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.

Post Extras