Reaper or Cubase 8 Artist?

[JamesZhan9592]

Hi beautiful people,

Because I'm very broke, I am still using Cubase 5 and I'm fairly satisfied with it. However, I feel like I really have to get an up-to-date DAW for better workflow/production or w/e. As I said, I'm broke and I want to save money whenever possible.

So my question is: Reaper and Cubase 8 Artist, which one is better and why (pros and cons)?

My mentality is that if Cubase 8 Artist is much much better than Reaper, then aight; I will spend the $300. On the contrary, if Cubase 8 Artist is not that much better than the $60 Reaper, or it's not even as good as Reaper, then I will go with Reaper.

I do electric guitar/bass tracking a lot, program instruments a lot (Superior Drummer) and also do mixing, editing and mastering.

One other issue is that I found Reaper SO different from Cubase, and it doesn't look as slick as Cubase. But I've heard extremely great feedback about Reaper from experienced producers and I'm willing to learn.

Sorry this is kind of long. Plz be as unbiased as possible Reaper people! =D

Thanks guys!

[stereolost]

I've just switched from 500euro Cubase 8 Pro to Reaper and not looking back.
But you may not like it. Feature-wise it beats Cubase Pro, not to mention the stripped down Artist.. but relearning will cost you couple of "WTF" weeks.

Regarding the Artist 8 you should know that there are no VCA faders, no VariAudio, stripped down automation, no ControlRoom, no loudness meters, no mp3 export, no batch export.

Try this video: https://youtu.be/1zVQolY8zy4 - if you watched it and no single thing makes you excited, maybe all the stuff Reaper can do is not for you, and you would be happier with the familiar Cubase workflow, which got significantly more interesting (and buggy) since version 5.

Also, Reaper is free to try, so you can download it right now and try it.

[reaperguy45]

I didn't get along with stripped down Cubase. Reaper pretty much does it all if you can deal with the steep learning curve. Then I got Studio One and started making music and quit fiddling and configuring. Xlxt Built in Mastering facility. Check out the demo along with the Reaper Demo, you'll know what to do...

[mschnell]

After I showed Reaper to him, a friend of mine who uses the most expensive version of Cubase since years bought Reaper and never touched Cubase again.

He said, of course the ways or Reaper in many aspects are rather different, and you need to re-learn multiple details, a lot is better with Reaper, and the license-scheme is unbelievably friendly: not forcing you to expensive upgrades to stay up to date, and allowing you to use multiple computers.

-Michael.

[Time Waster]

I moved from Cubase AI4 to Reaper after looking at moving up to either Cubase 7 Artist or Elements. I chose Reaper because:

It was fully functional
It costs significantly less
It looked more interesting

The last point refers to the fact that Cubase seems to be pretty set in mimicking a hardware setup, lots of emphasis on a nice GUI, but lacking in imagination.

I did go through a few weeks of pain in learning how to use Reaper and I did have moments of doubt that I had made the right choice, but that is to be expected, I think, with any change of software. No doubts now.

[gmgmgm]

I'd strongly recommend installing Reaper and using it for the full trial period before putting your hand in your pocket and making a decision. It'll give you plenty of time to decide if you can make Reaper work for you. You might consider trialling with the pre-release version, which has some added capabilities.

The major difference I find between Reaper and other DAWs is the ability/requirement to customise it if you want to benefit from the workflow efficiencies its flexibility offers. A clumsy analogy is that Reaper is to Other DAWs as Unix is to Windows - each offer similar capabilities, but presented differently. Reaper allows you to assemble functionality to suit your preferred way of working, at the cost of bewildering some newcomers with a vast array of options and resources requiring initial time and effort to learn. Once you become familiar with it you can likely make it work very efficiently as you wish to work, always provided that you know how you wish to work. Other DAWs have a greater tendency to impose a workflow. This may actually be more efficient for those without a strong preference for how things should be done; tinkerers have ample opportunity to consume their time configuring rather than producing, both in Reaper and Unix.

From your list of interests, the only weakness you might find in Reaper is in MIDI programming, and even there it's very capable. I've recently purchased Cubase 8 Pro after a couple of years of primarily using Reaper, mainly because I work mostly in MIDI and Cubase Pro's Note Expression, Expression Mapping and Scoring offer workflow possibilities unlikely to appear in Reaper in the foreseeable future. I haven't run into any stability issues with Cubase, it's been as reliable as Reaper over the month I've been using it. I wasn't tempted by Cubase Artist 8 for the reasons stereolost listed - if I was very broke, I wouldn't have made the change.

I've also spent time working in Sonar and Studio One. It seems to me that it's possible to do pretty much anything you need to do in any full version of a modern DAW, each offer their own strengths and weaknesses but they're all very complete packages. Having started way back with C-Lab Notator in the late '80s, I feel spoilt rotten by what's available.

