What Would It Take to Make You Switch DAWs?

[Philter]

Reaper still doesn't offer true stereo panning on stereo tracks. If you have a stereo track with a quarter note delay on the left channel and an eighth note delay on the right, and you pan the stereo track hard left, the eighth note delay will disappear.

 

ProTools gives you independent pans for both the left and right channel, which is how any pro audio app should behave.

 

That one thing about Reaper is keeping me from using it as anything but a VST host. The only way I could mix with Reaper would be to stop using stereo tracks altogether, and that would take me back to the days of ProTools 4. I like stereo tracks and I like being able to fully control how they pan.

[veracohr]

 

Reaper still doesn't offer true stereo panning on stereo tracks. If you have a stereo track with a quarter note delay on the left channel and an eighth note delay on the right, and you pan the stereo track hard left, the eighth note delay will disappear.

 

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is a "true" stereo pan as far as hardware mixing consoles go. On a hardware mixer stereo channel, if you turn the pan knob left, it just attenuates the right channel. So the method of offering independent panning of left and right channels is really something "above and beyond" what is expected of a "stereo pan", no?

 

Software may offer capabilities beyond hardware, but don't go saying such features aren't "true".

[vintagevibes]

I've been using Cakewalk products since the mid 90's but I need notation at least as good as ProTools or Cubase. Since Cakewalk will likely never develop Sonar's notation I'm thinking of changing now.

[Philter]

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is a "true" stereo pan as far as hardware mixing consoles go. On a hardware mixer stereo channel, if you turn the pan knob left, it just attenuates the right channel. So the method of offering independent panning of left and right channels is really something "above and beyond" what is expected of a "stereo pan", no? Software may offer capabilities beyond hardware, but don't go saying such features aren't "true".

 

 

I'm not really familiar with any studio consoles that feature stereo channels on a single fader in the main mix bus, with a single pan. I guess some live mixers have that kind of thing for DJ'ing or CD playback. Just about any kind of studio gear I can think of that features dual channels (for example stereo preamps, or compressors, etc) feature independent gain controls for each channel, and on channel strips the usual approach to stereo pairs is grouping, which still leaves you with individual pans per channel.

 

So yes, software does go beyond some hardware. But if you're going to offer a stereo channel feature, you need to offer a way to independently control the pan assignments of BOTH channels- otherwise you're not really offering a full stereo channel for mixing purposes. When I say "true" stereo panning, I'm really talking about stereo panning as it exists in the vast majority of commercial recording studios across the world. If Reaper wants to do something like unseat ProTools, they need to at least match all the most fundamental features.

 

If I wanted to mix in Reaper, I would have to have all my stereo tracked parts split out onto mono tracks, assuming I wanted full pan control over each channel. As an alternative I could open a plug in that emulates true stereo panning. That is not the case in ProTools or some of the other DAWs. In my opinion this is a major shortcoming for Reaper that has been allowed to persist for far too long.

 

Putting that in terms of the original thread topic, I would need to have the full feature set of ProTools matched, plus the ease of use and intuitive interface, plus the portability and compatibility between studios and artists, plus the low latency and rock-solid performance of ProTools Mix and HD DSP cards matched. Finally I would need some kind of killer selling point that would justify my switching platforms and having to spend time learning a new program.

 

This is coming from someone who would love to see Avid knocked down a few rungs. I know it's hard to believe from my posts here, but on the DUC I have a completely different attitude. But since Opcode went under, I've tried a lot of alternatives to ProTools and have just not been sold, at all. Reaper looks great but they can't have glaring holes like the stereo panning thing. That's just inexcusable after this long.

[Anderton]

The thing that keeps me from trying Reaper is that it doesn't have a video window. I do a lot of soundtrack creation by throwing a video into Sonar, then using the looping/stretching options for the soundtrack so I can fit the music to the visuals. But, I'm probably in a minority. Those who just want to record music don't need a video window.

 

I also find Live works well for this type of application.

