Luc Henrion wrote:

Reaper is certainly one of the cheapest DAWs, but by no means the easiest to master. There are many others, including free ones. On the Mac, of course, there's Garageband, on the PC there's Traktion Waveform free, Cakewalk, etc...

I abandoned the Mac three years ago, so no Garageband.

Traktion Waveform has a nice website with good "Who Are You?" section. There is no "piano player" and all the others mention completely irrelevant (to me) things. But maybe it's worth giving it a try and I will, thanks for mentioning it.

Cakewalk, I explored back in the way, but now I don't remember what the problem was. Its current website is somewhat confusing. Do I want Sonar, Next or Legacy?  probably Next.. but then its features are completely irrelevant to me, besides perhaps "Customize your sound". Yet even that it's unclear if it does what I want (e.g. simply adding reverb as a getting started project) and if it does how hard it is. Its FAQ is all incomprehensible jargon.

Etc does not help because I don't know what to look for.

Maybe what you need is something with both a ton of online videos, and a different paradigm. If you’re a software engineer by trade you’ll be able to figure any software out, but a shortcut may be something like Ableton (the “lite” version is given away with SO much stuff that you’ll be able to get a free code from someone).

Watch a few intro videos. See if the workflow makes sense.

The basics (like selecting an audio out) are the same across all software.

I’m an IT guy as well and was easily able to grasp the basics of Ableton or Bitwig.

Tracktion Waveform was weird for me - the way you need to do sends/returns for effects wasn’t intuitive and seemed like it needed more steps than something like Ableton.

REAPER looks complex but just to be able to insert an instrument track and a meter - it’s stupid simple. But to do sends/returns it feels harder than other DAWs.

In fact most DAWs are very simple for that basic thing you’re looking for, even for relatively computer-illiterate people (most pro musicians aren’t IT guys at the same time).

Try the basic versions of Ableton, Bitwig, Cubase, Studio 1. Not the more advanced ones. Go for the absolute basic versions. Try those.

Another recommendation would be to read a book on basic audio engineering. For example, how should you use reverb so you don’t end up with lots of low-end signal “mud”? (AKA “the abbey road trick”).

Or to use a high pass filter at the final stage - something like a gentle roloff around 50Hz for example.

Or basic understanding of compression and limiting.

Or saturation.

These aren’t things for pro (or even wannabe) audio engineers.

These are very simple techniques that can help you get stuff sounding better (=more enjoyable when playing) and become muscle memory very quickly. 

I’ve impressed people that claim Pianoteq sounds sterile and artificial just by using these basic techniques - they couldn’t believe it was Pianoteq.

Low hanging fruit!

I have a Windows 11 laptop with Studio One 7 running a  Presonus 1824c DAW downstairs with my Fender Rhodes Mark I and Roland VK7 + VK8 and pedal virtual combo organ tied to it. I free record and do multitrack sessions on that setup. It's complicated and takes time to set up and I have many plugins and effects.

I have Pianoteq on an iPad on my acoustic grand with optical MIDI key rail upstairs. It's simple. I sit down, put on the headphones and play.

I don't expect the same easiness or levels of functionality out of either setup, that's why I have both. I just got the Pianoteq setup because I didn't like the built in sounds of the MIDI box on the record strip on the grand. One is not inherently better than the other.

That’s why I suggested something like Cantabile — there’s even a free version — that’s designed for performers instead of recording engineers.

Thanks for insisting. I erroneously considered it the same thing as Cakewalk (I have a mild condition by which I exchange words that start with the same letter, typically for the amusement of my family members when I speak, but I digress...)

Will definitely try Cantabile too!

But as things stand, I appreciate that some people like you have been able to make use of it, but I remain of my opinion that for people like me or the OP, Repear or other DAWs are just a waste of time.

I use Reaper myself. But I was recording on multitrack tape before I ever did audio on a computer. The logic of Reaper was nearly transparent to me, but I can easily see where that wouldn’t be true for people who are more performers than engineers. And I agree, they have an annoying documentation situation. Too many videos, too little clear and concise explanation. Then again, everything is getting that way. (Excuse me, I have to go yell at some kids on my front lawn now.)

