Is Anyone using Reaper professionally?

[Joystick]

And I totally agree with Lawrence here, if it was for popularity the Lord of the Rings trilogy would have been made in FL Studio :-P

ProTools are also a strong way to ensure compatibility with Hollywood, this is not a small thing. And Nuendo is a full Post Production related tool.

Personally I use REAPER to develop audio content for games, films and content libraries. As for ProTools compatibility I always deliver stems, at least that's my pipeline some years now.

[bladerunner]

Originally Posted by JIMJ

I've just about had it with Digital Performer not only not being 64-bit but with the fact that 64-bit is not mentioned once in connection with DP on their website (except for mastering). I have 32 Gigs of ram. How many more years am I supposed to wait to use the 28 Gigs that are sitting there idle?

So here's my question: is anyone using Reaper (Mac) professionally? I mean like real, getting-paid-to-meet-deadlines professionally. 'Cause I don't have time to indulge an interesting hobby sequencer and to spend hours swapping ideas about neat things to implement. That's totally cool, but not what I do. I'm just an end-user who uses computers to make music for a living. Efficiency and reliability are what matter for me.

Yes, I use it professionally and it's my sole DAW software. It's the lesser of all DAW evils for my purposes in my view. It's far from a hobby sequencer - very powerful and very customisable. I will warn you that, out the box, it will most probably seem like a bewildering mess and yes, you will probably spend hours figuring stuff out and perhaps rearranging menus, toolbars but put the time in and you will be rewarded. Efficiency and reliability are two words I would definitely use to describe Reaper. That's about as helpful as I can be unless you ask more specific questions.

[ashasha]

Not a professional on the creative side of affairs, but a professional on the technical side. I have yet to find something that I absolutely need that Reaper cannot do that another DAW can. On the other hand there are so many things that I have discovered because Reaper does them natively that I have taken massive leaps in the creative side of the house.

Now there are some differences and there are some idiosyncrasies, but it's basically about learning the tool which any professional knows is the key to mastering their craft.

Biggest issue is going to be workflow and I cannot recommend highly enough watching some of Kenny Gioia's videos on Groove3; especially to get your layouts set up. Once you get things situated things start to fall into place quickly.

[rvman]

The Groove3 videos are a MUST !!!!!!!

if you are seriously considering making a switch, which is a big deal, then the money and time invested in the Groove3 videos will pay for itself. Well worth it and you will be farther along much quicker.

[pattste]

Many are using REAPER professionally and you can meet some of them in this forum. Now if you're asking if there are major commercial recording studios using REAPER as their main DAW, I doubt it very much. But the same can be said about SONAR, Digital Performer, Cubase, Studio One, Samplitude, FL Studio, Reason and pretty much any other. The major recording studios aren't using them as their main DAW either. Virtually all of the major commercial studios are using Pro Tools, with the exceptional one that is using Nuendo or maybe Logic. Many of the studios are using older (several years old) versions of Pro Tools.

I was very careful to specify "major commercial recording studios". Post-production, Mastering and Music Production suites have very different needs and use a variety of DAWs.

[rvman]

Originally Posted by pattste

Many are using REAPER professionally and you can meet some of them in this forum. Now if you're asking if there are major commercial recording studios using REAPER as their main DAW, I doubt it very much. But the same can be said about SONAR, Digital Performer, Cubase, Studio One, Samplitude, FL Studio, Reason and pretty much any other. The major recording studios aren't using them as their main DAW either. Virtually all of the major commercial studios are using Pro Tools, with the exceptional one that is using Nuendo or maybe Logic. Many of the studios are using older (several years old) versions of Pro Tools.

I was very careful to specify "major commercial recording studios". Post-production, Mastering and Music Production suites have very different needs and use a variety of DAWs.

Yes, there's two areas happening here. The COMMERCIAL studios will have PT. Almost 100% guaranteed that some version will be used. Then there are the INDIVIDUALS who work there but also have their own studios on the side, usually in their home, and they will use something else. They are professionals using a different DAW.

I know of two individuals who use Sawstudio and another one uses Studio One. Most DAWS have progressed enough so that folks don't have to shell out big money to Avid anymore. And we should all be happy with that.