[MikeRivers]

 

Reaper still doesn't offer true stereo panning on stereo tracks. If you have a stereo track with a quarter note delay on the left channel and an eighth note delay on the right, and you pan the stereo track hard left, the eighth note delay will disappear. ProTools gives you independent pans for both the left and right channel, which is how any pro audio app should behave.

 

Sorry, but there's no such thing as "true stereo panning." If you have a stereo source (and in a DAW, a stereo track is considered a source) when you "pan," you're adjusting the balance between the two channels. As you pan to the left of center, the level of the right channel drops, and vice versa when panning to the right. So if the whole channel goes away, so will the delay on that channel.

 

What you're describing that yow want is mono panning. If I wanted different delays on two channels, I'd make them mono channels and then I could pan the delayed source wherever I want it. You might think this sounds like a work-around. I think of it as a normal way of working.

 

If Reaper has the ability to split a stereo track into two mono tracks, try that and see if it gets you where you want to go.

[Mudcat007]

...ProTools gives you independent pans for both the left and right channel, which is how any pro audio app should behave...

 

 

This can be done with either the JS or FLUX plugins.

 

EDIT: A REAPER user has coded a JS plugin that behaves exactly like PT. You can download it from the REAPER stash. Here's a link to a thread where it is discussed at the REAPER forum.

 

Anderson T JS Dual Channel Panner

[Philter]

 

Sorry, but there's no such thing as "true stereo panning." If you have a stereo source (and in a DAW, a stereo track is considered a source) when you "pan," you're adjusting the balance between the two channels. As you pan to the left of center, the level of the right channel drops, and vice versa when panning to the right. So if the whole channel goes away, so will the delay on that channel.

 

Panning is not a level change, it's changing where a signal is located in the stereo sound field. If you want to reduce it to fundamentally how this is achieved, yes there are level changes taking place. But that fundamental fact says nothing to your claim about how stereo panning works as a concept.

 

Conceptually ProTools stereo track panning is much more powerful than Reaper's. Stereo panning is not simply balancing the levels between the two channels. That's not panning at all. When you have a stereo track, you have two sources, not one- the left channel and the right channel. You described it as being two channels in your own post. The way ProTools panning works allows you to pan either channel independently. You can have a stereo channel with left and right guitar takes, and place either channel anywhere in the stereo field that you want. You can swap them left right, send them both down the middle, put one hard left and one in the middle, etc etc etc. Reaper can't do this at all without completely abandoning stereo tracks or resorting to third party workarounds, and it's a severe shortcoming when it comes time to mix.

 

I have no idea why anyone would argue for the weaker feature set. Proper stereo panning is stereo panning that allows you full control over the stereo sound field for every channel. Reaper does not feature this unless you limit yourself to all mono tracks. That's shoddy and a dealbreaker for me.

[Philter]

 

This is truly a non-issue. Have you checked out the JS stereo plugins bundled w/REAPER? They can do pretty much whatever you want with regard to panning. If you don't like the plain-Jane JS interface you can download the free FLUX Stereo Tool and use it as a panner. If you don't want to be required to open the FX dialogue to adjust pan remember that in REAPER you can assign any FX parameter to the channel strip on the mixer tab. This can be done with either the JS or FLUX plugins. EDIT: A REAPER user has coded a JS plugin that behaves exactly like PT. You can download it from the REAPER stash. Here's a link to a thread where it is discussed at the REAPER forum. Anderson T JS Dual Channel Panner

 

 

But this thread is about what it would take me to switch platforms. Why would I switch from a platform that does what I want by default to a platform that needs to be reprogrammed and rebuilt to do what I want? Why in the world should I waste more time from my life on playing with software? I got the "fooling with software" out of my system years ago. It's a huge distraction from what should be important: making music.

 

What it would take for me to switch from ProTools would be for another application to do everything ProTools does, and more, without making the interface any more complicated or any less user friendly or intuitive. Dealing with plugins and GUI remakes to achieve something as simple as full-featured stereo panning does not meet that criteria.

 

I think a lot of people feel the same as I do about it. ProTools has a pretty overwhelming grip on the music industry, and if someone wants to take it down and open up the playing field, they have to do BETTER, not "similar" or "close." For people who are really using the tools to create, I don't think BETTER means "loaded with a ton more features". It means "reliable, powerful, stays out of the way and doesn't steal your attention from being creative."

 

Reaper is working fine for me as a VST host and I think it shows promise. But they can't leave pro features like basic panning up to third party developers and custom GUI's and hope to compete in the big picture. Believe it or not but for a lot of people, the gear is as much a hassle and a nuisance as it is a fun addiction.

[Ernest Buckley]

Stability is everything for me.......at least when it comes to catching my tunes. I know that I can power up a preamp and a mic at 3:00 AM with my eyes still mostly closed and that tune will be there in the morning. I guess it's all about old dogs and new tricks.

 

You`re absolutely right. I was playing with REAPER yesterday, trying to figure out how to import audio for about 5 minutes and then I thought to myself, "Why am I doing this?"

 

DP works for me. If I ever outgrow it, I`ll make a switch but until then, theres no point.

[AudioArtist]

I'm a PT user and the only thing I would like to see added to it would be the ease of manipulating tempos while working with sample based sessions, like GarageBand offers. However, I wouldn't switch for this reason alone.

[Lee Flier]

Errhh... drag and drop the audio file into the REAPER window...

[Lee Flier]

The thing that keeps me from trying Reaper is that it doesn't have a video window.

 

 

Yes it does. You can drag and drop a video into Reaper on any track, and use it to do what you're talking about...

[MikeRivers]

Panning is not a level change, it's changing where a signal is located in the stereo sound field.

 

That's absolutely correct. If you record the sound field, your pan control is where you place the sound sources. You don't need a knob, nor do you get one. But "panpot stereo" is a different thing entirely.

 

If you want to reduce it to fundamentally how this is achieved, yes there are level changes taking place. But that fundamental fact says nothing to your claim about how stereo panning works as a concept.

 

But unless you record something as a stereo source, you can only artificially approximate panning. You can pan a mono source by putting it at equal level on both channels and delaying one relative to the other.

 

You can "panpot pan" a stereo track to, for example, place a stereo-miked piano somewhere to one side of center, but when you do that you normally only change the volume.

 

Conceptually ProTools stereo track panning is much more powerful than Reaper's.

 

The concept of stereo track panning is foreign to me. Maybe it's because I've never used Pro Tools. But I suspect that what it does is not something different from panning, and it's just called "panning" because that's a familiar term. Let's see:

 

Stereo panning is not simply balancing the levels between the two channels. That's not panning at all. When you have a stereo track, you have two sources, not one- the left channel and the right channel.

That doesn't make sense to me. Do you mean that I can't have one singer, I must have two? No, I'm sure it's not what you mean. I can have one singer recorded with two microphones. And what do I do with those two microphones? I record them to two channels. And what do I do with those two channels (normally)? I assign one to the left speaker and the other to the right speaker. Ergo - two tracks, two channels, two sources. Each of those two channels contains some of what the other channel contains.

 

The way ProTools panning works allows you to pan either channel independently.

 

Oh. But that's the same thing as panning two mono sources. You start out with one panned hard left and the other panned hard right, and you move one or both toward the other channel. How is this different from having your stereo mic pair going into two (mono) channels of a mixer, starting them out with one panned full left, the other panned full right, and then manipulating the pan pots so that your source doesn't appear in the center ,or wherever off-center it was when you recorded it, but rather, somewhere else?

 

You can have a stereo channel with left and right guitar takes, and place either channel anywhere in the stereo field that you want. You can swap them left right, send them both down the middle, put one hard left and one in the middle, etc etc etc.

 

That's exactly the same as if you had two mono tracks. Perhaps what's different is the user interface. Can you describe that to me?

 

Reaper can't do this at all without completely abandoning stereo tracks or resorting to third party workarounds, and it's a severe shortcoming when it comes time to mix.

 

But what's the point of keeping them as "stereo tracks" if they're no longer stereo in the classical sense? Or is it simply a matter of bookkeeping so you can have "Stereo Guitar" as one object rather than "Guitar Left" and "Guitar Right" as two objects?

 

I have no idea why anyone would argue for the weaker feature set. Proper stereo panning is stereo panning that allows you full control over the stereo sound field for every channel.Reaper does not feature this unless you limit yourself to all mono tracks. That's shoddy and a dealbreaker for me.

 

I guess I'll have to see what you're talking about, or what else this magic Pro Tools panning does that Reaper doesn't. Now maybe what you're talking about is not panning, but "balance" - like what the Balance knob on your stereo receiver does. But it's really a pan. Suppose your "stereo" track consisted of a guitar on the left and a trumpet on the right, both recorded together but completely isolated so there was no trumpet in the left channel and no guitar on the right channel. With the "Pan" (balance) control in the center, you hear one on the left and one on the right. Turn it fully to the left and you hear the guitar coming out of the left speaker and nothing coming out the right speaker. And vice versa.

 

Now maybe what you want to hear is the guitar 3/4 left and the trumpet 1/2 left. No problem with mono tracks (which they are). Just set the two pans to those relative positions. Same if you wanted the trumpet and guitar to maintain their same relative positions, but you just wanted both of them to move closer to the center. Also no problem.

 

But if the two tracks were tied together as they are in a stereo audio file, you can't do that without taking them apart and manipulating them separately to send part of each track over to the other channel. This is almost certainly what Pro Tools is doing, and they have a user interface for it that makes you think you're panning the stereo track.

 

It gets more confusing when you have a true stereo source or a noticeable amount of leakage, so that when you listen to just the guitar track, you hear the guitar and a little trumpet coming out of the left speaker.

 

Unless Pro Tools is doing something under the Pan control that involves phase or time in addition to amplitude manipulation, I think it's just a matter that you like the knobs and how they name them. Now if Reaper had no way to split a stereo track into two mono tracks, that could be a problem, but apparently that capability is available, and when you have control over all of the parameters of each of the two "stereo channels" independently, you have everything you need.

 

OK, I just looked at the Reaper "just like Pro Tools panning" add-on that was linked here. It looks like it gives you independent control over left and right channels of a stereo track. No different than if you made them into two mono tracks. Move on, folks, nothing to see here.

 

Oh, and I'm not arguing in favor of what you consider the weaker system, I'm only saying that I don't understand why it's weaker, or why Pro Tools "panning" is advantageous.

[Lee Flier]

Reaper 4 will have the kinds of stereo panning options you're talking about, native. Meanwhile you can use the JS-stereofield plugin.

[Geoff Grace]

 

Yes it does. You can drag and drop a video into Reaper on any track, and use it to do what you're talking about...

 

This is a pretty recent development though, isn't it? The last time I checked, video was on the to do list for Reaper developers; and I believe the last time I checked was sometime during 2010.

 

Reaper is evolving at a mind-boggling rate, so I'm not surprised that it can do video now.

 

Best,

 

Geoff

[the stranger]

I think we should have a Reaper Forum with Lee as the moderator.

[Lee Flier]

 

This is a pretty recent development though, isn't it? The last time I checked, video was on the to do list for Reaper developers; and I believe the last time I checked was sometime during 2010.

 

 

Well you can't actually edit video, but the ability to drag a video into the timeline and edit audio to match it has been there for about a year, I think.

 

 

Reaper is evolving at a mind-boggling rate, so I'm not surprised that it can do video now.

 

 

Yeah, they really do continually add new stuff, so if it's been even 6 months since the last time you checked out their feature set, you should probably check again!

[Lee Flier]

I think a lot of people feel the same as I do about it. ProTools has a pretty overwhelming grip on the music industry, and if someone wants to take it down and open up the playing field, they have to do BETTER, not "similar" or "close."

 

 

First of all Reaper doesn't consider itself "competition" for Pro Tools. It's not trying to "take Pro Tools down." That just isn't their attitude. It is what it is and you can use it or not. IMO, it does a lot of things better than Pro Tools (including that to me at least, it actually sounds better, which is kinda important). Other things, it doesn't do as well. Still other things, it does differently and it's just personal taste which you like better.