That’s why I suggested something like Cantabile — there’s even a free version — that’s designed for performers instead of recording engineers. I haven’t used it myself, because I am familiar with Reaper, and I don’t perform. (But as I said, I still use Blue Cat’s Axiom sometimes when I’m practicing with plugins, because I already have it and it’s less trouble to set up than a Reaper project.)

Reaper is certainly one of the cheapest DAWs, but by no means the easiest to master. There are many others, including free ones. On the Mac, of course, there's Garageband, on the PC there's Traktion Waveform free, Cakewalk, etc...

I abandoned the Mac three years ago, so no Garageband.

Traktion Waveform has a nice website with good "Who Are You?" section. There is no "piano player" and all the others mention completely irrelevant (to me) things. But maybe it's worth giving it a try and I will, thanks for mentioning it.

Cakewalk, I explored back in the way, but now I don't remember what the problem was. Its current website is somewhat confusing. Do I want Sonar, Next or Legacy?  probably Next.. but then its features are completely irrelevant to me, besides perhaps "Customize your sound". Yet even that it's unclear if it does what I want (e.g. simply adding reverb as a getting started project) and if it does how hard it is. Its FAQ is all incomprehensible jargon.

Etc does not help because I don't know what to look for.

+1. I must admit that I found Reaper quite intimidating at first, but now I wouldn't be without it. If you ever want to record and edit your playing and maybe apply some simple effects, the time taken to learn the basics in Reaper is a worthwhile investment.

Let's assume that I agree (which I did back in the day when in fact I used the trial version for a month and stopped because I had an awful experience). So I try to document myself on what to do, Googling "Reaper getting started". My first hits are:

* a 3.5 hours video (WTF? who can watch that!!!)
* a 3 page, official "Quick start" document (namely this one https://www.reaper.fm/guides/REAPER%20Quick%20Start.pdf ) which is all but a quick start. Maybe it's a quick reference, but not "start"
* the one that is more comprehensible is this one https://www.musicgateway.com/blog/music...w-tutorial and one of its highlight is "You will run into problems when you try recording for the first time. This happens to all of us. Just be patient, Google your issue with a focused search and you will likely find someone with the same issue." (I did Google my problems back in the day, but it took me forever to find solutions for my problems -- and not for all of them -- most likely because I did not use the right terminology because I am not a sound engineer)
* the official 460-page Reaper "dictionary" (ehm, I mean user manual ROTL)

So again, maybe I'm an idiot, but Reaper (and other DAWs that I have seen) have at least a serious documentation problem (if not also a workflow problem for simple use). If you know of a simple getting started for musicians (***NOT*** sound engineers) similar to https://www.modartt.com/user_manual?pro...mp;lang=en in length, ease of reading and completeness, please post it and I will definitely change my mind.

But as things stand, I appreciate that some people like you have been able to make use of it, but I remain of my opinion that for people like me or the OP, Repear or other DAWs are just a waste of time.

Coises wrote:

dv wrote:

I feel you. In fact I hate DAWs too. I tried a few and found them just a waste of time. Sadly, they are the only option to do what you want: intercepting the audio path, do something with it, yet leave it unchanged (or not, if you e.g. want to use an effect) and route it back to the output/speakers.

That is not true. Examples of stand-alone programs that can host VSTs but are not DAWs are Blue Cat’s PatchWork, Audio Modeling’s Camelot and Cantabile. I’m sure there are others. (I sometimes use Blue Cat’s Axiom that way, since I have it for processing virtual guitars and it includes similar functions to PatchWork.)

With any of these programs (like standalone Pianoteq itself) you have to tell them to use your midi controllers, tell them where to find your sound interface, set that up.. it's pretty much the same procedure. Very little difference between them - including standalone Pianoteq.

The limited skill set you need to open those other programs compared to simply opening Reaper, inserting an instrument plugin, applying any additional effects then playing is hardly any different. At $60 you can use Reaper like this and you will have all the functionality you wanted or needed - with the potential to go further if you ever wanted or needed at similar cost.

The complexity is there if you want or need it, and so is the simplicity.

