Reaper questions

Feb 13, 2012

  1. thesamuel

    thesamuel
    250 posts
    Since May 11, 2011
    ok, im seriously thinking of buying this instead of cubase, but i just want to ask some questions to thos who already may have it.
    Can reaper automate anything, or can it automate just as much as cubase?
    How many times can you use envelopes on one track to automate different parameters? e.g filter, reverb, flanger etc all from one synth on one track.
    How many bus groups can you have?
    Is it compatible with most plug in formats? e.g Au, VST.
    Is it stable and rarely has glitches?
    Is it good for recording audio?
    What can it not do that cubase can?
    Thanks. :twothumbs:
  2. luthatron \o/ Lord Wavey \o/

    luthatron
    42,245 posts
    Since Feb 3, 2004
    does all that (no AU though) very well.

    demo is free.
  3. imPray

    imPray
    192 posts
    Since Dec 26, 2010
    Yeah you can download the demo and use it for however long you want for free.
  4. SourBattery

    SourBattery
    495 posts
    Since Aug 15, 2009
    Anything you would wish 2, only exception is when a third party plugin haven't made a parameter available, but that goes for all DAWs ofc.

    How many times you want.

    Specify "bus groups". But I bet the answer is unlimited or more then you need.

    VST, VSTi
    DX, DXi
    AU (OSX only)
    ReWire
    JS (user-scriptable plugins)
    According to the Reaper website.

    The most stable and bug free daw I've used. If it crashes its usually a third party plugin causing trouble.



    Excellent!

    I haven't used cubase much myself so I cant answer that. I've heard people having trouble when using automap tho, but that is all.
  5. press

    press
    3,230 posts
    Since Oct 3, 2003
    Reaper can automate more than cubase, you can automate any paramaters on a vst/vsti/au etc but there is also a VERY awesome feature called paramter modulation that will let you run an internal (to reaper) LFO or envelope on any knob on any plugin, also the envelopes can be controlled via audio signal, so you can have an incoming audio signal controling the modulation of a certain knob. HUGE.

    virtually unlimted busses, all tracks are the same, audio midi bus send, all the same type of track no midi only tracks or audio only tracks etc.

    yes compatible

    very stable

    yes it was for along time much stronger with recording than midi etc. probably about the same now.

    paramter modulation is one thing that cubase doesnt have, im sure there are others....probably a few visa versa as well.

    if your thinking about it imo repear is a better deal than cubase. if your starting fresh i say go reaper but if you have cubase experience theres really no reason to change it is a fully capable and good program itsefl aswell.

    as said down load the demo of reaper its free and the only thing different from the fulll is a nag screen.

    :twothumbs:
  6. Concealed Identity Registered Loser

    Concealed Identity
    9,987 posts
    Since Jul 18, 2002
    I would say the only advantage Cubase really has over Reaper if you're writing dance music is a MUCH better workflow. Reaper is pretty much menu hell until you customize it to your workflow, which will take a while. If you don't mind doing that, it's probably a better deal in my opinion. If the prices were closer to each other, it would be tougher, but Reaper is so cheap that it's probably worth buying, and if after a while you find it lacking or you're not getting on with it, you're not really out much.
  7. luthatron \o/ Lord Wavey \o/

    luthatron
    42,245 posts
    Since Feb 3, 2004
    disagree, i've not customised anything, have used cubase for years, reaper for over a year and i hardly have to use the menus at all.

    (but then i never know quite what people mean by "workflow" anyhow)
  8. thesamuel

    thesamuel
    250 posts
    Since May 11, 2011
    thanks for all the replies guys. its kind of weird how steinberg charge so much for cubase though.
  9. Hecticcc

    Hecticcc
    486 posts
    Since Aug 1, 2005
    let's not forget the possibility to make feedbackloops between tracks - there may be other daws that do this but i have yet to find them :slayer:
  10. Rogue Trooper Giant Smurf

    Rogue Trooper
    1,514 posts
    Since Jan 22, 2004
    The workflow in Cubase is really clunky compared with Reaper. Selecting a VST if you've downloaded every free plugin from KVR is like playing whack-a-mole , and organising your plugins requires actually physically putting the files into folders, whereas in Reaper you create your own custom folders in the plugin browser and drag them in. If you want to find a specific plugin you just type into the search filter, and then drag the FX you want into the track- very quick.

