Quote Loudbox:

---

Sorry, I've posted a similar comment elsewhere. I'm a long time Cubase user (back on Atari with Pro24). I've used it virtually every day for the past 12 years. So a move to any other platform is going to be tricky. I've tried the demos of both Samplitude and Sonar and just can't seem to get into them at all. Is this because Cubase is better or more likely that I'm so used to Cubase that I just can't see beyond the different interface and gui.

I know that in principle I should look for an alternative to Steinberg due to the shocking way they have treated loyal customers over the years. However, Cubase 4 offers me an application that I'm familiar with and new features that will be very handy. Whether they work or not remains to be seen!

---

It's probably a mix of both. If you HAD to use Samplitude, you'd find that you would pick it up MUCH quicker and enjoy using it more. I think anyone moving over will have to fight through that barrier if they really want to leave Steinberg and work with another package.

Quote Conz
It's probably a mix of both. If you HAD to use Samplitude, you'd find that you would pick it up MUCH quicker and enjoy using it more. I think anyone moving over will have to fight through that barrier if they really want to leave Steinberg and work with another package.

---

Yeah, I hear what you are saying. I guess the truth is that I dont HAVE to move away from Cubase. I'm only considering it out of principle. Cubase is offering me a tool that I'm comfortable with and will allow me to create music. Which I guess is the main requirements when choosing a DAW. I'm sure Samplitude will offer the same eventually. I'm not sure I can cope with the learning curve and time out from creating. But then at the same time I hate the fact that I have to pay out £140 for an :

---

pgrade" with Steinberg. An upgrade that still doesn't feature what was promised in previous versions. Grrr.

All this talk of alternative DAW's. Not suggesting it as an alternative - just yet....... but have you guys tried Reaper? non-crippled shareware at the moment, but it is coming along very, very quickly with user-requested features being added every week. Very flexible, customisable interface, small footprint, seems extremely stable. Perhaps just another cult DAW, except the guy behind this one is Justin Frankel who designed Winamp and then sold it for loads, and also the guy who invented the gnutella peer to peer network. I think steinberg need to watch their back.

Quote maaszy:

---

All this talk of alternative DAW's. Not suggesting it as an alternative - just yet....... but have you guys tried Reaper? non-crippled shareware at the moment, but it is coming along very, very quickly with user-requested features being added every week. Very flexible, customisable interface, small footprint, seems extremely stable. Perhaps just another cult DAW, except the guy behind this one is Justin Frankel who designed Winamp and then sold it for loads, and also the guy who invented the gnutella peer to peer network. I think steinberg need to watch their back.

---

I'll give this a go later - Looks interesting. What are your overall thoughts on it? Is there anything obvious missing?

Is it really viable for a commericial studio? Or someone who uses it on long sessions every day such as myself? If it is then great but I have my doubts.

Yes, I have tried a couple of versions of Reaper. It's ok for recording (not tried midi stuff yet) but I find that the UI needs a fair amount of work. It also looks like a piece of Windows software - very obviously so and I prefer things to be a bit more neutral. I'm sure that it will come on in leaps and bounds and so I am keeping an eye on it as it develops. It's great, but not really _there_ yet for me...

--------------------
Veni, Vidi, Aesculi
(I came, I saw, I conkered)

Quote PrinceXizor:

---

Did you get it set up in the mixer mode that appeals more to Cubase users?

Jim

---

Hey Jim!

Is the "mixer mode" option available in the demo?

Also, do you know how to get a hold of a dealer in the usa for the crossgrade deal?

Thanks,
Jamie

Quote Dave B:

---

Not necessarily 'knock me out', but I do have a thing about the aesthetics of software - usually if it is clearly laid out and readable then it easier to use especially for long periods. This is one of Steinberg's strengths imho although I will probably bite the bullet and get a copy of C4 and am dreading the darkness...

---

I know what you're saying about Cubase visuals looking a little more "polished". However, most new users find it difficult to memorize the meaning of all those tiny visual objects in Cubase. The icons are very unintuitive, don't have tooltips, and a lot of them are too small for your eyes' comfort. When I get back to Cubase after not using it for a while, I can't remember what those things are! Though slick the Cubase UI looks, I find it thoughtless and kitschy.

=============================================
Kitsch. In the arts, anything that
claims to have an aesthetic purpose but is tawdry
and tasteless. It usually applies to cheap sentimental
works produced for the mass market, such as those
found in souvenir shops and chain stores, but it is
also used for any art that is considered in bad taste.

Definition from Helicon Publishing Ltd.
=============================================

Well, I'm leaning towards a crossgrade to Sonar Producer. The support looks miles better & even the forum doesn't give the impression the mods have secret service sunglasses on and jaquebutts.
I don't see any updates to C4 before Easter and the 64 bit Vista version will take years by the look of it and if past history repeats itself they won't get it right until you've paid an extra £200+ for 2 more upgrades. Also I see that the VST standard may be overtaken which will cause them one hell of a headache.
I'll give them a bit more time but I'd rather use a product that delivers without playing peekaboo with it's customers.

Now somebody shoot me down. Explain to me why my assumptions are wrong. I'm all ears. But if anyone says I'm conspiracy theorising I answer that that's because Steinberg's somewhat less informative (and agreeable) than the KGB.

--------------------
Success is round the corner. It's also round the bend.

What happened to the posts between 27/1 and 1/2 of this thread?

Quote MsM:

---

What happened to the posts between 27/1 and 1/2 of this thread?

---

Damned good question! Perhaps the Cubase.net mods have infiltrated SOS ...

Weren't those posts about the pros and cons of other packages?

--------------------
Veni, Vidi, Aesculi
(I came, I saw, I conkered)

Just worked it out : we have two similar threads that are crossing over each other timewise. So the posts about functionality of Samplitude, etc are in the other thread, the 'Steinberg cancel SX3' thread.

Phew! We are safe from the Cubase.net secret police still!



--------------------
Veni, Vidi, Aesculi
(I came, I saw, I conkered)

Quote Dave B:

---

Phew! We are safe from the Cubase.net secret police still!

---

I don't know about that!!! They are sneaky little devils!

--------------------
James
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" ~Napoleon Bonaparte~

Quote tex:

---

Well, I'm leaning towards a crossgrade to Sonar Producer.

---

I made the following (or similar) comment in the cubase.net lounge forum:

Sonar looks pretty impressive, but somehow I just can't shake their "home/amateur" reputation. I know this is unfair, and I am being a snob here, but it just can't bring myself to consider Sonar as a professional application.

I *KNOW* this is incorrect, and that they have come a long way since their earlier versions, but it is an ingrained notion nonetheless.

Samplitude looks unfinished, and amateurish is some ways, and doesn't thrill me so far, but I really do need to spend some more time with it.

So what is left on the PC platform?

-PT LE - no way! I need ADC.
-PT|HD - expensive for what you get. Not sure if I want to buy into that hardware paradigm

What else am I missing?

I record 99% audio, and do very little midi (almost none). No loops or samples to speak of (except some sample replacement for drums using Drumagog).

--------------------
James
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" ~Napoleon Bonaparte~

Quote Doublehelix:

---

Quote tex:

---

Well, I'm leaning towards a crossgrade to Sonar Producer.

---

I made the following (or similar) comment in the cubase.net lounge forum:

Sonar looks pretty impressive, but somehow I just can't shake their "home/amateur" reputation. I know this is unfair, and I am being a snob here, but it just can't bring myself to consider Sonar as a professional application.

I *KNOW* this is incorrect, and that they have come a long way since their earlier versions, but it is an ingrained notion nonetheless.

Samplitude looks unfinished, and amateurish is some ways, and doesn't thrill me so far, but I really do need to spend some more time with it.

So what is left on the PC platform?

-PT LE - no way! I need ADC.
-PT|HD - expensive for what you get. Not sure if I want to buy into that hardware paradigm

What else am I missing?

I record 99% audio, and do very little midi (almost none). No loops or samples to speak of (except some sample replacement for drums using Drumagog).

---

Fairlight MFX3?

Quote Doublehelix:

---

Sonar looks pretty impressive, but somehow I just can't shake their "home/amateur" reputation. I know this is unfair, and I am being a snob here, but it just can't bring myself to consider Sonar as a professional application.

I *KNOW* this is incorrect, and that they have come a long way since their earlier versions, but it is an ingrained notion nonetheless.

---

I don't know where you ever got this impression from DH. Cakewalk (and its successor Sonar) has always been a professional program although they tend to conform more to the standard Windows interface guidelines so it doesn't have some of the fancy graphics that Steinberg software has. In fact, as someone who has never used an Atari, Steinberg software looks amateurish to me.

Cheers

James.

--------------------
JRP Music - Audio Mastering and Restoration.
http://www.jrpmusic.net

Quote Conz:

---

Quote Doublehelix:

---

Quote tex:

---

Well, I'm leaning towards a crossgrade to Sonar Producer.

---

I made the following (or similar) comment in the cubase.net lounge forum:

Sonar looks pretty impressive, but somehow I just can't shake their "home/amateur" reputation. I know this is unfair, and I am being a snob here, but it just can't bring myself to consider Sonar as a professional application.

I *KNOW* this is incorrect, and that they have come a long way since their earlier versions, but it is an ingrained notion nonetheless.

Samplitude looks unfinished, and amateurish is some ways, and doesn't thrill me so far, but I really do need to spend some more time with it.

So what is left on the PC platform?

-PT LE - no way! I need ADC.
-PT|HD - expensive for what you get. Not sure if I want to buy into that hardware paradigm

What else am I missing?

I record 99% audio, and do very little midi (almost none). No loops or samples to speak of (except some sample replacement for drums using Drumagog).

---

Fairlight MFX3?

---

Oops, this aint PC, sorry

Quote Doublehelix:

---

-PT LE - no way! I need ADC.

---

I don't understand. Do you mean that you need more ADC than they can offer? (I'm assuming you mean analoge-digital conversion). The Digi 002 can do 16 channels and I'll be interested to see what the 003 actually ends up being. I know that the 002 isn't great in the mic pre dept, but iirc you have better outboard anyway.

Quote Doublehelix:

---

I record 99% audio, and do very little midi (almost none). No loops or samples to speak of (except some sample replacement for drums using Drumagog).

---

Which means that you actually _are_ a Pro Tools user in my book...

--------------------
Veni, Vidi, Aesculi
(I came, I saw, I conkered)

I was not too excited about Samplitude at first, but now after several recordins, it feels like an old friend. I know my way around it already for the basic things, and the midi and drum midi maps work just like Cubase.

I have tried Sonar, and the mixer looks similar to Cubase in that the faders are big in your face on the screen. Samplitude is a futher away shot but it allows you to see more. So far Sonar does not seem to have a similar work flow on many things like Samplitude and Cubase. It could be that Sonar is an American program and they have more of a microsoft work flow to it. All these small box icons on top that you really can't see well. They are too small to figure out what they are. You have to put your mouse over each icon to know what it does. And there is like 20 of them across the screen. Yes Cubase and Samplitude has icons put they are much bigger and you can figure out what they are jut by looking at the picture.

Doublehelix, on Samplitude there are different skins you can choose from, so if you don't like the mixer look, you can change it's appearance. This function is not on the demo, but I have seem pictures of another mixer that is more grey.

