Anyone left Cubase/Nuendo/Wavelab for Reaper??? If so Why?

I have been using Cubase and WaveLab since the late 90s, generally when something works for me i stick with it unless utterly convinced to change. I was extremely disappointed by the SX range hence only just recently updating from 32/score to Cubase 5.

However i am curious about reaper having heard a Firefox/IE analogy on another post (i use ff and LOVE IT, would never go back to IE!)


Can any of you guys give me some solid reasons why i should "leave" Steinberg and go with Reaper? I don't mean use both for certain things, i mean one or the other....

Not bothered about the unlimited fx...nor am i bothered about cost difference if it means workflow has to change...


Would love to hear from former Steinberg fanatics turned Reaper! Please no Pro Tool fans


Essentially why should i go with reaper and ditch cubase?

Many thanks,
Mrc

Apparently you have not seen the unending epic saga of the other thread of the exact same title.....

Reaper vs Cubase

Download the (uncrippled, fully functional) demo, and install it, and try it out. The workflow is different (though there are likely cubase macros and key mappings available), and only you will know if you can readily adapt to it.

Cheers

Kris

It really is that simple....

+1

-Alex (a Pro Tools-to-Reaper convert)

I ditched Cubase 5 for Reaper a while ago with no regrets.

This is why (my reaper pros):
* Extremly powerful routing capabilities - opens up new possibilites
* Faster better workflow when you get used to it, it's really true!
* Very Customizable. Menus, keycommands (I set all keycommands to the Cubase standard to ease the transition) and looks (I made my own theme, it was fun and looks cool)
* Better "built in" compressor and gate than Cubase imo
* Very affordable. I would still be a bargain if it cost 10x more.. I sold Cubase and bought more gear insted..
* Stable and faster on my system
* Alot better mixdown/render and consolidate options. Thank god for Cue render..
* Great support, great community
* No dongle to haul around

What I miss about Cubase 5 (my reaper cons)
* Variaudio
* can't think of anything else really..

While learning Reaper I constantly discovered functions that made me think "why can't I do this in Cubase? It's so smart, but at the same time so obvious".

However I did read that people say that Reaper is inferior in the MIDI department. But I don't use midi much, so I can't comment on that.

No its not really that simple. Yes i can download it and try it, but if i follow your thinking why don't i just go and do that with 20+ other DAWS out there?

Thats why i was asking for the opinions of Cubase fans who have ALREADY switched over to Reaper and presumably have had time with the two.

SPECIFICALLY FORMER CUBASE USERS.

Whats with the cheap shots..

Sorry, I didn't think it would come across as a cheap shot.

My point is that you are the only person who can know if it will work for you to switch DAWs.

If you're seriously considering a switch, then I do think you should demo the software that you're thinking of switching to. It's only when that is impossible that I feel forum advice is what you should base your choice on. But since you're asking specifically about Cubase (which you have used for years and therefore know very well) and REAPER (which is utterly free to demo), then it really does seem to me like the easiest and most effective way of helping you to decide.

I was being entirely honest, not patronising.

It's not a cheap shot. I know of no other DAW software out there that has a truly uncrippled demo (with no time bomb in it either...it just keeps showing a nag screen if you go past 30 days).

Can you name another DAW with a comparable demo that lets you really take your time evaluating the product?

Cheers

Kris

I dont think Reaper has lanes for editing - that stopped me.

I used Cubase for five years before switching to Reaper. First SX3, then Studio 4 (which was a great upgrade!), then version 5 (which I bought mainly for the batch export feature).

The only thing that got me interested in Reaper was the unstability of Cubase. It crashed alot on my systems, especially on large projects. Also, my studio is about 45 minutes by car from my home and I usually mix at home. Imagine my frustration when I forgot to bring the dongle...

I heard some good things about reaper so I decided to try it and I used it shortly. I was thinking kinda "meh, nothing special" and didn't bother with it. About a year later I decided to try it again on advice from a friend. This time I really took the time to learn how it works. I used the demo for about two weeks before I decided to buy it. Not long after I decided to sell Cubase.

And as I said.. No regrets.
If Cubase wasn't so unstable for me I wouldn't have discovered how great Reaper is, and I would probably still be a happy Cubase user.

But, as others has said. Download it and try it and see if you like it. It's the best advice anyone can give.

