THambrecht
Because we need 10 laptops for recording tapes and vinyl we need project templates.
We found out that Cubase can very easy save and load complete project templates, track templates and FX templates. If you don't need in place offline rendering, Cubas Elements (99.-) can do this. Cubase is more suitable for comple audio editing - for example if you need batch numbering thousends of clips and batch export.
 

Although I'm liking Cubase - I would think REAPER would be ideal for your situation.  Complete project/ track templates - customize, automate just about everything..  etc.

cityrat

THambrecht
Because we need 10 laptops for recording tapes and vinyl we need project templates.
We found out that Cubase can very easy save and load complete project templates, track templates and FX templates. If you don't need in place offline rendering, Cubas Elements (99.-) can do this. Cubase is more suitable for comple audio editing - for example if you need batch numbering thousends of clips and batch export.
 

Although I'm liking Cubase - I would think REAPER would be ideal for your situation.  Complete project/ track templates - customize, automate just about everything..  etc.

 
I will also have a look on Reaper.
But we need to 100% offline rendering. For example we have to apply an iZotope RX deNoiser to 40 clips, then with a different setting to the next 37 clips ... and so on.
Cubase can also batch naming (numbering) of thousends of clips, and batch exporting them. Then we need the possibility to record up to 100 hours of audio (for example 30 tapes for one customer).

THambrecht
I will also have a look on Reaper.
But we need to 100% offline rendering. For example we have to apply an iZotope RX deNoiser to 40 clips, then with a different setting to the next 37 clips ... and so on.
Cubase can also batch naming (numbering) of thousends of clips, and batch exporting them. Then we need the possibility to record up to 100 hours of audio (for example 30 tapes for one customer).

It would be good to post that scenario in the forums.  I think with the vast scipting and capabilities it would be possible but I'm no expert.  I would think a lot of REAPER power users would love the challenge.
https://forum.cockos.com/forumdisplay.php?f=19

cityrat

THambrecht
I will also have a look on Reaper.
But we need to 100% offline rendering. For example we have to apply an iZotope RX deNoiser to 40 clips, then with a different setting to the next 37 clips ... and so on.
Cubase can also batch naming (numbering) of thousends of clips, and batch exporting them. Then we need the possibility to record up to 100 hours of audio (for example 30 tapes for one customer).

It would be good to post that scenario in the forums.  I think with the vast scipting and capabilities it would be possible but I'm no expert.  I would think a lot of REAPER power users would love the challenge.
https://forum.cockos.com/forumdisplay.php?f=19

 
As I see, Reaper is really a very great software. If I would only make music - I would probably buy Reaper.
But there are a few things that are not suitable for our situation. I have no chance to select 40 clips and export them in one dialog to 40 wavefils (SONAR can), and rendered audioclips do not replace itself - instead they get in a new layer (like Studio One). That is a time killer. Sonar replaced the rendered audio in itself. So I don't need to check other functions.
But for business and for us, the price does not matter (Reaper commercial license is $225). We have 800 customer per year - and every minute processing time counts.
Cubase: Batch naming and numbering of clips is a time argument. Also the comfortable naming of clips in a event window (Pool) is a time argument for Cubase.
Cubase has also Makro functions and scripting (via Steinberg Wavelab). So we don't look what is cheaper - we have to look what saves us a lot of time.

Thanks sooooo much for the feedback! I've been away dealing with my mom who just entered the nethesphere. Picked up Cubase during the crossroads sale but will also pick up Reaper as sometimes simpler is better, for me at least.   Impressed with both, actually and now f eal better about moving on...
 
Gibson sucks!

I am slowly digging Reaper, and since the thread is resurrected...

THambrecht
As I see, Reaper is really a very great software. If I would only make music - I would probably buy Reaper.
But there are a few things that are not suitable for our situation. I have no chance to select 40 clips and export them in one dialog to 40 wavefils (SONAR can),

If that is about "Export..." in Sonar. Reaper can do this from "Render...", directly or with "render queue" (batch processing).

and rendered audioclips do not replace itself - instead they get in a new layer (like Studio One). That is a time killer. Sonar replaced the rendered audio in itself. So I don't need to check other functions.

I do not know how to do this in Sonar. Sonar export dialog has no option to put the result into the project.
If that is not about render but "Bounce to clip(s)", that is called "Glue" in Reaper and it does the same, replacing original clips.
But "Render items as new take" is way more useful from my perspective:
* the result is auto-selected, so no extra action required. To "protect" against mixing source/render during future operations with the track/project, there is "Lock to active take" action. And/or toggle "Show all takes" option.
* the result can be visually/audition compared with the source
* the source can be discarded by "Crop to active takes"

But for business and for us, the price does not matter (Reaper commercial license is $225). We have 800 customer per year - and every minute processing time counts.
Cubase: Batch naming and numbering of clips is a time argument. Also the comfortable naming of clips in a event window (Pool) is a time argument for Cubase.
Cubase has also Makro functions and scripting (via Steinberg Wavelab). So we don't look what is cheaper - we have to look what saves us a lot of time.

You probable reference https://steinberg.help/wa...lab_pro_scripting.html
 
In Reaper, you can use EEL2/Lua/Python/C++ access to almost (if not all) elements of the DAW. That means in case by chance you do not have required functionality, you can find some programmer to automate what you need. If nothing else works (Reaper scripting covers a lot), by C++ plug-in.
 
 
 

Even though we didn't get this until X3, it is amazing

Did you make some typo there?

I like the idea of track templates, but i got tired of having to figure out routing issues.