I have firmly decided not to go to Cubase 4, and I would like to make the move soon if I go to Samplitude since they will be having that cheaper crossgrade for Feb. That way I can continue to use Cubase with customers while I learn Samplitude on my own projects. Got to move forward.

--------------------
revelationsoundstudio.com

Quote Dave B:

---

Quote Doublehelix:

---

-PT LE - no way! I need ADC.

---

I don't understand. Do you mean that you need more ADC than they can offer? (I'm assuming you mean analoge-digital conversion).

---

Sorry Dave, I should have spelled it out! ADC = "Automatic Delay Compensation". Interestingly, it does look very much like A/D conversion. Sorry about that!!!

ADC is the ability of the host software to compensate for the delay caused by the plugins. So when you insert a compressor plugin on a channel for example, it takes a certain amount of time for the signal to pass through the compressor algorhythm, and then back into the host program again. This is compounded by DSP-based plugins like UAD-1 plugins.

So in a large project with a lot of tracks, the one track with the compressor is going to be slightly behind the others due to the delay caused by the compressor plugin.

Now compound this with the fact that most tracks have at least one plugin, and some have several, and each plugin has a different amount of delay.

This can lead to smearing of the sound and some subtle phase issues.

ADC automatically compensates for this issue.

Several years ago, nobody had ADC, and we all had to find ways to manually compensate for this kind of stuff, *especially* with the DSP effects (UAD-1, Powercore). Nowadays pretty much everybody has ADC, *except* PT LE.

Sorry for the confusion. Hope that helps!

--------------------
James
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" ~Napoleon Bonaparte~

Quote Doublehelix:

---

Sonar looks pretty impressive, but somehow I just can't shake their "home/amateur" reputation. I know this is unfair, and I am being a snob here, but it just can't bring myself to consider Sonar as a professional application.

---

What you said implies that Cubase is a professional/mature application. Would this thread come in existence had that been true? The sad truth is that the PC platform doesn't have a PROFFESIONAL, STABLE, and MATURE sequencer that wouldn't be tied to specific hardware.

Therefore... the hell with the slick UI! The meat behind those buttons must do something. I mean, does it matter if your hamster looks cute when it falls of the wheel after each feeding?

This is why I'd choose Sonar over Cubase any time of the day.

Quote dima:

---

What you said implies that Cubase is a professional/mature application. Would this thread come in existence had that been true? The sad truth is that the PC platform doesn't have a PROFFESIONAL, STABLE, and MATURE sequencer that wouldn't be tied to specific hardware.

---

Actually, the main reason with this thread is how Steinberg treats its customers, not anything to do with whether Cubase is a professional/mature platform.

SX 3.11 is extremely stable, professional, and mature. There were a few "features" that needed fixing, but then again, what software doesn't, including Sonar?

SX 2 was the same way.

SX 1 was the same way.

Cubase VST 5.1 was the same way.

What we have now is a new version, Cubase 4, that is riddled with bugs, and a company that is slow to respond, and could care less than their customers. They cancel promised upgrades to legacy products, and drop support for others without a moment's notice.

These are things that tick us all of, and end up generating threads like this all over the internet.

I agree with your inference that in order for a product to truly be professional, it needs to be backed by a professional-acting company, and Steinberg falls flat on its face in this area.

My comments were meant in a different vein.

--------------------
James
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" ~Napoleon Bonaparte~

Quote dima:

---

The sad truth is that the PC platform doesn't have a PROFFESIONAL, STABLE, and MATURE sequencer that wouldn't be tied to specific hardware.

---

Nuendo is just for rich hobbyists then is it?

--------------------
Ars longa, vita brevis, occasio praeceps, experimentum periculosum, iudicium difficile.

Quote Doublehelix:

---

Sorry Dave, I should have spelled it out! ADC = "Automatic Delay Compensation". Interestingly, it does look very much like A/D conversion. Sorry about that!!!

---

DH, Reaper has this at ALL points in the signal path.

I had recently been thinking of upgrading to SX3 (still on VST 5.1), because I really needed ADC too, and I have just been having too many problems of late with VST.

But now that Steinberg have pulled this I've decided I'm not going to follow their hellish forced "upgrade" path.

I have been playing around with Reaper a bit lately, and I have to say that I find it much more intuitive, more problem free, and seems to offer me a much faster work flow than Cubase.

You can also customise the look a bit, which I find very nice. I have a couple of "skins" set up that I can switch between, with different colour schemes, to ease the eye strain a bit. Actually, it's an absolute doddle to make your own skins if you wan. If you have even the tiniest bit of savvy with graphics programs like Photoshop or GIMP, you can even use the graphics from a screen grab of Cubase or whatever, to infuse a little of that look into REAPER.

And, as mentioned before, it just keeps getting updated -- sometimes every few days, or every couple of weeks, and it gets better and better.

Check some of the basic tutorial videos.

FWIW, there are seem to be a number of pro engineers switching to Reaper, because they are happy with the user interface, features, the routing (which is phenomenal), etc. Justin is also working closely with some working pro engineers in the development of this thing, as well as paying very close attention to the suggestions and wish lists of the users, to make sure that it is a program that is intuitive and easy to use, and has the features people really want.

There's also a fair bit of discussion about making things easy to import and export projects to/from other applications.

I also like being able to do so many things on the fly (including while recording) that I could never do in Cubase, like assign recording inputs and arm tracks, editing, inserting plugins and VST instruments, etc. I was in a studio a while back during an overdub session for a hip hop recording, and the producer was editing bits of the overdubs on the fly (in Pro Tools). I remember thinking how much cooler it would be to be able to do some of this stuff on the fly that I couldn't in Cubase.

It's also very fast and light on the CPU (people reporting successfully running reaper on old P2 and PIII computers with ancient sound cards, etc.) without clicks and pops, etc.

