The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Cubase vs Reaper
Old 6th January 2008
  #91
Gear Maniac
 
ForgottenG's Avatar
 

Reaper Stays

I switched from Protools to Reaper at the beginning of the year and haven't looked back yet. I also have Cubase. Partway into my reaper use I decided to try Cubase to give a "Legitamate"(meaning more expensive) program a try Cubase had so much Drama in getting it set up and running it that I just got tired of slogging around in menus and settings and just wanted to record. Bottom line Reaper just works. It is no drama but plenty of options I have done 2about 4 paying gigs on Reaper and each artist was pleased with the results. If it didn't sound good or kept crashing I would dump it. To this day I have Protools Cubase and Reaper. Reaper is the go to.
Old 6th January 2008
  #92
Gear Guru
 
AllAboutTone's Avatar
 

Cubase 4
Old 7th January 2008
  #93
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForgottenG View Post
I switched from Protools to Reaper at the beginning of the year and haven't looked back yet. I also have Cubase. Partway into my reaper use I decided to try Cubase to give a "Legitamate"(meaning more expensive) program a try Cubase had so much Drama in getting it set up and running it that I just got tired of slogging around in menus and settings and just wanted to record. Bottom line Reaper just works. It is no drama but plenty of options I have done 2about 4 paying gigs on Reaper and each artist was pleased with the results. If it didn't sound good or kept crashing I would dump it. To this day I have Protools Cubase and Reaper. Reaper is the go to.
Cubase 4.1 here

Cubase isnt that complicated. Save the drama man. Your lack of understanding does not constitute a bad application. What it shows is that your wanting Cubase to run like Reaper or Protools and your unwillingness to learn the way Cubase operates.

Start with the getting started book that comes with it and youll be fine
Reaper aint all that, MIDI sucks. I have Cubase Protools and Reaper as well BTW

Cubase wins everytime
Old 7th January 2008
  #94
Switched to Reaper from Logic 5.5 in Aug. 07,
The rate of developement is stunning. Midi is now rock solid and the new drum editor is another right step.
The audio part of Reap is as good and comprehensive as any other DAW. Imo
The included plugs are as good or better than included plugs in other apps.Imo
Midi is good enough to lay down parts and do any basic editing you want.
The community is absolutely great over at their forums,
There's no reason that you can't turn out professional results with this app.
I'm a very satisfied user as you can tell. Just my 2 cents.
Thanks
henge
Old 8th January 2008
  #95
Gear Addict
 
PitchSlap's Avatar
 

Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeronimo View Post
this skin looks great!
there are several good looking skins to use with reaper!
I don´t think visuals should keep people from using the app.
Here's a better picture with more stuff on the go. Looks like Cubase to me


Yesterday I was liking Reaper, today I LOVE IT! After digging around on the forums there I found all sorts of great stuff. The things that can be done with the macros, are mindboggling. Its even got a "export tracks" option built in that allows you to export every track individually which is something Steinberg hasn't done after YEARS of pleading from its users. The weekly updates are pretty cool too.

To really understand what its about I think its necessary to dig into the manual, and if theres something you "can't do" ask on the forums, chances are someone's made a macro or can tell you a different way.




*EDIT* - I just downloaded the THIRD UPDATE of 2008! Thats astounding. People are lucky if they get three updates from Steinberg in a year.

*EDIT2* - Reaper was updated again after midnight (#4 of '08). I've got my default template almost done. Much better than what I ever had in Cubase and it loads about 2-3x as fast!
Old 8th January 2008
  #96
Gear Maniac
 

so far so good

OK I've been messing around with reaper since the day after Christmas and have to say I'm pretty into it now.

It has many cool features. I'm sure I'm only scratching the surface because my needs are pretty simple to begin with.

I like the way you can put a buttload of channels on a single track, and then send them off in stereo pairs to a number of stereo tracks. Very handy for rewiring in a bunch of drums from Reason and giving each their own stereo track in the host app.

No issues so far. Well.... OK I'm not 100% crazy about the reverbs that come with it but I'm happy enough with my v-verb for that.

Speaking of outboard, the ReaInsert plug is a very slick way to put outboard stuff in there like any other plug and it automatically takes care of latency for you (I guess a lot of software does this, just so happens the one I've been using doesn't, so I'm pretty stoked about the latency thing in ReaInsert!).

As a hobbyist who is still pretty new to all this, the flexibility and "open source" nature of Reaper is more like what I thought I was getting into when I got my little recording rig about a year ago. I think I may look back on what I have been doing over the past year with PTLE as a great learning experience but otherwise a detour. Nothing against the PTLE product - it's great in its own way too. But Reaper seems more in line with the way I want to do this thing.


