Who is using Reaper???

[illacov]

Who is using Reaper to record, produce and mix hip hop here?

I use it to record and then to mix with my OTB setup (24 channels to Soundcraft K1 to Suitcase 24Sum).

I absolutely love this program for its flexibility, portability and downright affordability.

I still chuckle when the guys at GC keep trying to sell me the Mbox portable usb joint.

I just shrug my shoulders and tell them that its a "feature," and that the usb thing for Reaper is FREE. All you need is a 5 dollar thumb drive and you can take Reaper to any studio. Hey I run it from my T Mobile phone if that matters to you.

Just want to get a feel for who is using what.

On a side note, that PT8 must be a major bitch considering you guys are paying for those updates. Reaper updates come every couple of weeks. Soon we'll be on version 3.

Peace
Illumination

[rawsteele]

i use it on my open lab i use it with my mp4000 but i use protools too i like reaper and protools

[mdjice]

I use reaper on My Miko to Produce and PT to record and mix. I'm getting PT8 tomorrow, hopefully I can ditch reaper and do EVERYTHING in PT

[rjs]

I've been using Sonar Producer since version 5, moved up to 6 later on mostly. Also have registered copies of Live and Tracktion. Also work with various Linux audio apps.

I've done a bit of research and have been trying out Reaper the last few days. Quite honestly this program is enough to make the most hard core users take a serious look at using this as a main daw. The routing is bar none super. I see a few areas that would need some work. But by far an easy to use software for those experienced with the more complex daws.

A few days more of working with this for verifying the stablility and I'll most likely purchase a license to support the effort. I believe that if they keep improving the software, that it would be a great contender for some of the more complex software's on the market.

The issue I have with professional high end daw software is their upgrade pricing. Which I why I decided to look for a more cost effective solution. You would think that paying 5 to 6 bills for software would allow a better pricing structure for further upgrading. Especially when the upgrades fix, or attempt to resolve issues in prior versions.

Seems to work with M-Audio 1010LT and Mackie 1640 Onyx firewire.

[illacov]

Originally Posted by mdjice

I use reaper on My Miko to Produce and PT to record and mix. I'm getting PT8 tomorrow, hopefully I can ditch reaper and do EVERYTHING in PT

You might want to hold onto Reaper as a backup in case PT8 starts shittin the bed on you.

You using PT to mix over Reaper?

How is PT these days?

My biggest gripe with Reaper is the use of hardware effects as inserts. It works but there's times where it can be a little off for people, I've never had any problems with it.

I use my 8 track reel to reel like a plug in and Reaper syncs it up fine. Audio out from the computer to the in on the reel to reel. Out from the tape deck set to Repro mode back into the DAW. Put Reainsert on the track you want to sweeten with tape. Hit record on the deck. Ping the deck from Reainsert. Voila! Sync!

The only bitch I really do have is how Reaper freezes those hardware inserts. Takes a few commands but fine otherwise. And you only have to do it once.

I think for the average guy, a $50 DAW solution is the ticket. Who could argue with that?

Peace
Illumination

[Alxi]

I'm new to reaper...about 3 weeks. Took me a few try before getting use to it. For now i mainly compose in it. It handles cpu and multicore way better than Sonar. I can work with a 64 buffer with not problem what so ever. There's no latency + a lot of goodies. The stretch algorythm are simply awsom. If they can work on the visual aspect i would definitely be more than happy. I currently hate the Mix window ( console view ).

-Alxi-

[illacov]

Originally Posted by Alxi

I'm new to reaper...about 3 weeks. Took me a few try before getting use to it. For now i mainly compose in it. It handles cpu and multicore way better than Sonar. I can work with a 64 buffer with not problem what so ever. There's no latency + a lot of goodies. The stretch algorythm are simply awsom. If they can work on the visual aspect i would definitely be more than happy. I currently hate the Mix window ( console view ).

-Alxi-

What up my dude!

Few things.

You try the skins out? The new API skin is official among many others especially White Tie's stuff.

And regarding the mixer pane have u tried it expanded?

U get your sends returns, busses, inserts etc The only thing missing is the eq but I prefer using it in the fx window since u get a way better gui compared to some little knobs.

The great thing about Reaper is that by next month it won't be the same daw, only better.

3.0 has a completely different look and texture, it has 3d buttons and better graphics overall, plus improved engine and features. I can't wait. The only thing is mac is behind pc as far as progress so ymmv if you aren't on a pc.

I love it.

Peace
Illumination

[taturana]

I use Reaper for live remote tracking and it's spotless and very reliable for that... for most of my studio work i prefer using Sonar because of the features it has.

Reaper is a fine Daw, but i don't think it's fully ready to replace the majors yet. It will get there soon though... and at that price it's a no-brainer.

[mdjice]

the problem have with Reaper is that it freezes all the damn time !!! as soon as I start getting a bit heavy on the VSTs Reapers acts out of control.
I definitely prefer Protools for mixing and recording plus I work with so many majors and artists that using anything else then PT for the final session is not even an option. Tey need to leave the studio with something any other studio can open and it's just not possible with Reaper.
plus their something that reaper does when Leveling and panning that confuses me. it just sounds different then PT, maybe it's just me but I'm not confortable mixing and recording in it at all.
I however love some of the functions such as the VST search filed...man that's AWESOME!
for the price nothing beats reaper but at the end of the day I'm sick of render and bouncing each track I want to do produce, record and mix in the same DAW...I'm gettin PT8...I hope that will be the answer....

[illacov]

Originally Posted by mdjice

the problem have with Reaper is that it freezes all the damn time !!! as soon as I start getting a bit heavy on the VSTs Reapers acts out of control.
I definitely prefer Protools for mixing and recording plus I work with so many majors and artists that using anything else then PT for the final session is not even an option. Tey need to leave the studio with something any other studio can open and it's just not possible with Reaper.
plus their something that reaper does when Leveling and panning that confuses me. it just sounds different then PT, maybe it's just me but I'm not confortable mixing and recording in it at all.
I however love some of the functions such as the VST search filed...man that's AWESOME!
for the price nothing beats reaper but at the end of the day I'm sick of render and bouncing each track I want to do produce, record and mix in the same DAW...I'm gettin PT8...I hope that will be the answer....

What kind of computer are you using? Mac or PC?

What kind of cpu do you have? Memory??

THe only time I've seen Reaper even slow down is on a 1.8 ghz computer with 512 mb of ram. That was with a full instrumental mix with compressors and eqs on every channel some 40 odd tracks.

On my mix system (Dual core AMD 2.0 ghz and 3 GB of Ram) it NEVER gets close to slow. The only bottleneck Ive ever experienced was my hard drive and once I went SATA never had a problem since.

Sorry to hear that about PTs.

As far as other studios etc...I take peoples stuff all the time from Pro Tools, all they do is consolidate their files etc and I get wavs that are in sync in Reaper.

As far as sound quality difference thats on you and your ears. I think Reaper does have its own "better" sound (64 bit audio) but you are the first person that said it doesn't sound good to your ears that is.

I prefer Reaper to PTs any day.

I would hope that you are giving your clients a consolidated mix from PT in case they go to a facility that doesn't use PT right?? There are quite a few that are using Nuendo and even some now that are straight Reaper, but most still keep PT so the occasional client who comes with PT sessions can get things moved over quickly, but its an extra couple of minutes of work a song to give them a consolidated project. This affords this absolute portability without a need to have you recall anything.

Peace
Illumination

[Alxi]

Originally Posted by illacov

What up my dude!

Few things.

You try the skins out? The new API skin is official among many others especially White Tie's stuff.

And regarding the mixer pane have u tried it expanded?

U get your sends returns, busses, inserts etc The only thing missing is the eq but I prefer using it in the fx window since u get a way better gui compared to some little knobs.

The great thing about Reaper is that by next month it won't be the same daw, only better.