And bugs that show up as this thing develops get fixed almost as soon as they show up.

The development of this thing is absolutely the antithesis of the kind of crap we've been seeing from Steinberg and other big software companies, and the whole ethos behind Justin Frankel's software company (Cockos) is really very much user-focused, rather than big profits/big corporation feeding business model we've been seeing more and more of in recent years. To be honest, I've come to the conclusion that it's time to vote with my feet, wallet, etc., and try to support guys like this, and I think it may be in ALL of our best interests to do so, particularly as long as big business is pulling the utterly inexcusable crap it's been pulling.

Also, Justin is a multimillionaire from having had AOL buy out Winamp, Nullsoft, etc. So it seems he's doing this because it's a project he wants to do and believes in, and it's not like this is something that is being done completely on a shoestring and is likely to dry up as soon as the developer gets a "real job", etc., as often happens with projects like this. I think there is a real intent to make it a very serious application that offers serious competition to other professional applications, but also with the intent that this thing isn't going to cost the earth for people to own and maintain.

I've been watching this thing for a while now, and the more I find out about it, the more I like what I see. It's a breath of fresh air, really.

And I think it's a very worthwhile project to keep an eye on, and perhaps participate by making suggestions if you feel it doesn't (yet) have features you need. Given the fact that it's currently unrestricted shareware, and registration is very reasonable if it's something you begin to use regularly in a commercial application, it basically costs you little or nothing to watch and support a project that very potentially could end up being a rather ubiquitous application. If it isn't exactly right for you now, perhaps it will be later, and you won't have paid premium prices for beta software that never gets sorted out.

As an aside, I've also been looking at Zynewave's Podium. Looks very interesting as well. Some very cool features that could make for a very nice, speedy work flow.

Sorry to ramble on about this, but I am getting so sick of this whole planned obsolescence thing, and being forced to upgrade before I'm good and bloody well ready to upgrade. This is the kind of crap that destroyed the U.S. auto makers in the '80s as well. People got so sick of buying cars that were built to break down, and to nickle and dime you to death with repairs, that people just started to buy Japanese cars instead . . . because they weren't intentionally engineered to break down.

That kind of crap REALLY, REALLY, REALLY sticks in my craw.

--------------------
Scott
--Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?

DH - Ahhh ... I see ... you mean PDC (plug-in delay compensation) as some of us call it. And LE doesn't have that? Silly old Digi!!

Scott - yes, I keep looking at Reaper and (as I said in before - possibly in the other thread) whilst it is functionaly rich and fantastically lightweight (woo hoo), it's the UI that let's it down for me. After the last mention, I downloaded another eval version and it's getting better - I found a skin that I quite like - but that's just the main window that's improving. The dialogs are a little basic and there's a fair few of them. In a few versions time, I suspect that I will be prepared to part with (admittedly a small amount of) cash but not _quite_ yet.

Interesting what you say about the author though...

--------------------
Veni, Vidi, Aesculi
(I came, I saw, I conkered)

Quote Doublehelix:

---

Several years ago, nobody had ADC,

---

For the record, Cakewalk have had full APDC since Cakewalk Pro Audio 7 or 8. (8-9 years) They never advertised it because they considered it essential in a fully functional DAW.

UnderTow

Quote Dave B:

---

DH - Ahhh ... I see ... you mean PDC (plug-in delay compensation) as some of us call it.

---

Dave:
Haha!!! I have always called it "PDC" as well, and lately, I have been corrected several times, so I thought *I* had it wrong, and have been calling it "ADC" for the last couple of months! That is pretty funny...


Scott:
I keep hearing the Reaper name pop up all over the place, and it certainly sounds like they are starting to make a name for themselves.

The problem (for me) with a new startup like this is that there is very little outside 3rd party support. For example, Lynx tests their driver updates with all the usual suspects, but I would guess not with Reaper. When CB4 came out, there were several plugins (mostly VSTis if I remember correctly) that did not work well with CB4, so they had to be updated by the manufacturers in order to function. I would guess that very few of these folks test their products with Reaper... at least *YET*.

Someday, SOS will probably even publish a monthly technical article called "Reaper Notes"!

I will go ahead and take a closer look anyway, if for no other reason that to see what all the fuss is about.

--------------------
James
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" ~Napoleon Bonaparte~

Quote Doublehelix:

---

The problem (for me) with a new startup like this is that there is very little outside 3rd party support. For example, Lynx tests their driver updates with all the usual suspects, but I would guess not with Reaper. When CB4 came out, there were several plugins (mostly VSTis if I remember correctly) that did not work well with CB4, so they had to be updated by the manufacturers in order to function. I would guess that very few of these folks test their products with Reaper... at least *YET*.

---

DH, I have to tell you . . . one of the biggest things that has pissed me off recently with Cubase is that, even using the copy of Cubase VST that came with my Emu 1820M, I have had all kinds of VERY frustrating issues with getting the EMu and Cubase to talk to each other properly -- including some problems that outright ENDED TWO SESSIONS!

I also found it difficult to get the Behringer BCF2000 working properly with Cubase VST.

I have had NO such troubles with REAPER. As a matter of fact, REAPER talks better with my hardware than Cubase EVER did, and everything is much easier to set up. It's also very configurable -- you can even rename the inputs and ouputs, which can be nice if you have certain hardware wired in to certain inputs and outputs.

All third party plugins I've tried so far have also worked beautifully with REAPER. The plugins in REAPER are better than the native plugins in Cubase, and all the supplied Jesusonic plugins (highly unfortunate name, IMO, but people seem to now be referring to them as JS) are user editable, etc., so if you want to add new features or improve on them, this is an option.

ReaComp is a very interesting compressor (check the tutorial vids on that one).