Charlie
Old 9th January 2008
  #97
Gear Maniac
 
ForgottenG's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by shanabit View Post
Cubase 4.1 here

Cubase isnt that complicated. Save the drama man. Your lack of understanding does not constitute a bad application. What it shows is that your wanting Cubase to run like Reaper or Protools and your unwillingness to learn the way Cubase operates.

Start with the getting started book that comes with it and youll be fine
Reaper aint all that, MIDI sucks. I have Cubase Protools and Reaper as well BTW

Cubase wins everytime
Obviously you missed my point Shawna. I am glad you like Cubase but I like Reaper. It works. I am in the buisiness of actually recording and not talking or dreaming about it and although I like to read I have no interest in stopping my flow when what I'm using works. I have a $3500 guitar but if the guitar I found in the trash works better for my application, I will use that, no matter what some kid on a forum thinks. The question was presented Cubase or Reaper? Answer is still Reaper.
Old 28th February 2008
  #98
Lives for gear
 
audiothings's Avatar
 

have been running nuendo 3. mix in the box. upgraded from p4 to core2quad a couple of months ago and did not find a significant enough difference. did the things recommended on the nuendo forum... removed uad and all... no difference... looked around and saw that reaper appears to use computer resources best. have been checking out reaper. and heres what i found yesterday, running guitar rig...

nuendo -> 11 instances before chaos... most of the load is taken by one processor. other three are more or less wasted.
reaper -> 36 instances and cpu meter peaks at 60%. stopped testing right there. load is being shared equally by all four processors.

also like very much the single window operation... easy importing of media from the browser... seems to play back any video i throw at it (nuendo sucks in this regard, very picky)... effects routing rocks.

looking to slowly move to reaper... still testing and learning. the fact that he did all of this in a 3 mb download is incredible.

just thought you guys should know....
Old 28th February 2008
  #99
Lives for gear
 

there is a little freebie ive been useing on some traks in reaper.
called freeamp.
ive been trying to use it in novel ways to experiment with different sound pictures.
for example record a synth trak in reaper then run the trak into freeamp.
then, once i'm happy i right clik over the reaper trak and hard print it.

reaper now has per item fx which lots of users wanted.
ie..isolate a clip in a trak n just apply fx to that clip.

i do a ton of lead vocal comping on songs in reap.
set a track as a folder n nest under it several vocal takes.
then apply fx to the folder trak.
there are lots of triks if one is willing to take the time.

i also urge everyone to explore the reap plug in REAXCOMP.
for different frequency bands.
apparently there is now a new synth called OLGA thats mentioned
on the reap user forums people might find interesting.

a comment was made up thread bout reap reverb.
once again its triks. n how to use stuff. mebe the right settings/impulses werent being used.
try dupeing a vocal trak n then offset the dupe by a few milliseconds in ITEM PROPERTIES,
then apply reverb to the duplicate n experiment with settings.
also dont forget all the JS plug ins one can use on vocals n other traks.
n other triks like widening etc.

got a less than stellar mic pre ? use a hint of JS flange on it then experiment with REAFIR n
REAXCOMP n go to town on it. lots to discover.
Old 28th February 2008
  #100
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by manning1 View Post
a comment was made up thread bout reap reverb.
once again its triks. n how to use stuff. mebe the right settings/impulses werent being used.
If that's my reaverb comment you're referring to... well… ya OK I have to say I learned a lot about it, and about reverb since then. I find now that I’m getting pretty great reverb sounds using better impulses. Just yesterday I downloaded a bunch of great impulses (from pipeline iirc… ) really nice clean tails. I find what I like to do lately with reaverb is have a few instances running, kind a medium length one that takes sends from most instruments, and a somewhat longer one for vox, maybe a 3rd one between the other two but panned completely differently. It’s like a whole world of stuff to explore in there, and now that I got some really clean impulses I’m really happy with what I have so far.
Old 29th February 2008
  #101
Here for the gear
 

Hi guys..

I'm going to share my experience. I was a cubase user before i got reaper. First of all i download reaper because i wonder why ppls are talking about reaper a lot. so i try it, and it's a little bit different than cubase actually. but i believe it's not just from the workflow, routing, midi etc.. but also on the audio engine...

Here's the story, i use to mix a song from one of my client with cubase, and then i want to try to mix it with reaper. so i bounce all the data and moved them into reaper, and surprisingly the sound to my ears is totally different... then i keep moving on, mix the song in almost the same technique i use in cubase. then i render the result..

and then I compare the two result.
the result was, the mix from cubase sounds more muddy compares to the reaper's result. then i played them in car, and again the reapers results more solid in the low frequencies and translates better compare to cubase which is sounds unclear and uncontrolled in the low freq

so my question is, is it only me or anyone else ever having the same experience which is each daw is difference and they have their own kind of sound? because i've read a lot of comments which is said that daw sounds the same, it depends on the AD DA...
Old 29th February 2008
  #102
Gear Addict
 

No I've never noticed any difference in sound between reaper and the other cakewalk apps I use, although there may be, but I haven't noticed if there is.

