Reaper Question

S

sixways

New member
It has occured to some of us Protools guys that Reaper can act as a rewire slave to PT...and in theory add to our limited track count (I suppose the same would be true for Cubase LE users as well).

The problem is that Reaper and Protools running together is quite a memory/resource drain so it doesn't work.

Does anyone have any idea how to reduce the amount of resources Reaper needs so these two could co-exist?

6
 
Slimming down an app is a very hard thing to do, especially the already slimmed down Reaper.

The only thing I can think of is to keep the plugins to a minimum in both apps and use the 'bounce live output to disk' in Reaper to do the equivalent of freezing tracks in other programs.

And by the way, why do you need protools when you have Reaper? They both sound the same and Reaper is much easier to navigate, both for audio and for midi...

.
 
sixways said:
It has occured to some of us Protools guys that Reaper can act as a rewire slave to PT...and in theory add to our limited track count (I suppose the same would be true for Cubase LE users as well).

The problem is that Reaper and Protools running together is quite a memory/resource drain so it doesn't work.

Does anyone have any idea how to reduce the amount of resources Reaper needs so these two could co-exist?

6
Click to expand...

How about reducing the amount of resources ProTulez needs. Fuck, Reaper is lean as hell and can run MANY more tracks and plugin instances on the same machine as crappy ol' ProTulez can.
 
I just prefer Protools...I had a feeling that debate would ensue. I know it, I'm comfortable with it, it does what I want it to do...but the track limitation does suck.

6
 
I used to think Audition 1.5 was "slimmed down". I don't think you can get any more slimmed down than Reaper, especially for the amount of features/options it has.

I really don't see the need to use anything else.

I just prefer Protools...I had a feeling that debate would ensue. I know it, I'm comfortable with it, it does what I want it to do...but the track limitation does suck.
Click to expand...

If you're comfortable with Protools, then why do you feel the need to use another app? :p

Track limitation is a good enough reason to not feel comfortable with a program.

But if you want to limit resources, you'll have to use less plugins/VSTi's, etc. There's not much else you can do except mess around with the preferences and disable anything you don't need.
 
sixways said:
I just prefer Protools...I had a feeling that debate would ensue. I know it, I'm comfortable with it, it does what I want it to do...but the track limitation does suck.

6
Click to expand...

Prefer? You mean more familiar with probably. If you put in about 2 straight days (long days) of using nothing but Reaper, then went back to ProFoolz, you would probably dump PT in a hurry!
 
I don't feel the need to use another app, I'm fine with PT and can't imagine switching...I just thought the idea of Reaper working as a Rewire slave was interesting.

I guess its all what you get used to.

6
 
sixways said:
I don't feel the need to use another app, I'm fine with PT and can't imagine switching...I just thought the idea of Reaper working as a Rewire slave was interesting.

I guess its all what you get used to.

6
Click to expand...

I know where you're coming from. I spent years in Audition and know it inside and out. Never even wanted to switch over.

I also got tired of everyone saying how great Reaper is, but after using it for a few days I guess I'm one of those people now. :D

But to answer your question, I've never tried using Reaper as a ReWire slave, so I can't be of much help.
 
sixways said:
I don't feel the need to use another app, I'm fine with PT and can't imagine switching...I just thought the idea of Reaper working as a Rewire slave was interesting.

I guess its all what you get used to.

6
Click to expand...

So, you are fine with an app that has track count restrictions and is a resource hog?

Have at it! I will continue to utilize Reaper and it's unlimitedness! :)
 
Ford Van said:
So, you are fine with an app that has track count restrictions and is a resource hog?

Have at it! I will continue to utilize Reaper and it's unlimitedness! :)
Click to expand...

Track count restrictions, yes. Not so much a resouce hog. Best of luck to you and Reaper.
 
Ford Van said:
I will continue to utilize Reaper and it's unlimitedness! :)
Click to expand...

Unlimitedness??!?!?!?! That's not even a word! :D

I didn't think anybody even used Pro Tools anymore.........
 
Ford Van said:
Prefer? You mean more familiar with probably. If you put in about 2 straight days (long days) of using nothing but Reaper, then went back to ProFoolz, you would probably dump PT in a hurry!
Click to expand...