 

 

For people who are really using the tools to create, I don't think BETTER means "loaded with a ton more features". It means "reliable, powerful, stays out of the way and doesn't steal your attention from being creative."

 

 

Reaper does exactly that for me. It does have a ton of features, but if you spend a little time setting it up the way you want it, you can have just the features you want and none of the ones you don't want, and then it just works. I've spent a lot more time in Pro Tools mucking around with hardware and software incompatibilities and other things that are a pain in the ass about it.

 

It's natural if you've used something for a long time and gotten it to a point where it's stable and you don't have to think about it, that a different product will be frustrating and seem inadequate by comparison - until you get the new product to that same point. I say this as somebody who's used just about every DAW at some point or other (as well as having to learn lots of other different software platforms on a regular basis).

 

I'm not trying to get you to switch - I agree that if you're comfortable with any system and have gotten it (and yourself) to a point where you no longer have to think about it and can just get on with the business of creating, you should probably stick with it! No matter what it is. No reason to switch if you're happy. But for other people who might be wondering what they're missing with other DAWs, or looking for some particular feature that theirs is missing, they'd be crazy not to try Reaper, considering it's free to evaluate (fully featured, no crippleware), ridiculously cheap to buy a license, and the developers are incredibly responsive to the requests of users.

 

 

Reaper is working fine for me as a VST host and I think it shows promise. But they can't leave pro features like basic panning up to third party developers and custom GUI's and hope to compete in the big picture. Believe it or not but for a lot of people, the gear is as much a hassle and a nuisance as it is a fun addiction.

 

 

I'm one of those people. The last thing I want to do is piss around with gear when I'm trying to be creative. However, panning of stereo tracks isn't terribly important to me (and easy to work around with a plugin, and it'll be native in the next version anyway), and for me, Reaper has a lot of other benefits that make my life easier, and those benefits really outweigh the drawbacks. So there you have it.

[UstadKhanAli]

I'm into getting my ideas down as easily and creatively as possible. Screwing around on a computer is not my idea of fun. Thankfully, Pro Tools does that for me, but I recognize that it could easily have been Logic or Reaper or some other program. But using PT makes sense to me, and I was able to get about on it quickly and effectively.

[Ernest Buckley]

Errhh... drag and drop the audio file into the REAPER window...

 

 

Damn, why does everything have to be so difficult?!

[ggm1960]

I was working in Logic this afternoon, wondering if there was any midi further down on a track I was looking at and thinking, 'wouldn't it be nice if there were dashes like Sonar has to indicate there is stuff somewhere on this track'.

[UstadKhanAli]

 

 

It's easy, but like some things, if you don't know, then it's not so easy!!!

 

I have all these pens at work that twist so that the tip appears so you can write. Except one. I twisted and twisted, only to discover that all I was doing is twisting the fancy pen cap.

[Ernest Buckley]

 

It's easy, but like some things, if you don't know, then it's not so easy!!! I have all these pens at work that twist so that the tip appears so you can write. Except one. I twisted and twisted, only to discover that all I was doing is twisting the fancy pen cap.

 

 

So... how does the pen open to write? Jeez Louise... what if I came across this pen someday? I would think of you but then I would be like... "What the heck? Ken left me hanging. He never explained how to open this!" Its sort of like when you go to turn something on and its not working and you`re standing there pondering the universe trying to figure out the damn thing and then someone walks over (usually your better half) and they`re like "Duh, its not plugged in!"

[Geoff Grace]

You know, if I had a Reason to switch, I'd want a DAW with the most Pro Tools. As a musician who doesn't use analog much anymore--a Digital Performer as it were--Logic dictates that I look for a DAW with a particularly Sonar-ous sound, something that will help me become a Reaper of great tracks. It should also have editing abilities to help me change arrangements, to create new beginnings or Nuendos. And it should be stable enough that I could Record performances Live without dropouts or crashes. I guess that would be the Acid test. Last but not least, it should allow multiple takes, such as bass tracks from A to Z; and it should allow me to label those tracks, for example, "P Bass," "Cubase," or "R Bass."

 

Best,

 

Geoff