However with a daw you can save those settings of instrument tracks that you've inserted in numerous ways.. you can create templates (with a few clicks)  dedicated to separate midi controllers if you wish. Then you can with a couple of clicks open those the next time you open the DAW.

So a DAW could be perfectly useful for you even if you never record anything with it ever!
I would recommend Reaper over pretty much any other DAW because it opens almost instantaneously, and is ultra light on resources. You don't have to go through a long slow laborious moment where it looks for new plugins and updates for absolutely ages (like you do with some DAWs), it's just immediately open.

+1. I must admit that I found Reaper quite intimidating at first, but now I wouldn't be without it. If you ever want to record and edit your playing and maybe apply some simple effects, the time taken to learn the basics in Reaper is a worthwhile investment. And yes, you don't have to record anything if you don't want to, just open it up and play!

By the way, for a sophisticated metering solution I can recommend Youlean: https://youlean.co/ - the Pro version draws a graph to show a complete history of all your dynamics. Maybe what you're looking for?

YvesTh wrote:

The automatic midi recording of everything that's played is, for me, the big advantage of standalone. Sometimes I use a DAW and often I regret it because I can't recover an idea or a piece I've just played because I hadn't planned to record it. And when I do plan to record it, it doesn't necessarily interest me.  I learn everyday and I never know in advance whether what I'm going to play will be of the slightest interest.

but you can record the whole session also on a DAW if you want to. The storage required is minimum as it is only midi data . Plus you can find it straight away with the score editor, isolate it and export it. On the standalone version , you will have to export the whole session reopen it with a DAW and find the sequence . So the advantage is not so obvious to me .

It's likely that some DAWs allow automatic recording (the ones I use don't by default). I mainly use the pianoteq tool to reload the last recorded file and listen to it again, It is very easy. You don't need daw either to listen to all the recorded files, just drag them onto the pianoteq window.

Coises wrote:

dv wrote:

I feel you. In fact I hate DAWs too. I tried a few and found them just a waste of time. Sadly, they are the only option to do what you want: intercepting the audio path, do something with it, yet leave it unchanged (or not, if you e.g. want to use an effect) and route it back to the output/speakers.

That is not true. Examples of stand-alone programs that can host VSTs but are not DAWs are Blue Cat’s PatchWork, Audio Modeling’s Camelot and Cantabile. I’m sure there are others. (I sometimes use Blue Cat’s Axiom that way, since I have it for processing virtual guitars and it includes similar functions to PatchWork.)

With any of these programs (like standalone Pianoteq itself) you have to tell them to use your midi controllers, tell them where to find your sound interface, set that up.. it's pretty much the same procedure. Very little difference between them - including standalone Pianoteq.

The limited skill set you need to open those other programs compared to simply opening Reaper, inserting an instrument plugin, applying any additional effects then playing is hardly any different. At $60 you can use Reaper like this and you will have all the functionality you wanted or needed - with the potential to go further if you ever wanted or needed at similar cost.

The complexity is there if you want or need it, and so is the simplicity.

However with a daw you can save those settings of instrument tracks that you've inserted in numerous ways.. you can create templates (with a few clicks)  dedicated to separate midi controllers if you wish. Then you can with a couple of clicks open those the next time you open the DAW.

So a DAW could be perfectly useful for you even if you never record anything with it ever!
I would recommend Reaper over pretty much any other DAW because it opens almost instantaneously, and is ultra light on resources. You don't have to go through a long slow laborious moment where it looks for new plugins and updates for absolutely ages (like you do with some DAWs), it's just immediately open.

reaper is great indeed and possibilities are endless . It’s my favourite DAW with Logic Pro.

The automatic midi recording of everything that's played is, for me, the big advantage of standalone. Sometimes I use a DAW and often I regret it because I can't recover an idea or a piece I've just played because I hadn't planned to record it. And when I do plan to record it, it doesn't necessarily interest me.  I learn everyday and I never know in advance whether what I'm going to play will be of the slightest interest.

but you can record the whole session also on a DAW if you want to. The storage required is minimum as it is only midi data . Plus you can find it straight away with the score editor, isolate it and export it. On the standalone version , you will have to export the whole session reopen it with a DAW and find the sequence . So the advantage is not so obvious to me .

dv wrote:

I feel you. In fact I hate DAWs too. I tried a few and found them just a waste of time. Sadly, they are the only option to do what you want: intercepting the audio path, do something with it, yet leave it unchanged (or not, if you e.g. want to use an effect) and route it back to the output/speakers.