    Routing in Reaper is second to none. You aren't restricted to an arbitrary number of sends or groups, and you can create extremely complex routing including feedback(if you like the taste of danger), and you can also save your routing as a track template. It's easy to frequency-split bass, although the splitter plugin that comes with Reaper is a bit shit as the filter slope is only 6dB/octave, but there are better 3rd party splitter plugs available. Folder tracks are great as they not only group your tracks together they also route the audio through it too, so it acts as a bus.

    Creating sends is a doddle- there are 3 ways of achieving this- drag from the parent track to the send track, select the send track from a list of tracks in the sends/receives section or select the parent track in the list of receive tracks in the send track. Any track can be a send track. You can also sidechain everything to everything using the parameter modulation feature which uses either an audio signal or an LFO to modulate whatever parameter you want in whatever FX you want including instruments- it's not just restricted to compressors.

    The FX chains are great. You can have as many as you want unlike Cubase which is 6 prefader and 2 post. However, there aren't any post-fader FX in Reaper which is something that myself and some other users have requested on the forum. There is a workaround, but it's much less convenient than having dedicated post-fader FX.

    If you want to timestretch anything, you just alt-drag the sample. The only feature that I miss from Cubase apart from the post-fader FX is the dedicated audio editor and the audio warping. Again, this is a much-requested feature on the forums.
  11. Concealed Identity Registered Loser

    Concealed Identity
    9,987 posts
    Since Jul 18, 2002

    Fair enough, you're honestly the first person I've ever heard say this though.
  12. luthatron \o/ Lord Wavey \o/

    luthatron
    42,245 posts
    Since Feb 3, 2004
    i might be missing something but i really don't use the menus at all and i haven't re-mapped much at all.

    i don't know what the latest versions of cubase offer, but reaper (for me at least) is a lot quicker, more stable and more feature rich than SX3, plus it's updated a few times a month.
  13. Ibunshi Mpc Pilot

    Ibunshi
    8,399 posts
    Since Jun 8, 2007
    might try reaper some time.. but not convinced it is better for what i do and how i work in cubase

    cubase feels as simple as it gets for most things i do.. recording is easy.. usually i just have hardware hooked up and record it straight into cubase.. i might tweak the sound before i even record, just by putting some inserts on the channel in cubase, so that in a way, i can many times already be finished with that piece of audio as soon as it has been recorded.. so its easy to get things close to how i want, and not risk recording stuff only to find out the processign i want to do doesnt work and then having to start over.. and then handling the audio after recording i think is easy as hell too.. just drag and drop, quick access to those kind of tools.. my edits are rarely anything more than a cut/paste, re-arranging or replacing/removing of audio and i got that at my fingertips.. so not sure how much better that could get.. then as for processing, i think that is quick too, i use single button commands to bring up the ones i use the most if i want to process a piece of audio right on the audio lane, and using the inserts are pretty quick too..

    have only just started working with midi, but it has worked great for just capturing what i play and tweak live on the keyboard i use as a controller.. so that has been great when recording myself playing


    so my use of cubase is extremely basic, but i feel a great and swift workflow, and so reaper would need to either beat that flow, or have some kind of awesome feature i feel justifies a switch
  14. luthatron \o/ Lord Wavey \o/

    luthatron
    42,245 posts
    Since Feb 3, 2004
    yeah, it does all that.

    i don't get the idea that it's extra complex, it's been made after all the other big name sequencers, it's nabbed all the best functions and been designed recently (with no legacy stuff) to be as good as possible.

    there are pages of menus, but you don't have to use them, it's vastly customisable, but you don't have to customise it. it's a 5 meg installer.

    i think the idea it's complicated is a bit of a myth, all sequencers are a bit complicated if you don't know how to use them.
  15. Stevie Boy Amongst the pigeons

    Stevie Boy
    1,819 posts
    Since Jan 1, 2011
    Reapers wicked, only use it for audio mind. keep finding things in it that make things soooo much easier for me.

    one of the quickest hosts I've got to grips with, maybe that was having background in a few other hosts such as cubase but I've found it a lot less intrusive to what I am doing so I can get on with it. couple of things I had to figure out, but that goes without saying for any host isn't it.
  16. Stevie Boy Amongst the pigeons

    Stevie Boy
    1,819 posts
    Since Jan 1, 2011
    Can reaper automate anything, or can it automate just as much as cubase?
    How many times can you use envelopes on one track to automate different parameters? e.g filter, reverb, flanger etc all from one synth on one track.


    not gotten into this, used audio fades and the such, might be soemthing for me to look at, anything I do like that is done well before it touches reaper, recorded or whatevs., think it's all as automateable as anything else


    How many bus groups can you have?


