic access and use. I've come to believe REAPER is the Linux of DAWs. Geeks love it for the complication.

Things like just opening the VSTi GUI or selecting tracks to make a bus are not obvious in Reaper compared to Cubase. I didn't even need to read manual or watch a how-to guide to use Cubase. Just 10 or 15 minutes in and it clicked logically. Steinberg should call it Logical or just Logic for short.

[BONES]

"too many tools"

Yeah, too many tools, things you have to wade through to get to the tools you want to use, like needing an "action list" to get something done, instead of just doing the thing.

50% btw ???

"LOL" if you like but which of us has an album in the charts at the moment? Look at the screenshot, I don't use a lot of tracks, instruments or effects to get the job done because I put a lot of effort into keeping everything simple and, therefore, easy to work with. I don't endlessly stack shit on top of shit, just to try and get things working. Given that we got our first album done on a computer with less than one-tenth of the CPU power of the one I use now, and less HDD space than I have RAM now, even 50% CPU usage seems profligate but that's the price you pay for the kind of sound quality we can get from our instruments and effects these days.

You are unable to use Reaper straight out of the box to do the basics of basics (no fussing about) and everyone else who uses Reaper to get work done is clueless?

Speaking of clueless, where did I suggest I was unable to use Reaper. I've never had any desire to use Reaper and, this being an artistic/creative venture, desire matters. They can all get the job done and once you've used something for a while you will be able to do more with it than with something else, so the choice is one you make before you really know how good it is going to be. That makes the initial experience hugely influential and I just had to look at Reaper to know that I wouldn't enjoy working in that environment.

You yourself only need the bare-bones basics from a DAW. Reaper does this - again - straight out of the box. You can't figure it out.

Why would I bother to figure it out? It's not like it was the only option and it certainly wasn't the best one.

Double click on the open area of the arrangement view where tracks go, that loads a track. Click the FX button to load an instrument. Right click the record button to arm any controller you like on whichever channel. Done.

Great, one thing that's just as easy in any DAW and another that I pretty much never use. But tell me how I can adjust the parameters of an effect without having to open it's GUI. In Studio One I can do it right in the mixer, no floating window required. Or tell me how I can get a complex set-up I used in one song into another song without having to go to the effort of saving it in it's own specific file. IN Studio One I can drag any track from any song into the song I am working on, with all it's complex routing, effects and automation intact.

CNTRL M opens/closes the mixer.

Why do you need to open the mixer? The mixer is the centre of any decent workflow, surely it needs to be open all the time?

[VOODOO U]

Things like just opening the VSTi GUI

Click the FX button on a track, this will open the fx window (which includes instruments).
Double click on the instrument listed to open it's GUI.
There is another way IE you can have each instrument and effects (if any) displayed (a named button) on the track itself whick can be clicked on akin to having efects displayed on a mixer channel. But I'll just stick to basics.

or selecting tracks to make a bus

1. Create a track. This will be the bus track.
2. Select the tracks you want to send to the bus. You can select the first track, hold shift and select the last track to cover both and any tracks between (where applicable). The tracks selected remain highlighted.
While holding shift, hover the mouse over the routing button of the last track that's part of the selection, left click- drag to any spot of the bus track (you'll see a cable jack icon as you drag).
Done.
The bus track routing window automatically opens showing it has received the selected tracks.

[VOODOO U]

They can all get the job done and once you've used something for a while you will be able to do more with it than with something else,

Which means Reaper users aren't clueless idiots. Reaper, like other DAWs gets the job done. Figured out by those who have utilized it.

But tell me how I can adjust the parameters of an effect without having to open it's GUI.

You can select parameters and have them be displayed on a track. I forget how to do it and not home so I'll check later to see how (for my own curiosity).

Or tell me how I can get a complex set-up I used in one song into another song without having to go to the effort of saving it in it's own specific file. IN Studio One I can drag any track from any song into the song I am working on, with all it's complex routing, effects and automation intact.

Open the project with said track, copy and paste to the other project.

Why do you need to open the mixer? The mixer is the centre of any decent workflow, surely it needs to be open all the time?

Ok so have the mixer docked and open at all times. Not a big deal.