ReaGate is a very configurable gate with wet/dry controls, lookahead (on hosts that support PDC), hysteresis, hold, noise generator, MIDI event sending (on hosts that support it), built-in filtering sidechain as well as supporting sidechain inputs, and more.

ReaFir is a FFT-based EQ/dynamics processor/noise removal/analysis plug-in. ReaFir can do a lot of types of processing, from standard linear FIR-based EQ, to noise signature detection and removal to per-band compression and gating.

REAPER includes a load of plugins with everything from Convolution to amp simulation.

Hehe . . . another little feature that I dicovered quite by accident (I still haven't run across it in the documentation) is that there is a little slider below the master fader, which looked like a balance adjustment or something, but is actually a speed adjustment. So you can actually slow down the entire session if someone needs to practice a phrase in time and in correct pitch, but at a slower tempo, in order to nail it down. I haven't tried to record something at a slower tempo and then speed it up, but it seems to me somebody's really on the ball here, putting in a feature like that!

As Dave mentions, the effects dialogue boxes seem a little strange and rather plain, particularly at first. My first impression of it was. "OK, that's kinda lame." However, now that I have a better sense of how it works, I like it better than the way Cubase handles it.

One cool thing about it is that you can set up a template with channels for all the different instruments you'd typically record in a session, and then any number of additional channels as send effects channels. Any channel can be run into any other channel either as a group channel or as a send channel, and you can do any kind of side chaining you want, which is something I very much missed in Cubase. Then in each of those channels you can load any and all plugins you would typically use on that instrument, etc., and order them the way you want.

Then, for each channel, you can uncheck the boxes for any and all effects you do not want to use for the time being. As long as the box is not checked, that plugin is turned off and eats no processing power. You could load 100 plugins into a channel, and as long as they are turned off you place no strain on your computer.

Found an effects chain that works particularly well or that you will use on a very regular basis? You can save the effects chain as a preset (it can also save the effects settings with the effects chain), and call up the entire effects chain at a moment's notice.

When you are mixing, if you get an effected sound you are happy with on a given channel, you can quickly and easily render the effected track as a new take and then turn off the plugins to save CPU cycles. Switching between takes is easily done by right clicking on a track and choosing take X. And it's easy enough to go back and change if you later decide you don't like it. This feature is a big help for older computers, like my aging P4 1.6 GHz machine.

I find the handling of multiple takes to be much faster and easier, with fewer mouse clicks, etc., in REAPER than in Cubase -- though the lanes in Cubase/Nuendo can be nicer for comping tracks. But, even so, you have an option to break all takes out into new subtracks, so you can use that in a similar manner to using lanes, and there is actually some talk of implementing an option to use Cubase/Nuendo style lanes in REAPER.

I find that there is a deceptive simplicity to REAPER, and it's easy to overlook or entirely miss some very deep features because of this, and because the documentation is fairly simple and not entirely complete at this point. That's why it's worth dropping in to the REAPER forums on occasion and having a look around. And, as I said earlier, those basic tutorial videos offer some nice insight as well. TBH, it was looking at those that convinced me to look a little deeper . . . at REAPER (sorry 'bout that one ).

Sorry for a bit of cut and paste, here, but:

Wide open compatibility

* Human readable and editable project file format
* Support for on-the-fly reading and writing of many common file formats, including WAV/W64/BWF, MID, AIFF, WavPack, FLAC, MP3 and OGG
* Support for consolidating track edits, to enable easy export of edited audio
* Support for rendering track stems, to enable easy export (with FX and automation)
* EDL import/export for both Samplitude and Vegas (there is also discussion of implementing OMF import/export for applications that support OMF)
* Includes ReaRoute, which enables sending/receiving of audio to/from most other ASIO enabled applications
* Supports ReWire enabled applications
* ReaMote offers realtime network FX processing (use spare machines on your local network for processing) -- though there is a disclaimer that this one is still very much in the Beta stages. But, for example, that also potentially increases the number of UAD or PoCo cards you could use, if you have a couple of spare computers lying around. Cheaper than buying a Magma PCI expander, too!

REAPER is also apparently set up for complete forward and backward compatibility -- unlike Cubase et al.

REAPER is also set up so you can install and run it from a portable drive -- so you can even throw it on a small USB drive and run it in a different studio, etc. (The whole installation package is less than 2MB, FFS.)

User arrangeable user interface. The following windows can be hidden, docked, or floated to meet your needs:

* Track mixer view
* Transport controls
* Undo history
* Media explorer
* Routing matrix
* Navigator
* FX browser
* Track FX chains
* Performance meter

You can easily switch between the docked windows by clicking the tabs at the bottom of the screen. I love this! I am not endlessly opening and closing windows in REAPER.

I don't mean to sound like a fanboy here, and REAPER may not have everything for everybody (yet), but, while I haven't had a chance to use it on a full project yet, I really like what I'm seeing here -- both in what it offers now, and in what it is likely to offer in the very near future.

One of the things I like about this is that there seems to be a very serious mission to offer as broad compatibility as possible, and to get away from the kind of overly proprietary design that makes it more difficult for musicians and engineers/studios to work with each other.

At the very least, I can forsee REAPER being a very handy tool for people to have in their arsenal, even if they also use another more proprietary package.

Again, I haven't had a chance to really use REAPER in anger yet, but I plan to start any upcoming projects in REAPER, so I can push it a bit more to see what happens. But I do know that there are a number of serious, working commercial studios that seem to have switched over from Pro Tools, etc. to REAPER and are extremely happy with it even as it is now.

And a look at the current history list shows version updates every couple of days since at least the beginning of January. Quite in contrast to the Steinberg pace!



--------------------
Scott
--Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?

Quote Doublehelix:

---

Actually, the main reason with this thread is how Steinberg treats its customers, not anything to do with whether Cubase is a professional/mature platform.