3.0 has a completely different look and texture, it has 3d buttons and better graphics overall, plus improved engine and features. I can't wait. The only thing is mac is behind pc as far as progress so ymmv if you aren't on a pc.

I love it.

Peace
Illumination

Good, thanks. I Haven't seen the API GUI yet. I'll take a look at it today.

I know 3.0 is on it's way... can't wait to try it also. Have you had a Peek at it ??

The thing about the console view is that i have to click on the sends to ajust it. Wish the knobs where directly tweakable without having to open an extra window and i don't like that bussing a track has to be done via send.. but i think i could get use to it.

Although, like u, i use the Fx window, i sure miss the per channel EQ that Sonar Has. In any case it's not a deal breaker for me but i don't think that Reaper is ready to become my main DAW yet. I'm still more comfortable in Sonar. I soooo like the console view in Sonar and the way that things are diplayed... to compose it doesn't change a thing but for mixing i sure like it alot.

There's also the fact that Reaper is no on point with the control surface that i use ( Motor Mix ) but i plan to get an alphatrack in the next coming weeks. That should do the trick.

-Alxi-

[smoke]

When they stablize the Mac version I would be all over it. I'll probably load it on my G5 when I move over to a Pro. Reaper loads VST right?

[Alxi]

^^^^^^^^^ Yes it Does

[elmolemon]

I know this maybe OT, but buying my Mac and installing Logic 8 was the best decision since i make music!

I would recommend everybody to invest in one of the major DAWs! Logic or Protools.

But hey just my OT-0.02$...

[mdjice]

Originally Posted by illacov

What kind of computer are you using? Mac or PC?

What kind of cpu do you have? Memory??

THe only time I've seen Reaper even slow down is on a 1.8 ghz computer with 512 mb of ram. That was with a full instrumental mix with compressors and eqs on every channel some 40 odd tracks.

On my mix system (Dual core AMD 2.0 ghz and 3 GB of Ram) it NEVER gets close to slow. The only bottleneck Ive ever experienced was my hard drive and once I went SATA never had a problem since.

Sorry to hear that about PTs.

As far as other studios etc...I take peoples stuff all the time from Pro Tools, all they do is consolidate their files etc and I get wavs that are in sync in Reaper.

As far as sound quality difference thats on you and your ears. I think Reaper does have its own "better" sound (64 bit audio) but you are the first person that said it doesn't sound good to your ears that is.

I prefer Reaper to PTs any day.

I would hope that you are giving your clients a consolidated mix from PT in case they go to a facility that doesn't use PT right?? There are quite a few that are using Nuendo and even some now that are straight Reaper, but most still keep PT so the occasional client who comes with PT sessions can get things moved over quickly, but its an extra couple of minutes of work a song to give them a consolidated project. This affords this absolute portability without a need to have you recall anything.

Peace
Illumination

I have Reaper running on a Miko Gen 4 so no problem here.
It's no slowing down it's just crashing a LOT.
as far as reaper and PT I do production as well as mixing so no way to bounce wav files...you need the Plugs (like Eq, Compressors etc...) on the session!! as far as people going to a studio that doesn't use PT....that doesn't exist with majors.
I only deal with Majors and Major artists (my studio is not open to the public) and a PT studio is the FIRST requirement before any session is booked. matter of fact I havn't seen a Pro Studio NOT having PT in the past 5 years.
You can use whatever you want to produce but when it comes to mixing and recording the most compatible way to deliver a session is HANDS DOWN Protools.
I have never heard of the "occasional" client using PT.....but more the opposite. the occasional Client using Nuendo, cubase or Reaper. Even Big time producers using cubase for example always bring a "protools" session to the studio, that's just industry standard.
as far as the sound quality of reaper it certainly DOESN'T sound better then PT.
it's not bad at all, it just sounds different and quite a few people I discussed this with agree with me that once you are used to the PT sound and mix engine, using Reaper requires quite some times to get use to it.

