The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
New Pro Tools Pricing July 1 2019
Old 4 weeks ago
  #631
cut
Gear Addict
 
cut's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post
A major network is not a studio, if your network would pass to Reaper they would save so much in terms of money and time...
Ridiculous. A major network has dozens of Avid Media Composer bays - all networked and 3 audio post rooms - I guess those aren't studios.

If Reaper can open and send embedded AAf's/OMF's - stem out surround, stereo and Atmos mixes all the while switching monitor paths to ensure compatibility between all formats, do an M and E plus other required stems then let me know.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #632
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post
A major network is not a studio, if your network would pass to Reaper they would save so much in terms of money and time...
Does Reaper import and export AAF files? No?

Ok, it'd save zero time and money then...
Old 4 weeks ago
  #633
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
Does Reaper import and export AAF files? No?

Ok, it'd save zero time and money then...
Yes it does via AAT or Ardour
Or nothing stops your major network to write a script in Pyton
Which you can't do in pro tools
And if it's a major network they WILL write their own scripts (as here BBC does)
Old 4 weeks ago
  #634
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by cut View Post
Ridiculous. A major network has dozens of Avid Media Composer bays - all networked and 3 audio post rooms - I guess those aren't studios.

If Reaper can open and send embedded AAf's/OMF's - stem out surround, stereo and Atmos mixes all the while switching monitor paths to ensure compatibility between all formats, do an M and E plus other required stems then let me know.
Ok if network is stuck with Avid environment then yes might be good to keep on going until Avid is in business
Old 4 weeks ago
  #635
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC View Post
Agreed-

Also ever so often I build my big template, populate it with the same plugins (VI's and all the normal, heavy cpu inserts I use) and then try to get a feel for what in-use CPU performance will be like in all the daws I have.

For my workflow, in a large session, Reaper's performance is terrible. Out of the Daws that I own, PT|U, Ableton, Logic and Studio One and Reaper, Reaper is by far the worst. It works well at low latencies for small projects, but there is no way it can handle the same load as what I regularly do in PT without going to 512 sample buffer or higher.

For my template and workflow, only Logic outperforms PT. But with logic you have to trade off not being able to keep all the routing in place, because multiple auxes across lots of tracks lead to the single core peaking issue. PT can split the load over different cores. Studio one is a decent bit worse then PT, Ableton right about the same as that, and then Reaper at the bottom of the pile.

I guess because it doesn't have any sort of dual buffer? Maybe I need to change the way it's setup or something, but I don't see any option for a hybrid/dual buffer. Great performance for small projects though.

This is on a 7980xe @4.5ghz...

Personally I'm glad that Avid put the work in on being able to change/insert/move plugins without a stop in playback before adding other features. I do want other features, but clean playback and stability will always be the bigger priority for me.
You are joking right?
I work constantly with producers with 400+ tracks in reaper loaded with plugins which you just can't do in pro tools!

Do a L316 test and see how many your pro tools system can handle

Then do the same in reaper and you will be shocked
Old 4 weeks ago
  #636
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post
Yes it does via AAT or Ardour
Then the answer is "no" it doesn't. Your response is like saying that a software where you click the "import audio file" option in the menu says "SDII Files not supported" when you point on one, but you still says it's supported and imports those files as long as you use a completely different software to convert them to .wav files.

Language has meaning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post
Or nothing stops your major network to write a script in Pyton
Which you can't do in pro tools
And if it's a major network they WILL write their own scripts (as here BBC does)
Which scripts have BBC written?
Which scripts have BBC written for Reaper?
Which other networks have written scripts for Reaper?
Which networks use Reaper and not Pro Tools or Nuendo?
Which major networks use Reaper and not Pro Tools or Nuendo?
Old 4 weeks ago
  #637
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
Then the answer is "no" it doesn't. Your response is like saying that a software where you click the "import audio file" option in the menu says "SDII Files not supported" when you point on one, but you still says it's supported and imports those files as long as you use a completely different software to convert them to .wav files.

Language has meaning.