---

Had the application been really mature and professional it wouldn't have so many problems. Had it not have so many problems, people wouldn't be so upset about the update cancellation. I could care less about how Steinberg treats its customers or how arrogant they are for as long as their software is working.

Quote Doublehelix:

---

SX 3.11 is extremely stable, professional, and mature. There were a few "features" that needed fixing, but then again, what software doesn't, including Sonar?

---

Cubase SX 3.x is the crapiest and buggiest application I ever paid for! If it works for you to the point where you're able to say "it's extremely stable, professional, and mature" then may be you shouldn't hang out with angry people and spare yourself from the unnecessary agitation.

Quote Scottdru:

---

I don't mean to sound like a fanboy here, and REAPER may not have everything for everybody (yet)

---

Well I'm sold. I've been looking for an alternative solution to the unenviable (but necessary) upgrade from Cubase LE to Cubase 4, and if Reaper is half as good as you say it is then it'll be good enough for me. And at that price it has to be worth experimenting with

Thanks for the tip Scott.

*Rahnooo*

Configurable GUI -- some screen grabs:

As I mentioned before, the colour schemes and buttons in REAPER can be extensively customised (and quite easily as well).

The default theme is not that great looking, but a lot of people are doing their own schemes and posting them up in the REAPER forums.

REAPER can look much nicer than the various different themes you see in the screenshots on the website.

I've posted up a screen grab of REAPER, playing one of the demo songs, with the theme I'm currently using, which, if memory serves, uses the colour scheme from one preset and the buttons from another. You can have a look HERE. Personally, I find this theme to be very clear, uncluttered and easy on the eyes. I also feel the metering here looks nice and is very clear.

Note the tabs at the bottom of the screen, where you can dock many of the function windows and toggle between them with minimal mouse clicking and movement. Also, you'll notice that, if you select a track, it will be clearly highlighted in a different colour (which can also be changed to your preference) both in the channel settings panel at the left of the screen and also in the corresponding mixer channel.

If you don't like the look of the fader handles, buttons and other icons, you can always copy from a screen shot of your favourite application, edit as necessary in Photoshop or GIMP, and replace the corresponding icons with your own graphics. Screen grab of one of the icon folders from one of the theme presets HERE.

There's another screen grab of what it looks like reassigning track inputs on the fly in REAPER while playing or recording HERE . This is a very easy right click function, rather than having to stop playing or recording, and then go through all kinds of rigamarole pushing multiple buttons and multiple menus, etc. to reassign a track input and arm it for recording in Cubase.

If I've got an artist recording a part, I can add a new track, label it, assign the inputs, arm the track, and have the track ready to go by the time the artist is done recording the one part, and is ready to move on to recording the next part. And I'm not mousing back and forth all over the screen or having to make an excessive amount of mouse clicks to do it.

--------------------
Scott
--Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?

OT: Scott, which theme is that?

Is it just me or does Reaper bear somewhat more than a passing resemblance to Acid?

--------------------
http://www.jeremycorbett.co.uk

OK Scott:

Maybe I am an idiot, but I cannot view the images. It looks like I need to join esnips to see them? Bummer. Can you email or PM them to me instead?

I spent some time with the demo videos, and you are right they are very cool! If the development continues on the path it is on now, this is going to become a serious competitor.

I also spent a short time on their Forum, which is also encouraging.

One thing that seems to be missing is cooperation from Universal Audio with their UAD-1 card. There seem to be some issues there, which is a bummer since I use those plugs extensively (I have 3 cards in a Magma chassis).

Dima:

Not sure what you problem is, but *you* seem to be the angry one. I never attacked you, but you seem to have a chip on your shoulder about something.

You obviously do not have all the information you need to make your explosive comments, as SX 3.11 is one of the most stable releases from any DAW company. Maybe you had the initial release of SX 3 and are basing your reactions on that? Even SX 3.02 is rock-solid. Pretty much *everyone* that I know says that, including the angry masses at cubase.net.

Stability is not the issue with SX 3.11. Promised features that were not delivered are the issue. The software works well, and is in daily use in *thousands* of studios. So what does that say about you? If you cannot use it, either you have an initial release, a cracked copy, an ill-configured computer, or are making sensationalized comments to add worth to your argument. The Cubase and Nuendo market share is many times bigger than the Sonar one, so if it was the buggiest, crappiest software you have ever used, maybe it was something you were doing wrong?

Most companies have buggy releases at .0 releases, including Sonar. In fact, Sonar has just *finally* released version 6.2 which *FINALLY* fixes the issues with the UAD-1 cards that has been going on for a couple of years... A couple of years!!! How about that for response time?

Chill out a bit there man... life is too short for such anger.

--------------------
James
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" ~Napoleon Bonaparte~

Quote Doublehelix:

---

Quote tex:

---

Well, I'm leaning towards a crossgrade to Sonar Producer.

---

I made the following (or similar) comment in the cubase.net lounge forum:

Sonar looks pretty impressive, but somehow I just can't shake their "home/amateur" reputation. I know this is unfair, and I am being a snob here, but it just can't bring myself to consider Sonar as a professional application.

I *KNOW* this is incorrect, and that they have come a long way since their earlier versions, but it is an ingrained notion nonetheless.

Samplitude looks unfinished, and amateurish is some ways, and doesn't thrill me so far, but I really do need to spend some more time with it.

So what is left on the PC platform?

-PT LE - no way! I need ADC.
-PT|HD - expensive for what you get. Not sure if I want to buy into that hardware paradigm

What else am I missing?

I record 99% audio, and do very little midi (almost none). No loops or samples to speak of (except some sample replacement for drums using Drumagog).

