What do you think of Reaper?

Hi

Can you kindly help me to set up my 8channel Behringer Q1204 USB mixer to use with Reaper DAW please...

Routing matric Diagramme will be very helpful to control all the channels in and outs in reaper..

Also to use reaper as a an effect processor for live sounding....

Many Thanks
 
Hello

Can somebody help me to set up my 8channel Behringer Q1204 USB mixer to use with Reaper DAW please...

Routing matrix Diagramme will be very helpful to control all the channels in and outs in reaper..

Also to use reaper as a an effect processor for live sounding....

Many Thanks
 
You don't have ot keep posting the same question in multiple places. Look at my reply to your post in the Newbies section.
 
I must say that any DAW that works for you personally is what you should be using. There is however a reason why the more expensive DAW's have their price. Whether you need the added abilities of another DAW is totally up to you.

I have not yet found a professional studio that uses Reaper as it's main software. Why? Who knows.

From my personal experience I do not care for Reaper. But that is just me. It is just not software that I found comfortable.

It is funny/yet not surprising that some find Cubase difficult. For me, it is intuitive and is simple. To each their own, without any judgment.

I totally got a bad taste in my mouth when working with Protools in the 90's and up. God lord the company raped it's users as well...


Go with what feels good to you. Realize that every DAW has limitations that another might have ability to do. Bottom line is if it works for you, then you will be most productive by being comfortable. :)
 
There is however a reason why the more expensive DAW's have their price.
Mostly that they have more overhead and are actually in it to make a profit. ;)

Justification to buy at those higher prices comes down mostly to more bundled ready-to-play instruments and sometimes third party plugins that you'd otherwise have to buy separately. It may be true that you can save a little bit of money on the bundle prices compared to buying Reaper and the same or similar plugs, but that's only a value if you actually want/need those plugs.
I have not yet found a professional studio that uses Reaper as it's main software. Why? Who knows.
Either you're not looking hard enough or you've got a very narrow definition of what a "professional" studio actually is. I get paid to record/mix other people, and use Reaper exclusively, so now you've found one. :) Over on the Reaper forum we hear from people using Reaper to make money all the time. We're there helping some of them make the transition from whatever they were using before.

But the "industry" as a whole does tend to be pretty conservative and both studio owners and their customers can have a sort of brand fetish. People I think expect to see ProTools because it's been marketed as the "industry standard" for so long. It has name recognition and is what "all the pros" use. Heck, it says "Pro" right in the name!

It's also true that people equate price to quality in a way that just doesn't apply. Reaper has the disadvantage that anything else in it's price range is just a toy, so people don't take it seriously.

When you're advertising a studio, you sometimes have to pander to your customers expectations even if those expectations are a bit misguided. Two studios with the same gear list, one uses ProTools and one uses Reaper. Anybody who "takes themselves seriously" is booking the one with PT. Sad but true.
 
Reaper is a good full featured Daw.
A big strength is that it's cheap. That's also it's downfall.
Since it's cheap it appeals to the beginner home recording crowd and turns off professionals.
I have both reaper and protools. Protools has the benefit that I can exchange whole sessions with others.
 
Well, you can do that with any DAW, as long as the other guy as the same DAW and plug-ins of course.

True, but the majority of people I work with are using PT. That was a major deciding factor in me getting it.
Not saying Reaper isn't good, because it is. It's just compatibility is more important.
:D
 
It still depends on having the same plugins. No matter what DAW you're using, the only way to be sure that it comes across as intended when shared with others is to bounce all the tracks to audio files that include all effects and virtual instruments and then share those .wavs. Doing that, you can easily share between Reaper and PT or whatever.
 
...for heavy-duty MIDI orchestration & editing, Cubase may still be the best option for some. But I'm sticking with Reaper and hoping a few of the MIDI feature requests are finally implemented.
My sense also is that in terms of MIDI Editing/Sequencing there might be one other DAW, Cubase, that outshines Reaper, out of the box. I'd be very interested in others' responses, too, about Reaper's builtin MIDI prowess. As far as MIDI goes, I think Reaper's history is somewhat like Ardour over in the Linux world: Began with focus on audio with MIDI functions added on much later. With LUA and Python (if that's still supported) scripting I can do anything I want just as one used to be able to do with Cakewalk through their scripting language, "CAL", but only made it to early releases of Sonar, then dropped forever. So, any thoughts, anyone, about MIDI function comparisons, Reaper to other DAWs?
 
