REAPER

1. Overview

Digital audio workstation that works without a cloud account and stores projects in a text-based format.

Category: Media & Creative.

2. Version and scope assessed

Version assessed: Pinned evidence c0eafe87863b2bf69c5c822760f1b32a753b211b.

4. Principle profile

5. Fundamental requirements

6. Evidence and verification

• E1: REAPER project files are text-based, with documented project backups and media-copy options. (source), confidence high
• E2: Projects can consolidate media and render stems and standard audio files, supporting handoff and migration. (source), confidence high
• E3: The official extension SDK defines line-oriented ProjectStateContext AddLine/GetLine interfaces and an explicit project-import interface that generates RPP-compatible state. This establishes an exposed textual project-state interface, not a complete public specification or independent decoding of plugin chunks. (source), confidence medium
• E4: Recording and editing can be performed locally without a hosted account. (source), confidence medium
• E5: The SDK separates save/load, undo/redo and cut/copy context flags. Its project-config extension contract says plugins may choose whether to save undo state and ties it to the relevant undo-state flag. Undo coverage for arbitrary extensions therefore cannot be assumed from the existence of REAPER's general undo command. (source), confidence medium
• sovereignty: A positive Sovereignty finding requires established E1, E2 and E4 in the declared scope. The existing access/exit/custody record for REAPER does not establish all three minimums. The prior positive finding is withdrawn; recorded storage and portability strengths remain facts, not a verified failure. (source), confidence medium
• longevity: E3 is not established for REAPER's existing essential-record scope. The previous Longevity finding is replaced by Not assessed, not a verified failure or a positive placeholder. (source), confidence medium
• locality: The essential DAW workflow is local. (source), confidence medium
• transparency: The positive control observations above do not yet establish whole-scope E5. The methodology requires that minimum before a positive Transparency and Control finding; the previous positive finding is therefore withdrawn to Not assessed, not changed to Does not meet. (source), confidence medium
• E3: The SDK exposes textual project-state/import interfaces but does not fully specify proprietary-core or arbitrary plugin chunks. Complete RPP/media/plugin/automation reconstruction and compatible offline continuation have not been independently demonstrated. (source), confidence medium
• E5: SDK save/load and undo context flags explicitly allow extensions to choose saved undo state. Those contracts are not full evidence of effective script/plugin authority, destructive media operations, consolidation/output overwrite and correction in the assessed core/configuration. (source), confidence medium
• E2: The former E2 Pass does not establish a replacement editable audio workflow preserving routing, automation and plugin-dependent meaning. Consolidated media and rendered stems are useful handoff routes, not the full native-session migration comparison. (source), confidence medium

7. Migration and recovery

Native storage format: Human-Readable ASCII Project Files (.RPP).

Synchronization or runtime model: Portable local install (~15MB), proprietary licence.

Example export or inspection command (not verified against any particular version or data set): grep -E 'TRACK|VOLPAN' session.RPP

8. Architectural strengths

Established strengths and their scope are recorded in the evidence and assessment findings on this page.

9. Architectural limitations

• Source/retained-input inspection only; no installation or application restore performed.
• Actual RPP/plugin-state inspection, backup/autosave defaults, clean-host consolidation, stem equivalence, version compatibility and evaluation-license behavior remain untested; the proprietary core was not inspected.

10. Assessment findings and remaining work

Verification scenario: Relocate a project with all media, samples, fonts, and plugins; open it on a clean licensed environment; render stems.

What may invalidate an overconfident claim: A plain-text RPP file cannot preserve proprietary plugins, licences, sample libraries, or media by itself.

Documentation starting point: https://www.reaper.fm/userguide.php

Evidence update: 23 October 2026

• Resolved: The official extension SDK defines line-oriented ProjectStateContext AddLine/GetLine interfaces and an explicit project-import interface that generates RPP-compatible state. This establishes an exposed textual project-state interface, not a complete public specification or independent decoding of plugin chunks. Source.
• Resolved: The SDK separates save/load, undo/redo and cut/copy context flags. Its project-config extension contract says plugins may choose whether to save undo state and ties it to the relevant undo-state flag. Undo coverage for arbitrary extensions therefore cannot be assumed from the existence of REAPER’s general undo command. Source.
• Open: Actual RPP/plugin-state inspection, backup/autosave defaults, clean-host consolidation, stem equivalence, version compatibility and evaluation-license behavior remain untested; the proprietary core was not inspected. E5 needs core/configuration-specific plugin/script and media/save/export control, with explicit extension undo and backup limits.

Assessment follow-up: These bounded findings are incorporated into the evidence above. Eligibility and principle ratings are deliberately unchanged; their reconciliation and any blank-status fixes are deferred to the next pass. Reproduction details and retained inputs are in evidence/third-pass/batch-11/.

Human-readable criteria: Can a creator archive source material and editable state, reopen the project after version changes, and export important work in interoperable formats?

Rating reconciliation: 24 October 2026

E3 and E5 remain Not Verified for the existing declared scope. Longevity and Transparency and Control are Not assessed pending their required minimums. Sovereignty is also Not assessed because the required access/exit/custody minimums are not all established. The prior E2 Pass is withdrawn; its essential-record migration comparison remains incomplete. This is a targeted evidence decision, not a finding that the product fails. Existing E1, E4 and Locality findings were not re-certified.

Remaining: Actual RPP/plugin-state inspection, backup/autosave defaults, clean-host consolidation, stem equivalence, version compatibility and evaluation-license behavior remain untested; the proprietary core was not inspected. E5 needs core/configuration-specific plugin/script and media/save/export control, with explicit extension undo and backup limits.

Next without installing locally: Inspect a synthetic RPP/media/extension-state packet and dependency manifest with expected routing/automation/stems; obtain robust same-version independent save/undo/consolidation observations since the proprietary core is not available for source inspection.

The individual decision and provenance are retained in evidence/rating-reconciliation/batch-11/. Overall: Insufficient evidence.

Individually reconciled in rating batch 11 on 24 October 2026. E3/E5 remain Not Verified for explicit missing coverage; dependent unsupported findings corrected. Previously resolved questions are retained, not counted again. E1/E4/Locality were not re-certified by this targeted review. The assessment procedure is described in the methodology.