JPF Home Page Forums General Messages General Message Forum Computer Production Software

Hi Jim, in general, alot of people that use Audacity or Reaper are using their computer sound card, so it wouldn't sound as somebody with nicer equipment. I don't use either program. I have always tried to use Pro Tools wherever I go, if possible. The only other program I use frequently is a 2 track editor (Wavelab) I know a little about Reaper, and I can tell you that Reaper is now 64 Bit, and Pro Tools is still 32. Now when dealing with computer audio, let's say you record at 24 bit 48k. That's how we do it around here. So say you record a vocal into a U67 + Neve 1073 + Tube-Tech CL1b and split the signal into a couple Apogee Mini-Me's s/pdif into the same interfaces, clocked to the Apogees, at 24/48 into two separate computers, with one running Reaper and the other running Pro Tools 9. Virtually identical setups into two computers, with all the settings set exactly the same. Are you gonna hear the difference in the Reaper version and the Pro Tools version. Not likely. You just recorded the exact same program material into the same equipment. The only difference is the program. Most of the mathematics are not as important as how the sound is recorded. It's possible that many people believe because a recording program isn't as expensive, it isn't as good. This isn't true, as with any recording program, you will still be using the same sound engine. For instance, on a Mac, it's core audio. Personally, I wouldn't use Reaper. But not because I think it sounds inferior. It's because I don't want to stray away from something I know how to work, and has never failed to give me the sound I need. Also, I like the way it looks. It's okay to stare at Pro Tools for hours on end. Now crashes, and errors...well...that's a completely other topic. What we are talking about here is, is the recording program as important sound wise as your sound card, A/D and D/A converters, mics, pre's, compressors...well, no. It isn't. The difference is probably negligible at best. You should use the program you like best. Which is where Pro Tools really shines. Been using it since 1998, and won't switch until something better comes along....I may be waiting a long time. Not to mention almost every file I ever get is a pro tools session. I might chuckle if somebody sent me a session from an old Cool Edit Pro rig or something, and it was un-consolidated. And to answer your question, The main reason Pro studios started using Pro Tools first was it was around before everything else was. The very first incarnation of Pro Tools was around back in 1989. Almost 15 years ago Pro Tools could record 48 tracks. Nobody else was doing it like that. Radar had 24 tracks, and that EMU or Paris thing probably did the same, Fairlight was waaaay expensive and it did 24 tracks. Not to mention, Pro Tools had the hardware and better plug-in's at the time. Nobody else was really offering what the big studios needed to record with, and not to mention the awful block-form editing associated with the before mentioned products. So they get the big studios hooked on it, they release the Digi-001 so everybody can use it, and get those people hooked on it, really before most other companies had anything good. Then they released the Mbox and suddenly the Mbox is the coolest thing ever. You can record anywhere with it. Now.... had Reaper had been around back then, and had been making systems for recording since computer based recording was an option, then Reaper might be in Pro Tools position now, and maybe wouldn't have to give their stuff away for almost nothing.