---

If you're willing to push that "almost none" to "none", then I'd thoroughly recommend a look at Sony Vegas. I haven't used it since back at version 3 but at the time I thought it had the clearest, most elegant and intuitive interface I'd ever seen on any DAW. Extremely stable too.

Only problem with it is no MIDI, which makes it out of the question for me. I know some use it synced to another app for MIDI, and this is apparently not a big problem.

FWIW I use Sonar and love it to bits. But then I'm not a snob.

Quote Wurlitzer:

---

If you're willing to push that "almost none" to "none", then I'd thoroughly recommend a look at Sony Vegas.

---

It has been a while since I have used any midi, but I do use it occasionally, so I'd like to keep that option available. Thanks for the suggestion however. I have head that Vegas is GREAT for video work, and considered picking up a copy for that reason alone. I have a son that is really into editing video, and I am sure that he could work wonders with it.

Quote:

---

FWIW I use Sonar and love it to bits. But then I'm not a snob.

---

Ouch!!! Guilty as charged!

I know it is a great program, and that my bias is just prejudice from nowhere. I actually tried Sonar at version 1, and just couldn't get on with it, and have not tried it since. I really need to download the demo and make up my own mind about it, and not use old prejudices to influence my decisions. This is WAY TOO IMPORTANT to do that. Our DAWs become like our family, as we are more intimate with them than most other things in our arsenals. It is one of the most important and personal choices that we make.

--------------------
James
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" ~Napoleon Bonaparte~

Thanks for the heads up Scottdru. I'd heard of Reaper, but hadn't checked it out. Actually it seems like quite a serious bit of kit. I got a bit of a shock when I opened up the preferences and was confronted with a huge amount of configuration possibilites, pretty much the same as Cubase studio 4 which is what I currently use (and hate). I've been tinking I'd have to move over to Mac, but I'm gonna seriously check this program out first and see if it'll do the business.

Actually, some thing came to me as I was flicking through the various *themes* it has, and that was how important a likable GUI is and at the same time how unimportant it is too.

I (obviously in the minority) actually really like the C4 GUI, the work flow is improved no end, except that my work doesn't flow, as it keeps crashing. Anyway, that style of interface (dark) appeals to me and makes me comfortable, which is conducive to a productive session I feel.

Now obviously, the GUI doesn't matter so much when it comes to assesing the recording and editing facilities present in sequencer, but I must say, I am guilty of the fact that if you had presented reaper to me in one of it's grey windows/sonar 1 looks, and told me I had to live with it, I probably wouldn't have even bothered checking it out further. You can see my configuration of Reaper HERE, I particularly liked the way I could specify the colour of the selected track.

So why is it then (although I know nothing about programming), if a program like Reaper can have such extensive GUI options and weighs in as such a small program, why do we have to live with what the big DAW sequencer manufacturers give us? Is it considered *amateurish* to be able to *skin* a program or something?

By the way, I realise that for daily commercial use, perhaps Reaper isn't perhaps uo to the mark.. yet, but I bet it's a kick ass (and much cheaper) option to the masses out there making music at home.

Quote Wurlitzer:

---

Quote Doublehelix:

---

Sonar looks pretty impressive, but somehow I just can't shake their "home/amateur" reputation. I know this is unfair, and I am being a snob here, but it just can't bring myself to consider Sonar as a professional application.

I *KNOW* this is incorrect, and that they have come a long way since their earlier versions, but it is an ingrained notion nonetheless.

Samplitude looks unfinished, and amateurish is some ways, and doesn't thrill me so far, but I really do need to spend some more time with it.

What else am I missing?

I record 99% audio, and do very little midi (almost none). No loops or samples to speak of (except some sample replacement for drums using Drumagog).

---

If you're willing to push that "almost none" to "none", then I'd thoroughly recommend a look at Sony Vegas. I haven't used it since back at version 3 but at the time I thought it had the clearest, most elegant and intuitive interface I'd ever seen on any DAW. Extremely stable too.

---

As I understand it, REAPER was actually modelled after Vegas at the start, with the intention of taking that simple, but effective user interface, and developing something that offered more features and flexibility on the audio side for professional users. FWIW.

Quote Wurlitzer:

---

Only problem with it is no MIDI, which makes it out of the question for me. I know some use it synced to another app for MIDI, and this is apparently not a big problem.

---

I may do a bit of this myself with REAPER and Cubase (or some other MIDI sequencer) if I need some more advanced MIDI programming features that REAPER doesn't yet have. Should be fairly sensible to do, given that REAPER supports ReWire, and also has its own ReRoute features.

For now, I do mostly audio, with various bits of MIDI stuff, but I don't use a lot of the more advanced/automated MIDI programming features at this point (other than automation of faders and occasionally some plugins or external effects. If I can play stuff in and move it around as needed, that's basically what I need for 99.9999% of what I do at this point.

Doublehelix Quote:

---

FWIW I use Sonar and love it to bits. But then I'm not a snob.

---

That's another thing that I think we need to fight in this industry. There are so many people using so many different sequencer packages now, it's becoming increasingly irrelevant which software you use, or which platform you use. I very strongly feel that the creative process needs to be as platform independent as possible. As a musician, I don't give a f**k what software or hardware is being used -- I just want it to work well, offer the functions I need, be stable/reliable, and sound good. And I don't want it to slow me down in the middle of a creative burst.

Quote Koed:

---

OT: Scott, which theme is that?

---

It's called Unempty_DarkBlue. It's one I downloaded from the REAPER forum. I'm going to try some tweaking with the icons, etc., to get a look I like even better (when I get some more time). I like those detented buttons in the theme Hagalund posted up. That theme and the colours it uses looks great too!

Quote Doublehelix:

---

OK Scott:

Maybe I am an idiot, but I cannot view the images. It looks like I need to join esnips to see them? Bummer. Can you email or PM them to me instead?