[morgon]

Originally Posted by pattste

Many are using REAPER professionally and you can meet some of them in this forum. Now if you're asking if there are major commercial recording studios using REAPER as their main DAW, I doubt it very much. But the same can be said about SONAR, Digital Performer, Cubase, Studio One, Samplitude, FL Studio, Reason and pretty much any other. The major recording studios aren't using them as their main DAW either. Virtually all of the major commercial studios are using Pro Tools, with the exceptional one that is using Nuendo or maybe Logic. Many of the studios are using older (several years old) versions of Pro Tools.

I was very careful to specify "major commercial recording studios". Post-production, Mastering and Music Production suites have very different needs and use a variety of DAWs.

Yep, I second that, Pro Tools is now only prominent as a standard pro studio DAW imo bc its already there long after its been surpassed [imo] by other more flexible [what? pro tools no MIDI?] iow it helps to have a standard afa swapping audio between studios, but that's all. Maybe pro tools doesn't have MIDI bc it doesn't want to encourage the use of it to fix at home?

[nightscope]

Published in SOS September 2012

The BBC recently upgraded their Music Outside Broadcast trucks with Stagetec's Nexus modular stage-box systems, each configured to provide 128 channels via MADI, as well as various tie-lines and video link-ups. The Nexus system is controlled remotely from the OB truck via a PC running its custom software. The system runs with redundant lines in case of any failures, all connected via fibre-optic multicores to the OB trucks. "It's German, so it's solid as a rock and has awesome mic pres,” says Simon Askew, "but the software control, again with awesome features, wasn't really designed for on-the-fly, no-soundcheck festival mixing! We have to type in all the individual bands' line lists as inputs and again as outputs to have a chance of getting to the relevant mouse- or button-controlled mic pre when that quiet backing vocalist suddenly starts playing tambourine! It's an awful lot of typing and on most stages, especially main stages these days, it has to be done beforehand, or else you'll run out of time on the day. Second and other stages might have a more generic system, but again it's best to have a patch prepared for each band you're mixing.”

The trucks themselves are all slightly different. With two stages to cover at T In The Park, the BBC have brought two trucks along; both are fitted with SSL desks, but while Sound 1 has an older, analogue Solid State Logic 9000 console, Sound 2 boasts a C200 digital desk. Both desks have recall functions, and the C200's recall is, obviously, instantaneous. "Our digital truck [Sound 2] is brilliant, but it's so complicated!” says Simon. "We use parallel systems, so I/O latency and time-alignment have to be thought about. Plus we're doing it in 5.1 and providing compliance feeds for swearing removal. So the first couple of live broadcasts in that definitely aged us. It absolutely rocks now, but being the type I am, I push the envelope and run up to 24 time-aligned MADI inserts via an RME Madiface into my 2008 MacBook Pro running Logic with Waves and other plug-ins... that's quite scary.”

Monitoring in the trucks is via Mitchell & Todd 301A midfield monitors. These British speakers have been designed very much with the BBC in mind, and are used not only in the OB trucks but at Maida Vale as well, alongside the PMC main monitors. They have a 210mm polypropylene bass driver with a frequency response extending down to 35Hz, and a 28mm soft-dome tweeter.

The trucks record to multitrack, but this is just a matter of creating a safety copy, as it will be a 'live mix' that is sent to broadcast. Interestingly, the recording is done using Cockos' Reaper, a surprising choice for many, but one that overcomes the traditional hardware limitations of Pro Tools, and single-platform nature of Logic. Stereo mixes are also recorded to solid-state drives, CD-R and occasionally DAT!

ns

[martifingers]

http://www.musicradar.com/news/guita...casting-574464

If you have never heard of them they re a very well regarded (and successful) band who were e.g.on the bill with The Stones in Hyde Park recently. I have it from a very close source to the band that they are using REAPER for their next album.
All the more impressive when you consider that the multi-instrumentalist in the band has a very technical background in sound engineering (ex-BBC I recall). Do check them out as they are quite unique in their sound and presentation. ALso for an electronic band they are amazingly entertaining live!

[paulheu]

Originally Posted by JIMJ

So here's my question: is anyone using Reaper (Mac) professionally? I mean like real, getting-paid-to-meet-deadlines professionally. 'Cause I don't have time to indulge an interesting hobby sequencer and to spend hours swapping ideas about neat things to implement. That's totally cool, but not what I do. I'm just an end-user who uses computers to make music for a living. Efficiency and reliability are what matter for me.

