Reaper can display the spectrum and waveforms. Go to the 'View' menu, select 'Peak Display Settings'. In the pop up window select 'Spectrogram + Peak'.
Yes! Thanks for noting. I had that in an early edit of the vid, but I find it’s just not as detailed and fluid as in Audition so cut it. Do you find it slows Reaper down a bit? In the past I’d found the spectrogram makes reaper a bit laggy.
@@jaymyersvoiceover You are right. It's not as good as it could be. I don't have Audition, but when I want to do spectral editing I use Reaper's 'open copy in external editor' function and use RX or Acoustica.
Ah, yeah that’s a great workaround. I did the same for a long while. Also, in my version of Reaper the spectral view is under “Options” not “View.” In case other folks are trying to find it, I’m wondering if they changed the location in an update, or if perhaps its an Apple vs Windows question?
My AU (Basic) was $20.99 ($21) per month then now went up to $22.99 ($23) monthly which it still is now. Something I learned about Reaper is that because it is non-destructive, the files need to be cleaned out periodically, if not frequently, and the unused files deleted permanently. I discovered this when my PC began really slowing down and I realized I had 100+ .wav files saved! I also had to empty they Recycle Bin, now is all good to go!
Yes! Good point. I've found that offloading my projects into Dropbox as well as using an automated computer 'cleaner' that detects and removes unused files, both to be helpful in keeping my computer snappy.
If REAPER had AA's "heal" function, I'd be a very, very happy camper. Admittedly, REAPER's Spectral View is rather clunky. I use iZotope RX Standard as one of REAPER's two External Editors. I can perform those granular fixes by bouncing Items over to RX to manipulate that Item with RX's Spectral Repair (and other RX modules). Then send it back to REAPER (File: Overwrite Original File) - Rinse & Repeat - with both programs open simultaneously. Much in the same way as doing those fixes in AA, with the added bonus of it being non-destructive.
When you record in multitrack it is none destructive for the most edits, changes, effects etc. that you make. Only thing is you can't normalize in multitrack. Therefore you have to go to wave form and yes, than it will be destructive.
So I'm definitely more familiar with reaper as I've been a recording hobbyist for a few years now. I'm actually recording an audiobook and recently got the adobe creative cloud package thing for another unrelated project of mine. I was wondering if I should make the full switch over to adobe audition, but now that I know it's destructive which is kinda a turn off, I know understand that it's better to keep the 2. So what I'm thinking of doing is using reaper for the audiobook and aa for any projects relating to audio within adobe's ecosystem (like making a youtube video). Very good information thanks !
Hey Jay, I used Adobe Audition from 2016 to 2019. After learning Reaper and purchasing it, I never used Adobe Audition even though I uninstalled it. And Reaper has spectrum and waveforms. I also have been using isotope rx elements from long time and I was gaga that it can be connected to Reaper and I can apply its effects directly in Reaper and create chains. Then there was no reason to use audition anymore.
That’s awesome! Yeah I’m pretty much in the same boat. Some of my clients prefer audition specific workflows which is one of the principal reasons I keep it around, as well as some specific processes that it makes easier.
I've never tried Reaper but I'm still learning how to use Adobe Audition. For the moment, I can't do much! There are plenty of plugins but I can't get satisfactory results. So I keep switching between Audacity and the stand alone version of Izotope RX10 (I don't like the rx10 plugins and I don't like recording with rx10 :)). Otherwise I added the Muse fx plugins for Audacity which I find interesting and very easy to adjust (only 1 button 😄). With reaper, if it keeps all these .wave files, it might quickly use a lot of disk space no ? By the way, there's a debate about how much you should process your recordings. They will end up on the screen of a sound engineer with better ears, tools & experience and that's his job. Some studios, for example, are requesting non compressed recordings. And it's perfectly understandable: The more you do, the more you make his job difficult. I prefer to ask to be very clear about it. My natural choice is to make recordings who need a minimum of post processing: De click, de crack, de reverb, de noise, light eq, de ess. That's it. For very special rendering I use additional tools like compressors, expanders or mastering tools
Check out Boothjunkie's Reaper voiceover tutorials & shortcuts. Certainly eases the learning curve. Reaper's menus & interface are certainly not intuitive. It could benefit from copying how CAD software structures menus by workflow.
Audacity is even more friendly user and it's free. You can also use OBS to record voice over. You can do a lot with OBS but it takes time to be a power user
Reaper can display the spectrum and waveforms. Go to the 'View' menu, select 'Peak Display Settings'. In the pop up window select 'Spectrogram + Peak'.
Yes! Thanks for noting. I had that in an early edit of the vid, but I find it’s just not as detailed and fluid as in Audition so cut it. Do you find it slows Reaper down a bit? In the past I’d found the spectrogram makes reaper a bit laggy.
@@jaymyersvoiceover You are right. It's not as good as it could be. I don't have Audition, but when I want to do spectral editing I use Reaper's 'open copy in external editor' function and use RX or Acoustica.
Ah, yeah that’s a great workaround. I did the same for a long while.
Also, in my version of Reaper the spectral view is under “Options” not “View.” In case other folks are trying to find it, I’m wondering if they changed the location in an update, or if perhaps its an Apple vs Windows question?
@@jaymyersvoiceover It's in both places! The 'View' version brings up a window that allows you to customise the view.
Oh sweet! I’ll check that out, thanks!
My AU (Basic) was $20.99 ($21) per month then now went up to $22.99 ($23) monthly which it still is now.
Something I learned about Reaper is that because it is non-destructive, the files need to be cleaned out periodically, if not frequently, and the unused files deleted permanently.
I discovered this when my PC began really slowing down and I realized I had 100+ .wav files saved!
I also had to empty they Recycle Bin, now is all good to go!
Yes! Good point. I've found that offloading my projects into Dropbox as well as using an automated computer 'cleaner' that detects and removes unused files, both to be helpful in keeping my computer snappy.
Wow thank you so much for breaking this down, Jay! This was exactly what I was looking for, trying to decide between these two for a new DAW!
So glad to hear it was helpful!
If REAPER had AA's "heal" function, I'd be a very, very happy camper. Admittedly, REAPER's Spectral View is rather clunky. I use iZotope RX Standard as one of REAPER's two External Editors. I can perform those granular fixes by bouncing Items over to RX to manipulate that Item with RX's Spectral Repair (and other RX modules). Then send it back to REAPER (File: Overwrite Original File) - Rinse & Repeat - with both programs open simultaneously. Much in the same way as doing those fixes in AA, with the added bonus of it being non-destructive.
When you record in multitrack it is none destructive for the most edits, changes, effects etc. that you make. Only thing is you can't normalize in multitrack. Therefore you have to go to wave form and yes, than it will be destructive.
Thanks for clarifying that!
Thank you for sharing. your video is very precise and straight to the point.
My pleasure!
So I'm definitely more familiar with reaper as I've been a recording hobbyist for a few years now. I'm actually recording an audiobook and recently got the adobe creative cloud package thing for another unrelated project of mine. I was wondering if I should make the full switch over to adobe audition, but now that I know it's destructive which is kinda a turn off, I know understand that it's better to keep the 2. So what I'm thinking of doing is using reaper for the audiobook and aa for any projects relating to audio within adobe's ecosystem (like making a youtube video).
Very good information thanks !
awesome video thanks
Hey Jay, I used Adobe Audition from 2016 to 2019. After learning Reaper and purchasing it, I never used Adobe Audition even though I uninstalled it. And Reaper has spectrum and waveforms. I also have been using isotope rx elements from long time and I was gaga that it can be connected to Reaper and I can apply its effects directly in Reaper and create chains. Then there was no reason to use audition anymore.
That’s awesome! Yeah I’m pretty much in the same boat. Some of my clients prefer audition specific workflows which is one of the principal reasons I keep it around, as well as some specific processes that it makes easier.
I've never tried Reaper but I'm still learning how to use Adobe Audition. For the moment, I can't do much! There are plenty of plugins but I can't get satisfactory results. So I keep switching between Audacity and the stand alone version of Izotope RX10 (I don't like the rx10 plugins and I don't like recording with rx10 :)). Otherwise I added the Muse fx plugins for Audacity which I find interesting and very easy to adjust (only 1 button 😄).
With reaper, if it keeps all these .wave files, it might quickly use a lot of disk space no ?
By the way, there's a debate about how much you should process your recordings. They will end up on the screen of a sound engineer with better ears, tools & experience and that's his job. Some studios, for example, are requesting non compressed recordings. And it's perfectly understandable: The more you do, the more you make his job difficult. I prefer to ask to be very clear about it. My natural choice is to make recordings who need a minimum of post processing: De click, de crack, de reverb, de noise, light eq, de ess. That's it.
For very special rendering I use additional tools like compressors, expanders or mastering tools
If it works for you that’s all you need! Glad to hear you’re learning them though. If any specific questions pop up for you let me know!
Adobe Audition seems to be more newbie-friendly. I can see and adjust directly in Audition. I am a little bit lost with Reaper.
Check out Boothjunkie's Reaper voiceover tutorials & shortcuts. Certainly eases the learning curve. Reaper's menus & interface are certainly not intuitive. It could benefit from copying how CAD software structures menus by workflow.
Whatever is comfortable is a solid move! Though as others noted after a couple of weeks you can really start flying
Audacity is even more friendly user and it's free. You can also use OBS to record voice over. You can do a lot with OBS but it takes time to be a power user
@LeSaff It certainly gets the job done! It’s just a bit limited in higher level functionality, which can be helpful for some jobs.
@@jaymyersvoiceover I agree, this is why I added the muse fx plugins and few others (including rx10 wich is probably the best)
Audition seems awesome, but I hate ongoing subscriptions.
Same. It’s more reasonable if you need/use more adobe apps in your business/workflow in my opinion.