Which scripts have BBC written?
Which scripts have BBC written for Reaper?
Which other networks have written scripts for Reaper?
Which networks use Reaper and not Pro Tools or Nuendo?
Which major networks use Reaper and not Pro Tools or Nuendo?
Then sir sorry to disappoint you but also Pro Tools does not support OMF / AAF as it relies on a buggy OMF translator and you need to be careful which version of OMF you use

I did lot of works for BBC and used Reaper and I can assure you that pro tools is not a main software used there
(And yes Scripts for reaper too)

Cheers
I'm not against pro tools but also not such a fanboy with closed eyes
Old 4 weeks ago
  #638
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post
Then sir sorry to disappoint you but also Pro Tools does not support OMF / AAF as it relies on a buggy OMF translator and you need to be careful which version of OMF you use
No, you don't need "OMF Translator" for Pro Tools, it was integrated into the software years ago. And I can't remember the last time I had an issue with an OMF import where that had anything at all to do with Pro Tools. Every single issue I've had in the past 5-10 years when it comes to importing either AAF or OMF is on the video export side of things, not on the PT side.

And please just stop playing fast and loose with language. AAF and OMF import/export is absolutely supported in Pro Tools by definition. Imagine that you're a new user and need this functionality to actually be included in the DAW by definition and someone tells you "Pro Tools does not support it, but Reaper does"... what would you think that meant?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post
I did lot of works for BBC and used Reaper and I can assure you that pro tools is not a main software used there
(And yes Scripts for reaper too)
I didn't say PT is the main software used there, it obviously isn't, but can you tell us the main DAW used at the BBC?

And the rest of my questions that I asked weren't rhetorical, I wanted you to answer them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post

Cheers
I'm not against pro tools but also not such a fanboy with closed eyes
I don't really see any Pro Tools "fanboys" here. The term is juvenile.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #640
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Doesn't say anything about what's being used in BBC's post production facilities.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #641
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

BBC, being a government organization, has always given priority to UK-based developers, manufacturers, and suppliers.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #642
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post
You are joking right?
I work constantly with producers with 400+ tracks in reaper loaded with plugins
Sorry, but I am going to have to call you out as a fibber. Plus, you are trying way too hard to discredit Pro Tools. Reaper is not as popular or as great as you make it out to be. It is no better than the other options available. Just different.

"I work constantly with producers with 400+ tracks in reaper loaded with plugins"

If people "Constantly" need 400+ tracks loaded with plugins to tell a story, that's like a woman who wears too much makeup and perfume to look pretty. What's she hiding?
Old 4 weeks ago
  #643
Lives for gear
 

What's strange in this? I do work with producers who have projects with 400+ tracks in reaper - what's to face palm here?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Alrod View Post
Sorry, but I am going to have to call you out as a fibber. Plus, you are trying way too hard to discredit Pro Tools. Reaper is not as popular or as great as you make it out to be. It is no better than the other options available. Just different.

"I work constantly with producers with 400+ tracks in reaper loaded with plugins"

If people "Constantly" need 400+ tracks loaded with plugins to tell a story, that's like a woman who wears too much makeup and perfume to look pretty. What's she hiding?
Old 4 weeks ago
  #644
Lives for gear
 

I personally like to mix on the way in to have as little tracks as possible in my mix but I work with some new school producer who leave everything separate and trust me you would be surprised how many tracks you can end up using in a simple normal modern production... I do not say it's necessary or even interesting personally but I know few producers who do this constantly in all their productions

If you think about it it's way easier to reach higher numbers than it seem

Easily you can have 50+ tracks for drums only if you keep all mic separate in a big drumkit with 8+ toms, reinforcements, effects, overdubs, percussions,
Then you add another 5/6 track for bass and maybe one or two bass overdubs
And you already around 70 tracks
this without bussing or anything
With bussing etc easily you arrive to 80 tracks and you only covered the rhythm part.
Now go on guitars and think 2 or maybe 3 guitar player doing quad takes with each take having 3 mic on the amp and DI

And solo

And leaks

And BVs choir (easily another 20-30 tracks?)

Lead vocals
Double leads
More double



And then the big one keyboards, orchestras, FXs, sounds etc


I am personally a 24 track guy but I work with whatever it is given to me and sometimes I see these productions

And reaper do handle them fairly well

With pro tools I handle the odd hundered tracks but it's always a pain and back and forth between buffers etc

------------------
What's strange in this? I do work with producers who have projects with 400+ tracks in reaper - what's to face palm here?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Alrod View Post
Sorry, but I am going to have to call you out as a fibber. Plus, you are trying way too hard to discredit Pro Tools. Reaper is not as popular or as great as you make it out to be. It is no better than the other options available. Just different.