That is not true. Examples of stand-alone programs that can host VSTs but are not DAWs are Blue Cat’s PatchWork, Audio Modeling’s Camelot and Cantabile. I’m sure there are others. (I sometimes use Blue Cat’s Axiom that way, since I have it for processing virtual guitars and it includes similar functions to PatchWork.)

With any of these programs (like standalone Pianoteq itself) you have to tell them to use your midi controllers, tell them where to find your sound interface, set that up.. it's pretty much the same procedure. Very little difference between them - including standalone Pianoteq.

The limited skill set you need to open those other programs compared to simply opening Reaper, inserting an instrument plugin, applying any additional effects then playing is hardly any different. At $60 you can use Reaper like this and you will have all the functionality you wanted or needed - with the potential to go further if you ever wanted or needed at similar cost.

The complexity is there if you want or need it, and so is the simplicity.

However with a daw you can save those settings of instrument tracks that you've inserted in numerous ways.. you can create templates (with a few clicks)  dedicated to separate midi controllers if you wish. Then you can with a couple of clicks open those the next time you open the DAW.

So a DAW could be perfectly useful for you even if you never record anything with it ever!
I would recommend Reaper over pretty much any other DAW because it opens almost instantaneously, and is ultra light on resources. You don't have to go through a long slow laborious moment where it looks for new plugins and updates for absolutely ages (like you do with some DAWs), it's just immediately open.

I feel you. In fact I hate DAWs too. I tried a few and found them just a waste of time. Sadly, they are the only option to do what you want: intercepting the audio path, do something with it, yet leave it unchanged (or not, if you e.g. want to use an effect) and route it back to the output/speakers.

That is not true. Examples of stand-alone programs that can host VSTs but are not DAWs are Blue Cat’s PatchWork, Audio Modeling’s Camelot and Cantabile. I’m sure there are others. (I sometimes use Blue Cat’s Axiom that way, since I have it for processing virtual guitars and it includes similar functions to PatchWork.)

I'm answering my own question here

Wonderful! I will try to do that, even though I suppose it won't work for me given that I use different hardware. Thanks for describing the process for the mere mortals who have no intention whatsoever to become professional sound engineers.

Okay, in that one sentence I forgot to add a "for mere piano players who are not sound engineers" or something like that. But you nitpicking about it, and in the way you did, demonstrates just the attitude that appalled yeq30 too: one is either a professional sound engineer (or at least a wanna-be one) or it's worth nothing. I don't care if what the whole music recording industry does, I want to simply adjust the equalization to make my speaker/room combo sound marginally better with Pianoteq. I have no ambition to record a 16-track tune to be released on Apple Music to become millionaire.

Also, your comparion to Pianoteq itself is completely wrong: Pianoteq most of the times just works out of the box. It did the very first time I opened it, recognizing my keyboard and my audio interface. Out of several years of trying with many different hardware that I had at the time (a few Windows, one Mac and several Linux), only once or twice did not work out of the box -- and even then a litteraly 2 minute consultation to the manual and a literally 10 second clicking in Option->Devices for selecting the correct MIDI input and Audio Output fixed the problem.

By comparison, I used the "fantastic" Reaper. It took me 3 hours (in 3 separate sessions of 1 hour each) to get ANY sound out of it. And after that, it took me several hours to do probably 1% of my intended audio chain Pianoteq -> Reverb -> Multi-band equalizer -> Speakers. After many wasted hours I gave up. This was a few years back, on Linux and with the Trial version, so maybe things are different now, but I seriously doubt it. They did not get my money. I do not doubt that Reaper and other DAW are good for real (or wannabe) sound engineers, but they have been a total waste of time for me. I'm even willing to accept that I am an idiot (but I am a software engineer, so not a *complete* idiot), yet how come that most software is written to be successfully used also by idiots (and their vendors make money making the software easy to use), whereas DAWs are not?