Cubase vs Reaper - Midi

[for]

I used cubase like 10 years ago and don't remember much about it

my question is that i read Cubase is best daw for MIDI

does Reaper come any close to that or?

can someone explain what Cubase can do better in terms of midi thanks

[Karmoon]

I think the people who say this basically grew up with Cubase so have internalized that as the 'right' way to do stuff.

From my perspective, Cubase's MIDI was average at best. Extremely inefficient, and it feels like wearing a straight jacket compared to Reaper. In Reaper I can use the radial menu to drop all sorts of chords, arpeggiate things and a whole load of stuff that I need to do. My method of working is the fastest for me. I don't know who designed Cubase's system - but that person is not me. We are different people. We have different workflows. The simplest example to demonstrate the difference:

In Cubase, it's three separate key strokes to insert, edit and delete MIDI notes.

In Reaper, all these functions are available from the mouse. Very intuitive and fast.

A lot of people talk about the chord finder like it's some kind of magical tool that will help you write music. It isn't. It's just the circle of fifths.

Anyway, that's my opinion. you should download and try both and make up your own mind.

[martmix]

im happy with reaper midi editor

[SiddieNam]

So I was a Cubase user for years and years, and didn't even know Reaper existed. Then I discovered Reaper, and discovered that, perhaps unlike some other DAWs (like Ableton or FL Studio), Reaper is an easy leap for a Cubase user.

Now, the thing is, Reaper has more stuff, really. Ok, I'm not talking about instruments built in, or a sexy brand with corners on its letters. But hidden in its menus are a whole bunch of clever groovy things that make music production easy. A studio in a box. If you need to find that stuff, you can do a search on the actions list. There it is.

How relevant is this to MIDI? Well, I have sometimes read that Reaper's MIDI implementation can leave a bit to be desired. But I don't know why people say this; it's usually (when you dig into it) because someone says that there's a MIDI thing they liked on some other software that Reaper doesn't do quite the same way. For me, after I got used to it, it worked just fine, and I can manipulate MIDI precisely how I would wish to most of the time. But I could do that in Cubase too. So what's different?

In the end, there are two things that matter.

-- Is Cubase a great DAW? Yes, of course it is. If things in it work for you, you should use it. Does it have the features you need? Do you like the interface? Can you be productive using it? Does it make you happy? Then Cubase is for you.

-- Is Reaper a great DAW? Yes, of course it is. If things in it work for you, you should use it. Does it have the features you need? Do you like the interface? Can you be productive using it? Does it make you happy? Then Reaper is for you.

Reaper all the way for me now. I'd never go back. "Best" (as in "best for MIDI") is a meaningless word here, subjective at best. How do you define "best"? No one can, so all you have left is to ask yourself what works for you. Clearly both Cubase and Reaper can produce outstanding pro-quality results and are packed with features. You should try both and decide what's important for you. Use what works. I've made that choice and its Reaper all the way. But that's just me.

[CQrity]

The question is what do you want to do with midi?

You might want to take a look at this:
https://forum.cockos.com/showthread....ht=Midi+script

That for sure satisfies all my midi needs to manipulate CC.
Inputting midi notes is a breeze and comes close to how FL Studio handles it which seems to be regarded as one of the best piano rolls.

The biggest strength of Reaper is that you can tailor it to your way of working and specific needs.

[wildschwein]

MIDI features are totally adequate in Reaper and I learned to do MIDI in Reaper first but I think Cubase is better equipped in this area. In the end it's the craftsperson not the tools though.

Cubase is a lot more money though and the user community is dreadful. I want to kill myself after visting those forums. It's whinger/complainer central with people 'yelling' Steinberg in Caps Lock all day long.

[shanabit]

It depends on what your NEEDS are for midi, simple as that.

As a Cubase user here most dont even use 10% of the functions in a said area in their DAW. If that is the case then why spend $550 for a DAW based on midi use that you dont even know if you need or not?
I would opt for Cubase Elements then upgrade to Artist or Pro as needed. Same with StudioOne, start with Prime then go Artist or Pro as needed

I also use StudioOne here and its midi is supposed to suck compared to Cubase but it hasnt stopped me from doing a song here. Reapers midi sucks too from what I hear and it hasnt stopped me at all

You learn to find and use what it has to get your end result.

As far as the forum members at Steinbug, well, Steinbug NEVER listens to its users and never fixes long standing bugs which is why everyone is pissy all the time. I dont go there anymore as the moderators suck as well and will ban you if you point out an issue.