[jrides]

Originally Posted by illacov

I would hope that you are giving your clients a consolidated mix from PT in case they go to a facility that doesn't use PT right?? There are quite a few that are using Nuendo and even some now that are straight Reaper, but most still keep PT so the occasional client who comes with PT sessions can get things moved over quickly, but its an extra couple of minutes of work a song to give them a consolidated project. This affords this absolute portability without a need to have you recall anything.

Peace
Illumination

Unfortunately PTs is the standard. I have seen many a project where the artist complained that the engineer did not want to be bothered with consolidating, for non PT compatibility. If you are generating a decent income as an engineer, the cost of upgrading PTs is not really an issue. Some would argue that having it increases your income potential.

I see reason to have either or both. This is GS. You dont have to choose.

[rjs]

Originally Posted by mdjice

I have Reaper running on a Miko Gen 4 so no problem here.
It's no slowing down it's just crashing a LOT.
as far as reaper and PT I do production as well as mixing so no way to bounce wav files...you need the Plugs (like Eq, Compressors etc...) on the session!! as far as people going to a studio that doesn't use PT....that doesn't exist with majors.
I only deal with Majors and Major artists (my studio is not open to the public) and a PT studio is the FIRST requirement before any session is booked. matter of fact I havn't seen a Pro Studio NOT having PT in the past 5 years.
You can use whatever you want to produce but when it comes to mixing and recording the most compatible way to deliver a session is HANDS DOWN Protools.
I have never heard of the "occasional" client using PT.....but more the opposite. the occasional Client using Nuendo, cubase or Reaper. Even Big time producers using cubase for example always bring a "protools" session to the studio, that's just industry standard.
as far as the sound quality of reaper it certainly DOESN'T sound better then PT.
it's not bad at all, it just sounds different and quite a few people I discussed this with agree with me that once you are used to the PT sound and mix engine, using Reaper requires quite some times to get use to it.

Well, I've been in several professional studios over the years, have discussed audio architecture with other engr's and there are more than a few whom don't use PT. There are even a few very large studios out there that are using Ardour on Linux. I think it's a rather moot point however as the question was whom does use it. After spending a few grand just in daw software and upgrades, personally I find relief in having a daw that has the sophistication and functionality of this caliber in a price range that even the unemployed audio eng'r could afford.

After all the issues I've had with expensive daw software and the continued effort of waiting around for that next expensive upgrade to fix what should have already been working, I think many people will be looking around for alternatives to the ever ongoing expense. I've yet to use a software that I felt I wasn't beta testing.

[mdjice]

Originally Posted by rjs

Well, I've been in several professional studios over the years, have discussed audio architecture with other engr's and there are more than a few whom don't use PT. There are even a few very large studios out there that are using Ardour on Linux. I think it's a rather moot point however as the question was whom does use it. After spending a few grand just in daw software and upgrades, personally I find relief in having a daw that has the sophistication and functionality of this caliber in a price range that even the unemployed audio eng'r could afford.

After all the issues I've had with expensive daw software and the continued effort of waiting around for that next expensive upgrade to fix what should have already been working, I think many people will be looking around for alternatives to the ever ongoing expense. I've yet to use a software that I felt I wasn't beta testing.

And I totally agree. I'm still using Reaper everyday and for the price it can't be beat however it's definitely not a replacement for PT in a Professional Studio environement at least here in the US where it is the standard. It's different in Europe where I have seen many Pro studio using Logic, Cubase etc...

[illacov]

Originally Posted by mdjice

And I totally agree. I'm still using Reaper everyday and for the price it can't be beat however it's definitely not a replacement for PT in a Professional Studio environement at least here in the US where it is the standard. It's different in Europe where I have seen many Pro studio using Logic, Cubase etc...

For people who have their head wrapped around PT, because I know tons of guys who never even sold a beat before and throw the PT title at you like its going out of style, why don't u do all your stuff in PT as far as recording etc..and then mix in Reaper via Rewire?? You could give the final product as a PT session but if you ever need to go to another studio, you can take Reaper on your thumb drive and use it wherever you go, as long as they have a computer or PT rig.