It has, kinda

i used cubase sx3 and studio 4.


i got sick and tired of cubase four blowing out my inputs and outputs on my sound-card and never saving them. sometimes it just wouldn't sync up at all. it would take 5 minuets to load up all the stuff at the beginning. it seemed like the workflow was against me as opposed to for me. hidden menus and what not.

people say cubase 4 was ****. regardless, i just picked it up and then was considering picking up 5 maybe, but my cash was tight and after 4 i was think of a jump.

reaper was uncrippled and free to try. when i decided i liked it after all it was extremely cheap to pick up. the program just opens on contact. i had everything in my work-flow up and running in 30 minuets. it saved all my settings and seems to be solid with it so far.

40$ for a solid piece of code, or taking another risk on cubase 5 for 499?

C4 was ****? That's odd...I thought 1&2 were utterly useless...never touched 3...and 4 has really been great for me. I've not been able to trip it up--full IO compensation for hardware was mandatory, and while I thought (based on past experiences w/ 1&2) that would throw off some timing--it seems to have been rock solid in that respect.

I demo'd 5 during their 30day trial...new VST Expression (reason I was looking to upgrade) didn't work for ****...crashed a handful of times in that month, where 4's crashes are VERY infrequent...and only the whole pitch/timestrech features were actually "this is better"--and since I don't use it for much audio editing anyway, I skipped. Overall, it was fine...just not really worth $200 for my cheap ass.

Anyway, the advantages I see of Reaper, other than the obvious price being a quarter of the UPGRADE price of Cubase...it's lightweight and loads stupid fast. It's built in plugs--well, they sound better on average, though C4's has a few that kill (Magneto, VintageComp, StudioEQ off the top of my head). And...well, OK that's what I see.

I like what Reaper's trying to do...but, honestly...the main function of my computer is MIDI/VI work (audio handled elsewhere)--and it's not even CLOSE to equivalent. It's audio latency was noticeably worse on the last machine, despite being so lightweight.

However...I think if all you're doing is audio production...or MAINLY audio production, Cubase is probably a stiffer learning curve and FAR more money-back to the money thing. I mean why spend what you don't have to spend? Want to multitrack audio, splice it up, and mix it? It could use some GUI in handling plug ins...but, all in all, it's a solid lightweight product for short cash. If/when I have to build a dedicated audio box, I don't have a good reason to go with anything else. The C4 license/machine can sit over in the corner and to MIDI. I'd need a second license...which I haven't even priced...but, suffice to say-that would be more money than Reaper and I'd be using all third party plugs anyway.

Why would someone who already knows their way around Cubase switch? Ehh...I don't have a good answer for that.

some have said c4 was crap.

i had alot of problems with it. which might have been something else I'm running. the I/o's and the sync problem could be the firewire interface, but when i switched over to reaper it all went away.

i don't do to much midi so maybe it was easier for me to switch.

I would say that from Cubase 4 onwards, the program is pretty untouchable to be honest. The *levels* of editing offered are to a degree I'm yet to see matched by another program to be honest, not even Pro Tools.

But then again Reaper is cheap as chips, so....

Incidentally, I'm about to make the leap from Nuendo 4 to Pro Tools 9 - peer pressure wins, ultimately.

+1000

One thing that could get me to switch from Sonar to Reaper is that Reaper is cross platform.

I've been dabbling in Reaper lately and for tracking audio, it's really simple and efficient. As far as composition and midi work, it's not there yet. Reaper lovers will call that 'no bloat' and the others call it a 'lack of features'.

For someone like me, Reaper isn't developed enough to completely get rid of Cubase, but perhaps it's because I've used it for so long. I compose mostly in midi and record vox/guit in my own time and when it's band-time, I have to mix and be efficient with audio. I can still do both of these things better in C5. Don't need loop mash, but Beat Designer is something I'll use for a while when doing more electronic stuff to lay down the basics. Getting into Variaudio now and it's nice as well. VST expressions has a lot of potential.

It just reminds me of the Ableton converts a couple years back who said Live was the compositional tool of choice, yet wasn't the best for tracking/mixing at the time. Reaper has taken the other tack where tracking/mixing is great, but composition stuff is still better in Cubase, IMO. C5.5.2 is really really nice and actually most of everything I've been waiting for all these years.

Maybe Reaper 4 will implement deeper midi/compositional tools, but if I had to choose now, I'm still with C5 and waiting on C6 with a beat detective type tool. As far as cost, since I already have C5, it isn't an issue. Maybe we're at a time now where people will have multiple DAWs depending on whom one is working with and Reaper is the common denominator as long as it stays at a minimal cost.