Actually, I have been using Reaper for the better part of a month now, and I find it more cumbersome than Pro Tools. Not a bad program, just not for me.


Also, since I do most of my work in commercial studios, it is a major pain to have to keep switching programs when I want to edit and rough mix at home. I'm perfectly happy with Pro Tools, not so much with Reaper.
 
the original theory behind using Reaper with Pro Tools was not only for the possibility of more tracks, but also VST/VSTi capabilities. Maybe even being able to work with another home recorder on this site who is anti-Pro Tools, like Ford Van, and be able to have both programs sync up.

It was something we were trying over at PTForum but ran into hardware buffer/CPU usage errors. Both programs run fine when not in Rewire...but immediately opening Reaper via Rewire causes a huge CPU spike. I don't think it's a matter of "slimming down" an already slim program...but rather the way Reaper/PT (or maybe both) approach Rewire.

I prefer PT. I'm used to it it's layout, how it approaches editing/recording, and it does everything I need it to. If it doesn't have something I would like, there are work arounds. I've had very little time with Reaper but I'm sure it's a great program for other people, especially for the price. I'm sure there are things I could complain about that Reaper doesn't have or doesn't do that Pro Tools does...just as you complain about PT.
But let's just keep our comments about the original question and not give the "my dad can beat up your dad" responses as is so frequent from the usual suspects on this board.

Especially if you have no tests to back up the "PT is more of a resource hog" comment.
 
Last edited:
bennychico11 said:
But let's just keep our comments about the original question and not give the "my dad can beat up your dad" responses as is so frequent from the usual suspects on this board.
Click to expand...

don't you mean "my daw can beat up your daw"? :D

i really think it's a rewire implementation thing. both Live and Reason have no problems and rewire takes negligible resources when these apps are slaved to protools.

A single instance of gauger in Reaktor eats up more CPU than live or reason or Plogue bidule rewired to PT.
 
well, I believe pipelineaudio is the creator of the software, and he lurks around here. So maybe he can give us some insight as to why this is so. I'm sure Reaper rewires just fine with some other programs.
 
bennychico11 said:
well, I believe pipelineaudio is the creator of the software, and he lurks around here. So maybe he can give us some insight as to why this is so. I'm sure Reaper rewires just fine with some other programs.
Click to expand...

He is NOT the "creator" of Reaper. He is possibly Reaper's biggest fan, but he didn't code it. pipelineaudio has been tremendously helpful in Reaper's rapid development. He is a big label band credited engineer who has a great way of thinking about how a DAW should work.

Reaper is being written and developed by Justin Frankel who wrote and owned WinAmp before selling it to AOL. One thing you can count on, he will continue to develop Reaper to the point that it outclasses all other software like it, and he will keep it "cheap" compared the other over-priced bloatware that is out there. :)

The problem most people have when they try Reaper is that they are too used to slow, inefficient ways of editing and mixing on a computer. The strength of Reaper, once you actually LEARN it's commands is that the most common tasks a real engineer needs to do in MUSIC PRODUCTION are very easy and quick to accomplish. pipelineaudio has demonstrated to me how much faster you can edit in Reaper compared to PT. Yeah, PT has a few snazzy features that Reaper has not implemented yet, but overall all PT is a cumbersome application to work in compared to Reaper. But most PT users will never know that because they never like to learn another app (probably because of the huge learning curve PT has!)

Anyway........
 
Ford Van said:
The strength of Reaper, once you actually LEARN it's commands is that the most common tasks a real engineer needs to do in MUSIC PRODUCTION are very easy and quick to accomplish. pipelineaudio has demonstrated to me how much faster you can edit in Reaper compared to PT.
Click to expand...


PT is the same way, IMO. Every program has shortcuts that can be learned.
Do you have examples of things in PT that has slowed your editing down?
 
I found PT cumbersome several years ago and never bothered since. I have seen some guys using it, and noticed how many steps it takes to do simple tasks. I have never been convinced to try to learn it again after what I have seen.
 
the I guess maybe I'm one of those oddities that can just work really fast, because I've never found any feature that has slowed me down.
 
bennychico11 said:
the I guess maybe I'm one of those oddities that can just work really fast, because I've never found any feature that has slowed me down.
Click to expand...

How would you know there is a faster way?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top