It still depends on having the same plugins. No matter what DAW you're using, the only way to be sure that it comes across as intended when shared with others is to bounce all the tracks to audio files that include all effects and virtual instruments and then share those .wavs. Doing that, you can easily share between Reaper and PT or whatever.

When I know I'm going to be session-sharing, for whatever reason, I stick to stock plugs or a suite that I know the recipient has.
Stripping the thing down to wavs removes a lot of nice options.

Playlists, unused audio files, access to non-destructive edits, ability to manipulate fades, bus assignments, pan/volume/whatever automation, clip gain automation, elastic pitch+elastic time...it goes on.

It won't be important for everyone but personally I see a benefit from using the same DAW as a lot of my friends and colleagues.
 
Steenamaroo wrote; "Personally I see a benefit from using the same DAW as a lot of my friends and colleagues."

That's what I was saying! :)
And yeah I stick to stock plugins. Can't assume that someone one has what you have.
 
Awesome! Thanks for the replies. $60 seems hard to beat for a DAW. I am pretty used to the user interface and workflow of Cubase though. Is Reaper's interface pretty intuitive and easy to use? I have downloaded a trial version of it to experiment with.

It's not as intuitive as Cool Edit Pro was. There is a learning curve but once you saw few youtube video you will be able to do what you want with it an like it.
 
It's not as intuitive as Cool Edit Pro was. There is a learning curve but once you saw few youtube video you will be able to do what you want with it an like it.

There's a learning curve with all DAWs. And one man's intuition is another man's poison. What make something intuitive is how its design and programming lines up with how you think about things. I started out with Logic, and became reasonably fluent with it. But I was never comfortable with it. I swapped over to Reaper at some stage, and it was like a fog lifting from my eyes. Reaper allowed me to do things the way I expected them to be done. Similarly, I was always comfortable with SoundForge, but never with Wavelab.
 
There's a learning curve with all DAWs. And one man's intuition is another man's poison. What make something intuitive is how its design and programming lines up with how you think about things. I started out with Logic, and became reasonably fluent with it. But I was never comfortable with it. I swapped over to Reaper at some stage, and it was like a fog lifting from my eyes. Reaper allowed me to do things the way I expected them to be done. Similarly, I was always comfortable with SoundForge, but never with Wavelab.

I said it was intuitive (Cool Edit Pro) because it had all the same shortcuts as any other programs in Windows (not related to recording) like copy and paste (ctrl + C, ctrl + V) the way you select by sliding your mouse while holding down the left button, zooming with the mouse wheel, delete selection etc. etc. etc. All the names in the options made sense to you eventhough you had never recorded anything in your life. You didn't need tutorial to learn it, you just had to do what your think and it would work or would be really easy to find out. Like ampliphy a track or a selection etc. I miss that easiness in Reaper. Now I can do most of what I was able to do with Cool Edit Pro but it took me a while to learn how to use Reaper properly because I had for a very long time the habit of switching back to Cool Edit when I was blocked instead of trying to find out how in Reaper. The way to think when using Reaper is different, you have to think Reaper not Windows hehe which was a bit hard for me to do since I'm a computer technician and I'm use to have all the sames short cuts in most of the programs I use. But once you learn the basic you start to love Reaper and see all the possibilities.
 
I said it was intuitive (Cool Edit Pro) because it had all the same shortcuts as any other programs in Windows (not related to recording) like copy and paste (ctrl + C, ctrl + V) the way you select by sliding your mouse while holding down the left button, zooming with the mouse wheel, delete selection etc. etc. etc. All the names in the options made sense to you eventhough you had never recorded anything in your life. You didn't need tutorial to learn it, you just had to do what your think and it would work or would be really easy to find out. Like ampliphy a track or a selection etc. I miss that easiness in Reaper. Now I can do most of what I was able to do with Cool Edit Pro but it took me a while to learn how to use Reaper properly because I had for a very long time the habit of switching back to Cool Edit when I was blocked instead of trying to find out how in Reaper. The way to think when using Reaper is different, you have to think Reaper not Windows hehe which was a bit hard for me to do since I'm a computer technician and I'm use to have all the sames short cuts in most of the programs I use. But once you learn the basic you start to love Reaper and see all the possibilities.

Exactly.

The other part of what maes something intuitive is how much you've been prepared for it. Using Program B may seem like an easy step to make if the Program A you used prior paved the way.
 
Back
Top