    If I understand what I'm doing correctly, any track can be used as a bus & you can route anything anywhere to it from it, to other channels, whatever...


    Is it compatible with most plug in formats? e.g Au, VST.

    seems to run all my plug ins, not sure about AU, never used that.


    Is it stable and rarely has glitches?

    never really had it peg out on me with my set up.


    Is it good for recording audio?

    recorded loads of stuff, internally and from external sources.


    What can it not do that cubase can?

    dunno what cubase does these days


    :twothumbs:
  17. Concealed Identity Registered Loser

    Concealed Identity
    9,987 posts
    Since Jul 18, 2002

    No one's saying it's too complex, or the file size is too big or anything, it's just that there's essentially no premeditated workflow to speak of and that it's horribly unorganized. I've made professional tracks in Reaper and I really like it, but it is seriously where bad menus go when they die. I wouldn't say it's a myth either, when all of the people I hear / read that from are people who have put in a lot of time with it.

    Don't get me wrong, it's a great sequencer and has tons of functionality, it's just cluttered as all hell, to its own detriment. In my opinion, the price point has a lot to do with its appeal; if it cost anywhere near Cubase or Live in its current form, there would be a LOT less fans (apart from the people who love tweaking stuff).
  18. luthatron \o/ Lord Wavey \o/

    luthatron
    42,245 posts
    Since Feb 3, 2004
    what do you mean by "premeditated workflow"? it may be me not really grasping what people mean by !workflow" that is where my confusion lies.

    i don't see the problems, i can import audio, chop and pitch it, effect it, automate it and use VSTs and effects without using a single menu, i can make a full tune and then export it as a mixed wav and as stems or parts all at the same time.

    i can't see what cubase can do that reaper can't, or how cubase is quicker to use in any way, i've used cubase from the atari up til SX3.

    i don't like tweaking stuff really, i like things being quick and easy, and find reaper very quick and easy.
  19. Transient Energy Replicant

    Transient Energy
    4,486 posts
    Since May 8, 2004
    :script:

    The audio manipulation is so easy. I can chop up a break manually in Reaper much much faster than any other DAW I've used. I wouldn't say the menus are that bad and once you know/assign shortcuts it's fine. Just keep the wiki open or something to lookup stuff you cant immediately find but tbh i've not really struggled. . .
  20. luthatron \o/ Lord Wavey \o/

    luthatron
    42,245 posts
    Since Feb 3, 2004
    i'd do that, if i needed to, but i don't!

    i really haven't needed to use the menus, and yes, i find reaper better than cubase (up to SX3) for audio, and i've used recent versions of logic, and my mate who uses logic (penultimate version) says reaper is better for audio than logic also, tab and s, being able to scroll the audio within the item, easy fades, quick to reverse, multiple takes etc etc - i can't think of anything it's missing.

    but i don't know what concealed identity means by workflow, so maybe i'm missing something.

    i'd imagine workflow is something like:

    1) import and arrange audio
    2) add VST instruments
    3) mix using plugins and automation
    4) export

    and i don't see how reaper makes any of that hard.
  21. Transient Energy Replicant

    Transient Energy
    4,486 posts
    Since May 8, 2004
    Sorry, should have made it more clear that was aimed at Concealed Identity not you. You seem to have no problem with it.
  22. Concealed Identity Registered Loser

    Concealed Identity
    9,987 posts
    Since Jul 18, 2002

    Well like I've said, I've made stuff in Reaper before, so it's not like anything I'm saying is really that much of a big deal. I'm just saying that it's basically just every feature and option ever conceived for a DAW just plopped into a giant mess of menus. And like I said, if you take the time to learn it or customize it, it's no problem. I just don't think it's as polished (i.e. organized, has a thought-out workflow, etc.) as other DAWs...but again, I still think it's great, it just has a lot of room to improve.


