Live vs Reaper

Discussion in 'Reaper' started by signalflow, Jun 22, 2016.

  1. subGENRE

    subGENRE Audiosexual

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,336
    Likes Received:
    1,327
    One more thing as well, if you didnt know already. Dont forget to install the SWS extensions for reaper, it gives reaper a lot more functionality and features.

    http://www.sws-extension.org/
     
  2. signalflow

    signalflow Ultrasonic

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2016
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    39
    Hey guys I've got Reaper up and running and will test out. Are there any downloadable templates out there for the UI? I know this DAW is customizable but I want to see if there is anything I can download to something close to live and from there maybe customize it more.
     
  3. focusrite

    focusrite Platinum Record

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2013
    Messages:
    384
    Likes Received:
    200
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  4. lpu2n

    lpu2n Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2015
    Messages:
    192
    Likes Received:
    101
    It depends on what you're doing. Reaper is suited for conventional tracking/mixing purposes. Live, on the other hand, is built with electronic music production and performance in mind. I still give Live the edge because of its superb workflow, but for recording actual musicians/mixing post stuff (disclaimer: I have little experience in the latter), I think people will find Reaper more suitable. With its deep customizablity and macros, it can be used efficiently depending on the type of project you're working on. Unfortunately, I don't see it fostering the kind of creativity needed when you're composing electronic stuff purely ITB - i.e. it's a more of a mixer, not a musical instrument.

    I haven't even tried using it for electronic music, though. Live is, as I said before, just superb when it comes to that. The only DAW I can see myself switching to is Bitwig if it ever eclipses Live in terms of stability and ease-of-use. I'm hoping Live 10 will be released soon, with improvements to the browser (!), the mixer, handling of plugins, and stability (!). We'll see what happens.
     
  5. signalflow

    signalflow Ultrasonic

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2016
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    39
    I have had no trouble using live to mix/ edit/ post production / and general production. I guess workflow is subjective but I always like more intuitiveness.
     
    • Interesting Interesting x 1
    • List
  6. signalflow

    signalflow Ultrasonic

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2016
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    39
  7. ArticStorm

    ArticStorm Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,552
    Likes Received:
    1,000
    Location:
    AudioSexPro
    workflowwise Live, loading time and stability reaper.

    stability of live improved a lot since v9 was initialized, but loading or closing live still takes ages compared to reaper.
    would be nice to see sandboxing from both.
     
  8. signalflow

    signalflow Ultrasonic

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2016
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    39
    Loading closing was a huge issue for many using live including me. I've literally waited 10 min to fire up and close down at times. It now take a fraction of the time now as there were driver issues conflicting with my system and live I've just deleted however, loading/closing time doesn't matter to me as much as stability, and intuitive features to make my workflow better.
     
  9. Cav Emp

    Cav Emp Audiosexual

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2014
    Messages:
    1,546
    Likes Received:
    1,244
    One place where Live is (IMO) seriously underrated is ease-of-use/power ratio. The info box and built-in lessons were the reason I picked up Live when I was new to producing. Then of course when you get more sophisticated you learn that its ability to quickly and easily layer instruments and effects, create playable modulations, etc. is pretty much top notch.

    Reaper on the other hand is an all around powerhouse, kind of like how I imagine Logic to be. Or how Samplitude is. They will bend to your needs, but as far as I know there's not any one streamlined/specialized workflow
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Like Like x 1
    • List
  10. Zentropy

    Zentropy Kapellmeister

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2015
    Messages:
    53
    Likes Received:
    46
    Reaper has extensive sandboxing, you just have to set it to how you want it to work in the options. By default it only sandboxes bridged plugins, but you can change it to sandbox everything in separate processes per plug or sandbox all of them in one separate process.

    Ableton right now is really confusing to me. It's definitely the best live performance choice, but I feel like the production side of things is falling behind pretty fast. The only meaningful addition in ages really has been PDC, and it still has some really mind boggling design decisions you can't change (why is the normal device view nothing but a huge X-Y pad that's useless during production? I would rather set it to show parameters like Bitwig, but nope). I get that the ultra-simplified workflow is a big draw to a lot of people, but Bitwig's taking that same workflow and improving on it all over the place. I have really high hopes for Live 10. By the time Live 11 comes around, if 10 hasn't really stepped its game up, I bet Bitwig will have become the de facto DAW for the current Live audience. I'm very curious how well Live would do if it was released for the first time today instead of years ago and didn't have the community momentum that I think carries it now
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  11. Davey Jones

    Davey Jones Kapellmeister

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    354
    Likes Received:
    63
    I don't know about Live falling behind anytime soon. Hell yes, it can def be better, no doubt. But it is quick. And Push 2... my goodness. It's just starting.
     
  12. lpu2n

    lpu2n Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2015
    Messages:
    192
    Likes Received:
    101
    Well, it really comes down to nuance... there is no doubt Live is a very capable daw, and I agree with Cav, it packs some serious punch while remaining intuitive. From what I've read/experienced in Reaper, if you were to learn it very well, you could achieve things in tracking and post much faster and easier than in LIve. It might not be as intuitive, but it is rewarding to those who know how to use it effectively.

    Live is an instrument-type DAW - its primary focus is the session view, which lends itself to simplicity and flexibility in electronic music performance. The arrangement view, while more conventional, retains many of the same motifs. That's because most electronic music doesn't require surgical precision, hundreds of tracks, and utilities to manipulate batches of clips with simple macros. As far as I know, Live doesn't even support timecode. Its take system is one of its surprisingly weak points - while you might not need it when sequencing and quantizing, it is instrumental to the efficient recording of live instruments.

    Ableton removed stuff that they felt would only clutter up the interface and confuse people, and that's good, software needs to maintain focus. Reaper, on the other hand, focuses on intense customizability and useful features for power users. Naturally, this allows an experienced user to 'reap' ( :deep_facepalm: ) the benefits on projects that require much more complexity, fine-tuning, precision, and organization than the average electronic arrangement. There's no real winner here... again, it depends on what you're doing. Just my humble opinion, of course.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2016
  13. subGENRE

    subGENRE Audiosexual

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,336
    Likes Received:
    1,327
    Same Project REAPER.png Same Project LIVE.png
    Here is the same project first in ableton, then in reaper ready for mixing. The reaper session takes up less screen real estate as well due to the folding mixer.
     
  14. subGENRE

    subGENRE Audiosexual

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,336
    Likes Received:
    1,327
    Exactly, people with minimal computer experience will take to live better usually, Where the geeks like me will love reaper. Its like I mentioned in an earlier post, I like to refer to live as having a "musicians interface".
     
  15. lpu2n

    lpu2n Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2015
    Messages:
    192
    Likes Received:
    101
    Plus the pictures, in addition to the uniform colour scheme that stretches across the track, make it much easier to find what you're looking for. I like Reaper's grid and snapping much better too.

    Live's mixer view has so much wasted real estate it's not even funny. So many key controls that should be present on a mixer are obscured/tiny. See, when you're not using the session view clip/loop features, there's all this empty space there that could be used for controls/plugin list/routing/better meters. When you're actually performing with session view, you don't want to have that stuff cluttering up your interface, but when doing heavy-duty mixing, usability really takes a hit.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2016
  16. xbitz

    xbitz Platinum Record

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    404
    Likes Received:
    162
  17. subGENRE

    subGENRE Audiosexual

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,336
    Likes Received:
    1,327
    I want a push 2 soooooooo bad
     
  18. Pinkman

    Pinkman Audiosexual

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2016
    Messages:
    1,348
    Likes Received:
    1,142
    Reaper has a built in bit bridge for loading 32-bit VSTs in 64 bit architecture.
    With Live you have to use jbridge or another third-party method.
    Live does allow you to use aliases (shortcuts) to point to VST locations though.
     
  19. FerdinandIIIDeMedicis

    FerdinandIIIDeMedicis Kapellmeister

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2016
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    53
    They are two different DAWs suited for different tasks. Live, Bitwig, Reason and FL are similar DAWs, mainly intended for nonlinear production (using samples, loops, stretching audio), even though you can still write linear music with them of course. Reaper is more like Pro Tools, Cubase, DP, S1, etc.. With a linear workflow, intended for composing linear songs, mixing/mastering and recording bands, orchestras, and stuff like that. So you can't really compare Live and Reaper. IMO you (and most people who like to compose in different styles) should use both a non-linear DAW and a traditional linear DAW, this way you'll be way more versatile. You can try Reaper, but don't leave Live behind (unless you want to replace it by another similar DAW).
     
  20. xbitz

    xbitz Platinum Record

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    404
    Likes Received:
    162
    MIDI controlling was (by default) sh*ty in Reaper so mention it [​IMG]

    free one http://www.helgoboss.org/projects/realearn/ , Reaper can use ghost clip (can be MIDI file reference), can copy automation between clips, has screensets, can save mixer states, has bounce in place, etc. etc.



    macroing working this way in Reaper (needs some source device I'm using BlueCats Remote which knobs can be connected to knobs of other devices) works between tracks too

    done ... Reaper is nice and sexy "no hidden catch no strings attached just free love" brilliant DAW ;)
     
Loading...
Loading...