[G-Sun]

Asking here is of course gonna favor Reaper some.
I believe Cubase is very good, but I've not used it much.

If you have Cubase 5, then why go for Cubase 8 artist.
Is really Cubase 5 lacking much for you?

I belive you need to specify what you need that Cubas 5 doesn't have.

On the other side,
just try a project in Reaper.
In the end it'll only cost you ($60 and) a few learning hours.

[whiteaxxxe]

Cubase 5 does a really good job. if you have it, there is no reason for going to Cubase 8 Artist.

but there are reasons to go Reaper. see the above posts. and: compare the Steinberg forum to this forum here. difference like night and day. I myself used Cubase since the days it was Steinberg 12 for Atari. I changed to Reaper after 25 years and I (will) never regret it. There is nothing you will miss about Cubase whatever-version.

[zookthespook]

I was on Cubase 7.5 till a month ago and I have a license of 8
I have been using it for the past 15 years.. all my macros , shortcuts , logical editor presets were an essential part of my work flow
I shifted to reaper in 3 days ..thats it . I made a shift of 15 years of workflow in 3 days. I have scored over 3000 commercials and 9 bollywood film scores .. thats the kind of releationship i have had with Cubase.. since the past one month I have scored 7 commercials and 2 songs. THere are some really nice things exclusive to cubase.. when it comes to reaper.. it hardy felt like a bargain !
dont fear the reaper !
I am still a noob to this software tho !

[JamesZhan9592]

Wow! That's some very helpful replies!

I'm still a student and I'm willing to try other DAWs.

The first thing when I tried Reaper that made me uncomfortable was the right click feature. In Cubase, I love the feature that when I hold the right click, I can have like 8 functions to choose (like draw, mute, split etc).

I'm very satisfied with Cubase 5, except that if the volume of a track is automated, you cannot adjust the volume fader of the track. And from what I heard, in Reaper, this problem is solved.

And I admit that Reaper does look very interesting.

[JamesZhan9592]

Originally Posted by zookthespook

I was on Cubase 7.5 till a month ago and I have a license of 8
I have been using it for the past 15 years.. all my macros , shortcuts , logical editor presets were an essential part of my work flow
I shifted to reaper in 3 days ..thats it . I made a shift of 15 years of workflow in 3 days. I have scored over 3000 commercials and 9 bollywood film scores .. thats the kind of releationship i have had with Cubase.. since the past one month I have scored 7 commercials and 2 songs. THere are some really nice things exclusive to cubase.. when it comes to reaper.. it hardy felt like a bargain !
dont fear the reaper !
I am still a noob to this software tho !

How did you deal with the presets from Cubase? I'm sure you have lots of them since you have been using it for 15 years. That's what concerns me the most because I have many essential presets. Did you transfer them to Reaper?

[thequietroom]

I do not have experience with cubase, but I do have a similiar workflow as you (record guitars, superior drummer)

Reaper is really deep and has the reputation for a steep learning curve, but honestly for my workflow (maybe my needs for a DAW are simple), it wasn't all that much to learn.

as far as the "slick look"

If you spend some time with the customization of the UI you can make Reaper look pretty slick. The default theme is function over form, but even the default theme can look pretty slick.

If I was weighing the option between the two you posted, I would get Reaper (or maybe just stick with cubase 5 unless there is an essential function missing) and use the money saved to expand my DAW with a great VSTI instrument or maybe an interface..monitors.. something else I needed that would improve my capability.

As stated, you can try reaper for free.

to be honest, as a bedroom artist which DAW you use doesn't make much difference in how your recordings end up sounding. You'll get the workflow down.. and from that point, the biggest change you can make with software is probably with VSTI instruments.

Buy a new DAW, or spectrasonics omnisphere and see which one makes your next song sound more different

I dont even have omnisphere but its on my drool list

[thequietroom]

im not sure about the automation on a track.. again im not a power user, but if there is a volume envelope on a track and I move its fader while its playing, I can move the fader but it will snap back to where the envelope is when I release it.

my automation needs are fairly basic though.. maybe others will understand more of what you mean with that part.

[JamesZhan9592]

Originally Posted by thequietroom

I do not have experience with cubase, but I do have a similiar workflow as you (record guitars, superior drummer)

Reaper is really deep and has the reputation for a steep learning curve, but honestly for my workflow (maybe my needs for a DAW are simple), it wasn't all that much to learn.

as far as the "slick look"

If you spend some time with the customization of the UI you can make Reaper look pretty slick. The default theme is function over form, but even the default theme can look pretty slick.

If I was weighing the option between the two you posted, I would get Reaper (or maybe just stick with cubase 5 unless there is an essential function missing) and use the money saved to expand my DAW with a great VSTI instrument or maybe an interface..monitors.. something else I needed that would improve my capability.

As stated, you can try reaper for free.

to be honest, as a bedroom artist which DAW you use doesn't make much difference in how your recordings end up sounding. You'll get the workflow down.. and from that point, the biggest change you can make with software is probably with VSTI instruments.

Buy a new DAW, or spectrasonics omnisphere and see which one makes your next song sound more different

I dont even have omnisphere but its on my drool list

That's very true. Cubase 8 Artist is very expensive. And the customization in Reaper seems to be very very fascinating. I have downloaded Reaper and I will definitely spend sometime with it!

[JamesZhan9592]

Originally Posted by stereolost

I've just switched from 500euro Cubase 8 Pro to Reaper and not looking back.
But you may not like it. Feature-wise it beats Cubase Pro, not to mention the stripped down Artist.. but relearning will cost you couple of "WTF" weeks.

Regarding the Artist 8 you should know that there are no VCA faders, no VariAudio, stripped down automation, no ControlRoom, no loudness meters, no mp3 export, no batch export.

Try this video: https://youtu.be/1zVQolY8zy4 - if you watched it and no single thing makes you excited, maybe all the stuff Reaper can do is not for you, and you would be happier with the familiar Cubase workflow, which got significantly more interesting (and buggy) since version 5.

Also, Reaper is free to try, so you can download it right now and try it.

I watched the video and now I really want to spend a lot of time figuring out Reaper. Those functions are absolutely amazing! The customization is crazy. The only concern for me is whether I can figure them all out. Well, it's just a matter of time! Thanks bro (assuming that you are not a female lmao)!

[ProfRhino]

Originally Posted by JamesZhan9592

... I'm broke and I want to save money whenever possible.
... I do electric guitar/bass tracking a lot, program instruments a lot (Superior Drummer) and also do mixing, editing and mastering.

Same "job description" here.
Give me Cubase 5 full (well, ideally 6.5) over both C8 Artist and Reaper for these tasks any day.
If your idea of fun is mangling stuff in ways nobody has come up with before, you'll love Reaper. Its flood of options, actions and configurability are unparalleled, at the expense of straightforward recording / editing / mixing workflow.
And no, you can't custom build that workflow from all the options available, I've tried hard for over half a year ...
The upcoming v5 (going by the current prereleases) doesn't show any love for your scenario either (except for overcomplicated VCAs maybe which are completely missing the original point of "quick'n'dirty" volume grouping).
Strongest points are this forum (the best, most helpful I've seen, anywhere !), the action- and scripting system, plugin management and the "pioneer spirit" - if you still can't do something, you just have to dig deeper (often that's true, unfortunately not for many audio workflow basics).
Record, edit and mix a simple 3min dr,bg,2g idea and you'll see what I'm talking about.
I've been a die-hard Cubase freak from SX1 to 6.5, C7/8 were a huge disappointment, sacrificing essential workflow concepts for a UI coming straight from cellphone hell - so I was investigating alternatives with a future ...
Long story short, if you don't mind using an EOL product, C6.5 (and for the most part even C5) is as good as it gets for the jobs you described.
For me, it's still undecided - a tie between 6.5, a severely hacked into shape C8 (using all kinds of internal and external bandaids to make it workable) and - surprise candidate - S1Pro2.6 which I bought used for $100ish and which fares extremely well so far.
High hopes, if v3 goes in the right direction, S1 might be my future ...
The crux of the apostrophe with Reaper for me is v5 as far as we know yet, I'm not even remotely interested in any of the new stuff personally, but desperately missing some basic features and bugfixes that cannot be home-built, unfortunately.
We'll see what the future brings ...

I'm very satisfied with Cubase 5, except that if the volume of a track is automated, you cannot adjust the volume fader of the track. And from what I heard, in Reaper, this problem is solved.

If that's all that's bothering you, simply use groups. Not only a workaround, but a huge enhancement of your workflow.
Certainly not a reason for switching DAW, especially when your budget's tight.

all including 3x ymmv and 5x imho, with generous amounts of mustard,
Rhino

hope I made it clear I was talking about a certain type of "traditional" DAW jobs, I can perfectly see how Reaper might be ideal for other scenarios.

[zookthespook]

I am building the track presets from scratch here as well. I was never in the habit of making track chains.. I build everytime as i go on a project . There were certain things i was always dying for to have in cubase for eg.
1.Cubase has Vol and Pan env. but Reaper has Pitch envelope too
2.Audio stretch and pitch handling is way way superior here , no calculation times for TS or PS.

3.Insert Fx on clips !!! I would avoid automation as much as possible , as editing parts for me is a night mare.. In reaper you can insert fx on clip level without processing them !.

4.All the macros i wrote in cubase , i have managed to write most of them here too. in custom action scripts

Key commands have been remapped so i change my keys as i used to have them in cubase. and chaning keys with just hitting the ''?'' key is super fast !


Working with video is also as seemsless as Cubase.

Bussing in reaper is light years ahead of cubase.

customizing the DAW... is beyond any software for audio that i have worked on until now .


it will take sometime to set up .. but the benefits are immense .

[whiteaxxxe]

Originally Posted by ProfRhino

...
And no, you can't custom build that workflow from all the options available, I've tried hard for over half a year ...
...

try harder. of course you can have that straight forward workflow of record a track, record the next track ... cut and slice and clean up all the tracks, mix the tracks, render the track ... done.

where is the problem? the keyword is "options". an option is something you can use, but you must not. so leave the options alone if they confuse you.

(Cubase user since Steinberg 12 for Atari ...)

[stereolost]

Originally Posted by JamesZhan9592

I watched the video and now I really want to spend a lot of time figuring out Reaper. Those functions are absolutely amazing! The customization is crazy. The only concern for me is whether I can figure them all out. Well, it's just a matter of time! Thanks bro (assuming that you are not a female lmao)!

I'm totally bro))
I'm currently in the process or figuring Reaper out, most basic stuff already done. If you have any noob questions, you can message me. But actually this forum is one of the main Reaper's features - very friendly and helping. Just make sure not to ask which DAW sounds warmer and which is overcompressed )

[ProfRhino]

Originally Posted by whiteaxxxe

try harder. of course you can have that straight forward workflow of record a track, record the next track ... cut and slice and clean up all the tracks, mix the tracks, render the track ... done.

no doubt, but this is generalistic at best. Every DAW can do that of course.
The difference is how it's done.
... comping, lanes, edit folders, context-sensitive info line, hardware controllers (MIDI parameter feedback) to only name a few - this is stuff that really makes all the difference for me - no comparison between R or C & S, not even remotely. *
These things can't be user-configured, they would have to be officially implemented.
Easiest example, edit folders. A single button on a folder - edit one track and all other tracks in that folder get the same edits where applicable.
No other options needed, wysiwyg.
Disable with one key stroke for individual edits when needed.
Quick, obvious, elegant.
Reaper has a totally complex grouping system instead, but misses such an immensely useful everyday feature.
Prove me wrong, configure this simple thing for me in Reaper - I would love to eat my words !
In Reaper you can configure extremely mighty procedures that can do some of these tasks as byproducts somehow, but you're always confronted with choices and options where none are required most of the time.

Originally Posted by whiteaxxxe

where is the problem? the keyword is "options". an option is something you can use, but you must not. so leave the options alone if they confuse you.

What makes you think options confuse me ?
I love options, and I'm a notorious tweaker. You should see my keycommands / macros / controller setup ...
The difference is :
When I'm working I need everything to use my personal defaults, without asking all the time. And there has to be a modifier to bring up the full options in the rare case they are needed.
I don't get tired tweaking these defaults until they are precisely right for my needs, and I know exactly what I'm going for.
But I have zero tolerance for unnecessary checkbox lists or a bunch of similar key commands only differing in tiny details when I have clients in the room, I rather concentrate on the music instead.
Remember those vintage high-end Akai cassette decks ?



any questions ?

again, ymmv,
Rhino

* of course all candidates have their individual strengths and weaknesses, I'm mostly referring to the tasks the OP mentioned.

[JamesZhan9592]

I have been customizing Reaper all day and so far I'm definitely in great love with it. The macro creating is amazing. The fact that I can customize legit everything in the DAW is simply mind blowing. I'm definitely gonna buy it. And thanks for all the replies guys!

Cheers!

[Time Waster]

Just don't let it distract you from the actual task of creating music!

[mschnell]

Originally Posted by JamesZhan9592

I have been customizing Reaper all day

Did you take a look at the (free) SWS reaper extensions -> http://sws.mj-s.com/ ?

They did a lot of easy to use customizations.

Did you take a look at the Reaper 5 preview. Maybe some of the improvements might suit your needs.

-Michael

[JamesZhan9592]

Originally Posted by mschnell

Did you take a look at the (free) SWS reaper extensions -> http://sws.mj-s.com/ ?

They did a lot of easy to use customizations.

Did you take a look at the Reaper 5 preview. Maybe some of the improvements might suit your needs.

-Michael

Oh yes I have already downloaded it! Thanks!

[rvman]

Originally Posted by JamesZhan9592

I have been customizing Reaper all day and so far I'm definitely in great love with it. The macro creating is amazing. The fact that I can customize legit everything in the DAW is simply mind blowing. I'm definitely gonna buy it. And thanks for all the replies guys!

Cheers!

Cool. If you don't know already, you'll definitely want to check out Kenny's videos on the Groove3 website.

[SEA]

Originally Posted by JamesZhan9592

I have been customizing Reaper all day and so far I'm definitely in great love with it. The macro creating is amazing. The fact that I can customize legit everything in the DAW is simply mind blowing. I'm definitely gonna buy it. And thanks for all the replies guys!

Cheers!

Now that it's been almost a year since you have been using Reaper vs Cubase... any more insight you can share for those who are long time Cubase users?

I have a buddy of mine who works with Yamaha and does clinics for Cubase. Now he's going to help me on some projects in Reaper.

So I thought perhaps giving him a list of the things that Cubase users prefer now in Reaper might give him some insight.

Not trying to switch him and all, just want him to "think out of the Cubase box" and perhaps work together using Reaper.

So anything you can add would be appreciated.

[mabian]

Originally Posted by rvman

Cool. If you don't know already, you'll definitely want to check out Kenny's videos on the Groove3 website.

Well, nowadays I find no need to go to the groove3 website imho....

http://www.reaper.fm/videos.php

- Mario

[SEA]

Originally Posted by zookthespook

I am building the track presets from scratch here as well. I was never in the habit of making track chains.. I build everytime as i go on a project . There were certain things i was always dying for to have in cubase for eg.
1.Cubase has Vol and Pan env. but Reaper has Pitch envelope too
2.Audio stretch and pitch handling is way way superior here , no calculation times for TS or PS.

3.Insert Fx on clips !!! I would avoid automation as much as possible , as editing parts for me is a night mare.. In reaper you can insert fx on clip level without processing them !.

4.All the macros i wrote in cubase , i have managed to write most of them here too. in custom action scripts

Key commands have been remapped so i change my keys as i used to have them in cubase. and chaning keys with just hitting the ''?'' key is super fast !


Working with video is also as seemsless as Cubase.

Bussing in reaper is light years ahead of cubase.

customizing the DAW... is beyond any software for audio that i have worked on until now .


it will take sometime to set up .. but the benefits are immense .

What version of Cubase were you using when you switched to Reaper?

Anything you can add to the list of reasons you prefer Reaper of Cubase?

[Colox]

Cubase is (and has always been) a far more matured and inventive DAW. Cubase is the mother of them all as far as I'm concerned. Using the MIDI editor in Cubase is such an incredibly smooth experience, your work just flies like a well-oiled lightning bolt. The precision and response is that great, compared to Reaper.

But which one is good, depends alot on how you're working. Most people don't even use a fraction of the maze of advanced helpful tools there is in Cubase.

With that said, I left Cubase after 30 years. I ended up using Reaper, simply because I was in a hurry and couldn't work with stuff that crashes every hour, where the support or the user forum has no answers than to blame the user or the usage. The culture on the Steinberg forum is always like "have you optimized this, done that, checked that?". But never any errorsearching, no concrete tips on why Cubase does the way it does and how to get around it. Nope, it's only usage or your bad computer. Never Cubase.
But when met with the fact that Reaper, Samplitude etc works like a Swiss clock without any of all those optimizations, there is just dead silence as response - even from the pro support. They sort of know already, you can 'feel it' in the vibes that they do - if you know how I mean. They just don't wanna say it.

In the end I got raving furious. I couldn’t do pro work with such a bad setup. Kiddies were telling me "If cubase is good enough for Hans Zimmer, it's good enough for you too".

I went scientist. I spent some money and brought in some friends. An extremely talented/educated programmer (highly paid too), another friend an amazing sysop wiz with decades of experience, along with other guys who - like myself - call themselves advanced in the music area. This, along with 6 different Windows computers, all with different high-end audio interfaces - including the model that Steinberg highly recommends for use with their software, the HP Z-series. Me and 4 other guys spent 9 days in an apartment, trying to exclude ourselves down to what was making Cubase muck up like it did, on different machines (yes, the problems were nearly identical on each machine).
We even found some pretty interesting performance enhancers for Cubase along the way. We went through soooo much ground that I doubt Steinberg’s guys themselves ever did. I couldn't even follow the two tech wiz guys in the end.

But despite trying different Windows versions, audio interfaces, drivers, plugin configs, hotfixes, different DAWs on the same systems, lots and lots of diagnostics, measurements, support recommendations .. I mean, the only thing that ended up being the common bad factor for everything, was Cubase. Nothing else.

The programmer guy looked at the source code for Steinberg’s VST3 protocol, and determined that if Cubase is programmed with the same code negligence as this, it would explain a lot of its insidious behaviour. It’s especially sensitive to graphic issues and coherent instabilities.

Recognize this one?

It's the most widely known error Cubase shows, for everyone. It's been around since Cubase SX1, in 2001. It's still there in Cubase 8.5 and happens just as often. Do you see it says it saves an errorlog, you can't read the log. It needs to be decoded by Steinberg tech guys and they almost never tell you what it says.

Again, this is connected to usage to some degree as well. For me, one normal song (including mixing and vocals) usually ends up being about 200 tracks with even more plugins than tracks. Cubase doesn’t stand a chance coping with that. No way. I couldn’t even run that in Cubase because of the much higher CPU-utilization.

When I look in my project archive since 20 years back, every Cubase project is filled up with “Projectfile name-1”, “Projectfile name-2”, “Projectfile name-3”, “Projectfile name-3”, “Projectfile name-5” all the way up to 40 versions on every projects. This is what Cubase does, when it crashes. When you re-open the project, it saves the backup of the crashed file as Filename plus the addition of a number, which increases every time it crashes.

But for simpler use, it should do quite good. It does have this annoying habit of just starting to .. act up in some random way that just doesn’t seem to have a firm source, and might just disappear in 30 seconds after starting, or by disabling some plugin. Next time it happens, disabling the plugin won’t remove the problem. It’s just kindof random and restarting Cubase needs to be done often for large projects. Also, Cubase needs a lot more CPU for the same thing as other DAWs.

Reaper? If you use Reaper you can simply forget the wall of text above. It just works. Period.
No matter how much you consciously try to make it act up, it doesn’t.

I ended up in rant mode a bit here, sorry ‘bout that. Woke up some emotions about .. old gastric ulcers :P

Overall, Cubase is much more mature when it comes to tools, editing feel, smart solutions, advanced tools etc. But it’s a DAW with a lot of personality, alot. For example, don’t count on using 32-bit plugins in Cubase x64. It will be so much trouble it ain’t worth it. But their support will tell you Cubase is 100% backwards compatible to VST x32, and if anything goes wrong, it’s you using it wrong, or a bad plugin.

Reaper is behind in many areas, not at least when it comes to feel and mouse response. But the amount of time you save by not having it act up, and be able to run almost any form of thing you put into it with less CPU taxation than any other DAW. That’s what makes me stay on Reaper and away from going back to Cubase.

[MikComposer]

I'm moving on from reaper to cubase.

@Colox I've seen Junkie XL vid, and he has almost 2k tracks in his cubase template. https://youtu.be/bB1twfL5b28

Personally Reaper crashes from time to time here, regardless of system I'm on. Often it is the case of either 32bit plugin or when sampler is loading a library while a midi message is being sent to it r sometimes some other random thing.

[ilporcupine]

MikComposer:

I assume you are going over to the Cubase forums as well. You have been complaining here about Reaper for the longest time, and you really should be over there with your amigos...

Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya...

[ilporcupine]

I also have seen all JunkieXL videos. He does have a huge template. He also slaves it to 4 Mac servers for samplers. Also he mentions that it is a matter of personal preference, not the only solution. He also mentions his 4 identically equipped studios, and all which that implies.$$$ There are several film and TV composers with similar vids, and some share the info that they have one or more technicians on staff to keep all that shit running day to day. There are Reaper "fanboys" on this site to be sure...IT'S THE REAPER FORUM! It's pretty damn good software value for dollar, and if it doesn't meet your needs, then you should go with the solution you want to use, however expensive.
I've been lurking here since before you joined,as well as on other software sites(used to be a Sonar user.Yeah, I know)and you seem to chime in on every thread about how inferior Reaper is to you favorite program... so spend the money, get your favorite, buy a few more computers, and be frickin Hans Zimmer already...!

[ilporcupine]

One more for the road. I watched a buttload of those Film/TV composer vids, because I wondered about the setups those guys used. Funny thing, it was actually you and a couple others here who did orchestrations who first sparked my curious nature! Thank you for that. It's a fascinating subject, and I'm learning about a whole new world. Props where due...
While watching and reading, I could not help but notice all the Logic users, all the Digital Performer users, and wonder what the hell is wrong with those guys. All top guys, almost all were Zimmer protege or colleagues at some point, and they were all too damn stupid to realize the superiority of "that which is Cubase!" I snark of course...but Dude, somebody is still keeping Cakewalk in business, so there is room for different products out there. Try everything, pick one and try to be happy. I will ask everyone here to not go to the Cubase forum and crap all over the product which people there have committed their dollars to, and you all can do likewise here. Friendly Rivalry, not war.

OK, ima shuttup now...whatta day!

PS. Happy Easter,everyone(even if it isn't your thing)

[msmucr]

Originally Posted by ilporcupine

MikComposer:

I assume you are going over to the Cubase forums as well. You have been complaining here about Reaper for the longest time, and you really should be over there with your amigos...

Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya...

??
We're still talking about DAW usage, right.. it isn't like football, where you can hardly cheer both teams at the same match and for example weaving both West Ham and Arsenal flags seems to be quite unpractical.

Some of Mik's previous posts, which I've read, weren't just empty rants, he always wrote about particular things, he'd like to do different way than it is currently possible in Reaper or he adopted some workaround.. etc.

Look DAW is just a tool, and its choice for particular task is very subjective thing.. although functionality of current DAWs is overlapping to a high degree, so you can hardly find normal music project, which is straightly impossible to do in one of them. There can be things, which are easier to do in one, but that's it. Maybe someone will find one is better suited to his preferences, workflow.. maybe someone will use multiple DAWs for different tasks.
It's hardly reason for getting emotional about it IMO.

With regards to Cubase choice.. to me.. why not. Of course there can be things, which are better in Reaper or vice versa. Some people, who moved from Cubase mentioned stability problems, outstanding bugs, huge footprint etc. which can be real reason for doing that. But on the other hand, most people around me use either Cubase and Logic (or ProTools, when straight audio work is concerned), so they definitely find their way around that problems, because otherwise they probably won't be be doing projects anymore or adopted different DAW.
As far as I had chance to see, Cubase is very common DAW/sequencer among composers, who doing that at commercial basis (TV, movies, ads) as opposed to hobbyists. And I've seen pretty big templates with full virtual orchestras there (although not at Junkie XL or Zimmer scale or course ).

Michal

[ivansc]

Yep - Mik is OK. A little tunnel vision going on there sometimes, plus of course his famous OCD, which in his chosen field is actually a good thing.
And lets face it, he has provoked some useful, meaningful discussion.
But it would be nice if he stuck to reaper in the reaper forums...

Criticise it by all means but no need to big up another DAW.
I own four or five DAWs, use three of them but dont see the need to big them up on here.
Well, apart from Bars n Pipes Pro....

[Colox]

Originally Posted by MikComposer

I'm moving on from reaper to cubase.

@Colox I've seen Junkie XL vid, and he has almost 2k tracks in his cubase template. https://youtu.be/bB1twfL5b28

Personally Reaper crashes from time to time here, regardless of system I'm on. Often it is the case of either 32bit plugin or when sampler is loading a library while a midi message is being sent to it r sometimes some other random thing.

If you are, my ranty post above might've felt like a sting. I didn’t mean to dismiss other people's choices as stupid or anything, but I’m afraid I have to stand by that .. long rant :P

I’ve tried everything I know of doing to get Cubase to work close to Reaper - as in e-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g, including offering former Steinberg engineers money to come work for me privately for a month to solve- or at least map out what I'm doing wrong. But over decades, on more than 12 different systems, different operative systems, I haven't been able to make Cubase work well enough for critical work. Neither have colleagues around me.

Until someone can actually tell me what the more wellknown names do, whose systems are often used as rolemodels, what they do that I can't get working, over decades, I'm at a loss. The first 500 suggestions to a problem I get, I've already tried thoroughly, and dismissed - literally. That's how much I liked the overall layout of Cubase. That's how it felt to have to leave it.

Every 32bit plugin that doesn't work in Cubase works 100% no fuzz in Reaper. Everyone. I don't think Reaper offers some 'healing magic power' to those plugins, I just think the Cubase bridge is not well made at all, and Reaper's is. Steinberg is the maker of VST, and if a small company with very few staff - like Cockos - can make VST work tons better and efficient than the company who makes and uprightholds VST, then that's very revealing. Either Steinberg didn't make much of an effort (you'll find their support certainly don't), or they've had a poor internal software engineer culture over decades. Just like Reaper is vastly more CPU efficient and more stable etc etc. I just can't imagine Junkie XL or Zimmer or other wellknowns has - by some mystical magic - gotten past those very real limitations. That those were like 'bugs' or something, already from the beginning; bugs that Zimmer et. al. has developed some software update patches for and applied.

I looked through Junkie XLs video. Cool setup. He seems to run most instruments via VST-link from samplefarms and the tracks are audio returns to a different computer. This offloads Cubase enormously. Doesn't reveal how stable his system is though, but it makes me wonder if there’s a reason he’s no longer running any system critical processes directly inside of Cubase? Or it could be those nice Tibeth type Zen-lamps.

But he's got more than five major orchestral libraries in there. That's not going to work for professional efficiency, and some of them are all based on the same sample recording sessions, which further reveals that it seems more a fascination of having them than a carefully tested out fast smooth-running work plot.

I'd like to use Cubase but … I can't support it for heavier and more critical work, and I've tried everything I possibly know how to over decades. *shrug*

But I do agree that my comment "If you use Reaper you can simply forget the wall of text above. It just works. Period. No matter how much you consciously try to make it act up, it doesn’t." was written in a hurry :P Reaper crashes maybe once every other month for me, from minimum 5 hours of day active usage, on a system that's constantly changing. And finding the absolute concrete rockhard error with is nowadays no problems. And it's never ever random for me, ever.

Cubase users often accept the 'it's some random thing' as a fully relevant explanation. Because finding the actual underlying problem in Cubase, not even the best veteran minds of their forum or their support can pin it down, because often it's different every time. The answer is often silence. What worked as a solution last time quite possibly won't work next time. This means problem remains, unresolved, jumps out of the dark when you least need it, and irritates and bogs down work, emotions, efficiency, art quality, and customer's trust.

To make it less Cubase bashing, this same thing applies almost identically to Nuendo (which they charge 3 times(!) more money for than Cubase), Sequel, Halion (in non-Steinberg hosts), and I found it applies to a lesser degree to Presonus Studio One too. I thought that was odd, until I found out Presonus main engineers cut their teeth working for Steinberg for many years, and they quit and formed Presonus. Wavelab is not so much prone to this though. Wavelab is very much the creation of french code-designer Phillipe Goutier, which might explain much of it.

[ilporcupine]

Yeah, I was being a little rude. And I know MIkComposer raised issues he had with the specifics of Reaper, but I was also trying in the next couple of posts added on to explain my feeling. Maybe it's a cross-cultural thing,UK vs.USA, or whatnot, but I really am not at all emotional about it. It is just mild irritation at what seems to be a trend. It just struck me funny, that he has been leaving Reaper to go back to Cubase, for 4 years now. You used the football analogy, so I'll continue it... he keeps threatening to take his ball and go home, but he doesn't go. I was just offering some encouragement! Really, I don't have a beef with the guy, personally or otherwise, except the constant negative attitude. (MikC if you read this, I apologize for being an ass.) In some ways Reaper is like Libraries are in computer languages, kind of a construction kit for a DAW you want to build, rather than the normal slick product. This of course drives some batty, and endears it to others...maybe it is not the choice for those who do not want to, or haven't time to spend on it. That's why the others exist. MikC comes across, to me and others as well, as just wanting Reaper to work "the correct way" meaning his way, and if not he's leaving! Other than that, what I said was pretty much my way of saying the same as you did. There are many users here, from what I can see, who use multiple DAWs, and that is probably the best of all worlds, and I do know you need not pick just one "team", but this is a Reaper forum, and it's a bit "bad form" to run down the team whose locker room your in.
At any rate, I was not really serious about it, it was just offhand snarky crap, and suited my crappy mood tonight. Sorry.
Now it is 5:18am here and ima get some sleep!

[ilporcupine]

MikComposer:

I really do apologize for being shitty. I don't know what level you are at, professionally, but if you have deadlines to meet and have to create music in a limited time frame, that is challenging enough for anyone, with any midi tools.
Of course you want the best tool for your purposes, and it may not be Reaper.
I do find the modern film/tv/ad music dynamic fascinating, and I've been hanging around composer forums for a few days. Lots of Hans Zimmer hate going around! I know that there were defacto standard ways of midi manipulation in other software, but I think Reaper was supposed to be something different to that, right from the start. Not to everyones taste, to be sure. It probably will not ever be the "big studio" software of choice, but you gotta admit, it has a pretty loyal following, some pro and some just tech junkies. I like trying to get big results from small money software, but I aint meeting deadlines with it, although quite a few folks here seem to be doing that. If you are currently making a living composing orchestral type music, and find any time to spare(!!), you would likely find a receptive audience for an extended post or article about how you work... OK, enough, I will give it up..

All the best..

[msmucr]

@ilporcupine

I hope, you've spent nice Easter Monday.
I see what you mean and got your football analogy.. but as I said earlier, I just haven't felt Mik's previous post were annoying to me and as ivansc mentioned, although points he had, aren't issues for all users, those posts sometimes ignited interesting discussions.
So even if Mik will choose Cubase as his main composition DAW, I won't be happy, if he will leave this forum.
(btw. I recommended him to check recent Cubase or DP couple months ago, not because I would be so annoyed by his "complaints", but because I believe it can really suit his workflow better)

Michal

[Judders]

Originally Posted by MikComposer

@Colox I've seen Junkie XL vid, and he has almost 2k tracks in his cubase template. https://youtu.be/bB1twfL5b28

"He has four studios — one at home and three at Remote Control — each containing identical setups featuring racks of custom‑made PCs with overclocked quad‑core 3.5GHz processors, hundreds of gigabytes of RAM and super‑fast hard drives.
These PCs get so hot that they are placed in separate air‑conditioned rooms. They run Cubase and Pro Tools in tandem, and are "loaded with every synth, mix plug‑in, and orchestral library known to man,” as well as Vienna Ensemble Pro, Symbolic Sound's Kyma, Native Instruments' Kontakt and the SAM sampling system written for Hans Zimmer by erstwhile SOS employee Mark Wherry. The single most astounding detail of Holkenborg's setup is that his basic Cubase template contains 2800 tracks. "The reason my template has so many tracks is that I want everything loaded at all times, so I can easily and instantly switch to another sound or another articulation when I need to."

- http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jun1...0614.htm#para1