[EnGee]

I have Reaper and use it only for testing and fast checking. I don't like to use it as my main DAW due to its horrible shortcuts for editing midi mainly. Scroll down/up supposed to be just like its name, scrolling down/up! No! It is for horizontally zoom in/out!! Come on!
How to scroll up and down? I must point to the piano roll and do it! In what universe Reaper's developer is living! This is just one example on how counterintuitive Reaper is. Score editor is horrible as well.

If someone started on Cubase/Logic some 20 years ago or more, just forget about Reaper! Unless you are doing just some specific audio tasks (although I don't know why you choose Reaper other than Cubase/Logic even then!).

It is a nightmare if I want to setup my hardware synths or NI Maschine (software) with Reaper! No way can be done without looking at several videos on the net! The options are nightmare to understand. Everything is shouting: " Only for geeks".

When I moved from Logic to Cubase, it was minimum learning, then from Cubase to S1 to Logic and back to S1, really very little to learn! I just do things by guessing and 90% it is ok. For Reaper, nothing is similar! Everything is different! (the same goes to FL Studio).

If you have started with Reaper, then I guess it is ok, because you'll be in another universe already! But for those who started with Cubase, Logic or S1, I doubt they would prefer Reaper over those DAWs unless they are geeks and love solving puzzles.

[jojoB3]

I started with Session 8, then Pro Tools (digidesign, now AVID).

Sir, you don't know actual PAIN.
*PT is hands down the worst. Patchwork coding at best.

Anyway, this thread is rather hilarious. 99% of the complaints here about Reaper are from people who are new to ANY other DAW but the one they (kind of) know.

At this point Reaper should be the new 'industry standard' for it's streamlined stability and coding alone.

I have Reaper and use it only for testing and fast checking. I don't like to use it as my main DAW due to its horrible shortcuts for editing midi mainly. Scroll down/up supposed to be just like its name, scrolling down/up! No! It is for horizontally zoom in/out!! Come on!
How to scroll up and down? I must point to the piano roll and do it! In what universe Reaper's developer is living! This is just one example on how counterintuitive Reaper is. Score editor is horrible as well.

If someone started on Cubase/Logic some 20 years ago or more, just forget about Reaper! Unless you are doing just some specific audio tasks (although I don't know why you choose Reaper other than Cubase/Logic even then!).

It is a nightmare if I want to setup my hardware synths or NI Maschine (software) with Reaper! No way can be done without looking at several videos on the net! The options are nightmare to understand. Everything is shouting: " Only for geeks".

When I moved from Logic to Cubase, it was minimum learning, then from Cubase to S1 to Logic and back to S1, really very little to learn! I just do things by guessing and 90% it is ok. For Reaper, nothing is similar! Everything is different! (the same goes to FL Studio).

If you have started with Reaper, then I guess it is ok, because you'll be in another universe already! But for those who started with Cubase, Logic or S1, I doubt they would prefer Reaper over those DAWs unless they are geeks and love solving puzzles.

[jojoB3]

Ok so you (and so many here) should put a note on the fridge or bong that says "Hey, read the manual".

I mean...the uptick in forum quality alone...

Reading is good.

Cubase, hands down, for me. I tried REAPER but it is too complicated in basic access and use. I've come to believe REAPER is the Linux of DAWs. Geeks love it for the complication.

Things like just opening the VSTi GUI or selecting tracks to make a bus are not obvious in Reaper compared to Cubase. I didn't even need to read manual or watch a how-to guide to use Cubase. Just 10 or 15 minutes in and it clicked logically. Steinberg should call it Logical or just Logic for short.

[EnGee]

Ok so you (and so many here) should put a note on the fridge or bong that says "Hey, read the manual".

I mean...the uptick in forum quality alone...

Reading is good.

I have read once most of Cubas's manual and I think some of Reason's manual some more than 10 years ago or more, then I have never needed to read any other manuals! S1 especially never read its manual since v1.6 nor Logic or Bitwig, while I needed minor readings for Ableton Live, nothing of Bitwig (not even its Grid modular synth/effects). Why I should read Reaper's manual for a very odd DAW! If Reaper is the only DAW software available, I mostly would switch to a hardware sequencer!

For me (and many others), Reaper has a very bad design and maybe it is too late to correct or make it really friendly. It is just a bunch of good features without thinking of user's perspective or others' DAWs experiences as a base. So, it lives in its own world.