Do this:
1. Install Reaper Demo

2. Install Cubase Elements Trial which is limited verses the Pro version which you need to buy a USB licenser to even TRY the Pro version. If you dont like it you are out $30. Nice huh?
https://www.steinberg.net/cubase/trial/

3. Install StudioOne Prime https://shop.presonus.com/Studio-One-5-Prime

NOTE: There is no upgrading with Reaper, ALL the midi features are there in the full $60 version

Now, do the EXACT same thing with just MIDI in all Three and see which is easiest to get your head around.
Thats what I do to test here. Simple things like apply quantize, adjusting note lengths. How do you like its note editor?

*Im a guy with hardware synths here that likes to change the patches in the DAW with the NAME of the patch showing in the DAW. I like to save those patches using sysex dumps via midi into the DAW as well to save the patches. IF I cant do those things I simply print the audio from the synth and put on int he track notes which synth I used and which patch, simple. I also use softsynths.

Go to MIDI & Vitrual Instruments
http://reaper.fm/videos.php Watch whatever interest you

https://www.youtube.com/user/steelyad

https://www.youtube.com/c/REAPERMania

[hsn]

Originally Posted by for

my question is that i read Cubase is best daw for MIDI

does Reaper come any close to that or?

Yes, Cubase is very good in MIDI, so is Apple Logic Pro, but Waveform is not bad either if you seek something free and don't need advanced functions but value fast workflow. You can have also free Cakewalk its still much better then Reaper for MIDI but workflow with loops is not such smooth as it is in Waveform. Cakewalk has advantage in very good sounding channel strip plugins.

Reaper is really bad in MIDI. Avoid.

[Pink Wool]

Originally Posted by hsn

Reaper is really bad in MIDI. Avoid.

Absolutely not true! But I guess my MIDI based songs are imaginary too...

[SiddieNam]

Originally Posted by hsn

Yes, Cubase is very good in MIDI, so is Apple Logic Pro, but Waveform is not bad either if you seek something free and don't need advanced functions but value fast workflow. You can have also free Cakewalk its still much better then Reaper for MIDI but workflow with loops is not such smooth as it is in Waveform. Cakewalk has advantage in very good sounding channel strip plugins.

Reaper is really bad in MIDI. Avoid.

What an extreme load of rubbish. It's not noticeably worse or better than any other DAW for most common features that most MIDI composers or editors will use most of the time -- which is primarily putting notes in places, changng the velocity, stuff like that. And you can customise the editor to put in the toolbars you want -- which is much harder in many other DAWs. It is true that Cubase has some nice functions to manipulate CC for example, but some people have written some nice Reaper scripts to do similar things -- easily available via Reapack. OK -- a bit of a pain just to get going but once you have it installed -- no biggie. "Really bad" is too extreme and just mis-sells it completely.

[ovnis]

With Reaper, there are lots of actions we can't use on MIDI notes inside unactivated MIDI items. So, it's sad when we want apply one action inside lots of MIDI items. It can be very long...

[SiddieNam]

Originally Posted by ovnis

With Reaper, there are lots of actions we can't use on MIDI notes inside unactivated MIDI items. So, it's sad when we want apply one action inside lots of MIDI items. It can be very long...

It's dead easy in the MIDI editor to select / unlock all the items you want to edit, and conversely unselect and lock all the ones you're not using. If you don't want to unselect and unlock multiple MIDI items then Reaper by defualt makes sure you don't do it by accident. To me that's a good thing. It's a feature, I guess.

[SiddieNam]

It's quite interesting that some people have got "good" and "bad" mixed up with "I like it" vs "I don't like it".


I think I would just like to say at this point that I thnk debate about the posiive and negative qualities of any DAW including Reaper is very interesting. Of course, people should use the DAW with the workflow that suits them, for MIDI reasons or anything else.


But I am baffled by comments like "Reaper is really bad...". It patently isn't.

[hsn]

You can certainly make MIDI songs in Reaper like in any sequencer. But if you compare it to Cubase you will find that:

1. UI for basic MIDI editing (note move, change size, change velocity, group move) is not such intuitive like Cubase has
2. Cubase has lot of advanced functions for MIDI editing - my most used "change velocity of 1st kick in each bar". For EDM this kind of stuff is must.
3. No Chord progression editing. This is real time saver.
4. I see sometimes reaper used in commercial environment (such as in house game audio recording) and its never used for MIDI stuff. I haven't seen such use.

It will take much longer in Reaper then in Cubase to finish song. Better to spend time composing then wasting time with clumsy MIDI editor. In real work you are time limited. Time to finish track matters.

I see people still using Cubase 2 on Atari STE for MIDI today but its not main stream. Same with reaper, its not definitely mainstream MIDI composer tool. Why? Other tools will make you more productive and major tools with large market share certainly doing their job well.

DAW market is very competitive; there are tools I consider decent (Cakewalk, Tracktion) and they have very small (about 1%) market share. I don't think they will ever grow.

[SiddieNam]

Originally Posted by hsn

You can certainly make MIDI songs in Reaper like in any sequencer. But if you compare it to Cubase you will find that:

1. UI for basic MIDI editing (note move, change size, change velocity, group move) is not such intuitive like Cubase has
2. Cubase has lot of advanced functions for MIDI editing - my most used "change velocity of 1st kick in each bar". For EDM this kind of stuff is must.
3. No Chord progression editing. This is real time saver.
4. I see sometimes reaper used in commercial environment (such as in house game audio recording) and its never used for MIDI stuff. I haven't seen such use.

It will take much longer in Reaper then in Cubase to finish song. Better to spend time composing then wasting time with clumsy MIDI editor. In real work you are time limited. Time to finish track matters.

I see people still using Cubase 2 on Atari STE for MIDI today but its not main stream. Same with reaper, its not definitely mainstream MIDI composer tool. Why? Other tools will make you more productive and major tools with large market share certainly doing their job well.

DAW market is very competitive; there are tools I consider decent (Cakewalk, Tracktion) and they have very small (about 1%) market share. I don't think they will ever grow.

Interesting stuff. Taking your points in order then:

(1) I am a former Cubase user, and I don't find the basic UI for MIDI editing any more or less intuitive. I think that's just a matter of personal taste (which I acknowledge, of course).
(2) You can use MIDI filtering in Reaper to accomplish this -- it's not hard as far as I can see.
(3) Agree with you about this. It would be a nice feature to see in Reaper. But there are VSTs that can accomplish this type of thing. But you are right -- built in would be very cool. The one thing that can help of course is "key snapping", but I acknowledge it's a poor relation.
(4) Who can really say how true this is without doing some actual proper research? There is professional snobbism about Reaper generally in my experience (it's as if studios are embarrassed about it or something). That's just silly, though. You have the same thing in the 3D graphics world with Blender, and yet, it gains ground all the time.

I mean, don't get me wrong. I know Cubase is a good MIDI editing DAW. I can't fault it in many ways. It's probably one of the best out there. But I think the whole premise that you can't be productive in Reaper is wrong. I can be, and I am. And, as you have to do for something in pretty much any DAW, I work round the foibles. And they all have their foibles, MIDI or otherwise, let's be honest! I find Cubase's audio routing options much harder than Reaper's for example. Swings and roundabouts.

[nicholas]

Interesting that the OP seems to have disappeared from this thread ...

[SiddieNam]

Originally Posted by nicholas

Interesting that the OP seems to have disappeared from this thread ...

Yes! Ha ha! A shame if so as there has been healthy and lively debate. Ah well. I might disappear too, then.

[wildschwein]

Originally Posted by shanabit

As far as the forum members at Steinbug, well, Steinbug NEVER listens to its users and never fixes long standing bugs which is why everyone is pissy all the time. I dont go there anymore as the moderators suck as well and will ban you if you point out an issue.

My feeling with a lot of the 'bugs' in Cubase is that it relates to people's computer set ups.

The best practice for modern music recording in general I think is this:

"Remember that you are going to use your computer for music only; do not try to run games, Internet surfing, e-mail, bank account management, shopping list, and more on your main machine. You must have a clean, simple, and well-organized computer to run the audio sequencer in your studio, so leave the other tasks to a second machine."

From "Creative Sequencing Techniques For Music production, 2nd Ed." by Andrea Pejrolo, p. 53.

You see loads of people over there on the Steinberg Forum who are also gamers and they have unstable graphics card set ups and have a fit everytime Cubase crashses on them or a plugin interface has a rendering glitch.

In most cases it is user error with people not following compabilty advice which can easily be found with some Googling. DAWs also don't just fit your brain pattern -- after all there is no single brain pattern -- you need to learn them and find out how they work and it's tough going no matter what.

I know that Steinberg's official support offering is poor for users in some countries as well but in Australia it's fine -- you hear back from them in a week or so and they often solve your problem which you find will often be of your own making.

I have found over the years that a lot of problems can be simply avoided by not using your recording computer for lots of other computing tasks. The adavantage with Reaper I guess is that it would run on a wrist watch where older DAWs like Cubase and Pro Tools etc are much more resource hungry in my experince with them.

[Malfunction]

Midi editor is okey. CC editing still need some work.

[Malfunction]

I remember Cubase keeping different actions seperated by mouse modifiers.
Reaper has a tendency to separate actions by mouse contexts.
This can result in "context wars". One context is blocking/fighting the other.
Specially when working with small objects like notes/cc objects.