As far as the cheap shots go, I notice a lot of the Reaper fans will defend their baby to the death...dunno why...maybe it's the "new kid on the block" syndrome. The same is happening with Studio One. C5/Live/Reaper are all very stable for me so no complaints there.

i tried the demo of reaper and after an hour i switched straight back to cubase 5.0. I didnt like the way audio editing and midi are handled, not to mention the lack of variaudio and hit point editing

What i like about Reaper is that it is so open. For example there is only one kind of track (which was confusing as hell first) which means you can decide what goes where and how. And the real killer feature is how customizable it is.
You can script and change tons of things and there's an API which means you can add features that's not in the program.

That means i'm not in the hands of a selected group of people at Company X. If i want a feature i can add it myself or someone will add or if all else fails i can pay someone to implement it for me. This may be way to hardcore for most people but i think in the long run it will generate tons of cool features.

For example adding OSC to Reaper isn't really that hard. Only two things has stopped me from doing it myself:1. I'm not really a C++ programmer and i don't really need it. I have looked into it though and it isn't that much work and not really hard either. I have contemplated getting a friend to help me but i don't have any OSC devices so.... Anyways i don't have to wait for Cockos to implement it,if i want bad enough i can have it. When do you think Cubase will get OSC support and if it does will it work the way you want it ?

Reaper fans do this no more than fans of any other DAW do. People are basically the same, no matter what DAW software they choose.

Reaper fans do tend to promote others to try the demo and 'drink the kool-aide'. But the main reason for this is that other than the nag screen at the start, the demo is the same as the paid version, and the only way you're going to know if Reaper's structure/philosophy is going to work for you is to get your hands dirty and to try it (assuming its feature set is sufficient for your needs).

Oh, and another nice thing about the Reaper demo is that it can serve as a free host for plugin developers to test their work on. That's how I got started in Reaper.

Cheers

Kris

Good post, j8.

The developer has hinted that OSC is on the way.

Cockos Confederated Forums - View Single Post - Reaper / Reason 4: Only 16 Midi channels?

ns

Yeah i've heard those rumors as well. Anyways it was to prove a point. I did briefly entertain the idea of doing a Max4Live clone for Reaper (Pd4Reaper) as well but again my C++ skills were a bit too weak. Or i just got bored with it. Anyways that wouldn't be that hard either. That is the main selling point for Reaper to me.

hell yes!!!!! Do you actually know anyone who could do this, or do it yourself?

That would be amazing...someone started making a graphical Jesusonic programming thing, but it's pretty basic.......PD and REAPER would make me the happiest geek in the world

Cubase might be many things but it never crashes on my computers (Windows 7 x64+Cubase 32-bit 5.5). I'm almost certain this are issues with your computer.

I'm also surprised that the OP was disappointed with Cubase since it turned SX. I think Cubase was a piece of serious **** when it got ported from Atari to the Mac all the way until Nuendo came out and eventually SX which is basically Nuendo.

I left Cubase in the late 90's for Pro Tools and/or Sonar only to come back when it was SX.

Reaper is no alternative for me as it's lacking many necessary things I use in Cubase. You have to find out what's important for you and what isn't. No advice here will give you an answer.

I'm on Mac, so my experience may be different than others...

I've used Cubase since VST, SX, # and now I'm using 4. It's very stable, and I'm so fast with the editing stuff that I had a hard time trying to use Reaper.

My other problem with Reaper was that many plug-ins wouldn't load for whatever reason. Both Audio Unit and VST gave me trouble.

I think Reaper is a cool program, the interface was a little weird to me, probably just because I'm so used to Cubase. I think if it has the editing capabilities of Cubase, and gets the plug-in issues solved, I might consider switching.

What are these advanced editing features in Cubase? I keep reading such things......I may have to demo it.

Well both. I started on porting the PDvst to VST 2.4 but i bore easily and C++ is amongst the most boring things possible. And i'm not very good at it either.
I mean WTF does this mean ?
#define IMPVAR(x,nm) if (!((*(void **)&(x)) = get_config_var(nm,&sztmp)) || sztmp != sizeof(*x)) errcnt++;

This is really all I meant and you're probably right about the reason. No bad stuff intended. As someone who doesn't waste time being in love with a DAW, I'll suggest to first timers to give Reaper a try as well.

I just notice that when I mention that Reaper isn't as 'full fledged' as Logic/Cubase, I tend to get responses/PMs basically daring me to show what Reaper can't do. I dunno, to me less bloat means the same thing as less features. It just depends on what one's needs are. Since stability is not a problem for me and I'm not running 100 tracks, I like more features.

For example, I like having a scissor tool and I like right-clicking to see all my edit options. Lots of people prefer key commands. Whatever's clever.