Go Back   Cockos Incorporated Forums > REAPER Forums > REAPER General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-18-2011, 09:42 AM   #41
JHughes
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Too close to Charlotte, NC
Posts: 3,554
Default

SOS magazine uses Reaper all over the place. Not only in the Reaper column, but in the mix rescues and elsewhere. So I think the word must spread.

BTW have you seen Mix magazine lately? It's a skeleton of its earlier self, little more than a collection of ads. TapeOp has more content and is a better read.

I'm mentioning Reaper all the time to my friends. A friend of mine had a studio for quite a while, now he works from home and has a job at a music store also. He poo-poos Reaper because no one ever comes in to the store asking for Reaper. I said that's because Reaper isn't sold in stores! NTM everyone thinks they need Pro Tools to be compatible.
JHughes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2011, 10:06 AM   #42
Fex
Human being with feelings
 
Fex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Portsmouth, UK
Posts: 4,376
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sonnie View Post
reaper gets now his first pubic-hairs.
At the age of six?
That's quite worrying.... precocious puberty is usually a symptom of a serious underlying brain condition.
Reaper will probably die soon.
Fex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2011, 08:09 PM   #43
Ras Keita
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 120
Default

I was talking to a close friend the other day, he says he went to Guitar Center last weekend was talking about Reaper and all the "know it all" sales staff touted PT and slammed Reaper. When my friend asked if they used Reaper the reply was generally no they'd never used it but just know PT is the "Industry Standard" so why would they choose anything else.
Ras Keita is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2011, 08:21 PM   #44
Primitive Don
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Land of F150s
Posts: 14
Default

Reaper gets lots of love and recommendation on the Tape Op Message Board.
__________________
Hoarder of dynamic mics
Primitive Don is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2011, 09:41 PM   #45
superhawk
Human being with feelings
 
superhawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: STUCK ON EARTH, USA
Posts: 264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Primitive Don View Post
Reaper gets lots of love and recommendation on the Tape Op Message Board.
Reaper kept coming up on other message boards....that's how I learned of it. So don't think the words not out.
__________________
*************************************
Ugly enough to be a member of Mensa
superhawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 06:55 AM   #46
Kundalinguist
Human being with feelings
 
Kundalinguist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,630
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ras Keita View Post
I was talking to a close friend the other day, he says he went to Guitar Center last weekend was talking about Reaper and all the "know it all" sales staff touted PT and slammed Reaper. When my friend asked if they used Reaper the reply was generally no they'd never used it but just know PT is the "Industry Standard" so why would they choose anything else.
This supports my contention about motive for advertising or supporting Reaper in retail:
http://forum.cockos.com/showpost.php...2&postcount=22

I've had the same replies from sales staff ie. "Reaper? That's not a professional product" or something of that nature. What I have also found is that when I do my own product research on the internet, I often know far more than those hired to sell PTs and other expensive options to those who haven't done or are unwilling to do their own research.

Furthermore, if you were to put Reaper in a clear plastic wrapper on a shelf with a price tag on it, you'll sell many more copies each year because now the store has a reason to talk about it. Otherwise, it's just cutting into their profits.

I suspect even some magazines are fearful of losing their big DAW advertising dollars for praising Reaper. I learned about Reaper from message boards.
__________________
Success is just one more plugin away! And happiness is as close as your next upgrade. (On the interweb: www.rolandk.ca / www.auroraskypublishing.com)
Kundalinguist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 08:55 AM   #47
g8torcliff
Human being with feelings
 
g8torcliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JHughes View Post
......BTW have you seen Mix magazine lately? It's a skeleton of its earlier self, little more than a collection of ads....... .
Yup....my daughter gave me a year's prescription to Mix magazine last Christmas. To be honest, I don't think Ive read more than a handful of articles. Mainly because they just seem to turn into endorsement after endorsement....between all the name dropping, of course.

I don't even know if they miss a delivery.

Most magazines about recording seem to cater to the companies who are buying ads....so they don't interest me much. Besides, I'd rather record and listen to music instead of read about it.

I think Cockos is doing just fine.....being not driven by $$$. Tops in my book.

cliff
g8torcliff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 08:59 AM   #48
g8torcliff
Human being with feelings
 
g8torcliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,509
Default

.....yikes, changing my post count....
g8torcliff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 09:14 AM   #49
chip mcdonald
Human being with feelings
 
chip mcdonald's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: NA - North Augusta South Carolina
Posts: 4,294
Default

1) don't worry about what someone working at GC says about something;
2) magazines exist because of advertising - and they understand this;
3) you don't acknowledge the Subaru turbo WRX if you're trying to sell a Camaro;
4) perception is unfortunately everything, the world sucks.
__________________
]]] guitar lessons - www.chipmcdonald.com [[[
WEAR A FRAKKING MASK!!!!
chip mcdonald is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 09:30 AM   #50
Jim Roseberry
Human being with feelings
 
Jim Roseberry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,027
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeF View Post
I love Reaper! I've been with Cubase and Sonar before. But for some strange reason, you never hear Reaper listed as suggested DAWs in other books, websites, etc. You ALWAYS hear about Cubase, Sonar, Logic, Pro Tools, Reason, and so on. Yet never Reaper. Sure, on this forum it is, but did you ever check out other recording forums? Some do, but it's like a minor reference.

Reaper has been around for a decade or so. Why the lack of acknowlegement?? Obviously, competitors won't do so but there are tons of audio recording books out there that never mention Reaper at all (by authors who aren't connected with any corporate system).

Is it because they are TOO cheap for the cost of such a great program? All the ones recommended by others are 10 times more expensive!! Sometimes, if you under-price the competition too much, people tend to think you have a basic, entry-level program with very few features. But I know this is not so with Reaper. It has them all beat in my opinion.

Everyone in life is out to make a profit. Isn't Reaper? I'm SO GLAD it's this reasonable, but how can they grow and continue to lose millions of dollars by not being in the ballpark with the others? What would they lose if they charged more? Nothing, because other lower-priced DAWs suck and people would know it; therefore, they would get the business anyway.

Then again, maybe soon down the road Reaper WILL charge $500 for a fully functional program if they figure this out. I HOPE NOT!! I love Reaper but you do have to wonder why they aren't acknowleged after all these years...

Mike
Brand recognition... and marketing
Has nothing to do (obviously) with features/capabilities...
This is where Avid's deep pockets have them entrenched (for better and worse). To the point where ProTools is used as a verb... "ProTools it"
which is refering to editing/mixing.
__________________
Jim Roseberry
www.studiocat.com
jim@studiocat.com
Jim Roseberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 09:46 AM   #51
Kundalinguist
Human being with feelings
 
Kundalinguist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,630
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by g8torcliff View Post
Yup....my daughter gave me a year's prescription to Mix magazine...
Do you have to take it with food or between meals.

[sorry, it was there and I couldn't resist. That was post 666 btw. ]
__________________
Success is just one more plugin away! And happiness is as close as your next upgrade. (On the interweb: www.rolandk.ca / www.auroraskypublishing.com)
Kundalinguist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 09:54 AM   #52
MikeF
Human being with feelings
 
MikeF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Anaconda, Montana
Posts: 364
Default The Complicated Default Settings/Options

Wow, guys, overwhelmed by all the great comments! You must be gods from another planet (ha-ha). Seriously, great thread and great comments!

Some here say that the default settings/choices etc. make new users scared to hang in there. But I'm a newbie (I didn't go very far with Cubase or Sonar) and I LIKE all the options and default settings! It's like, this is a great roadmap/guide to really learn what a top-level DAW can and will do (even if you don't change a thing and learn the program as is). But then again, I'm learning you can change 90% of all default settings to have all kinds of options available (you can always go back to default settings if you get lost or frustrated).

Thumbs up to the complicated default settings!! Hey, every DAW has its own default settings anyway, and usually there are dozens and dozens to choose from there as well. It's just a question of perhaps a longer learning curve. So what if it takes a few extra months to get familiar with all the additional choices, features, etc?? If a program doesn't have them, I would immediately think it is not as versatile and productive as those that do. It's an "un-priced price" you have to pay: the more options available, the longer the learning curve, but the better program it will be.

Mike

Last edited by MikeF; 12-20-2011 at 11:36 PM.
MikeF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 10:47 AM   #53
MikeF
Human being with feelings
 
MikeF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Anaconda, Montana
Posts: 364
Default

OK, so if PT has features used by many that are desirable and not included in Reaper, wouldn't it be simple for Reaper TO include them as well in their updated versions? Seems like the programmers could easily figure out what PT does and offers and program those options into Reaper as well.

One thing I would like to see in Reaper (a BIG feature, I might add) is the ability to re-draw wave forms/peaks with a pencil too. All I see is a pencil tool that allows you to copy an item, nothing more. But to get rid of clicks/blemishes, a pencil tool option to touch up the wave shapes and peaks themselves would be awesome!! I know Sonar has this. PT probably does, too.

Has anyone else ever noticed this obvious editing tool that Reaper doesn't seem to have??

Reaper also needs to have a way to allow imported loops with embedded data to automatically fit the tempo and pitch of samples to fit a project like ACID does. If it does, then I sure haven't found it: you have to screw around with the imported item through the Item Properties dialog box, the playback rate, quantizing, etc. to make it work (and that can be a pain, too).

Mike

Last edited by MikeF; 12-20-2011 at 11:36 PM.
MikeF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 11:59 AM   #54
Goreteks
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 11
Default

My hero Dom & Roland fully endorses it. That's all i need to know
Goreteks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 03:57 PM   #55
Kenny
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Central PA
Posts: 598
Default

I would like to share a contrasting Guitar Center experience. The guys in the pro audio department at the shop near me are actually good dudes. I was in asking about the Reaper Power book. The one guy said, "well we don't sell it and we never will" and explained because Reaper isn't a "physical" product like the others, GC doesn't sell it and don't particularly want to support a product they don't sell by pimping it's peripheral publications. BUT, this salesperson himself said "and it sucks, because Reaper is a great program. I love it and use it all the time." he also runs a studio and holds training seminars. He's converted to a Reaper based studio (but keeps PT for the clients who demand it).
So while I agree that Guitar Centers, being the types of places they are, usually aren't staffed with the most knowledgable people and aren't putting their customer's best interests above their profit interests. But it shouldn't be assumed that everyone who works in one is a useless shill.

Reaper's appearance in the public eye is just fine, I think. While I'd heard about it before, it was SOS magazine that finally convinced me to give it a serious look. The buzz is picking up steam. Everything is progressing just fine, I wouldn't worry about it.
Kenny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 04:15 PM   #56
seebs
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 622
Default

A friend recommended it, and I'm impressed. Affordable for my tiny non-commercial use, friendly company, good attitude...

I think some of it comes down to: Most people assume that a less expensive product is less valuable. The theory that "you get what you pay for" is widely ingrained, and people tend to take it at face value regardless of evidence.
seebs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 04:16 PM   #57
MikeF
Human being with feelings
 
MikeF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Anaconda, Montana
Posts: 364
Default The great "Reaper Power!" Book

Thanks for mentioning "The Reaper Power! The Comprehensive Guide" book. I bought it 10 months ago and it has been my Reaper Bible (the author is also the one who writes the Reaper User's Guide for everyone, did you know that??).

It is a GREAT guide, even for newbies like me!! Can't support it enough (although 90% of it is repeated in the users manual).

I now own about 12 basic recording books, a Cubase manual, a Sonar manual, and Geoffrey's "Reaper Power!" book. I've read them all over and over again, and NOT ONE even comes close to explaining all the details for home recording for both beginners like me and advanced users. That's a fact. Maybe a bit advanced for me to start with, but so what?? 10 times more info on construction, recording, editing, mixing, and mastering than any book I own. Hey, it doesn't matter if it's for Reaper users: most of what he says can be applied to any decent DAW out there!! It's just that other books forget to include dozens of items that he does include (especially in editing, navigation, routing, grouping, etc.).

Mike

Last edited by MikeF; 12-20-2011 at 11:36 PM.
MikeF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 04:24 PM   #58
MikeF
Human being with feelings
 
MikeF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Anaconda, Montana
Posts: 364
Default

Hey, Seeds, I hear you. I'm a newbie, this forum is teaching me a lot, and here's my view.

Reaper is SO loaded with SO many features, it's incredible!! As a newbie, I guess I bit off more than I could chew, but it's worth it: if it takes me 6 more months to really get it down vs. an "easier DAW" for beginners, then so be it! In the end, using Reaper will allow me to use dozens and dozens of editing features that other programs don't provide (or they don't explain that they are there, which is the same as not providing them).

I also know that within a few years (Reaper is still in diapers), it will be known as a monster is the business. Then everyone else will be saying: "Gee, I wish I would have jumped on board earlier!!" Why?? Because people well-versed with Pro Tools, Cubase, or Sonar will have a long learning curve to get used to Reaper while trying to break their old habits with former programs. That's their problem.

Mike

Last edited by MikeF; 12-20-2011 at 11:35 PM.
MikeF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2011, 11:21 PM   #59
DuraMorte
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: In your compressor, making coffee.
Posts: 1,165
Default

If Line 6 is bundling your software, you must be doing something right.
http://line6.com/offers/spider-podfarm
__________________
To a man with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. - yep
There are various ways to skin a cat :D - EvilDragon
DuraMorte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 03:36 AM   #60
sonnie
Human being with feelings
 
sonnie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 652
Default

Wow, Line6 is bundeling Reaper? Great
The first step...
sonnie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 04:15 AM   #61
g8torcliff
Human being with feelings
 
g8torcliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kundalinguist View Post
Do you have to take it with food or between meals.

[sorry, it was there and I couldn't resist. That was post 666 btw. ]
yeah....i noticed the "prescription" thing too. Must be because I work in a Pharmacy.

changed my post count....

cliff
g8torcliff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 09:51 AM   #62
Pixelshock
Human being with feelings
 
Pixelshock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 167
Default

I see a ton of Reaper name-drops in Sound on Sound and on popular podcasts like The Home Recording Show. It's definitely gaining momentum. I think cost-to-quality perception does play a small part in it (perhaps more than I realize), but from a designer's standpoint - and someone consumed with marketing for clients - I think there's a HUGE hole Cockos needs to address.

The program isn't finished. Not from a visual standpoint. What if we installed Reaper and Studio Plus One (v2) on a bunch of computers? Then you take 50 people and sit them down in front of computers and tell them to choose a DAW (and they have ZERO experience with any of them). 2 hours later, you make them pick one. Who do you think comes out on top?

From a marketing perspective, I'd say the majority will pick Studio One. Why? Every single element of the app is polished and screams "pro" from a visual standpoint. The build in plugs look awesome and it feels like a major commercial product. I love Reaper's main interface (props to White Tie!), but the moment you open that FX window....game over. The moment a new user sees the included plug-in interfaces? Game over. In my opinion, it's a deal-breaker. Power users don't care. They want the best tool for the job. But those who don't know will roll with what is PERCEIVED to be the best tool.

Reaper could easily climb to the top three DAWs used, but it's got to start taking itself seriously. And that means taking it's interface seriously. Those one pixel pan-lines are absolutely hideous. And Nick or WhiteTie can't do anything about them. The Track Manager/System Resource monitor/Plug-Ins/etc. interface looks like a bad Windows 3.1 experiment....and nobody can skin those. And as long as they look amateur, then expect the general community to take it at face value. As it stands right now, it still feels like a Beta app....and that's never going to scare ProTools.
Pixelshock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 10:02 AM   #63
plamuk
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,221
Default

Quote:
But those who don't know will roll with what is PERCEIVED to be the best tool.
^ the minute reaper starts catering to those types is the minute i'll stop checking the pre-release forum

it's funny that in order to attract the non-pro user, reaper must attempt to look more "pro." (i am really starting to hate that word). the irony kills me - because in focusing on its sparkle, devs would be neglecting the program's developing functionality - which, of course, is the ONLY thing that determines "pro" ness to real "pros"

proproproproproproproproproprop

there, i've used up the "pro" quota for 2012, by nym's decree we need to come up with a new word to use by january
plamuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 10:16 AM   #64
Pixelshock
Human being with feelings
 
Pixelshock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 167
Default

Dude, that's how I make my living. Making digital products look good. If you don't like things that looks good, then you belong in a very special category that about .0000001% of the population accounts for.

It only takes one programmer at Cockos to build the framework to allow ONE designer to go in and polish the hell out of the whole interface. It's not going to cripple the app. It's going to make it stronger. Reaper has FAR too many Linux-like-minded fans who believe it needs to look like crap so it will remain the underdog. That just doesn't make any sense. Polished doesn't mean "garbage".

I actually believe there's a chunk of the user community that doesn't want Reaper to blow up. Because then they will have to switch to "the other DAW that nobody knows about".
Pixelshock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 10:28 AM   #65
plamuk
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,221
Default

haha props to your line of work, i meant no slight to the polishers and designers among us, i hope they know that.

it's not that i don't care if something looks good, it's that this is so low on my priorities that to me it seems a distraction from an application's real-world functionality. for instance, GUIs for ReaComp - in my lowest 1% of "careabout."

Quote:
Reaper has FAR too many Linux-like-minded fans who believe it needs to look like crap so it will remain the underdog.
haha come on fella, that's just silly. if you ask, you'll find that those folks simply don't think it DOES look like crap. fx window for example. does its effin' job...who cares if it looks like windows explorer? w.e. is the bees knees.

(besides the point and not worth discussing, also, but i do not see how linux fits into this at all, aside from a well intentioned low blow at technologically inclined)
plamuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 12:13 PM   #66
McMaz
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1
Default

Give it time. Every DAW has its day.
McMaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 12:59 PM   #67
clickonce
Human being with feelings
 
clickonce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonE View Post
It has, the item and takes structure: http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/nov1...-tech-1110.htm
Haha, talk about trying to build a house with nothing but duct tape and baling wire.

Can you record new material while the loops are playing? It seems to me it would only work for pre-recorded clips.

Interesting link though. I'm a big fan of Reaper, but I would never use it for this. That workflow is pretty horrendous.
__________________
clickonce tunes
Well, I suppose you could practice it, but I don't. It just developed naturally.. sort of like a rash. -- Nigel Tufnel.
clickonce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 01:05 PM   #68
Pixelshock
Human being with feelings
 
Pixelshock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 167
Default

Nym, no offense taken....please don't take my comments as argumentative as well. I have no problems with the tech savvy (and no offense to Linux fans). I'm pretty geeked up myself, so I definitely fall into that category.

You mention Windows Explorer...I'm with you. If you look at Win7 or Vista, explorer looks VERY polished. The absolute opposite of the plugin window. And that's kinda my point: These are things you take for granted from professional software. Nobody really gives it much thought. It's just there and it works. But make no mistake - several designers have gone to great lengths to make file-management as attractive as possible.

Looks may not hold credibility for you...I'm just saying that they are a huge deal for many. If the iPod didn't look as slick as it does, would it have became the standard MP3 player in the world?

A good example is a recent client of ours. They had great products, but some of the worst packaging design I've ever seen. They sold car-spray-smell-good like products and were transitioning from bulk sales to rental companies (such as Avis/Budget)into a commercial market. Their packaging looked like something straight out of the early 70s and would look appropriate at a dated garage sell. On top of that, their photography sucked horribly. No matter how well you described the product (or how many testimonials/videos they put on their site), when they tried to sell directly to the consumer - the traffic stopped as soon as the buyer saw an image.

After some tough love (which was pretty awkward - but I have to have those talks with clients), I talked them into new packaging (more along the lines of Febreze) and professional photos of the products. And it worked. As soon as we made those changes, sales began to happen on their site. Same product - new marketing.

Now granted....that had a little to do with their target audience. But the truth remains that when a product looks nice, it's perceived as "the real deal". And us tech-heads are pretty spoiled with slick interfaces. Almost to the point to where we don't even pay attention to them unless something ugly pops up. I'm in Photoshop/Illustrator at least 5 hours a day. If I pulled up a tool in Photoshop that looked nothing like the front end of the app (and very dated), I'd start to wonder what Adobe was doing. I'm not saying any of this to make Reaper sound "cheap". But I know for a fact that there's a ton of potential users that see parts of the product as just that - cheap. And cheap often translates to junk in the tech world.

Before I get swarmed, let me restate that I LOVE the default skin and I really appreciate the interfaces that WhiteTie and Nick (and others) have contributed. I never meant to suggest that the mixer/track-view UI is anything but outstanding.
Pixelshock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 01:15 PM   #69
plamuk
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,221
Default

good post all around, don't have much time to comment on it but i wanted to add this amusing bit:

Quote:
If you look at Win7 or Vista, explorer looks VERY polished.
see i have for ages switched back to "windows classic" view (circa 95)
maybe that's why i don't think the fx screen looks ugly - it matches the rest of my OS haha
plamuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 01:59 PM   #70
Graal
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 54
Default

Hello guys!

I work for a ProAudio Retailer here in Romania.
I always recommend Reaper to our customers, saying that I could work with any DAW I want, but I choose Reaper. Many have taken the plunge and thanked me for it.

I only wish we could be able to sell it in a box in the store.
We would be more than thrilled to do this, even though we do sell Steinberg, Cakewalk, Avid, Ableton and Presonus as well. We endorse Reaper and we do it free of charge!

Thank you Cockos!

PS: Please make an option so that the automated mutes behave like pressing the mute button so we can save CPU...

Yours trully!
Graal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 02:20 PM   #71
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 22,754
Default

We seem to have attracted quite a few graphics designers on here of late, all of whom are busy telling us we can't possibly work with reaper looking as ugly as it does.

If I could be arsed to figure out how to do a screen shot off a Amiga 1200 I would love to hear what they think of the GUI on Bars n Pipes pro, my MIDI sequencer of choice!

Sure' most of us would agree that there are elements of Reaper that are not exactly Windoze compliant, snazzy looking, w.h.y., but comparing it with Studio One is a joke.
Reaper works really well for me and to be honest Studio One lasted exactly three days after I bought it - just long enough to realise how few of the things I needed were included in the Artist version (which in my opinion wasn't even adequate as a free demo let alone something I had to pay nearly as much as my Reaper licence cost me.)

Bad comparison.
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 03:20 PM   #72
Pixelshock
Human being with feelings
 
Pixelshock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 167
Default

I don't agree. I installed Studio One Ver2 last week and gave it a spin. It's very nice. I'm not switching from Reaper, but it definitely gives any commercial DAW a run for it's money. Sound on Sound apparently thinks so as well in this month's issue with a full review.

I NEVER said I couldn't work with Reaper or that it is "ugly". It's my DAW of choice and I'm not switching. I love the program. I'm saying it's not finished. And those unfinished parts hurt the perceived value of the program for potential new users or getting other DAW users to switch sides. I'm in NO way a Reaper hater. I recommend the app constantly to other musicians.
Pixelshock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 03:48 PM   #73
seebs
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 622
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivansc View Post
We seem to have attracted quite a few graphics designers on here of late, all of whom are busy telling us we can't possibly work with reaper looking as ugly as it does.
I don't think that's what they're saying.

UI design is a major and hard field. Thing is, lots of UIs are basically usable for an experienced user -- but are harder to learn. (Some interfaces are the other way around; easy to use but not flexible enough for hardcore use.)

I think the claim isn't that we can't do stuff in REAPER, but that a newbie confronted with it will have a harder-than-necessary time finding things, and will tend to end up picking something that's easier to pick up and use.

And that strikes me as a pretty unexceptional claim.

REAPER's not bad. It's not like the GIMP, which is probably one of the most horrible UIs I've ever used, or QuickTime 4, which was stupendously awful and outright crazy. On the other hand, it does suffer a little from Kitchen Sink, and it's full of things I don't understand. (Obvious example: There is a horizontal volume slider to the left of each track, and a row of vertical volume sliders for each track below them. They appear to be linked. Why do they both exist?)

Quote:
If I could be arsed to figure out how to do a screen shot off a Amiga 1200 I would love to hear what they think of the GUI on Bars n Pipes pro, my MIDI sequencer of choice!
I miss B&P so much. It really did have an insanely beautiful approach to MIDI management.

That said, it had some really *nice* UI choices.
seebs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 04:00 PM   #74
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,926
Default

I agree that it's not finished. I'll even agree tht there are some ergonomic quirks that need ironing-out; the way REAPER has evolved maybe hasn't helped here.

I'm really worried by people wanting to mess with the interface "because it's ugly". I'd like to make it uglier by putting dB lines on the fader. Why? Because I want it to bemore functional. I don't always agree with what WT (the graphic design team leader) does, but I think he's done a pretty good job so far.

As one of the members of the population who "do things" I'll save further asthetic judgements for the audio I work on with this software, thank you.

I don't care how pretty my screwdrivers are, as long as they're well designed for the job.



>
__________________
Nathan, Lincoln, UK. | Item Marker Tool. (happily retired) | Source Time Position Tool. | CD Track Marker Tool. | Timer Recording Tool. | dB marks on MCP faders FR.
planetnine is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 04:05 PM   #75
Kundalinguist
Human being with feelings
 
Kundalinguist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,630
Default

I like my DAWs and my women as ugly as possible, just to make me look prettier.

But seriously, Studio One does rock visually and one of the reasons I left Digital Performer was the version 6.0 GUI - whitewash. So looks do matter to me. But money in the bank doesn't hurt either. And I know Reaper's got some.
__________________
Success is just one more plugin away! And happiness is as close as your next upgrade. (On the interweb: www.rolandk.ca / www.auroraskypublishing.com)
Kundalinguist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 08:45 PM   #76
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

My (oft-repeated) subjective-ness... (on the GUI)...

1. Reaper looks really great once you find a theme you like. If you can't find one yet, try some bastardizing from among the various parts of themes and thank / credit the various creators if you share it.

2. OTOH, once you start opening some of the edit windows and panels, it actually doesn't look all that great anymore... which is why those things are rarely ever open in screen shots showing how great it can look... because that diminishes the overall look of the GUI.

Like I said before, even the devs seem to know it because the home page doesn't actually show any of it. No tracklist, no media browser, none of it. It's great stuff but it looks so plain it doesn't help to plaster it all over the page.

This looks pretty good actually... imo, mmv. Tastes vary but it looks pretty good to me...



Now show a few things docked besides the mixer, and... not so much anymore. When people bring it up others start talking about price and expensive daws and bloat and all kinds of other stuff having nothing to do with any of that. They have a world class graphic artist (and world class devs) on board already so... all of that other stuff is really irrelevant to that, imo.

So... that's the Reaper "marketing shot", that's not what Reaper really looks like when you use it, start opening FX windows and things. But something like this below... what users get out of the box ... wouldn't look all that good on the home page...



... so maybe users should stop sending the devs mixed messages when it's all upside, improving those parts, and it won't (shouldn't) change anything else about Reaper. It'll still be inexpensive, powerful, flexible, everything it is now... but look much better... or rather, not only look good when most of it's parts aren't showing.

Last edited by Lawrence; 12-20-2011 at 10:39 PM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 10:27 PM   #77
Smurf
Human being with feelings
 
Smurf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,173
Default

"Why Is Reaper Never Mentioned As A Top Notch DAW Like Pro Tools, Cubase, Sonar??"

Because it is not a top notch DAW....yet....
__________________
Yep's First 3 Years in PDF's
HP Z600 w/3GHz 12 Core, 48GB Memory, nVidia Quadro 5800, 240GB SSD OS drive, 3 480GB SSD Sample/Storage drives, 18TB External Storage, Dual 27" Monitors
Smurf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 10:54 PM   #78
Blastrio
Human being with feelings
 
Blastrio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Montreal, Qc
Posts: 453
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nym View Post
haha come on fella, that's just silly. if you ask, you'll find that those folks simply don't think it DOES look like crap. fx window for example. does its effin' job...who cares if it looks like windows explorer?
The paying customers do. You know, those guys that pay us money in exchange of our services so that we can eat, pay our electricity bill, etc.
Blastrio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 11:14 PM   #79
Mr. Data
Human being with feelings
 
Mr. Data's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Location
Posts: 5,559
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
My (oft-repeated) subjective-ness... (on the GUI)...

1. Reaper looks really great once you find a theme you like. If you can't find one yet, try some bastardizing from among the various parts of themes and thank / credit the various creators if you share it.

2. OTOH, once you start opening some of the edit windows and panels, it actually doesn't look all that great anymore... which is why those things are rarely ever open in screen shots showing how great it can look... because that diminishes the overall look of the GUI.

Like I said before, even the devs seem to know it because the home page doesn't actually show any of it. No tracklist, no media browser, none of it. It's great stuff but it looks so plain it doesn't help to plaster it all over the page.

This looks pretty good actually... imo, mmv. Tastes vary but it looks pretty good to me...



Now show a few things docked besides the mixer, and... not so much anymore. When people bring it up others start talking about price and expensive daws and bloat and all kinds of other stuff having nothing to do with any of that. They have a world class graphic artist (and world class devs) on board already so... all of that other stuff is really irrelevant to that, imo.

So... that's the Reaper "marketing shot", that's not what Reaper really looks like when you use it, start opening FX windows and things. But something like this below... what users get out of the box ... wouldn't look all that good on the home page...



... so maybe users should stop sending the devs mixed messages when it's all upside, improving those parts, and it won't (shouldn't) change anything else about Reaper. It'll still be inexpensive, powerful, flexible, everything it is now... but look much better... or rather, not only look good when most of it's parts aren't showing.
Yes, that's really true IMHO. As soon as you open a floating window or whatever window it looks somewhat like . Maybe the devs could give more insight in theming or tools for theming windows for Reaper (if they have dealt with that topic at all), since we have great theming artists here.

On the other hand, compared to most other DAWs it looks incomplete, which leaves hope that there will be done some work at some time. It really doesn't look like "top notch", but at least for me it's better than "oh so stylish" GUIs that you can't change or not even alter. I remember by the time I left Cubase, you could alter the main GUI from a very light blue to a light blue; Dunno what you can do today. And Vegas or Acid ... Oh well...


-Data
__________________
German Language Pack for REAPER? Get it here! ... Donate? Yeah!! | Are you nuts? | Maybe
Deutsche Sprachdatei für REAPER? Hier zu haben! ... Spenden? Klar! | Spinnst wohl!? | Vielleicht
Mr. Data is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2011, 11:25 PM   #80
DBMusic
Human being with feelings
 
DBMusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,203
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
... so maybe users should stop sending the devs mixed messages when it's all upside, improving those parts, and it won't (shouldn't) change anything else about Reaper. It'll still be inexpensive, powerful, flexible, everything it is now... but look much better... or rather, not only look good when most of it's parts aren't showing.
This is all very subjective. Personally, I don't give a rat's crap about how the FX window looks. Reaper is a top notch DAW because it gets out of the way and lets me create.

DB
__________________
My Stuff
DBMusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.