---

I tried emailing them to you, DH, but it bounced back to me, saying "this user is over quota" or something.

You might try a different browser? I just checked the links using IE (only because IE won't automatically log me in as a user/member at that site), and I had no problem viewing the pics.

Doublehelix Quote:

---

One thing that seems to be missing is cooperation from Universal Audio with their UAD-1 card. There seem to be some issues there, which is a bummer since I use those plugs extensively (I have 3 cards in a Magma chassis).

---

Yikes! I guess that will be a pretty important issue for you then!

One thing about the way this software is being developed is that it's being run a bit like an open source project -- especially since it can be used as uncrippled shareware or you can register it under a "personal use only" license for only $50.

So you get a lot of users working with it and trying out different configurations and reporting back, etc. So, while there may not be direct "cooperation" with the UAD at this point, the UAD is a pretty popular and important piece of gear in this industry, and, if there are enough people saying they need to be able to use this gear (which I'm sure there are already), Justin will find a way to address it (and perhaps buy a UAD card himself to figure out how to fix the problems).

It's not like Justin is new to developing software that has to run on all kinds of different gear, etc.

There is actually an industry movement amongst a number of signatory software developers (Justin being one of those signatory developers) that holds certain core values at high priority for software development. I don't remember what the name of the group is at the moment, but some of the principles are to develop software that is stable, widely compatible, easy and intutive to use without requiring ridiculous amounts of documentation, and to make sure any necessary documentation is clear and concise. I wish I could remember the name of the group and/or find the link to the website. Very interesting. I'll post it up if I run across it again.

I know some of the other developers in this group have been keeping tabs on the REAPER project, and I remember one of them posting in the REAPER forums, saying that, while he didn't have any real connection to music, he had been watching the development of REAPER because it was an excellent implementation of the core principles of type of software development.

That's one of the reasons I feel that this is one that is really worth following and supporting, because I think we need more of this kind of thing in the industry, rather than big corporations fighting for every last scrap. We all lose out when this stuff happens -- the big software companies, the big record companies . . . all of them. It doesn't need to be like this. I have no problem with people getting fabulously wealthy when they develop products and/or offer services that are superior in quality. But when a company's business model/marketing focus moves from offering quality to spending more time, money and effort shutting other developers out of the market so they can have it all to themselves, then we have a big problem -- and we ALL lose.

I also have to wonder if some of this more healthy, quality/user-focused development might help prevent piracy as well. When big software companies charge premium prices to release beta level software that is full of bugs, or they pull a Steinberg and repeatedly reneg on promised features and fixes, it devalues the software in the minds of many people in the market, and people feel like they are being ripped off.

Likewise, when the big record companies force loads of bullsh*t cookie cutter, throwaway music down the throats of the market, and at the same time push truly talented and interesting artists out of the market, it devalues music as a saleable product. If people find music that they know they will want to keep and listen to over and over for years, they will go out and buy the CD. But if they just want to be able to listen to the current ear candy that they will only tire of when the next new bit of ear candy comes out, they'll download it -- and if there is an option download it for free, then unfortunately many people will go for the free option.

If a really quality piece of software comes along that doesn't cost the earth to purchase, perhaps a lot of people who might not have paid the premium buckage for the big name beta software will pony up a few bucks to support the software company that serves their needs, so that development can continue.

I also think it's a pretty fair idea charging non-professional users a lower price so they can enjoy using the software as a hobby, and requiring a higher fee for professionals who use it to generate income for themselves.

Quote Doublehelix:

---

Sonar has just *finally* released version 6.2 which *FINALLY* fixes the issues with the UAD-1 cards that has been going on for a couple of years... A couple of years!!! How about that for response time?

---

Ummm . . . better than Steinberg's overall response time?

Anyway . . . I'm really not meaning to try to over-sell REAPER, or to hijack this thread to make it about REAPER; but, especially having looked at some of the background of this thing, I do think that the whole REAPER project is rather an eye opener as to how things COULD be, and I think it is well worthwhile for we users to keep an eye on it, and

I think that the big software companies would do well to take heed as well. But they probably won't take heed unless those who would be their customers FORCE them to take heed!

--------------------
Scott
--Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?

Quote Doublehelix:

---

Not sure what you problem is, but *you* seem to be the angry one. I never attacked you, but you seem to have a chip on your shoulder about something.

---

Doublehelix:

I'm angry with Steinberg and the fact that I paid money for a ticket to the dead end. Don't know why you decided I'm angry with you personally.

Cheers!

P.S. Look at the title of this thread. Make sure you're comfortable with the subject. There's a lot of angry Cubase users out there.

Quote Hagalund:

---

You can see my configuration of Reaper HERE, I particularly liked the way I could specify the colour of the selected track.

---

I like the look of that one too! Which theme is that?

Quote:

---

So why is it then (although I know nothing about programming), if a program like Reaper can have such extensive GUI options and weighs in as such a small program, why do we have to live with what the big DAW sequencer manufacturers give us?

---

I'm with you on that one!

Quote:

---

By the way, I realise that for daily commercial use, perhaps Reaper isn't perhaps uo to the mark.. yet, but I bet it's a kick ass (and much cheaper) option to the masses out there making music at home.

---

But, as I understand it, there are indeed pro studios using it in daily commercial use -- many of whom have switched from Pro Tools because they like it better.

Also, one of the pro engineers who seems to be working closely with Justin on this stuff is Aaron Carey (Stevie Nicks, Megadeath and Gin Blossoms, among others) -- a/k/a Pipeline Audio (the guy who did the REAPER demo videos, and who also has a lot of impulse files up at noisevault.com).

FWIW.

--------------------
Scott
--Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?