    And when I say workflow, I mean that these days every DAW does essentially the same things, but they all do them a little differently. Most are only customizable to a certain extent, and those limits are because the people that wrote the software designed it so that you would do things in a certain way. That's the DAWs unique workflow. Sometimes it's more subtle, sometimes not. But it's essentially why people prefer FL or Ableton or Cubase or Studio One, etc. They all work a little differently, even though in essence you're doing the same things. This could be through the graphical UI, the menus, the tools, the keyboard shortcuts, the routing systems, how MIDI and automations are written/edited/recorded, etc. When I say "premeditated," I mean that the software designers had a somewhat clear method of working in mind when they made it.

    The place I think Reaper needs to improve is for the designers to cool on features for a second and work on organization, so that it has a better system of working where I can find what I need and easily discover things I didn't know I needed. As it is, it's like they just give you every option clumped together in a box and say "Okay, have at it," and it's yours to arrange how you want. Which isn't a bad thing. I just think it's Reaper's weakest point, and would keep it from competing with other DAWs on the market if it were in a similar price range.

    Shit that's really long. Sorry. :smashed:
  23. luthatron \o/ Lord Wavey \o/

    luthatron
    42,245 posts
    Since Feb 3, 2004
    lol no worries.

    i don't know what you are doing in the menus though, i really don't need to use them, ocassionally open something in the view (cpu usage etc) but aside from that i don't use the menus, hardly at all, but i get what you mean - the menus are massive.
  24. SourBattery

    SourBattery
    495 posts
    Since Aug 15, 2009
    I think that the only thing unorganized in reaper is the menus. Everything else that has a lot of stuff have a search functions. And that is not a problem for most users because of the freedom you have with shortcuts and toolbars etc. However I do understand that the menus would confuse a lot of new users from other daws.

    Two of the main ideas that I've understand the developers had with reaper was, a tool less interface (the reason why I love reaper) and fast access to all relevant actions on right click.
    The tool less interface works extremely well, even tho it confuses new users (Where in hell is my scissors!?!?) the menus does not . They probably worked fine in v1 and v2, but not now with the amount of features.
  25. thesamuel

    thesamuel
    250 posts
    Since May 11, 2011
    ive downloaded the demo but im not at home at the moment. But apparently the automation, and copying the automation is a bit frustrating compared to other DAWs, to some people. Im not sure if this is true or not. Me just be what they're used to, to be honest.
  26. SourBattery

    SourBattery
    495 posts
    Since Aug 15, 2009
    Just make sure "move automation with items" is set to what you need and remember that copying of automation data obeys selection.
  27. luthatron \o/ Lord Wavey \o/

    luthatron
    42,245 posts
    Since Feb 3, 2004
    yeah, once you work this out it's pretty simple.
  28. thesamuel

    thesamuel
    250 posts
    Since May 11, 2011
    Really like this DAW so far, the workflow is how i want to be too. However ive got one problem, when i drop in an audio sample of a drum it sounds as if there is a fade in on the sample, i drag the fade in bit back, i then i put the curser right at the start of the sample and itstill sounds like the puch has been chooped out. Instead i just put the curser back one of 16th note before the sample and it fine. But so far its really good.
  29. Sulihin

    Sulihin
    2 posts
    Since Oct 30, 2011
    I believe the default settings will auto-crossfade a media item. You can disable (or change duration) in the Preferences/Project/Media Item Defaults menu (at least on Os X Reaper 4.151).
  30. Rogue Trooper Giant Smurf

    Rogue Trooper
    1,514 posts
    Since Jan 22, 2004
    Agreed. I was hoping the devs would improve the overall design for v.4, but they didn't. They just added a shitload of new features, which improved the MIDI greatly, so I'm not complaining too much, but the underlying architecture is still very much the same, and could be streamlined a whole lot more.

    Another problem is that the community have far too much input rather than not enough. In many respects, that's good and a very refreshing approach compared to the typical monolithic corporate approach where the community are largely ignored and longstanding bugs never get fixed. In Reaper, bugs get fixed very quickly because the prerelease versions are available to download at all stages and the community hunts them down before they make it into the release version.

    However, the community's input sometimes seems to be have a negative effect on the devs ability to prioritise their workload to fix basic usability problems which should have been fixed when Reaper was in its infancy. That way they'd have a solid base to add all the cool new features. There are many different factions in the Reaper community, all with their own ideas about what good usability is depending on their previous choices of sequencer, and I think that is largely why Reaper is a melting pot of loads of good features from other sequencers without a single, coherent design philosophy. Everyone has their own pet feature request which they'd like implemented. It must be hard for the devs to decide which feature they should implement next based on the community's input.