"I work constantly with producers with 400+ tracks in reaper loaded with plugins"

If people "Constantly" need 400+ tracks loaded with plugins to tell a story, that's like a woman who wears too much makeup and perfume to look pretty. What's she hiding?
Old 4 weeks ago
  #645
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Please note the graphic of pro tools 5 and 6 used - this is what they suggested you to use 10 years ago
Old 4 weeks ago
  #646
Lives for gear
 

Anyway I quit this chat seem like I am the only one disappointed by such AVID policies. Enjoy your pro tools for me it starts to smell as a rip off and I am sad as it's my favourite DAW if only wouldn't be so closed minded.
All the investment you do get lost with time and all they can explain is they want more money for one small number update yearly who can't even keep pace with the changing world of OSs and hardware.
But people seem to enjoy it so
Keep on paying your monthly or yearly fee if it makes you happy
Old 4 weeks ago
  #647
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
BBC, being a government organization, has always given priority to UK-based developers, manufacturers, and suppliers.
On the other hand. Avid were/are actively involved with the BBC during their relocation from London to Manchester.
It was mentioned here on GS during the move.I don`t recall the thread.
A quick google of "Avid installation at BBC Manchester"
https://www.google.co.uk/search?neww...4dUDCAo&uact=5
Old 4 weeks ago
  #648
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post
Anyway I quit this chat seem like I am the only one disappointed by such AVID policies.
Don't be silly. Plenty of people are disappointed with it.

But just because people are disappointed doesn't mean Reaper is a great replacement for Pro Tools, does it? I mean, is it maybe possible that we can make those two points separately? Or do we always have to buy the whole package and automatically be disappointed and tell the whole world how pathetic the software is and how much better everything else is?
Old 4 weeks ago
  #649
All of the following things are simultaneously true: I think pro tools business model is awful, I think the software has fallen behind numerous competitors in a number of ways, I will continue to use pro tools, pro tools is far superior to its competitors in a number of ways, I will mix mostly in studio one, I will learn several other daws, I’ve never used reaper but will likely try it some day.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #650
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post
Please note the graphic of pro tools 5 and 6 used - this is what they suggested you to use 10 years ago
You're totally right it was the standard then too.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #651
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
What is your point? That whole page is set up for explaining to amateurs how to make voice recordings for the radio show The Next Big Thing.

Utterly irrelevant.

Alistair
Old 4 weeks ago
  #652
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
What is your point? That whole page is set up for explaining to amateurs how to make voice recordings for the radio show The Next Big Thing.

Utterly irrelevant.

Alistair
You're totally right, it is popular with amateurs as well as big production companies like the BBC.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #653
Lives for gear
 
AlexK's Avatar
 

I've been involved in enough shows with the BBC to tell you that they do often work with Reaper, but they also use SADiE, Sequoia and ProTools occasionally.

You can use whatever you want to get you over the finish line. A lot of broadcasters on this side of the pond are jumping ship from ProTools because of the sheer cost involved in getting the software in the hands of the vast number of people under their corporation's umbrella who need to use it.

I'm a fan of the software itself for the most part, it's my favourite platform and I spend 6 days a week sitting in front of it, but Avid are really fanning the flames of discontent.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #654
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post
Here in Europe it's a different story though, Pro Tools is seen as a pyramid scheme more than a breakthrough in these days
I don't make a secret of not being a fan of Avid's business practices but the above is incorrect. I do work for most of the major networks and they ALL use Pro Tools. That would hardly be the case if they thought it was a pyramid scheme. (You might want to look up how a pyramid scheme works btw. Avid deserve plenty of criticism but they are not even remotely a pyramid scheme).

Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post
A major network is not a studio, if your network would pass to Reaper they would save so much in terms of money and time...
And yet they don't. That should tell you something. See below.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post
Yes it does via AAT or Ardour
Or nothing stops your major network to write a script in Pyton
Which you can't do in pro tools
And if it's a major network they WILL write their own scripts (as here BBC does)
Well the BBC is a rather unusual network in that they do not need to make any profit as they are funded by tax payer's money. That said, you can not write an AAF translator script for the price difference between PT and Reaper. Not even close! Not to mention the time it would take to write it... For the vast majority of facilities, the limited number of seats means that it would not be cheaper to switch to Reason.

