New DAW player, Mac & Windows, affordable

Noiz2

Noiz2

Sound Ninja
Let me first say I'm a ProTools user and if you want to work professionally in the film industry in audio post that is the application you should learn. Love it or hate it PT is "the man" and will probably be for awhile.


BUT for a lot of people on this list that isn't really an issue. And the general principals are pretty much the same no mater what you use. With that in mind...

I came across this DAW today that should be great for many people on this list and might even have leggs in the pro market (if Digi doesn't figure out that released software should be more stable that beta ware). It's called REAPER
http://Reaper.fm/

Mac and PC, looks interesting, I haven't really played with it much yet but it has most of the tools. For non commercial use, that should cover most of the folks asking what DAW to use, it's $50. Full commercial use is $200 and you can upgrade for the difference in price. There is no functional difference and it's on the honor system as far as I can see but even $200 is very cheap for a DAW.

If your cutting on FCP then you have STP as an option but if your not on FCP there are not many options around and few/ none with professional in mind. REAPER seems to be aiming at getting in to the big leagues and looks pretty promising. AS I said I really haven't used it yet but I heard about it from a post professional who is using it for some FX and design, still uses PT also.
Cheers
SK
 
I've used it a little bit, and it's a very solid DAW for practically free. It's from the guy that created WinAmp back in ancient internet history (around '97, I think, before AOL bought it and made it suck.)
 
REAPER is my main DAW, mostly because of the helpful user forum, price point, and a few friendly recommendations. The biggest selling point, for me, is that Justin Frankel and the dev team over there respond to user input. I'm expecting a slew of feature requests to be granted in the upcoming Reaper 3, which is something you don't often see with the bigger players.

The Reaper free trial is fully functional (and doesn't technically expire), so I'd definitely recommend that those interested download it and see for themselves.
 
After playing with it the biggest down side I can see for post is that at the moment it doesn't support OMF or AAF so there is no way to get tracks out of a NLE or other DAW and into reaper except as bounced tracks, which would be killer on a feature.
 
Yeah, exactly. Reaper was really born as a live-audio recording workstation. Features like the flexible routing are simply phenomenal. On the other hand, MIDI functionality and post-type workflows have really been evolving with the development. They're getting better, and should really improve when Reaper 3 is released, but I don't think Reaper really caters specifically to our market just yet.

Then again, I'm an active voice on the forums to encourage development on features that would matter to us, and there does seem to be some momentum building. I'll give an update here if anything changes with Reaper 3.
 
Hope so. It would be nice to see some competition in the lower price market, if nothing else it keeps Digi on their toes.
 
Noiz2 said:
...if nothing else it keeps Digi on their toes.
Click to expand...

The sad part is Digi, just like Avid doesn't seem to listen/care about
the options that everyday users want implemented. They think they are
untouchable at this point.
Glad to see Avid is really starting to take a hit with final cut pro.

Hopefully someday soon someone will come out with an audio program
that is a true alternative to PT just like FCP is to Avid.

(basicly if these other existing audio programs could figure out
import/export of OMF's etc, correctly we'd already be there)
 
ProTools is a fantastic application and is king for many good reasons. One problem, which I think is shared by Avid, is the cultural addiction to these brands. There are many professional producers over on the Reaper boards and even they get bands who know virtually nothing about DAWs demanding PT for their sessions. Not that PT wouldn't be a great choice, but Reaper does certain things better (as I'm sure Cubase and Sonar do too). But when people have their mind set on something, it's tough to change it.
 
I have it (PT) i own it i dont like it.
Nickle and dime you to death. (paid $1200 bux just to unlock omf importing and timecode)

The undo functions are worse than nuendo of 7 years ago, one word "bins"?..etc..etc.

To me (my opinion) the "good reason" its king is simply import/export support.

But anyway, dont want to highjack this thread.
So back onto Reaper.
 
Rippie said:
I have it (PT) i own it i dont like it.
Nickle and dime you to death. (paid $1200 bux just to unlock omf importing and timecode)

The undo functions are worse than nuendo of 7 years ago, one word "bins"?..etc..etc.

To me (my opinion) the "good reason" its king is simply import/export support.

But anyway, dont want to highjack this thread.
So back onto Reaper.
Click to expand...

Well this is a thread on DAW's so I'm not sure it's a hijack. You have PT Le, which cost a small fraction of the cost of the HD version. Even with the $1200 for TC & OMF, and to be fair a few other goodies that would have cost on any system, you are still way below the cost of any of the high end DAW's. Pyramix on the PC Fairlight etc are in the high end category and all cost in the same ballpark as PT, actually most are more, and that would be around 10X what you have payed. It's a little like griping that FCE doesn't do everything FCS does. Of course it doesn't it's 1/10 the price!

