man this dude did a lot for reaper users and even if he used AI to comment he has the knowledge to back it up and is a profesional engineer (i guess with a real degree derived from his deep audio knowledge )using reaper as workhorse and surely knows all other DAWs.


how about u going over to the reaper forum and pitch the devs and users your ideas of converting this hyper optimized workflows into reaper.

PS im not a reaper user

which are ?

 

in my book not but rather used live 9.77 and 10 which may be the reason.
oh forgive me im talkin bout warez ...

 

Last edited: Jan 30, 2025 at 9:21 AM

yep we in the stonemountain lands were also the first making it mandatory to use seat belts in cars

 

I replied to the thread topic. "What do other DAWS have that REAPER doesn't?" It doesn't have most of the things I listed, and/or other DAWs have much better implementations. That's not an opinion, it's a fact. There's nothing to even argue. Anyone can download and see for themselves. Why are people hurt by this?

You too are trying to argue, and mock, but you don't even use Reaper, so why? And why can't I point out some AI bullshit that's completely irrelevant and drifts off into typical AI drivel? Did you even read it?

And I do post on the Reaper forums, there are many users that do who feel the same way. Many of them are scripters themselves. A lot of scripts are born out of frustration of what's ignored or heavily pushed back on by other users that all high five themselves, kind of like what's happening here.

 

Well, it’s not uncommon for modern, sound design heavy electronic music to use lots and lots of effects and considering the fact that stuff like FL Studio’s Patcher or Ableton’s effect rack are a thing and basically allow you to have an infinite amount of effects per channel (same with Reaper), it seems a bit weird to have 14 inserts max in Cubase.

And before you say “well just freeze/bounce the tracks/add a group”, it’s not that easy, because more often than not with these long chains you need to go back to tweak a certain parameter on an effect that’s way earlier than others in the chain, because you’ve applied a new effect that may drastically change the sound, but there’s something earlier in the chain that you need to get rid of, so having to unfreeze or do a bunch of undo actions is a nightmare workflow in that case. I know, I know, kids these days with their dubbin’ n steppin’ and their EDMin’.

 

Last edited: Jan 30, 2025 at 4:23 PM

The max in Cubase Pro currently is 16 insert slots not 14 although that doesn't really make a difference overall. I find it strange as well especially the smaller versions have even less insert slots and it was one of the main reasons why I switched from Artist to Pro a couple of years back. I think I read in the past that this has legacy reasons and is for backwards compatibility.

Personally I don't reach that limit that often even though I produce electronic music. You wrote adding a group would not be sufficient although that's what I do in the rare cases I need more inserts and I never really found it to be a issue other than it being annoying. There are also Plugins like the Waves StudioRack that could be used and that add extra functionality although of course external plugins are not a general replacement for missing functionalities of course.

 

Lifetime free updates I switched to FL

 

I do not begrudge anyone using a workflow that suits them because these days most people do a lot of their music in the privacy of their own spaces.

I have found most of the time if what is already is there is really good before processing, it does not need a lot of inserts, only tweaking. I can understand it certainly if a piece of music is designed purely around effects and modulation within reason, but even then, 14 insert effects on a single track seems excessive? There is an easier way if you need a pile of inserts. Lets say if a track had worse, even less, say as little as five inserts maximum. You can duplicate it as many times as you like and add effects 5x's for each track. All you'd have to do is gainstage each to a -db level where they're manageable. You wouldn't have phasing issues either because you're duplicating the identical track, with each track having its own unique inserts.

The only reason I see to freeze a track is because you are not only happy with it, but more because your DAW is not handling the number of inserts.

P.S. - I see this often that some people use inserts per track instead of stepping back and working out which tracks will use the same FX and simply assigning it to an FX bus, like the old AUX knobs on mixing desks, where the amount can be dialed in per track less and more etc.. It also puts a lower load on your DAW. I get that this is not a one size fits all, but with a lot of tracks, it would be unusual that at least a few tracks are not using the same thing.

 

Last edited: Jan 30, 2025 at 5:12 PM

Because it is. That is fear of commitment, not knowing your tools, reliance on samples not synths, or something along those lines. I've watched an awful lot of production videos from all the various sources, and have never once seen a "track breakdown" of a successful track with that many effects just piled on a single DAW channel, from anyone. Ever. Maybe if you are using single-purpose widget plugins like you might get from Kilohearts, it could make some sense. But that is why we have larger Multi-FX plugins which do many different processing tasks all in the same plugin. The actual 14 count limitation is interesting in actual number, but they probably figure they have already given you more than enough at just 10.

It's also a great way to never finish stuff for a lot of people. Constantly working backwards and tweaking, instead of just printing it to audio files and re-sampling. Or doing a better initial job when selecting starting samples.

 

Last edited: Jan 30, 2025 at 8:22 PM

You’ve never seen a game audio asset/palette prep FX chain, have you? Easily goes up to +20 effects on a single track and there are music genres that use similar amount of stuff, look up Noah Sitrin on YouTube. It has nothing to do with commitment, it’s about the process of actively manipulating large FX chains to achieve a particular result.

I’m not sure what “track breakdowns” you are talking about specifically, since the charts are dominated by trap songs that are very often produced by 20-something year olds on a laptop (look up Nick Mira) who already use heavily processed sounds to begin with (Omnisphere, Elektra, Nexus etc.), so putting more than 15 effects on stuff like that would be an overkill, yes.

But not everyone makes pop/trap/whatever, there are extremely complicated electronic genres that heavily rely on atmosphere, complex mangled textures and weird morphs, which very often are a result of experimentation, that wouldn’t have happened otherwise if it was limited by insert count. You may laugh, you may not like it, but that’s how it is and that’s how thousands of experienced artists make music.

 

Last edited: Jan 30, 2025 at 10:13 PM

Removed post. Too much room for ambiguity and a lot of inaccurate information.

 

Last edited: Jan 31, 2025 at 1:28 AM

what really would be cool if you could post a explicit example of a genre and such a long chain/insert plugs and track using it ?
i mean i use long stupid chains too in i dont even how to descripe it but your above text may be match on that....mixwise in kno ppl using long magic masterchains and/or stuff like http://legowelt.org/smackos-lemuria-vintage-sampler-simulator/
but hell to req more than 16 inserts maybe up to 20,25 or 30 seem laughable to me .

 

That’s not the same thing, which is exactly why I’m criticizing it.
Especially since a good chunk of what you’re saying is exaggerated or even factually incorrect.

I’m not trying to prove it - I already have.

You’re the one who brought it up. These are your points, not mine. I just provided the relevant context.

Wait a sec... hold on... it's coming... Because:

Exactly ;)

Well, that’s one way to twist things to fit your narrative.

Nice attempt at distraction. But it's the other way around.
*cough* Ahem… I hereby declare the AI used for the purpose of translating my written text: DeepL

Okay

Oh, I can't?
Wait a sec...

Code:

desc: I definitely can!
slider1:m1=0<-100,100,.01>mod 1
slider2:m2=0<-100,100,.01>mod 2
slider10:p=0<-100,100,.01>param
@slider
p = m1 + m2;

You were aware that JSFX is a native tool, right?

I don't. Why so dramatic?

That’s a pretty broad generalization, but no.

Yeah, because they’re designed for a very specific and limited use case.

Interesting. And here I thought that since Reaper 4, I’d written countless feature requests, developed and co-developed JSFX and scripts for the community, spent hours in pre-release discussions, pushed for UX improvements, contributed UI design studies, helped shape feature concepts, and so on.
But sure, you must be right - I’m obviously just one of those people holding Reaper back. Makes total sense.

Great!
Here’s a tip: Try being a little more constructive, buddy.
You want a slicer? Write a feature request.
Bonus tip:
Reaper has 2 developers. They can only do so much.
With thousands of other pending feature requests, it makes sense to consider Reaper’s design philosophy and existing features when making suggestions.
Reaper already has transient detection.
For example, you could propose integrating transient detection into the Media Explorer so that the waveform time selection automatically snaps between transients. That way, you’d just click the section you want to insert.
Boom, you’ve got a slicer!

 

Last edited: Jan 31, 2025 at 3:11 AM

I'm the one twisting narratives, making exaggerated claims, and being factually incorrect?

But you've written code for something that doesn't exist, and told me to put in feature requests for things I said don't exist or have convoluted workarounds?

And you're trying to argue that they do exist, only I have to put in a feature request and write code to get them? And wait for Microsoft to get their shit together and push an update? So they don't exist... But I'm wrong?

You further solidify everything I wrote about what other DAWs have that REAPER doesn't.. I really don't know what you're trying to prove other than that you're the one in the wrong..

 

So is it an unconscious oversight that you're leaving out the following statements in your qoute?
-->

Very convenient, as it allows you to bypass my main criticism.. ;)

Apart from the obligatory 'yes, but' and subsequent disregard of that point, it is simply not 'reality'.

Spontaneously, I can only think of 1 single DAW that consistently has the edge in this context (your context, not necessarily OPs context). 3 additional DAWs that have the edge in (yes, undoubtedly important) partial areas, are on par in other partial areas, or lag far behind. And spontaneously, I can think of an almost endless list of DAWs that cannot even come close to Reaper or these other 4 DAWs in this context.

And what are these “simple necessities” that make Reaper cost the same or more than other DAWs?

If you want to modulate a parameter from 2 modulation sources, you need to link it to 2 modulation sources - just like any other connection, it doesn’t exist beforehand. It’s a fundamental principle: 2=1+1.
Some other DAWs (not most) handle this calculation in the background. Here, you do it yourself. Once. And in most (fact!) DAWs it is impossible.

It's the same as in some DAWs where you need to create an AUX way and set an AUX send before you can route something to an AUX track.
Yes, you do it once -problem solved. That’s not a workaround; it’s simply the way it’s designed.

You don’t have to do anything. It’s all there - right at your fingertips.
But if you want to see it implemented in a very specific way that differs from the current implementation, it helps to speak up and ask for it.

Again, Reaper supports Dark Mode on all OSes that support Dark Mode. Dark Mode is not natively supported on any WinOS.
A WinOS workaround (not a Reaper workaround) is using Dark Themes, which has been supported since at least Win7.

Since you seem to like generalizations, here’s one that is actually based on facts:
Most other DAWs supporting Dark Mode do not support (or even install on) any OS below Win10 or macOS 13.
One reason for this is UI rendering.

I'm just imagining you standing in front of a massive modular synth rack, asking where the synth is.
Jokes aside. As I said, you have a few valid points. But that doesn’t mean you’re right or that I agree with you.

...
To bring the discussion back to the actual topic (and my main criticism):
The OP asked,

You responded by calling Reaper one of the worst DAWs, presenting a list of features - about half of which are natively available in Reaper, while the rest can be integrated using its native tools. My criticism isn't about your list, but the context of your presentation, which is characterized by factually incorrect generalizations.

While some of your points may be legit from a user's perspective, your argument is fundamentally flawed. Your posts are rife with untenable generalizations and unnecessary false accusations that go far beyond valid criticisms. The core issue is that 90% of your original post either completely misses the point of OPs question or remains objectively indefensible - and the worst part is, you don't even seem to realize it.

PS: I'm done here.

 

Last edited: Jan 31, 2025 at 4:05 PM

I cut out the rest of the quote, because those are the only parts of the post you quoted in your original reply.. You know, the one here, post #36: What do other DAWs have that REAPER doesn't? (songwriting, composition, music production) I'm such a filthy little narrative twister.

You defenses to my claims

• Drumrack: A terribly time consuming workaround with poor/no integration into the work environment, that involves setting up multiple FX, tracks, containers, routing, naming, and using track lane tools.
• Sampler: You keep skipping over this one, nice, I don't blame you.
• Slicer: Make a feature request if you want one, or use dynamic split mode from menu items in the track lane as an alternative solution
• Darkmode: It's Microsofts fault
• Liveloop: That's a unique feature specific to other DAWS bro that's not fair
• Param modulation: Assign more than 1 LFO? Write your own code
  
• Ugly cluttered workflow: It's just 2 devs, do you know how hard UI/UX design is?

You've showcased in great detail that these workarounds are indeed extremely cumbersome or don't exist, which is exactly what my original post highlights.

• Just put in a FR and learn to code.
• Flashbang yourself and your artists in a vibey dimlit room.
• Open up a notepad outside of your DAW to create drum map note names for your Megababy sequencer and then figure out which folder it goes in then restart your DAW for it to show up in the dropdown menu.
• Print your RS5K Samples onto the track timeline every time you want to do a basic reverse/timestretch/pitch shift without rate change, and then import it back into your RS5K instance because you can't do any of it within RS5K. Oh you want an AHDSR with curves? Yeh, you'll have to look around on google and scroll through pluginboutique for another sampler. Oh you want to edit your samples again? Back to the track timeline.
• Create 16 containers each with an instance of RS5K, edit each note start and note end of each instance so it's mapped to an individual key, and route them to 16 tracks, and name all your containers, name all your instances of RS5K, and name all your tracks, so you can navigate your drum rack a bit better. Don't forget to open up notepad and do the Megababy note naming thing again. Don't forget to forget a step..
• Hey let's try an arp and a step sequencer, you know, production tools.. Yeh, one sec, I gotta google something again and find my credit card.

These workarounds and tools make it barely usable for some of the most basic tasks if you're making music ITB.

This is funnier than your synth joke/insult. "Specific and limited use case", my brother it's 2025, but keep enjoying your sleep.

Anyway I'm done too, I got to put in a call to Microsoft and learn how to code, find some VSTs, write up some feature requests and shit.

I'm sorry @bigbing for messing up your thread. Because you already have REAPER and do sound design, I would take a good look at Ableton or Bitwig for your song writing and production needs, they are great environments for sound design too so they pair well.

Edited: A few of those comments were off topic and uncalled for. Removed.
Sorry

 

Last edited: Feb 1, 2025 at 7:10 AM

Completely ridiculous thread.

 

Nothing.

 

Popularity...