And anyway, it isn't as simple as you say. AAF is a moving target. There are no exact standards. The latests Media Composer outputs AAFs that are incompatible with PT 11 () just to give you an idea of what a mess AAF is. Even the facilities that have extensive IT teams have better things to do than chase after such a moving target.

Much more important for the networks is compatibility. Internally and externally. For instance, I sometimes work in my own studio and sometimes in theirs. The projects I do in my own studio have to be 100% compatible with their system so they can open them and make changes if needed. Everyone being on PT is a big advantage. A bigger advantage (currently) than any advantage Reaper might give.

Even more important for large corporations: Service and support contracts! Coco's doesn't have them so that is usually the end of any conversation on that topic with management.

And then there is availability of expertise: All the facilities I work at have a pool of freelancers that they can call in at any time. I occasionally get called in the morning to jump in in a facility I have never been in because someone is ill or whatever. Everything being PT makes that possible.

So to recap, little decision making around DAWs at this level has much to do with functionality or quality of the DAW itself. Other aspects are more important.

Alistair
Old 4 weeks ago
  #655
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post
I personally like to mix on the way in to have as little tracks as possible in my mix but I work with some new school producer who leave everything separate and trust me you would be surprised how many tracks you can end up using in a simple normal modern production... I do not say it's necessary or even interesting personally but I know few producers who do this constantly in all their productions

If you think about it it's way easier to reach higher numbers than it seem

Easily you can have 50+ tracks for drums only if you keep all mic separate in a big drumkit with 8+ toms, reinforcements, effects, overdubs, percussions,
Then you add another 5/6 track for bass and maybe one or two bass overdubs
And you already around 70 tracks
this without bussing or anything
With bussing etc easily you arrive to 80 tracks and you only covered the rhythm part.
Now go on guitars and think 2 or maybe 3 guitar player doing quad takes with each take having 3 mic on the amp and DI

And solo

And leaks

And BVs choir (easily another 20-30 tracks?)

Lead vocals
Double leads
More double



And then the big one keyboards, orchestras, FXs, sounds etc


I am personally a 24 track guy but I work with whatever it is given to me and sometimes I see these productions

And reaper do handle them fairly well

With pro tools I handle the odd hundered tracks but it's always a pain and back and forth between buffers etc

------------------
What's strange in this? I do work with producers who have projects with 400+ tracks in reaper - what's to face palm here?
Your tracking math would still not come to 400+ tracks. I find it hard to believe that there are engineers/producers that would have 400+ tracks "Constantly".

I rarely go over 30 - 40 tracks. I realize (because I have seen it), that people go up to 100 - 200 tracks. But 400+ constantly . Again, I am going to have to call BS on that one.

Also, I don't like AVID's new pricing policy either. I have made that very clear. It doesn't mean I am going to bad mouth Pro Tools. It does exactly what I need for it to do. I have tried Reaper and I don't like the workflow at all. That's just my opinion. Nothing you say will change my mind. I don't want to simply "settle" on a different DAW. Studio One is the only other DAW that I almost like. Still a far way off from what I would replace Pro Tools with. And trust me, I want to find an alternative so as not to have to pay the new AVID subscription price.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #656
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexK View Post
I've been involved in enough shows with the BBC to tell you that they do often work with Reaper, but they also use SADiE, Sequoia and ProTools occasionally.
So in-house productions in BBC's own audio-post facilities use Reaper? They have rooms ranging from voice-over to re-recording and they run Reaper there?
Old 4 weeks ago
  #657
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
So in-house productions in BBC's own audio-post facilities use Reaper? They have rooms ranging from voice-over to re-recording and they run Reaper there?
Quick google search pulled up this from 2012, seven years ago they were already using it for at least some applications.

https://www.soundonsound.com/techniq...broadcast-team

"The trucks record to multitrack, but this is just a matter of creating a safety copy, as it will be a 'live mix' that is sent to broadcast. Interestingly, the recording is done using Cockos' Reaper, a surprising choice for many, but one that overcomes the traditional hardware limitations of Pro Tools, and single-platform nature of Logic. Stereo mixes are also recorded to solid-state drives, CD-R and occasionally DAT!"