Avid had no low end market at all before FCP came on the scene, now they also have very cost effective products. They own Digi and they have largly the same market model, a low end system that is affordable and a high end system that is used by pros. Computers becoming insanely powerful have blurred the crossover a bit but in theory that's the split. FCP doesn't have a high end version, or I should say it is the high end version. But because of a few things it's not really competing with Avid's high end app, it's competing with Avid's low end app, which only came in to compete with FCP. FCP isn't cutting into Avid's high end market much if at all.

There are competitors to PT (HD). Most cost more. Even Nuendo which does have good OMF in and out, starts to get pricey once you get comparable hardware. PT (le) has a lot of very viable competitors, and Reaper looks like it might be another.

It gets very complicated because there are really a hand full of markets not just one or two. Ultra low film audio post, PTHD is just about out of that market, Music.. Probably a more even mix depending on budget but there are a lot of good/better options to PT in that market so you see a lot of apps that used to be MIDI sequencers doing DAW duty, and Nuendo and ... Big budget film, 99% PT HD (US), maybe 98%, with the rest being a wide assortment of other high end systems. Part of the reason is habit, but also stability and flexibility. The hourly tab is too high to try something new. So a change if it happens will usually be slow and move up from the lower budgeted films and have a track record before it hits the big time. Not that long ago (10 years or so) PT was the David coming in to unseat the Goliath that was WAVEFRAME (running Win 3.0 of all things). they have only been the big film standard since the very late 90's early 00's. And when they came in they were the chaep alternative. A basic WAVFRAME cost around $35,000, PT at that time was $15,000 - $20,000.
 
Noiz2 said:
Well this is a thread on DAW's so I'm not sure it's a hijack. You have PT Le, which cost a small fraction of the cost of the HD version. Even with the $1200 for TC & OMF, and to be fair a few other goodies that would have cost on any system, you are still way below the cost of any of the high end DAW's. Pyramix on the PC Fairlight etc are in the high end category and all cost in the same ballpark as PT, actually most are more, and that would be around 10X what you have payed. It's a little like griping that FCE doesn't do everything FCS does. Of course it doesn't it's 1/10 the price!

Avid had no low end market at all before FCP came on the scene, now they also have very cost effective products. They own Digi and they have largly the same market model, a low end system that is affordable and a high end system that is used by pros. Computers becoming insanely powerful have blurred the crossover a bit but in theory that's the split. FCP doesn't have a high end version, or I should say it is the high end version. But because of a few things it's not really competing with Avid's high end app, it's competing with Avid's low end app, which only came in to compete with FCP. FCP isn't cutting into Avid's high end market much if at all.

There are competitors to PT (HD). Most cost more. Even Nuendo which does have good OMF in and out, starts to get pricey once you get comparable hardware. PT (le) has a lot of very viable competitors, and Reaper looks like it might be another.

It gets very complicated because there are really a hand full of markets not just one or two. Ultra low film audio post, PTHD is just about out of that market, Music.. Probably a more even mix depending on budget but there are a lot of good/better options to PT in that market so you see a lot of apps that used to be MIDI sequencers doing DAW duty, and Nuendo and ... Big budget film, 99% PT HD (US), maybe 98%, with the rest being a wide assortment of other high end systems. Part of the reason is habit, but also stability and flexibility. The hourly tab is too high to try something new. So a change if it happens will usually be slow and move up from the lower budgeted films and have a track record before it hits the big time. Not that long ago (10 years or so) PT was the David coming in to unseat the Goliath that was WAVEFRAME (running Win 3.0 of all things). they have only been the big film standard since the very late 90's early 00's. And when they came in they were the chaep alternative. A basic WAVFRAME cost around $35,000, PT at that time was $15,000 - $20,000.
Click to expand...
I do disagree with you mentioning FCP isnt cutting into avid's market.

Just as you, a lot of the post places around me have been using avid for years..
but as most of these places have been doing switch overs to handle new workflows and HD..way more than 50% have switched over to FCP.
I would have to think this isn't an isolated area in that regard.
Im not saying avid is drying up and dying, but I think they are falling way behind the curve on things.

I also have to disagree with the HD version of PT offering "more" for less than what you can get a good nuendo system...etc for.

Yes LE is a crippled version of HD..BUT..why? So Digi can continue to sell hardware in order for you to get HD?
5 years ago you needed those cards in order to do serious work, but im sorry
but in this day and age and the speed of computers its just not NEARLY as necessary.

nuendo 6+ years ago offered WAY more features in its software (thats the last copy i bought) than the PT's of today (my opinion)

Back then I think the software was 2K..and my motu interface was another grand.
My 003 factory was 2200ish?.. 1200 for DVtoolkit.. and i STILL dont even have the option to do surround sound?!?!?!
In order to get THAT feature unlocked it'll cost me another 6-700 bux?!?!?

Even Sony vegas which cost me a few hundred bux..has surround sound options.

If people like protools, thats great! And honestly if i never used nuendo way back in the day I would probably think protools is great as well.
But being a newer user to it (about a year) im very unimpressed with its power.

I could list 100 specifics like "no bins"?!?
Its version 8.0..thats something that should have been in 1.1!

