Pro Tools v REAPER Sound Test
Saturday, July 31, 2010 at 12:37PM | Email Article There's a lot of talk about DAWs sounding better than each other. Is this really true? If it is, can you tell the difference?
For a bit of fun we've created this easy test to for you to try, it takes a couple of minutes to find out.
For one we mixed on Pro Tools M Powered and the other REAPER. No ADC was used on the Pro Tools system. The Pro Tools mixes were done in real time and the REAPER mixes as off-line bounces.
This quiz is a simple test to see if you can identify audio created in Pro Tools v audio created in REAPER. Many people claim one sounds better than the other, can you tell? Listen to the audio clips, there are 2 short audio demos for each question and then simply identify which is which. All audio files have been mixed as WAVs using the same mix settings in decibels, the same effects and plug-ins with identical settings.
The point of the test is not to see who wins or loses, but to simply see if you or indeed anyone can tell the difference. In a couple of weeks we'll let you know the results.
Reader Comments (26)
I'll have to try again later. It appears that the application may not like Safari 5.
I had the same issues with Safari 5. Also, isn't this supposed to be a test of whether we hear a difference between the two? This is set up as "can you tell which is PT and which is Reaper?", not "is there a difference?".
Fine here on Safari 5.
The point of it is can you or anyone tell the difference, bearing in mind how many claims there are that there is one.
I got the first two right and ran out of time on the last one. Apparently I failed! ;) I can tell a difference. Going into the test I was skeptical, but you can hear it. Safari 5 works fine.
hmmmm Interesting,,,there's clearly going to have to be some re-thinking going on
100 out of 100! 100% I think Pro Tools sounds a little better, just my opinion. O yea! On The First Try Too!
I got the beats by Dr. Dre headphones. You can hear clearly everything in the mixes between Pro Tools & Reaper!
Yep, the 2nd and subsequent test audio clips do not appear in Safari 5.0. Works OK in FireFox :0
Never having heard Reaper I am having difficulty deciding which clips sound like Reaper!
Anyhow, clearly, one is noticeably brighter that the other, save one test ;)
I took a guess on which DAW might sound brighter and got only 33%. Guessing the "control" case was the only one I got correct, so I retook the test, switching what I guessed to be the "bright" DAW and got 100% second time round :)
Anyhow, maybe subsequent tests should be "which do you prefer?"
Regards,
Stephen
Troy - if I told you all of them were REAPER, what would you say?
I Don't Know? So You Are Saying That All Of Them Are REAPER! I Can't Believe That! LOL!
You never know! ;)
i only got one of three right but the one i got right was a full mix one and to me, reaper sounded better. a little "clearer" and slightly more highs. anyone else agree?
btw, never used reaper before so this was probably a silly test for me to take. but i am close to being a convert...
I think this test is flawed.. Pro tools does not have an identifiable sound except for its exclusive RTAS plugs!
The better question would what recording do you prefer?
Of course the test is flawed. As much as the silly assertion by some that Pro Tools sounds better. If that assertion is true then the average person should be able to tell. As it stands less than 5% have got this test right.
Even more telling us the fact that the REAPER versions are offline bounces at 44.1 and the Pro Tools realtime at 48.0.
A test of which people prefer is irrelevant as that is about taste.
Btw. RTAS is simply a wrapper and does not change the audio properties of a plug-in either way.
Anyway a bit of fun and keeps conversation going.
Okay, no need to be defensive
For starters...
I know what RTAS is and I didn't say there would be any difference between that and VST, A plug in is a plug in, I meant Exclusive, like AIR plug ins/massey and until recently McDSP that you cannot get on another DAW program, that would be an identifiable sound not waves on Reaper or Pro Tools, I expect them to sound to the same or any differences to be subtle.
On taste, people's attraction to a DAW program is largely down to taste, either workflow or what they perceive to give them the better sound or because something is a standard that is why I say the test is flawed and the same goes for anyone that says a program is better than another.
I have been using Reaper for over 2 years now but because of the plug ins I use (Massey) so that already gives Pro tools an "identifiable" sound to me,comparable to the other tools on hand at the time.
When using Logic in the past I have come up with different results than I have in PT not because they sound different but because they are exclusive to the host program plug ins or soft synths are different and have affected my creative judgement accordingly, just like playing a Fender or Gibson will give you a different sound and have an influence on the piece you write.
Just like you can tell an 808 kick you can also tell when someone is using a stock Logic kick or a PT strike kick drum, this is what makes the difference between two platforms, there are also so many factors involved such as the interfaces, mics, room used etc. all of these are down to the users taste and affect a recording far more than the host program and people really should be basing their opinion on features available anyway.
Did you use the same plug ins? or stock plug ins?
if not and you did a test of a mix of Reapers stock plug ins and PT's stock plug ins that would be worth comparing features and how they are relevant to the user.
If all things are equal between the test conditions someone will pick what they think they prefer anyway, it's like taking a (no pun intended) a taste test of two drinks without ever knowing they were different in the first place, how could you tell, they just come in a different tin, that is why I said the test is flawed not the idea of a test, (all standards /perceptions should be challenged) just the way it's presented, in fact I agree with the idea of a test to challenge perceptions but why just reaper? why not Cubase or Logic also?
They are platforms that people would change to as well and to be honest if I could jump ship from Pro Tools I probably would after the money I've invested in PT and still cannot get it to work on my MBP for real time (ish) monitoring recording which renders it useless for mobile recording but the fact remains these other DAWs do not have the features I require for editing and they don't have AIR or Massey.
Anyway I respect the work you have done for the community but take some debate / opinion that isn't cooing about the test on the chin, I hope I expressed my points clearly enough as I'm not blindly defending PT's (as you may have taken my comment) or looking for an online ruck ;-D.
Not defensive at all, my point wasn't meant to take anything away from your comment, more to point out that the whole debate is silly in the first place. If I wanted people to simply agree I wouldn't have started a debate.
Every mix was plug-in matched and every setting matched to the decibel.
What a waste of time and energy this test!
You are better off spending your time being creative and making music than to try and make a point with a silly test as to whether or not one DAW sounds better than the other.
Of course it is impossible to say if one sounds better than the other. Every sane engineer will tell you that. There are just too many variables and it's too subjective. I totally agree with Gonk.
If you want to keep the conversation going than discuss clear opinions, features of daws, or audio engineering, mixing and mastering. Not something that is downright impossible.
Stick to the videos which you do so well.
I couldn't agree more, you'll be pleased to know no videos were sacrificed in the creation of this fun test.
If someone wants to use PT, or Logic or REAPER that's fine. Most of that choice is down to taste, industry standards, in some cases just the look.
The point was to say 'hey make your choice, but please let's stop the silliness about one sounding better than the other. A decent engineer can make GarageBand sound great and a bad one can make anything sound bad.
The test was born from me reading the book 'Perfecting Sound Forever' which had a chapter about how the industry decided on audio compression codec standards.
Amazingly some world class engineers were saying that they thought MP3 and WMV files sounded better than full resolution audio files.
As I say this isn't a 'now we know you can't tell the difference so ditch your DAW' becuase our choices extend beyond simply something as subjective as the sound.
If it's not broke don't fix it, if you work well with your DAW an can do what you need to do without pulling out your hair, then why go on about this test, in the end if what you've done sounds good to you isn't that what matters, how well you work and how good it sounds. ( I'm A PT user by the way )
I think this was a fun little test. Got the first two right, and the last one wrong. That tells me that I basically don't have a clue. I can't tell which is which. Only thing I didn't like with this test is that one mix had a rack tom panned left, and the other didn't.
Like Russ said in the description - "For a bit of fun...".
Great test - want more !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The test was fun.
I got 67%...and I know nothin, apart from what Russ and the gang have demonstrated on vids. Who cares if they're all 'Reaper' . With what I've spent on Protools and stuff, I'd like to 'Reaper ' some of it back myself, so I guess I'll stick with P.T.... and all the whoo-ha.
I love how worked up everyone is getting. It kills them to think than essentially a free program sounds as good if not better than there DAW. The only question that mattered is that you got number 2 right!!!!! Because you can hear a clear difference on Question 1. I got number 1 wrong but saw after that my ears liked REAPER.... Wow
Great Test!!!!!
Ed
I must have missed something.
Do AIR plug-ins run in Reaper?
No they don't but the mixes were all done with identical plug-ins that work both in the RTAS and the VST/AU environment.
Thanks, I already knew they didn't . . . I guess my point was . . . oh, never mind.