I will bust your balls a little bit about the sound quality.
PT8 sounds better than Reaper? Or any other DAW??

Prove it.


I hear this crap all the time about how the newest version of Samplitude sounds better than PT.

Industry standard or not, I want proof.

My opinion is that PT sounds like every other DAW out there. The features in PT for a good while allowed people to mix better hence "better" sound quality.

I think Reaper is pretty much sample accurate and honest. It doesn't improve or degrade the audio, even if it is a 64 bit audio application vs PT 48 bits, I don't think it sounds better or worse than PT. Ive mixed in PT before in large facilities on HD 192 rigs with 96 input consoles to bedroom studios on Mboxes when I was just hangin with some kids tryin to steal a trick or two. It all sounds the same to me, the only determining factor was and still is the A/D. The D/A is unimportant unless theres OTB or hardware inserts. Your car stereo is the D/A.

So of course a guy on Lavry A/Ds is going to smoke a guy with Mbox converters or Delta 1010s. The A/D does make a huge difference, that can't truly be attributed to the DAW. Hell you could multitrack in Audition with great converters, that doesn't mean that Audition sounds great, its the A/D converters.

If you really want to know the way I feel about it, the whole DAW sound thing is nuts.

People constantly ask me what version of PT we used to mix our album because of how it sounds.

They ALWAYS trip over the fact it was Cubase SX3. Then again, we didn't mix IN SX3. We mixed OTB and the interface was SX3.

Reaper allows me to do it even faster and much more flexible.

The fact that it can use the PT hardware is always funny to me because a good deal of guys never experiment in the bigger houses with alt DAWs. Some don't even know that you can use PT hardware with other DAWs lol.

Peace
Illumination

[Airon]

It's more in the features. The mixing engines are just adding stuff up, and the resolution of the audio is high enough in both not to matter.

Some things I enjoy mixing more in Protools, like TV shows and generally most sound-to-picture projects.

For sound design, music mixing and recording I go with Reaper, and would do so in almost any professional situation, though both DAWs are very capable for all such projects. Some of the automation features are way more advanced on Protools, while the routing flexiblity, delay compensation(anyone mentions TDM and I will have to laugh) and the range of customization features are amongst Reaper standout features.

I wouldn't edit sound-to-picture on Reaper, but develop sounds, record almost anything and mix mostly music and effects on it.

It has a way to go, but it's neither as slow, badly coded or static as Protools is, and therefore I think Reaper will make greater strides than Protools ever did in the coming years. Personally I think Digidesign has worked up a chance of tanking. Their native software is behind in a big way, but they have a lot of good features to rely on that nobody else has, while they're completely clueless in other matters, such as using the power of native computing more effectively.

Cockos on the other hand is fairly clueless to professional needs on the post production side, so I'm sticking to Protools for pure editing and mixing, just to get results in a timely fashion.

[mdjice]

Originally Posted by illacov

For people who have their head wrapped around PT, because I know tons of guys who never even sold a beat before and throw the PT title at you like its going out of style, why don't u do all your stuff in PT as far as recording etc..and then mix in Reaper via Rewire?? You could give the final product as a PT session but if you ever need to go to another studio, you can take Reaper on your thumb drive and use it wherever you go, as long as they have a computer or PT rig.

why not just use PT??... I don't see any use in using Reaper if i have PT for mixing and recording.

[Kyle S]

i hate that it doesnt have control room outputs. so if a guy is playing guitar over a track, and you want to solo just the gtr or even just the hihat or something, his headphone mix will mute.

i like how mute works and takes the entire track out of the universe. but the solo should only affect the control room or master mix (at an option i would think).

serious pain in the ass. and pretty embarrassing when you assume the solo to work in that manner and mute out the headphone mix in the middle of a track.



but otherwise i really like reaper and dont even dream about other sequencers.

[tonymission]

I used Reaper for tracking beats when I had a PC.

It was dope. PC, not so great (at least mine).

[Big Ale]

for mixing the midi in there is kinda slack still but other than that i think its solid i was not feeling it at first

[illacov]

Originally Posted by mon3ymotivated

I would like to use Reaper more but it doesnt "IMPORT OMF FILES". I record with cubase sx3 and planned to travel and mix my music but it doesnt import omf files. Sonar can but way too many problems with sonar 7. Hate sonar, would love reaper if it imported omf files. My 2 cents

I could have sworn you have to pay for PT to import OMF, like its not a working feature out of the box. Maybe I'm wrong but I thought OMF was a paid for add on.

Peace
Illumination

[illacov]

Originally Posted by Kyle S

i hate that it doesnt have control room outputs. so if a guy is playing guitar over a track, and you want to solo just the gtr or even just the hihat or something, his headphone mix will mute.

i like how mute works and takes the entire track out of the universe. but the solo should only affect the control room or master mix (at an option i would think).

serious pain in the ass. and pretty embarrassing when you assume the solo to work in that manner and mute out the headphone mix in the middle of a track.



but otherwise i really like reaper and dont even dream about other sequencers.

I almost fell out of my chair.

You do realize your problem can be solved with a send right?

There's several send options in Reaper's IO window on each track, one of them allows a send to be routed so it doesn't get muted when you mute the source track. Might be the pre fader post effects option??

Do you have multiple ins and outs? I would think so. Just make one of them the outputs for your players headphones. Have it set so it doesn't get muted when you adjust the source track.

It might not be labeled CONTROL ROOM but thats what the keyboards are for.


Peace
Illumination

[MERC476]

Originally Posted by illacov

I could have sworn you have to pay for PT to import OMF, like its not a working feature out of the box. Maybe I'm wrong but I thought OMF was a paid for add on.

Peace
Illumination

Yeah, I believe you need Digi Translator. Problem I had at one point trying to send OMF files from Nuendo to a PT user that didn't have digitranslator.

[illacov]

Originally Posted by MERC476

Yeah, I believe you need Digi Translator. Problem I had at one point trying to send OMF files from Nuendo to a PT user that didn't have digitranslator.

I don't work with the majors but I know my Pro Fools.

For what I do (location recording for bands in their homes, mix FTP projects for e-clients and record my own projects) Reaper is legit.

I know how the majors do with recalls etc..

But for the guys I work with, they get such a dope product from my setup (36 input console, analog multitrack on Ampex 456, good choice pieces of outboard (1176, LA2A, SSL 4000G comp, dbx compressors), custom summing sidecar and respected ears in my region, that they don't want a recall. They want to call their mastering engineer.

Reaper allows me to do that and do it fast.

I'm still quite happy with my dual core AMD 2 GHZ machine, 3 gigs of ram purring away. I still can't believe you guys haven't mentioned the fact that Reaper is a program thats smaller than 20 MB when its installed! The installer is at the moment only 3.2 mb. It loads lightning fast!

Peace
Illumination

[6th_World]

What are U talkin about reaper? Acid is da bomb compared to it from a brief look....


I use steinberg, and only steinberg dough... I used to it


Word!

[jrides]

Originally Posted by mdjice

why not just use PT??... I don't see any use in using Reaper if i have PT for mixing and recording.

That would make too much sense. Its funny because one of the reasons they give for choosing reaper is prohibitive costs of upgrading PTs. Now the suggestion is pay 50 more bucks to add an unnecessary component to PTs. Outstanding logic...

LOL

I guess the flipside question would by. Why not just have all reaper users buy PTs to ensure compatibility on all levels, if the should happen to get a professional gig?

I do understand the pros and cons of Reaper vs PTs, but once you start getting more gigs, not having PTs can get annoying. I was anti PTs for a long time. Not somuch these days. If you are a hobbyist, its MUCH easier to fight the good fight.

All that being said, I historically have mixed audio in Samplitude. I will probably get PTs this year though. Having artists fight with lazy PTs engineers can annoy them. Annoyed artists may view your shop as unprofessional due to the lack of convenience.