Why is the Reaper's input monitoring behavior different?

[spinear]

I'm so sorry about my poor English but I'm really curious about this.

All other DAW input monitoring works like this.

Monitoring OFF = always no audio signal armed or not but you can record.
Monitoring ON = always audio signal armed or not
Monitoring AUTO = only audio signal if being recorded

but in Reaper,
if I want to monitor input signal, I have to arm the track regardless of 'monitor settings'

Actually, there is no point of having 'Record:disable' option because if you didn't armed it it won't record it.

So, It is almost feels like a bug but is there purpose of this?

Thank you!

[ivansc]

On the other hand, if you can monitor it WITHOUT record enabled, you can also very easily forget to actually arm the track when you want to start recording.
No really good solution to this.
I use three different DAWs and I honestly cant remember exactly how monitoring input works in them all, but you may well be right.
Dont see a satisfactory way of resolving this, as an option to change the process seems like it would confuse more people than it helped.
Or are you saying you want it changed without the option?

[spinear]

Originally Posted by ivansc

On the other hand, if you can monitor it WITHOUT record enabled, you can also very easily forget to actually arm the track when you want to start recording.

I was wrong about Monitoring AUTO.
Auto should be like this 'audio signal when armed'.

originally, this is what its made for.

anyway, in my case, A unnecessarily arm the tracks for just monitoring is more weird.
I have to check the monitoring every time If I re-arming or change something.

And this is very hard to explain to other person.
'Why should I do this?' They said. It is obvious.

I can't tell it's a bug or feature and i don't care which way the changes go or not.

I am using Live, Cubase, Protools, Studio one... all have the same behavior but the Reaper and nobody care?
So there must be something. I want to know.

This is so hard to explain something in my mind. What a short language skill I have.

I'm really sorry if I seem offensive to you.

Thank you!

[+NRG]

Originally Posted by ivansc

On the other hand, if you can monitor it WITHOUT record enabled, you can also very easily forget to actually arm the track when you want to start recording.

That's the way I look at it... I use track templates for the most part and have the monitoring enabled when I save the template.

If it was changed we'd probably have people complaining about REAPER not recording takes! B)

If other options were added that would be OK as far as I'm concerned!

I've used Cubase and was a long time Cakewalk user (last version Sonar X3)... I moved to REAPER and learned how REAPER worked. I didn't try to change REAPER into another DAW... But, I can see how it could be confusing if you're using more than one DAW. B)

[ivansc]

(grin) I have the same problem trying to explain sophisticated things in other languages. I dont think you have offended anyone, certainly not me.
IF your native language is one of the "preferred " ones in this forum under "non-english forums", you might want to see if anyone who actually speaks your language can make things easier for you to explain.


You said: "Auto should be like this 'audio signal when armed'.

originally, this is what its made for."

And that IS how it is in Reaper.
If no new input signal present, "auto" plays what is already recorded on the track.
With or without the track being armed.
Which means that all you have to focus on with every track set to "auto" is whether or not the track is armed.
Are you looking for something different?

[spinear]

Thank you for your consideration.
English was the only 2nd language I can speak.

My friends? nobody using the Reaper.
I am the missionaries. I have to fight and win against Pro tools.(it looks like so childish, but I am enjoying it)
So there must be perfectly plausible explain.

I am not looking for specific functions because Reaper can do something what other DAW can't.
Even Reaper's AUTO was totally different than others. that's okay.

But why Reaper always have to arm the track for just a input monitoring.
Why do I have to change Record:disable every time(besides that function is hidden!)
Is that more intuitive just doing un-arm and re-arm?

This was so unique problem for me.
I was though about this so many times and reason for "you can mistake a recording" doesn't cut it.

Then something hit me. (by everyone's dedicated explains)
Reaper's monitor function means not for a input. it was for a track output.
Right? There was a direct correlation between input and output.

But other DAWs hasn't any problem for a tracking so....

I think we have reached an impasse. then more option will help many people.
What should I call this, 'monitoring setting doesn't affected by arming?'

Anyway, I have to have many DAW for a reason.
Live and Reaper is for mainly creativity(so good) and others just for compatibility.

Thank you everybody.
keep me informed if any!

[Dstruct]

Would be a nice thing for REAPER 6.0. Separate buttons for record and monitor arming.

http://forum.cockos.com/project.php?issueid=1276

[spinear]

Wow.. That's the solution.

so. this mean, there is no unique purpose for now?
I mean, Is it safe to say 'it will be improved someday'

[Dstruct]

No. Personally I also pretty much don't care about this issue anymore.

[spinear]

Thank you.

So, A perfectly plausible explanation goes to 'Deal With It'
That is so cool!

[ivansc]

There is a long-running thread covering this and similar situations.

Since what we have works, I don`t think there is likely to be a strong move to change behaviour.
And unfortunately for you, in Reaper it isn`t the majority that rule, its the devs - just like every other piece of software.
To be perfectly honest, I for one haven`t missed this when actually recording.