In this thread (https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=109550) you have stuff like:

"Reaper is in use all over European broadcast stations... For instance, the archival service of our national broadcasters uses Reaper. And the podcast section of a Dutch national broadcaster does too."

and

"I'm still a BBC radio producer and use Reaper on a daily basis. I first hopped on the Reaper train in 2011, liked it, and bought it for myself. I finally persuaded the organisation to purchase it too. (Spending licence-fee payer's money is never particularly easy.)"
Old 4 weeks ago
  #658
Lives for gear
BBC has a big contract with Avid for their media backend, doesn't mean they don't run reaper in a remote sound truck or whatever. The point remains that ProTools is the industry standard- no one said there aren't uses for other DAWs, in fact I explicitly said there were earlier in the thread, and this has been the same story now for 15+ years.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #659
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by newguy1 View Post
Quick google search pulled up this from 2012, seven years ago they were already using it for at least some applications.

https://www.soundonsound.com/techniq...broadcast-team

"The trucks record to multitrack, but this is just a matter of creating a safety copy, as it will be a 'live mix' that is sent to broadcast. Interestingly, the recording is done using Cockos' Reaper, a surprising choice for many, but one that overcomes the traditional hardware limitations of Pro Tools, and single-platform nature of Logic. Stereo mixes are also recorded to solid-state drives, CD-R and occasionally DAT!"

In this thread (https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=109550) you have stuff like:

"Reaper is in use all over European broadcast stations... For instance, the archival service of our national broadcasters uses Reaper. And the podcast section of a Dutch national broadcaster does too."

and

"I'm still a BBC radio producer and use Reaper on a daily basis. I first hopped on the Reaper train in 2011, liked it, and bought it for myself. I finally persuaded the organisation to purchase it too. (Spending licence-fee payer's money is never particularly easy.)"
I worded the question the way I did for a reason. Nobody disputes that you can't produce certain types of content using Reaper, and nobody disputes that you can deliver that as an independent producer to a network like the BBC, and nobody disputes that you can record in reaper.

So if all you do is record, or if there are zero demands on your production process (i.e. "Just deliver .wav files please" or whatever), then of course Reaper is fine.

The question was about built-up rooms for audio at networks like the BBC. When those rooms get content to work on from a bunch of edit bays, what is expected? You're not going to get a bin (folder) full of .wav files and hope that they all sync and then you rebuild the video editors edit by eye/ear/spreadsheet. You're going to get an AAF or maybe OMF that reflects the edit. If you get a folder with a bunch of .wav files then most likely you'll need to sync them using a field recorder workflow. Reaper can as far as I know do none of those things.

So tell me what network will install something like Reaper instead of PT or Nuendo in their own in-house audio rooms for actual post production. Until Reaper does these things and a few others I doubt it will happen.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #660
Lives for gear
 
JSt0rm's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post
I personally like to mix on the way in to have as little tracks as possible in my mix but I work with some new school producer who leave everything separate and trust me you would be surprised how many tracks you can end up using in a simple normal modern production... I do not say it's necessary or even interesting personally but I know few producers who do this constantly in all their productions

If you think about it it's way easier to reach higher numbers than it seem

Easily you can have 50+ tracks for drums only if you keep all mic separate in a big drumkit with 8+ toms, reinforcements, effects, overdubs, percussions,
Then you add another 5/6 track for bass and maybe one or two bass overdubs
And you already around 70 tracks
this without bussing or anything
With bussing etc easily you arrive to 80 tracks and you only covered the rhythm part.
Now go on guitars and think 2 or maybe 3 guitar player doing quad takes with each take having 3 mic on the amp and DI

And solo

And leaks

And BVs choir (easily another 20-30 tracks?)

Lead vocals
Double leads
More double



And then the big one keyboards, orchestras, FXs, sounds etc


I am personally a 24 track guy but I work with whatever it is given to me and sometimes I see these productions

And reaper do handle them fairly well

With pro tools I handle the odd hundered tracks but it's always a pain and back and forth between buffers etc

------------------
What's strange in this? I do work with producers who have projects with 400+ tracks in reaper - what's to face palm here?

Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump