View Single Post
Old 12-29-2017, 04:52 AM   #11
Colox
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,206
Default

I recognize the overall impressions described by the OP, very well. If I had not 2 decades of history on Cubase and other DAWs before this, and felt I had no other choice, I would've found it incredibly frustrating as well.

Reaper does take quite a bit to get going, and it's a real cold shower for anyone coming from closed source and static DAWs, expecting everything to be served for them, and nothing more available than what they immediately see in the GUI. DAWs like Presonus Studio One have become popular precisely because they are simple, direct, pre-set, no fuzz or hundreds of parameters and alternatives. Reaper is more like an opensource operating system which can be altered by code or a prompt, where nothing is static.

The impression that it was just as possible to put multitimbral virtual instruments on video tracks as on audio tracks, and no distinction between track types and channel amounts on each channel, not even an EQ on each track, gave me the impression that this 'unknown and alternative' DAW is so incredibly 'under construction' still, that they haven't even gotten such things organized yet. That was my initial conclusion, like it or not. And I had been around the block quite a bit.

Thankfully, with alot of work and re-learning, the perceived quirkiness was outweighed by advantages
__________________
There are only two kinds of people in the world: those who entertain, and those who are absurd.
- Britney Spears

Last edited by Colox; 12-29-2017 at 05:28 AM.
Colox is offline   Reply With Quote