Any new DAW (well anything new really) will have a learning curve and will require you to invest time and effort to get to know the ins and outs, the pros and cons (which each DAW has). Frankly you sound like you want a 'switch-on and go' kind of solution which just does not exist.

IMO while the basics are straightforward Reaper has so much power and offers so much flexibility it may not be for you seeing how you do not come across as someone who would be willing to spend the time with it unlocking it's (full) potential. Fairly frequently 'swapping ideas about neat things to implement' means 'not knowing how to do/where to find stuff' as I've come across so much posts to that effect here.

Meanwhile if you were to decide to give Reaper a spin, you can use it for free for 60 days and we'll be here if you have any questions to ask.

[pattste]

Sound On Sound ran a story last year about Caro Emerald and her producers using REAPER. She is a top selling artist in Europe.

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/aug1...ro-emerald.htm

It has a few choice quotes including this one:

"Jan's DAW of choice is Cockos Reaper, which allows him to manage his multi-layered mixes in a way he believes is not possible with any equivalent DAW."

[Magicbuss]

Kenny Gioia is pro and forum member who produced the groove 3 Reaper vids.

Mike Senior from sound on sound is a pro reaper user. Reaper is featured most notably in his mix rescue series. He was also the impetus behind the reaper tips column that run occasionally in SOS.

[musicbynumbers]

A resounding yes from me and at leasts 10 others I know using it professionally for everything from game sound design/visual media through to good old fashioned music creation.

Could not do the sound design stuff I do at the speed I do with any other DAW

[Joystick]

Originally Posted by musicbynumbers

Could not do the sound design stuff I do at the speed I do with any other DAW

Same here as I stated earlier, there is no way to do what I'm doing with the audio quality, speed, non-destructibility and low hunger in system resources with another software.

I also posted the same about the BBC On Location Recording Studios.

Anyway, I can't really see a different reason of REAPER not used in Professional Studios apart from that REAPER is still new on the neighborhood. But believe me, its probably one of the strongest kids around.

I know many commercial studios using it and I also use it in my studio in which I produce Music, Sound Effects, Post Production and Game Audio Mastering for the past 15 years, having Reaper running from their first beta version without a glitch.

Its supreme and I already converted 10 of my good friends in the industry prior attached with other tools.

[Retro Audio Enthusiast]

I'm a professional and have been in the business since 1984. I've had several record contracts and been a session player, worked in production, film & TV broadcast, collaborated and endorsed music software companies and I use Reaper. I used Logic 5 Platinum up until Apple bought out Emagic.

There is nothing that any other DAW offers, that I can't do with Reaper.

Here's what really makes me use it above all other reasons:

-Support. It is fully supported and will be around for years.

-Stability. It's stable. It has never frozen or crashed. Every other DAW I've used has.

-Usefulness. If I need it to do something it does it. I might have to Google it or read the manual but it has done everything I want it to.

-Customizable. You can have it *your* way. I have it set up so it acts and behaves like classic Logic 5x on Windows.

-No Hardware Dependency. The BBC has the right idea. Reaper is not hardware dependant, so you don't need to cart around flight cases full of Pro Tools hardware. Pop Reaper on a USB and you can work it anywhere.

[rvman]

Originally Posted by Retro Audio Enthusiast

-No Hardware Dependency. The BBC has the right idea. Reaper is not hardware dependant, so you don't need to cart around flight cases full of Pro Tools hardware. Pop Reaper on a USB and you can work it anywhere.

^^^^^^ BINGO !!!!!!!! ^^^^^^^^

[Rick Settle]

Originally Posted by j1mbafr0sty

Professional bull fighter here. Reaper user

I fight a lot of bull around here, too. So far, there's been no blood spilled.

[LOSANO]

An audio engineer graduate (SIRA) here.

[Joystick]

Originally Posted by Retro Audio Enthusiast

No Hardware Dependency. The BBC has the right idea. Reaper is not hardware dependant, so you don't need to cart around flight cases full of Pro Tools hardware. Pop Reaper on a USB and you can work it anywhere.

BBC also chosen REAPER because its the only one to provide full stability on Remote Recording. Think of it, it allows you to record in two different hard drives on the same time, boom, one hard-drive go, you already recording to the other. also you can stream through network with no issues directly from within the DAW and with latency compensation, what else do you want for remote recording on big venues?

And as a business you don;t need to buy software by the channels. I remember one time that the native PT offered even expansions of channels by payment, no way!

Also those days you don't even need the hardware of PT as there are top converters for good money in the market that are compatible with any DAW. So you can record with great quality even on FL Studio.

[The Telenator]

YES. And the time when people used to do an about-face and storm out the room when they discover you don't own Pro Tools is largely in the past, too.

[rvman]

Originally Posted by The Telenator

YES. And the time when people used to do an about-face and storm out the room when they discover you don't own Pro Tools is largely in the past, too.

Well, unfortunately it still happens but not near as often. I just emailed a buddy who I haven't seen in 2 years and he told me that he's moved to PT because he lost two potential customers in the last year. He lives outside of Nashville and needs all the business he can get. I was at first sad but then got pretty angry about it. But I can't fault him....he's got bills to pay like all of us.

[Magicbuss]

Originally Posted by rvman

Well, unfortunately it still happens but not near as often. I just emailed a buddy who I haven't seen in 2 years and he told me that he's moved to PT because he lost two potential customers in the last year. He lives outside of Nashville and needs all the business he can get. I was at first sad but then got pretty angry about it. But I can't fault him....he's got bills to pay like all of us.

I have read of some pro's who keep the protools rig around to show prospective clients but then do the mix on their DAW of choice (not necessarily Reaper).

I find that sad and somewhat dishonest but no more so than having a placebo hardware knob that allows the artist to "tweak" the mix. Yes that happens too.

[Swamp Ape]

Shoot, just get one of the ProTools-alike themes and replace the splash screen with a PT one. I bet a dollar those two potential customers wouldn't have been able to tell.

[rvman]

Originally Posted by Magicbuss

I have read of some pro's who keep the protools rig around to show prospective clients but then do the mix on their DAW of choice (not necessarily Reaper).

I find that sad and somewhat dishonest but no more so than having a placebo hardware knob that allows the artist to "tweak" the mix. Yes that happens too.

True.

But I will say this. I'm astonished at the rise of Studio One in such a short time. And if that means even more clients accepting the fact that PT is not necessary and other DAWS can do the job then I say "Halliluya!"

[rvman]

Originally Posted by Swamp Ape

Shoot, just get one of the ProTools-alike themes and replace the splash screen with a PT one. I bet a dollar those two potential customers wouldn't have been able to tell.

You know what? As crazy as that might seem, I bet that would work in some cases. LOL. But you're dealing with an honesty issue so.....

Thankfully, more and more realize PT is not a MUST. Which is great news for Reaper's future.

[ThomasE]

I have been using Reaper professionally full time since 2009. We do mastering and some occasional mixing in our studio.

The good thing about using Reaper is that you can decide upon a workflow you like, and then make Reaper adapt to that. We have a lot of custom actions and reascripts to make stuff happen in a very efficient way. Can't think of any other DAW that would be as productive for us. Takes a bit of hard work in the beginning, but there is a lot of time and effort to be saved after a while. And it just keeps on giving...

[mdmiller]

I run a small studio that generates aprox. 1/8 of my income. I earn much more from teaching and playing in musical theater productions, directing praise music in church and misc. gigs though. I still have ProTools but don't use it unless a client insists. Reaper does everything I need it to do and it's much more stable than ProTools.

[The Telenator]

Originally Posted by Swamp Ape

Shoot, just get one of the ProTools-alike themes and replace the splash screen with a PT one. I bet a dollar those two potential customers wouldn't have been able to tell.

I was thinking of something similar the other day -- get a good screen shot or two of Pro Tools and set them up as screen savers. Or activate them manually any time a potential new customer wants to see your setup, as more of a good joke than dishonesty.

But to what rvman said of his friend in Nashville, that's understandable, since Nashville is such a high-pressure market where image and what you own, look like, or are seen with is nearly as important as what you can do. Pro Tools still equals Status in a place like that. There are a few true Nashville Cats, longtime local guitarists, who purposely play an assortment of what most would consider 'crappy guitars', in part to show that it's the user more than the tool that produces great sound. (Some of those guitars sound incredibly good, even unique in tone, of course.) But it's a bold statement that flies in the face of all the owners of the $5000 Gibsons and custom builds.

[Lawrence]

The things some people do with PT, with large format controllers and video post rooms and other things, have no relation at all to what 90% of people buying daws to make their own music are doing.

How and why it often gets so conflated is beyond my understanding... like some guy who's never even been in a high level audio or post room trying the PT demo and summarily declaring it shite, with not a hint of a clue as to what some other may be doing with it or even why.

Such is the net.

You can use - any - of the usual suspects (PT, Logic, Cubase, DP, Sonar, whatever) in a pro (for pay) tracking and mixing setting with little or no issue. That mostly depends on the competency of the operators. You cannot use all of them so easily in some other situations, which is partly why AVID is kinda dropping their consumer products... that pretty clearly being the wrong market for their DAW.

Ask Airon why he maybe sometimes still uses PT. Probably not because he wants to, but maybe more because in some situations he does with post he kinda has to, for efficiency.

On a practical level, the higher level products for that market (PT, Nuendo, Pyramix, etc, etc) are far and away more feature laden for the features those people actually need, like managing media across networks and lans, like true professional level automation, etc, etc. Suffice to say, you probably will not find ABC signing a media contract with Ableton for the Olympics.

At that high level, PT is not just a daw, it's a small part of a huge media ecosystem, like Final Cut at that level, which isn't just an editor, but just a small part of a large editing ecosystem delivered from a single vendor. In the larger corporate world where big budgets still exist, AVID has very little real competition... from the usual consumer daw suspects anyway.

But yeah (duh), if you're just making your own music or running a smallish project studio room, PTHDx may be overkill financially and also probably not the best choice feature wise for some people... depending on what they're doing.

Anyway, part of AVID's financial woes are due to the systems they make costing a ton to research and develop and build and there being really long turnarounds on it. I mean, if you buy a $1 mil media system from AVID you probably won't be back for another one for some years. They're kinda not just sitting around mostly coding PT features, but doing a lot more, and hardware engineers with those kinds of high level technical skills don't work for $20k a year.

Which is probably why Sony stopped (I think anyway) making digital consoles, it's a pretty tough market, high level pro audio hardware.

That small format Sony console was really great btw...

[CaseTate]

Originally Posted by jonespnice

I think a better question would be does Reaper do the things I'm accustom to doing (then give examples), because if you think about it all software Daws can give professional sounding results it's just a matter of workflow and if it works with how you do things. Personally I was a Sonar user from Sonar 1-8 but I always felt like it didn't flow with how I liked to work, I even used pro tools and cubase/nuendo but nothing felt right until I started using Reaper but you may be different.

Very appropriate insight jonespnice. I too was a PT user (since 1991) and am now going thru the mud of learning Reaper. It would be nice to find someone to help me with the basic editing needs I have for vo/mixing work in Reaper locally.
Any thoughts? I'm in Tulsa, OK

[andyp24]

Another Pro here, now using Reaper whenever possible.

As an ex-BBC staff sound engineer, most of my work was on SADiE, but for my own work now I'm freelance, I find it too unstable and restrictive.

Reaper fits the bill very well - the main reason being the customisation possible through extensions, custom actions and scripts, so that I'm beginning to get ever closer to the very efficient editing workflow that SADiE gave me, while keeping all the advantages Reaper offers in other areas.

Andy

[jonespnice]

Originally Posted by CaseTate

Very appropriate insight jonespnice. I too was a PT user (since 1991) and am now going thru the mud of learning Reaper. It would be nice to find someone to help me with the basic editing needs I have for vo/mixing work in Reaper locally.
Any thoughts? I'm in Tulsa, OK

I would try your local music store, I bet someone there uses Reaper and they’ll probably be willing to give you some lessons (if you ask). Alternatively perhaps working with someone via Skype would work.

[jlgrimes11]

Originally Posted by JIMJ

I've just about had it with Digital Performer not only not being 64-bit but with the fact that 64-bit is not mentioned once in connection with DP on their website (except for mastering). I have 32 Gigs of ram. How many more years am I supposed to wait to use the 28 Gigs that are sitting there idle?