Getting back to avid, when i say companies I know are switching..
its these same people (not myself) saying FCP offers more, and avid just doesnt listen. One guy I know very recently went to some Avid get together
and he told me almost every answer out of the avid guys mouth was either "we dont plan on supporting that..." or "no it wont do that"


Trust me when I say I do "get" and understand where you are coming from though.
 
Last edited:
Other than opinions I'm not sure were very far away from saying the same thing. Avid's stronghold was alway features, that would be film features. Media 100 was a big player in lower budget productions and a very big player in video. I think Avid picked up some of the video market when Media 100 pretty much tanked but I don't think those folks were ever very happy with the move. FCP is great bang for the buck but it has some very serious issues in a professional work flow and Apple isn't listening to those users at all. And don't get me started on surround, what a marketing bog O' crap. Every low budget film is now sold on surround. Where are they going to mIX this surround? how are they going to play it? Not in a theatre, not in a festival. Because they of course don't want 4.0 surround the want DD surround. Prices have probably gone up but a DD lisence a few years back was $12,000 AND you have to mix on a Dolby certified stage put that at around $400/ hour for a week thats $20,000. So one gets all these sorry idiots who want to spend under a thousand on post but are insisting on a format that will cost a minimum of $32K just to show. OK you can put it on DVD's, well sort of. You can't tell anyone unless you have a lisence and that isn't free and how about the encoder? With out an encoder decoder in the mix you don't really know what is happening to the encoding, but that is a $$$ box (or plugin). The DVD is not getting discrete tracks it's getting an encoded AC3 file. You wan't surround on your $3000 PT rig but do you have a tuned surround mix space? I kind of doubt it since if you did then dropping $15K on a PT HD rig wouldn't seem like a lot of money. If you don't have a tuned surround mix space then doing surround is a joke, it's painting in a coloring book and calling it fine art. STP works in surround, but guess what they use a european track layout that is NOT used by the film industry, it's on some spec sheet somewhere and so it was used. NOBODY asked what was in use in the entertainment industry, so actually they don't do surround any better than PT does bins. PT had bins, once. Or more accurately Audiovision did and PT bought them to get into the post world. And YES PT should have bins and users including me have been saying that for YEARS. But in response to things I had said in a questionnaire that Digi sent to users I got a call fro the VP of product development asking about things I liked or didn't in PT. A lot of things that users have asked for have made it in. Le was never design for professional use.
To all the Native is better arguments, it is if that is all you can afford. When it's better in general it will take over the market. PT came in at took the market from Waveframe and SonicSolutions in about five years. Nuendo has been around longer than that and hasn't even made a dent. PT came in on pure cost/performance. If Nuendo was really beating everyone on cost/ performance Digi would be hanging out with Wavframe picking up the scrapps. Even you who is using a native version of PT is not on Nuendo. If it's "kicking ass" then why is every one still on PT? Basically because for a variety of reasons it doesn't KA in a professional work flow. It could in the future, but one thing it would have to do is really go for the pro market. It's capable and so is STP and Reaper and any number of other apps I have seen or used. BUT will Apple stay interested? Will Steinberg decide games are a better profit point? On top of features the one BIG thing Avid/ Digi have going for them in the pro market is that that is ALL they do. Apple sells hardware. They have made no bones about the fact that they are NOT a software company. If your a home user who cares but if your a pro you want your tools to be there tomorrow. That said I don't know any Pros whith a rabid attachment to PT or Avid. If XXXX came out and was clearly better, or as good for a lot less then we would switch. The problem with a lot of the wantabe players is that they look good on paper but fall short at work.
If Apple listened NDF frame would work, FCP and STP would both support AAAF and OMF I/O, suround track assignments would be configurable, FCP wouldn't reverse telecine 48K WAV files behind your back in 24 frame projects, Compressor would use FCP's render files or at least let the user choose the render quality instead of always using a lower quality. If Stienberg did OMF would actually work. The point isn't that they are bad and Digi is good. They all have their own priorities and they all ignore some requests in favor of others and most let the marketing dept dictate too much of the priorities. But some have really aimed at the feature market and it's needs and others haven't yet. Nuendo took a stab at it but Apple really hasn't. You can not do a normal feature workflow with FCP with out the help of a bunch of pretty pricey third party softwares.

we should probably give it a rest and either go to neutral corners or start a new thread. But go and have the final rebuttal. I think the thread is useful because opinions aside it pretty much covers the market and the issues.

Cheers
SK
 
I just looked at the May edition of EQ and there is an article, roundup, of DAWs. They only cover 9 and it's a bit Windows heavy since many of the Mac aps are are dual platform. Reaper is mentioned but not reviewed a questionable choice since they did Audition in it's stead. Also they put the focus on Cubase in the Cubase/Nuendo section, but if it's a DAW round up one would expect the reverse. But still a good overview of what's out there with good points and bad points of each.
Cheers
SK
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top