What I like about reaper is how well it scales. It doesn't matter if you have 25 or 225 tracks, it still does the business without fuss.

I like how I can use track folders to save dsp on my uad cards.

I like how I can route tracks to other tracks or to h/w channels in a totally unrestricted and unlimited way.

I like the way it deals with loop recording and exploding takes.. but that's just me. I'm sure cubase does all this as well. It's just that for $39 reaper is a no brainer even if it couldn't do half of what it's capable of
Old 29th February 2008
  #103
Gear Maniac
 
Matthew Presley's Avatar
 

There are differences in the audio engines.

I did a rough mix in Nuendo, and exactly matched the volume, Pan (and pan law) settings in Reaper.

Result:
The two files don't null. One isnt remarkably better or that different than the other, but every blind test I did with other uninvolved people, the Reaper mix was picked as the best.

What do I think? When you are really mixing something you make all of your decisions on how something sounds through it be it software or hardware. If something is lacking in the playback engine or, your monitoring system, or some hardware you are using etc. you will compensate for it so it is a non issue.
Old 14th May 2008
  #104
Here for the gear
 

read tallismans statement!

to some people in this thread:
talkin about reaper and cubase. you should try both before you post.
couldn´t believe some things I read.

at the moment you have to search for a function in cubase that´s not in reaper.
wait a year or two and good by steinberg.

(but as it seems steinberg don´t need something else to decry them)


reaper is what I use after I worked one year with cubase. it took one day to know that i´m kind of "free" in reaper.


the size, the prize the frequents of updates, the routin possibilities.....
not to be sneezed at.

never had one moment where I regret to change to reaper.
Old 14th May 2008
  #105
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PitchSlap View Post
Here's a better picture with more stuff on the go. Looks like Cubase to me

Dude, where's that skin? I thought I had found the skin I liked the best but I had not even seen that one and it seems to actually have some functionality that I'd like.

Obviously you can count me in on the Reaper boat. I've used PT and Cubase quite a bit (literal years on PT) and flatly prefer Reaper. Love the work-flow . . . love that I can pretty much customize the work-flow if it's not exactly what I want. Love the fact that it's open to just about everything. Love the fact that the ONLY problem I've had with Reaper has been that for one version of it, if I ran Cubase and then opened Reaper without restarting, my comp would crash. The next update (which took about 4 days) solved it.

Obviously if you're a midi-dominant person then Reaper is unlikely to be your primary DAW - but I'm an audio dominant person.
Old 14th May 2008
  #106
Lives for gear
 
Audio Hombre's Avatar
 

could someone elaborate on what the the increased, superior, routing options are in reaper?
Old 14th May 2008
  #107
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio Hombre View Post
could someone elaborate on what the the increased, superior, routing options are in reaper?
Could you elaborate on which "increased, superior, routing options" you're referring too?
Old 14th May 2008
  #108
Lives for gear
 
Audio Hombre's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Terminus Est View Post
Could you elaborate on which "increased, superior, routing options" you're referring too?
the several references to same, as read in this very thread.....
Old 15th May 2008
  #109
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio Hombre View Post
the several references to same, as read in this very thread.....
I think your question is too vague. Is there a specific post you're curious about? A specific claim?

I'm trying to think of how one can display "superior routing" via text and it's difficult. While I find that I enjoy the way that routing (and just about everything) is handled in Reaper compared to Cubase, I wouldn't really say it's definably superior. Different DAWs suit different people and different work flows differently.

I would say one notable aspect of Reaper's routing is that it's almost completely open and customizable to the point that, if you're willing to put the work in, there's almost nothing you can't do. Certainly I've yet to run into any walls in my experience.
Old 15th May 2008
  #110
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio Hombre View Post
could someone elaborate on what the the increased, superior, routing options are in reaper?
In reaper there's no concept of buses, because any track can be a bus if you want it to. So you just click the routing button in a track and you can send the output from that track to any other track (or multiple tracks). You can also receive into that track from any (or every) other track. It's simple and versatile
Old 15th May 2008
  #111
Lives for gear
 
stag's Avatar
 

...
Old 16th May 2008
  #112
Gear Nut
 

...

Last edited by Terminus Est; 16th May 2008 at 07:20 PM.. Reason: oh well
Old 16th May 2008
  #113
Lives for gear
 
stag's Avatar
 

...
Old 16th May 2008
  #114
Gear Head
 

I installed reaper ysterday , and the eq section alone makes it very versatile for me - sounds better already - i think it may be a great programme for mixing on . partularly if you are more into the audio with a small amount of midi.
Old 16th May 2008
  #115
Lives for gear
 
Audio Hombre's Avatar
 

thanks for the simple,concise answer. unlike terminus est, you weren't a kick in the ballz.