So here's my question: is anyone using Reaper (Mac) professionally? I mean like real, getting-paid-to-meet-deadlines professionally. 'Cause I don't have time to indulge an interesting hobby sequencer and to spend hours swapping ideas about neat things to implement. That's totally cool, but not what I do. I'm just an end-user who uses computers to make music for a living. Efficiency and reliability are what matter for me.

Don’t know if this counts but I did a couple of albums in Reaper where I was paid. Not too much different than other DAWS and it is surprisingly stable. In term of audio recording and mixing it competes well and does some things that more expensive DAWS can’t do.

It has a steep learning curve but the basics aren’t much different than other DAWS.


Try the demo and check out the Kenny G tutorials. He covers the basics really well and then some.

What specifically do you want from a DAW?

For audio recording and mixing, I highly recommend Reaper whether you are pro or not. You can use the leftover money for other things.

It’s included Rea plug-ins are highly functional but can be bland looking but that said one of Reaper’s benefits is its plugins compatibility. Many DAWS don’t support 32 bit plugins or VST3s. Reaper handles it all efficiently.

[drichard]

I assume you have already seen the video tutorials here, but if not they are an amazing resource.

Originally Posted by CaseTate

Very appropriate insight jonespnice. I too was a PT user (since 1991) and am now going thru the mud of learning Reaper. It would be nice to find someone to help me with the basic editing needs I have for vo/mixing work in Reaper locally.
Any thoughts? I'm in Tulsa, OK

[Joystick]

Originally Posted by JIMJ

is anyone using Reaper (Mac) professionally?

I use Reaper professionally since the first beta versions of 0.x. Almost 12 years I think. And I generally use the beta builds all the time professionally, they are stable as a castle!

Made me capable of earning a living much easier as I did boost my production workflow, lower my prices and still earn more than the competition because they spend all their time renaming and exporting assets for games.

I also used it to boost our production line in SoundFellas, which made our lives a lot more easier and allowed us to focus on our products and not the production tools.

I also know that almost any game development company that respects fast audio production with high quality, uses Reaper, as it is really open-ended and easy to fit in any workflow.

From the internet we can also see that many big companies use Reaper, as seen from screenshots of projects from great companies such as NI, Facebook (Facebook360), Google (Google Resonance) and the BBC.

But my advice is to choose whatever tool feels more natural and acts as a transparent medium between you and your creations.

Hope you get lucky with Reaper cause it's really cool!

Best of luck on your sonic adventures friend!

:-)

[colonelporridge]

This clip at 14.00 shows Pendle Poucher composer and creator of Soundust sample intruments explaining why he uses Reaper https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTBap8Q1J6s

[Simonblarkin]

Yes, I only keep protools on my hard drive for thos clients that insist on using it or to rip the stems from a track so I can mix it in Reaper.

[MRMJP]

I've been using REAPER in the professionally realm daily for the initial part of the mastering process for a little over 2 years now after I replaced another DAW with it.

Before that I had tried REAPER a few times but it didn't click. Then I heard a podcast with fellow mastering engineer Mike Kalajian and he said was using REAPER so I figured there had to be a way.

After dealing with the learning curve and having a decent amount of scripts made for my unique workflow thanks to some awesome forum members, I was able to replace Pro Tools with REAPER for the initial part of the mastering process which is processing the audio via my analog gear with a few plugins inserted before going analog, as well as cleaning up small sections the captures from analog with iZotope RX as REAPER's primary external editor before exporting versions for final assembly.

The amount of time saved, and consistency between projects is mind blowing. I didn't expect it to be THAT much better.

I still do have to use WaveLab for the final stage of the mattering process because the WaveLab montage kicks REAPER's ass for sequencing EPs, albums, and exporting all potential master formats and including CD-Text/metadata in all applicable places.

REAPER can do some of this but not all of this and when you are mastering a dozen or more songs per day, day after day, REAPER proves to not be a good tool for the very end of the mastering process. I don't think it can be beat for the initial part of the process though.

[HugoRibeiroDotCom]

I'm a professional using Reaper. Although I also use Digital Performer for different things.
I usually use Reaper for all my drum sessions and DP for composing.
I think that in this day and age there are many more people using multiple DAWs instead of just settling on one.

cheers

[CDS]

Many claim to be using reaper and say they are professionals, OK. Is there any person single or group that appears on the Billboard top ten in any chart of billboards, that uses reaper.