Reaper users, do you think Cockos is taking care of requests on the updates?

[narcossintese]

My question is basically for those who have been using Reaper for a long time. Is Cockos attending the user demands, making big improvements and implementing requested features at each new version of the program on a regular basis or they´re just kind of "fixing some bugs" on each update?

I ask this because I´m planning on movin from Nuendo to Reaper, but I´m afraid of spending time and money on a software that will be just an eternal promisse, at least until version 4.99.

Is it still a work-in-progress or it´s safe to migrate right now without looking back?

 

[PhilR]

I'm sorry but have you seen the rate of major updates to Nuendo? Or the bug list for Cubase?

Frankly for the money the update rate of Reaper is nothing short of superlative. And I assume that the developers, being a two man team have very valid and real reasons for prioritizing the features and fixes they focus on for each point release.

 

[digitaldeath]

The only problem with Reaper is that they like to add useless features above requests which are long outstanding. They need to improve the editing workflow because at the moment it's just terrible compared to Pro-Tools, the "Smart-Tool" feature request has been there for a while! Also, I personally hate having to remember a billion keyboard shortcuts and when you do use the mouse, there's endless menu options with long, convoluted names.
You won't realise what I mean with regards to the editing workflow until you're actually tracking a band and have to edit everything! Just ask AdamWathan...!

 

[drew_drummer]

The only problem with Reaper is that they like to add useless features above requests which are long outstanding.

It's more the case that some features that are long outstanding require huge re-writes of code, and big fundamental changes in the application. A lot more difficult to do something like that, when you've also got to support what you've currently got.

They need to improve the editing workflow because at the moment it's just terrible compared to Pro-Tools, the "Smart-Tool" feature request has been there for a while! Also, I personally hate having to remember a billion keyboard shortcuts and when you do use the mouse, there's endless menu options with long, convoluted names.
You won't realise what I mean with regards to the editing workflow until you're actually tracking a band and have to edit everything! Just ask AdamWathan...!

Agree with all of this. It is why I left Reaper. I finished up our bands album; and I just realised that so many things are too cumbersome; automation for instance is a big pain in the ass.

 

[Jind]

It's more the case that some features that are long outstanding require huge re-writes of code, and big fundamental changes in the application. A lot more difficult to do something like that, when you've also got to support what you've currently got.

The only problem with Reaper is that they like to add useless features above requests which are long outstanding. They need to improve the editing workflow because at the moment it's just terrible compared to Pro-Tools, the "Smart-Tool" feature request has been there for a while! Also, I personally hate having to remember a billion keyboard shortcuts and when you do use the mouse, there's endless menu options with long, convoluted names.
You won't realise what I mean with regards to the editing workflow until you're actually tracking a band and have to edit everything! Just ask AdamWathan...!

Agree with all of this. It is why I left Reaper. I finished up our bands album; and I just realised that so many things are too cumbersome; automation for instance is a big pain in the ass.

These are the reasons that I have been leaving Reaper alone and focusing on Sonar (at least for my use.) My experience with Reaper - I try it, I like it, I find a shortcoming in a basic feature, I see something totally unrelated added, I try it again, I find another shortcoming in basic function, I see something totally unrelated added, ... You get my drift.

While Sonar is in no way perfect, it's at least steady in what Cakewalk appears to be producing, it is expanding, it seems to have a consistency that for me Reaper does not. This is not a my DAW is better than your DAW post, it's just me agreeing with others that share my opinion about how one DAW impacts my use.

 

[muckypup1]

The updates they make make no difference to it at all, they only seem to change tiny little bits of shit that no one actually needs or uses, I don't mean any offence about Reaper, I love it! But I would like to see some more major updates made, and some new software added into it maybe.

 

[Dexter_prog]

I just hope they do something about the rendering speed. It's SO slow (and I've searched the forums, I am not the only one)

 

[Metaltastic]

I've never really had a problem with the rendering speed, usually it hovers around 2-4x playback, which is still better than Pro Tools!

 

[Dexter_prog]

I've never really had a problem with the rendering speed, usually it hovers around 2-4x playback, which is still better than Pro Tools!

really? When I render like 4 guitar tracks, each with amp simps, cabinet sims, EQ, compressors, etc I get 1x and sometimes I even get 0,8x

 

[Metaltastic]

How fast is your computer? And why are you compressing distorted guitar tracks? (unless they're all leads)

 

[GarethSE]

How fast is your computer? And why are you compressing distorted guitar tracks? (unless they're all leads)

low ratio, heavy gain reduction = smoothed off top end. cheers for that gem of info CLA... ;]

 

[drew_drummer]

I just hope they do something about the rendering speed. It's SO slow (and I've searched the forums, I am not the only one)

This will be because of a plugin I reckon. Try changing your plugins one by one until the render speed goes up.

 

[muckypup1]

When I am rendering my guitar tracks, sometimes it will be doing it slower than the actual song! so its almost in the - speeds!

 

[narcossintese]

Hmn, it seems that the "tons of updates" aren´t that good afterall... I will make a list of everything I use/need/like on Nuendo and check if/how they´re avaible on Reaper.

 

[Dexter_prog]

Forgot about another important thing: FREEZING TRACKS. Damn, how long are we gonna have to wait for this function to be in Reaper? And there are some "extensions" that say they will freeze tracks but all they do is mute them.

 

[Jormyn]

No, they bounce it and mute the original, thus freezing the track.

 

[John_C]

seriously, there should just be a button on each track. Pro tools here i come!
I'll keep hold of reaper though for the sheer fantastic flexibility and the regular updates that make me feel "cutting edge"

 

[Dexter_prog]

No, they bounce it and mute the original, thus freezing the track.

That's not freezing, that's just bouncing and muting. If I have a track with lots of plugins and I mute it, the CPU load is still as high, but I froze it, it would drop as it would be like if plugins where not active (at least that's how it worked in Cubase sx3)

 

[AudioGeekZine]

seriously, there should just be a button on each track. Pro tools here i come!
I'll keep hold of reaper though for the sheer fantastic flexibility and the regular updates that make me feel "cutting edge"

Pro Tools doesn't freeze tracks either.

 

[Ermz]

The only problem with Reaper is that they like to add useless features above requests which are long outstanding. They need to improve the editing workflow because at the moment it's just terrible compared to Pro-Tools, the "Smart-Tool" feature request has been there for a while! Also, I personally hate having to remember a billion keyboard shortcuts and when you do use the mouse, there's endless menu options with long, convoluted names.
You won't realise what I mean with regards to the editing workflow until you're actually tracking a band and have to edit everything! Just ask AdamWathan...!

These are the main reasons I've been giving Reaper a wide berth. It seems like something that will only be incorporated way down the track, because in many ways it would take a total redesign of the UI to make it streamlined enough for regular professional use.

Great potential, as always, but perhaps limited by the scope and size of the development team. Maybe it will only ever be a tool for the home recording musicians? Who knows.