Reaper Audio Engine

by **jkhuri44** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 11:29 am

Possibly a stupid or esoteric styled question....(im rather fond of those these days)...:)

But...i was wondering if any Turtlerockers have made the jump to Reaper???? its got a bat load of sweet features, ie. imcorporate whats cool in alot of DAWs ....but as heath said, its MIDI is lacklustre...however, my question is...

can anyone comment on how the damn program sounds?? or has any one done any tests on some identical mixes to see if they null?? Somehow i dont trust a 10mb program to have a good sound engine, but thats probably me being superstitious :)

Anyway,

hope someone has tried it !!

by **HA_DA_JA** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 12:01 pm

Its great for getting more tracks than LE pro Tools but I have only dabbled on it briefly.

by **Jason** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:19 pm

Just typed a large post about the program and then my internet crapped itself. So here is the short version.

Been using reaper for about a year and a half. Great Program, very flexible, easy to learn and use. Yes the midi lacks abit but it is getting better all the time.

Download it and have a go.

by **Thirteen** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:41 pm

Jason wrote:Just typed a large post about the program and then my internet crapped itself. So here is the short version.

Been using reaper for about a year and a half. Great Program, very flexible, easy to learn and use. Yes the midi lacks abit but it is getting better all the time.

Download it and have a go.

Are you with Bigpond? My internet just had a thrombo for about 20 minutes...

by **TimS** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:42 pm

My work internet is the same - really slow and keeps shi^^ing itself..

by **astrovic** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:52 pm

I use it and I like it. Doubt it has all the functionality of the other guys, but the less functions it has, the better (sorta kinda - you know what I mean)

Can't answer the question about how it sounds, TBH. I didn't know DAW's had a sound, at least I would have thought it would be marginal in the scheme of things. Certainly don't notice any sonic difference from what I'd previusly been using (Logic 5 on a PC)

by **heathen** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 4:59 pm

I dunno I swear I can sometimes hear a difference between daws, as far as reaper goes it sounds great, as good as samplitude.

Maybe its when people just use the plugins which come with thier daw which gives it "a sound" I dunno. I swear I hear something between them though.

Reaper is very smooth in the way it works, Nuendo sits there thinking about things sometimes. I think stuff like that boils down to the size of the program.

by **tunetown** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 6:48 pm

A DAW shouldn't have a sound. Maths is maths. They are all supposed to give back what you put in. If a DAW doesn't null, its math is wrong. Whilst I haven't used Reaper, I've heard it works as expected. Plug-ins are another story. Download it, try it and report back. I'd be interested in your view. It's certainly priced right.

Cheers
Peter

by **Thirteen** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 9:21 pm

tunetown wrote:A DAW shouldn't have a sound. Maths is maths. They are all supposed to give back what you put in. If a DAW doesn't null, its math is wrong. Whilst I haven't used Reaper, I've heard it works as expected. Plug-ins are another story. Download it, try it and report back. I'd be interested in your view. It's certainly priced right.

Cheers
Peter

I read an involved article last year that was a little above my head as far as the maths goes, but it showed that different DAW programs can indeed sound different. While it is correct to say that maths is maths, in a perfect simple world that is true, but apparently where different DAW's do very much differ is when more unusual mathematical events occur such as wrapping and handling floating point rounding errors. The article listed two mathematical conumdrums which can happen in a DAW's working processes which can give wildly different results depending upon how the code is written.

by **jkhuri44** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 9:34 pm

yo guys.

thanks for ur inputz...yeah, been meaning to try it, just wondering if it was worth it....i've just been tied up in an intensive project at the moment, but when its done, i certainly do plan on trying it!!! :)

Steve, thats interesting about that article...wouldnt happen to have a link to it wudja?

J.

by **heathen** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 10:47 am

tunetown wrote:A DAW shouldn't have a sound. Maths is maths. They are all supposed to give back what you put in. If a DAW doesn't null, its math is wrong. Whilst I haven't used Reaper, I've heard it works as expected. Plug-ins are another story. Download it, try it and report back. I'd be interested in your view. It's certainly priced right.

Cheers
Peter

Different daws use different maths, that makes sense. I agree they should'nt have a sound but...........

by **Howard Jones** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 11:42 am

A DAW shouldn't have a sound. Maths is maths.

Pure maths is maths. Applied maths is something different. Who decided that DAWs shouldn't have a sound, hmmm? Isn't outboard equipment valued because brands have different sounds?

by **jkhuri44** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 12:51 pm

oh crap...

did i open one of those dodgy worm cans??

hahahahaha

by **TimS** » Sat Aug 16, 2008 5:46 pm

yup!!

by **Jason** » Sun Aug 17, 2008 7:12 pm

[quote="Thirteen"][quote="Jason"]Just typed a large post about the program and then my internet crapped itself. So here is the short version.

Been using reaper for about a year and a half. Great Program, very flexible, easy to learn and use. Yes the midi lacks abit but it is getting better all the time.

Download it and have a go.[/quote]

Are you with Bigpond? My internet just had a thrombo for about 20 minutes...[/quote]

Yep. I really love bigpond somedays.......

by **jkhuri44** » Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:40 pm

ok... a null test, using 4 stereo stems, no panning, no volume automation, everything at zero, reveals the following...

-the 2 bounce downs do not null.

-there is activity around -24dB.... u can actually hear drums, and what not, when u crank it.

-the reaper master channel meter is 1.5dB off 0...a sine wave rendered at Zero dB Peak level (which is not clipping....) was clipping in reaper...

if anyone thinks i somehow screwed the test, id be interested to know, but im pretty sure i did it fine.

technically all this means is that the 2 programs have different sounds...its impossible to tell which sounds better, hehehe, unless we add VSTs', identical automation, and the like to the equation.

For now, until the metering issue is resolved, i think im gonna wanna be sticking to cubase :P but it really does make me wonder if the coders know what the f they're doing, if they cant get simple volume issue like that right...

Peace,

J.

by **otto ruiter** » Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:18 pm

A 1kHz 0.0dBFS wav file generated in Wavelab plays back at 0.0dB (channel meter and master meter) in Reaper v2.45. The clip indicator comes on at 0.0dB. Lowering the channel fader by 0.1dB gives a meter reading of -0.1dBFS and the clip indicator goes out. Looks OK to me.

by **jkhuri44** » Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:32 pm

A 1kHz 0.0dBFS wav file generated in Wavelab plays back at 0.0dB (channel meter and master meter) in Reaper v2.45. The clip indicator comes on at 0.0dB. Lowering the channel fader by 0.1dB gives a meter reading of -0.1dBFS and the clip indicator goes out. Looks OK to me.

anyone have an idea why the indiscrepancy is there in the first place? reason i ask is because, to my understanding, clipping is anything over 0dBFS...right??

i know there are benefits to having it lower, ie. will make u mix quieter, but i prefer decisions like that to be made by my own choosing, not the machinations of the guy that made my software :P

Reaper Audio Engine

Reaper Audio Engine

Who is online