Quote:
Originally Posted by bulls hit View Post
In reaper there's no concept of buses, because any track can be a bus if you want it to. So you just click the routing button in a track and you can send the output from that track to any other track (or multiple tracks). You can also receive into that track from any (or every) other track. It's simple and versatile
Old 16th May 2008
  #116
Gear Addict
 

+1 on the Reaper routing. great stuff.
Old 16th May 2008
  #117
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio Hombre View Post
thanks for the simple,concise answer. unlike terminus est, you weren't a kick in the ballz.
For asking you to clarify (or at least directly point to the claims of those who you were referencing) your question?

Sorry. I could have sworn that the fact that there are no assigned buses (because every track is pretty much a blank slate) had already been mentioned and thus I thought your question was asking for some sort of expansion from that as an answer.
Old 18th May 2008
  #118
Gear Head
 

ok, been getting into this reaper thing lot more in the last day or so

the templates in the eq / compressor and noise gate vst plugins are a great starting point for people who just want to get up and make music with little tweaking
Old 18th May 2008
  #119
Lives for gear
 

I'll chime in once again....

Reaper is a GREAT daw that does some things better than Cubase and some things not as good. People get so caught up in the excitement of this great product that they overlook what are (imo) some things that can be troublesome for potential converts.

Before I list these perceptual flaws (and all daws have flaws, Cubase has many) let me say again ... Reaper is a GREAT daw considering what it is, what it does and what it costs. It's LONG list of positives have been listed so let's cover some of the other stuff.

1. There will be some things you cannot do with Reaper with a control surface including switching automation modes. If you have FX masters on your control surface they won't work since there are no FX bus classes in Reaper. Same thing with channel EQ, since there is none if you have default EQ controls for "selected channel" on your controller... they probably won't do anything either.

2. Stem rendering is post fader only. This means that rendering stems as a "freeze" method or just to save contiguous audio files changes the levels and pan of the files. In the first case it will change your mix balances whenever you "freeze" tracks (assuming your fader and pan aren't zeroed out).

Of course in a daw you want to render stems pre-fader (with or without FX) to recapture cpu or whatever but keep the mix levels the same. Can't do that in Reaper... stem rendering is all post fader.

3. No ASIO Direct Monitoring support.

4. You can't export standard midi files without merging all of your midi tracks into a single daw track first which limits the exported midi file to a maximum 16 channels/parts and Type 0 midi files (no track names or individual tracks). Could be problematic for composers sharing midi files.

5. You can't mix any midi from the Reaper mixer. No volume, no pan, no midi automation. The mixer controls only control audio.

6. No nested groups or folders.

7. Pan law issue. A project -6 pan law will reduce all your stereo files by -6 even if you never pan them anywhere. Don't use project pan-law in Reaper.

8. You can't pick your hardware I/O from your ASIO device. You have to pick a "range" of I/O from (x to y) not specific I/O channels. If you need the first and the last you must choose them all... even if you want to reserve those in the middle for something else.

9. No pre-fader metering in the mixer.

10. No audio playlisting.

11. No midi patch facility beyond general midi and some third party stuff all of which are activated as plugins.

12. No solo defeat... (i.e. exclude a track from being muted by the solo bus) nor any global solo or mute releases. To unmute or unsolo 16 random tracks or 64 you need to hit them one at a time or select them all first to unmute or unsolo them all at once.

13. No post fader FX on the channels nor the master.

14. No "master section concept" in either the audio section (Cubase control room etc,) or the automation system... see item #1.

15. Can't split midi by note number, nor by channel if it's a Type 0 import.

That's just some stuff off of the top of my head that I have issues with being a Cubase and Reaper user. In comparison there's a lot of little things that Reaper can't do that other people don't care about that I do... and if you don't need them or use them in Cubase ... you won't care.

While Reaper's core audio engine is as good as any and better than some, overall it's lacking lots of things that don't quite match up with the Cubase's and Samplitude's of the world. Not yet.

That will change in the future I suspect. The current reality is that it's still missing some things for people like me who use most of Cubase's full feature set. A daw is the entire package in it's entirety (to me) and not just a sampling of features. For a realistic view you must look at the whole package... Cubase or Reaper or any daw.

Another reality is that if you like Reaper and are making good music with it ... who gives a ****? heh
Old 18th May 2008
  #120
Gear Addict
 
Dean7's Avatar
 

I recently tried Reaper for the first time and it seems to be solid to me. Been using it for a couple weeks now with 0 crashes.
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
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
mahasandi / Cockos Reaper
38
Kyle S / Cockos Reaper
45
Cymbals / Q+A with - Justin Frankel (designer of Reaper)
1
pipelineaudio / Q+A with - Justin Frankel (designer of Reaper)
5
Ravian / Music Computers
3

Forum Jump
Forum Jump