![]() A significant increase of users in the past few years probably took a toll on the company’s ability to satisfy every customer’s need. Studio One started small and gradually built up the community with more and more users every year. There have been a couple of highly voted features that were left unaddressed by the developers. Also, not all of the community requests are taken into consideration. I remember having a brief inconvenience with Presonus tech support regarding some headphones issue. However, it wasn’t always days of wine and roses. Most of the questions and troubleshoots you may have are either on the Presonus forum, or you can grab a support ticket and wait a day or two for a more detailed answer and guidelines on fixing the issue. Presonus generally has a good relationship with its customers. I’ve tried testing Reaper with multiple instances of CPU-hungry plugins and was pleasantly surprised at how much it could handle before it started giving me audio dropouts. Many people have praised the software for that, and with a good reason. However, Reaper seems to be even more stable than Studio One. Luckily, Studio One has an excellent autosave feature with all the previous versions stored within the same project, even if you rename it. I’m a long Studio One user, and I’ve only had a couple of minor crashes throughout my brief mixing career. I’d say that both DAWs are generally pretty stable. You could probably learn it reasonably quickly, although I’d say that Studio One is more user-friendly and definitely looks way prettier. Although menus are a bit more complex than in Studio One, it’s still not overwhelming. They’re vibrant and lush but, at the same time, not too distracting.Īll in all, Reaper has its cons when it comes to graphic design, but generally, the UI is organized pretty well. Speaking of color-coding, track colors look stunning. It looks fantastic, even with some bland color coding. Studio One ticks all the boxes for me when it comes to its design. Nice-looking things make me inspired to work. I think that aesthetics are super important in music production. There’s a lot of heated debate over whether graphics should play any role in deciding the value of software. Let’s start with the most obvious one – the user interface. However, this doesn’t mean they’re insignificant. Most of the DAWs nowadays tend to be filled with numerous and impressive features by default, with only minor differences. Studio One And Reaper Head-To-Head Comparison You’ll mostly have to rely on third-party VST instruments. It lacks all the tools you need to start producing music out of the box.Excellent tech support and online community.Ability to customize the DAW to your workflow.Solid performance with minimum or no crashes, even on CPU-demanding projects. ![]() It may take a while to get it all together, but once you get used to the settings, you’ll see yourself flying through the software features with incredible speed and efficiency. There’s virtually no limit to how you can organize your macros and adapt the software to match your particular needs. I’ve been using it for a while now, and I can confirm what others have been talking about all along – it’s as stable as a digital audio workstation gets.Īdditionally, Reaper is highly customizable. Reaper is developed by Cockos – a team of dedicated developers working on a handful of projects with stability being their primary focus. Doesn’t support surround sound, only stereo.Lots of MIDI import and export options are missing.Requires no dongle, and a single license can be used on up to 5 computers.Virtually no third-party software is required. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |