I switched to RReaper. You know, Its alsoms thw ONLY Daew that can do what SONAR did : to record over the same track, with previous recorded audio, an dbe able to also listen to ausio previous recorded, same time you do now recording as a "dubbing/ overlay". I was very surprised to find that onsly Reaper had this feature. And thats something I would NEVER compromize. I  a MUSt feature for me as a singer , guitarist :) and its developpend and driven by enthusiasts, Not Big Buck industry - overrated "thieves" ;)

Reaper is going to support ARA2
forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=200297
 

Pictus
Reaper is going to support ARA2
forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=200297

Yep. Schwa has been in close contact with Celemony, and it sounds like ARA2 is right around the corner, so REAPER will soon have not only the coveted ARA that everyone bows down to, but the second generation of it, which unfortunately Sonar will never have.

Melodyne and vocal correcting software, is somthing that will never be used in my studio. I will rather look for another job, or go back to carpenting, then "go to bed" with these kind of cheating-trick . If you cant sing ; stay out of a stduio, and do something else !

cecelius2
Hi:  I know some of you have highly recommended Reaper as an alternative DAW for Sonar.  I have never used it, but am now thinking about it as an alternative DAW.  I love Sonar, like Cubase, tolerate Studio One, and use Mixbus for final mix/masters.  I have downloaded Reaper and am viewing some of the tutorial videos on Reaper.  However, I wonder what is not found in Reaper that is found in Sonar, or Cubase, or even Studio One?
 
Question:   Can some of you let me know what are the weaknesses with Reaper?  or (more relevant to the announcement that Sonar is being discontinued) What is missing in Reaper that is found in Sonar?
 
Thanks
 
C2
 

The main thing it's missing, based on my experience so far, is a large bulk of third party plugins.  This is likely how the price is kept so low for Reaper. 
 
No ARA integration currently (so you can't use Melodyne in the same way as you would with SONAR), however this is coming soon apparently.

Metaclass
Melodyne and vocal correcting software, is somthing that will never be used in my studio. I will rather look for another job, or go back to carpenting, then "go to bed" with these kind of cheating-trick . If you cant sing ; stay out of a stduio, and do something else !

While I really don't care at all if REAPER gets ARA/ARA2, I'm glad they are putting it into the software so that Cakers might get to use REAPER, and not feel like they are losing even more than just their main DAW software.
 
That said, REAPER does include a pitch correction plug that does straight pitch correction, but I never use it. You can also put a pitch envelope on audio clips, and I have used that a few times, to fix one slightly flat or sharp vocal note in an otherwise good take.

Metaclass
Melodyne and vocal correcting software, is somthing that will never be used in my studio. I will rather look for another job, or go back to carpenting, then "go to bed" with these kind of cheating-trick . If you cant sing ; stay out of a stduio, and do something else !

That's kind of a narrow view.  Given almost every major recording artist uses some form of pitch correction these days, I don't see the problem in using it.  It doesn't have to be over the top, you can use it to correct one or two off notes in an otherwise excellent performance.

kevmsmith81

Metaclass
Melodyne and vocal correcting software, is somthing that will never be used in my studio. I will rather look for another job, or go back to carpenting, then "go to bed" with these kind of cheating-trick . If you cant sing ; stay out of a stduio, and do something else !

That's kind of a narrow view.  Given almost every major recording artist uses some form of pitch correction these days, I don't see the problem in using it.  It doesn't have to be over the top, you can use it to correct one or two off notes in an otherwise excellent performance.

Not only that, but even the Beatles used studio tricks, like pasting recordings from two different sessions together, changing their speed, cutting tape up and throwing it into the air, to be spliced back together randomly.
 
I much prefer an honest recording of a good performance, and that's what I try to achieve in my studio, but using a pitch envelope on one note doesn't invalidate the recording in my mind.  Yeah, I could do more takes until that one bum note was on the money, but at how much time burned?  I know I could do takes until I got the one, but in the case of minor tuning problems, I will sometimes fix it in the mix, so I can get on to recording the next tracks.
 
For me it's a balance of honesty and efficiency.  If you are correcting almost every note and changing the phrasing so it no longer resembles the original recording, then your pendulum has swung too far to the fix it side of the equation, and your music has lost it's honesty and integrity IMHO. Fixing something that you *could* have sung or played OTOH for time efficiency has not.
 

the_user_formally_known_as_glennbo

kevmsmith81

Metaclass
Melodyne and vocal correcting software, is somthing that will never be used in my studio. I will rather look for another job, or go back to carpenting, then "go to bed" with these kind of cheating-trick . If you cant sing ; stay out of a stduio, and do something else !

That's kind of a narrow view.  Given almost every major recording artist uses some form of pitch correction these days, I don't see the problem in using it.  It doesn't have to be over the top, you can use it to correct one or two off notes in an otherwise excellent performance.

Not only that, but even the Beatles used studio tricks, like pasting recordings from two different sessions together, changing their speed, cutting tape up and throwing it into the air, to be spliced back together randomly.
 
I much prefer an honest recording of a good performance, and that's what I try to achieve in my studio, but using a pitch envelope on one note doesn't invalidate the recording in my mind.  Yeah, I could do more takes until that one bum note was on the money, but at how much time burned?  I know I could do takes until I got the one, but in the case of minor tuning problems, I will sometimes fix it in the mix, so I can get on to recording the next tracks.
 
For me it's a balance of honesty and efficiency.  If you are correcting almost every note and changing the phrasing so it no longer resembles the original recording, then your pendulum has swung too far to the fix it side of the equation, and your music has lost it's honesty and integrity IMHO. Fixing something that you *could* have sung or played OTOH for time efficiency has not.
 

Agree with this. 
 
However, I also see no issue with "over-use" of it as an Artistic approach, such as done by the likes of Kanye West, T-Pain, Cher etc.  It's all down to personal preference, really.

kevmsmith81

the_user_formally_known_as_glennbo
For me it's a balance of honesty and efficiency.  If you are correcting almost every note and changing the phrasing so it no longer resembles the original recording, then your pendulum has swung too far to the fix it side of the equation, and your music has lost it's honesty and integrity IMHO. Fixing something that you *could* have sung or played OTOH for time efficiency has not.

Agree with this. 
 
However, I also see no issue with "over-use" of it as an Artistic approach, such as done by the likes of Kanye West, T-Pain, Cher etc.  It's all down to personal preference, really.

Difference between the examples you site is that Cher could actually sing the part without any tuning software. 
 
She was recording vocals way back in time when no "artist helper" software even existed.   ;)