Old 07-17-2014, 12:35 PM   #41
GMDuss
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 84
Default

Possibly silly question. 4.71 installed fine on my studio computer but here on the laptop I'm getting a "Windows cannot access the specified drive, path or file. You may not have the appropriate permissions to access the items" message. Tried running as an admin, but no dice. This is Windows 7 Professional. First time I've encountered this. Any ideas?
GMDuss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 08:42 AM   #42
SamuelC
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 232
Default

Try the demo for Studio One and use the Automation tracks and then come back and see what you can do with them!!!

It's not a request this is MANDATORY AUTOMATION features, we are not in 1990 and we are moving past 2014 already.


Automation tracks are not the silly automation lanes as those are ancient now.

Automation tracks should be MANDATORY as this way you control what ever you wish from within that track and it's treated separately from the main track.


Everything loaded in the Daw from FX to Inputs, Ouputs, Midi items WHATEVER you want can be automated there.



This is not yet possible with Reaper and for the Reaper Dev's to completely ignore this is really silly.

Hardware monitoring is a no brainer, this is from the VST 2.4 specs clearly written there.

I use Asio Direct Hardware monitoring in Studio One all the time with no issues, every audio track has a "Z" button so I can go to Z mode and back and forth with no issues.

Also when is every Reaper track going to get a MONO/Stereo button? Checking Levels, Mono issues is important vs Stereo
I use that feature in Studio One all the time too a simple button on every track.


Again not features that will break Reaper, but will enhance Reaper.
SamuelC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 08:51 AM   #43
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

I would respectfully suggest that nothing is mandatory and saying that will only cause unnecessary drama.

They're really nice, agree, but not mandatory.

Reaper does a lot of nice things that S1 doesn't do so that kind of over-emphasized argument only results in a daw war.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 08:54 AM   #44
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 22,754
Default

SamuelC:

I bet you are really young, aren't you? Like - about 35?






















P.S. I am old and stupid and cannot figure out for the life of me what your post had to do with the original post.

And FWIW I bought Studio One Pro and it sits on my hard drive doing nothing . Just could not get on with the workflow at all. At least in Reaper and to a lesser extent Sonar you CAN change things easily to suit your way of working.

Never thought I would say that about a Cakewalk product again! X3 is sort of growing on me....
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 09:22 AM   #45
Sound asleep
Human being with feelings
 
Sound asleep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 9,048
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelC View Post
Try the demo for Studio One and use the Automation tracks and then come back and see what you can do with them!!!

It's not a request this is MANDATORY AUTOMATION features, we are not in 1990 and we are moving past 2014 already.


Automation tracks are not the silly automation lanes as those are ancient now.

Automation tracks should be MANDATORY as this way you control what ever you wish from within that track and it's treated separately from the main track.


Everything loaded in the Daw from FX to Inputs, Ouputs, Midi items WHATEVER you want can be automated there.



This is not yet possible with Reaper and for the Reaper Dev's to completely ignore this is really silly.

Hardware monitoring is a no brainer, this is from the VST 2.4 specs clearly written there.

I use Asio Direct Hardware monitoring in Studio One all the time with no issues, every audio track has a "Z" button so I can go to Z mode and back and forth with no issues.

Also when is every Reaper track going to get a MONO/Stereo button? Checking Levels, Mono issues is important vs Stereo
I use that feature in Studio One all the time too a simple button on every track.


Again not features that will break Reaper, but will enhance Reaper.
I still don't understand what it is you could do with these features that would be impossible with reaper. I understand what you're talking about, but I think most of those things, from a sound perspective could be done with reaper, albeit a little more involved process in doing so.

You don't have many posts here. The thing I think you don't get about reaper is how versatile it is. It is not alway convenient and easy, and it is not always specifically designed with certain feautres, but it is so customizable, that you can simulate a wide variety of things. If you post on the forum with something you want to do, chances are, someone will tell you how.

There might not be automation tracks, but I think in most cases there would be a way to simulate what automation tracks do, just in a different way.
__________________
Slava Ukraini
Sound asleep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 10:01 AM   #46
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

This always happens. Somebody says X, somebody says "Reaper can do it.", somebody else says... "No, it cannot." Then the other person comes back and keeps implying that it can, or can be simulated.

It cannot.

It's not a big deal by any stretch. It only kinda becomes a big deal when you oddly keep implying something that's very clearly not true. It's one thing to say you don't understand what the thing really does, it's quite another to immediately follow that by implying, even while you already said that you don't understand what it does, that Reaper can do it anyway, and that you're pretty sure of.

No, it cannot. I'm not just lying about that. Let it go.

P.S. I suppose this is why Planentnine called me "the devil's advocate", because i have this (I suppose somewhat annoying) habit of correcting things that I know for certain are completely false rather than letting them slide. I know he didn't mean that as an insult, i got the joke.

Last edited by Lawrence; 07-19-2014 at 10:29 AM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 10:39 AM   #47
Sound asleep
Human being with feelings
 
Sound asleep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 9,048
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
This always happens. Somebody says X, somebody says "Reaper can do it.", somebody else says... "No, it cannot." Then the other person comes back and keeps implying that it can, or can be simulated.

It cannot.

It's not a big deal by any stretch. It only kinda becomes a big deal when you oddly keep implying something that's very clearly not true. It's one thing to say you don't understand what the thing really does, it's quite another to immediately follow that by implying, even while you already said that you don't understand what it does, that Reaper can do it anyway, and that you're pretty sure of.

No, it cannot. I'm not just lying about that. Let it go.

P.S. I suppose this is why Planentnine called me "the devil's advocate", because i have this (I suppose somewhat annoying) habit of correcting things that I know for certain are completely false rather than letting them slide. I know he didn't mean that as an insult, i got the joke.
Well, it can be settled pretty easily by just explaining what exactly this can do that is impossible for reaper. That's all I want to know. I looked at a quick video to see what it was, and I can't find it.

Someone mentioned automation tracks. I don't know what they can do that reaper could not do. That's what I want to know.

This guy is talking about how it is so fundamental, and I can't even see what it is that it would let you do that cannot be done with reaper.

Maybe it can do stuff reaper cannot do. That's what I want to know, I want to know what this is.

Saying reaper should have some option with some name, because it is basic and reaper can't do it, is an empty statement. Tell me what it actually is that reaper can't do, and how this feature would let it do that.

Then, you've said something. I'm not just gonna take you're word for it. I'm also not gonna say you're wrong. I am trying to find out what this can do that reaper cannot. I don't see why you wouldn't just tell me instead of dancing around the subject.
__________________
Slava Ukraini
Sound asleep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 10:47 AM   #48
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

Or you could just search the forum, do your own work, and read some of the other discussions about it instead of having a debate whenever anyone suggests Reaper can't do something.

http://forum.cockos.com/showpost.php...5&postcount=49

Now if you can tell me how you can "simulate" that when Reaper's automation lanes literally don't even move at all, let alone moving completely away from their parent track and collecting multiple envelopes from completely unrelated tracks and plugins in one track lane for grouped editing collectively, I'm all ears.

But you're "sure" about that right? Because, in your mind, Reaper can do anything, just need a script. And if anyone ever suggests otherwise you... must... prove... them ... wrong.

Like i said way back, it can not. Let it go.

Last edited by Lawrence; 07-19-2014 at 11:50 AM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 11:13 AM   #49
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,924
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
P.S. I suppose this is why Planentnine called me "the devil's advocate", because i have this (I suppose somewhat annoying) habit of correcting things that I know for certain are completely false rather than letting them slide. I know he didn't mean that as an insult, i got the joke.

Damn, I'm just not trying hard enough


>
__________________
Nathan, Lincoln, UK. | Item Marker Tool. (happily retired) | Source Time Position Tool. | CD Track Marker Tool. | Timer Recording Tool. | dB marks on MCP faders FR.
planetnine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 11:58 AM   #50
Jeffsounds
Human being with feelings
 
Jeffsounds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Northeast Michigan
Posts: 3,460
Default

I don't usually get involved in these kinds of threads... other than to jump in and say that I don't usually get involved in these kinds of threads...
__________________
"TV has become nothing more than a Petri dish where this country grows its idiots." -Dr. John Becker
My First CD On Spotify - Side O' The Highway
Jeffsounds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 12:01 PM   #51
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

It should have ended 20 posts ago but i guess he thinks i'm a liar who makes up stuff to make Reaper look bad or something, no clue really. Airon and i talked about all this some long months ago IIRC, in the FR board somewhere. It was all quite pleasant.

This, otoh, was all quite unnecessary.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 12:22 PM   #52
Sound asleep
Human being with feelings
 
Sound asleep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 9,048
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
Or you could just search the forum, do your own work, and read some of the other discussions about it instead of having a debate whenever anyone suggests Reaper can't do something.

http://forum.cockos.com/showpost.php...5&postcount=49

Now if you can tell me how you can "simulate" that when Reaper's automation lanes literally don't even move at all, let alone moving completely away from their parent track and collecting multiple envelopes from completely unrelated tracks and plugins in one track lane for grouped editing collectively, I'm all ears.

But you're "sure" about that right? Because, in your mind, Reaper can do anything, just need a script. And if anyone ever suggests otherwise you... must... prove... them ... wrong.

Like i said way back, it can not. Let it go.
I'm going to look at this. But I never said I was sure about anything. I would have to know exactly what automation tracks do, in order to be certain, wouldn't I?

Obviously, I know reaper can't do anything. I just know from experience, that it often can do a lot more than one would expect, if you dig a little.

EDIT: ok, so what you're saying is, track lanes are much better because you prefer to organize some automation all together in one track, rather than attached to the track it is editing, which you prefer, in part because that allows you to edit multiple automations at once.

It is important to be clear, exactly what you find useful about certain features, because for example, it might be relatively easy to to something like pooled midi items, where editing one envelope edits all other linked ones. Or perhaps other more powerful ways of achieving that same sort of thing.

If that's all it is, then, copy pasting envelopes actually accomplishes exactly what you want. Now, is that good workflow? No. Is it sensible to really want and prefer some better way to handle editing multiple envelopes at once? Absolutely. But it is not something reaper cannot do. It is a specific way reaper can't do something. Which is different.

Or if it is something different that track lanes lets you do, then I'm curious what it is.

I am not defending reaper or anything like that. And I am not in any conflict with you. All I am trying to do, is understand exactly the details about this feature, and what power it gives the user exactly.

Linked envelopes is one, and that's cool. It would indeed be a powerful feature. Being able to organize automation lanes into one place, I could see how it could be convenient for some people as well.

I'm not trying to tell you reaper can do this, whatever it is. I'm trying to find out what it is, and how exactly it is something reaper can't do. And yes, in my experience reaper can often accomplish what on the surface it appears it cannot do. When I come across something people wish reaper can do, and it cannot, that is interesting to me, because it means people are manipulating music in some way that I do not. That's why I care. I don't give a shit what anyone thinks about reaper.

If you look back, my original post was simple. It asked that question. You chose not to answer it, in order not to derail the thread, which really didn't work out. You could have just said. "it does xyz, which are important to me, amongst other little things I prefer." Or something like that. Then I could have seen that right away, instead of dragging it out into this big thing.

Obviously reaper can't do everything. Shit, reaper can't even limit the number of backups it makes, and fills your hard drive with saves.

I don't understand exactly why you got all defensive. It was a simple question, and a suspicion, that whatever it is, reaper could do. Obviously the workflow would be different, but the end product I think could be achieved. And even if that is correct, that doesn't mean it would not be a good feature to want.

The way midi works now, is fucking amazing. The way it was before was less awesome. But technically, I could make any music I can now, with how midi was before. It's just the workflow is way better.
__________________
Slava Ukraini

Last edited by Sound asleep; 07-19-2014 at 12:38 PM.
Sound asleep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 12:42 PM   #53
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

No biggie. If you look back on page one you said...

Quote:
"I think whatever it is, Reaper does it."
... and I said...

Quote:
"You would be wrong about that [in this case] but talking about it here would only throw the thread off topic."
We could have left it there or just opened a new thread to discuss it if you wanted to but for some odd reason you refused to just take my word (as a long time owner and user and fan of both products) for that. Not sure why exactly.

It seems like you just must defend Reaper at all costs, unnecessarily so, even when it's not being attacked. The fact that it can't do some things seems to really bother you and you appear to go to really unusual lengths to dispute or dismiss or minimize anything like that, demand that people prove it to you or explain it to you so you can somehow figure out a workaround to salvage it. You didn't even bother to (for yourself) go learn how the thing being discussed actually works before engaging others about it at length.

There is no workaround. "It can not", as i said on page one. I don't need to wait for you to exhaust yourself trying to find one to know that's true.

Then you said we were dancing around your later questions because you (I suppose) couldn't be bothered to just go search the forum for those answers. I told you a true thing. I had no personal interest in explaining it to you in detail here, off topic, when i've had those discussions here with others already that you can just go read for yourself.

Anyway, it's all over now so, "spilled milk" and all that proverbial stuff. No sense in us going on and on about it anymore. Maybe it's all my fault for using the W word. Being "wrong on the net" is the catalyst for 20+ page threads everywhere. Next time i'll say "incorrect" instead.

Thanks. No hard feeling on my end.

Last edited by Lawrence; 07-19-2014 at 01:39 PM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 03:42 AM   #54
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 22,754
Default

ZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz............... ..........................
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 07:54 AM   #55
chilledpanda
Human being with feelings
 
chilledpanda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 28
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
No biggie. If you look back on page one you said...



... and I said...


We could have left it there or just opened a new thread to discuss it if you wanted to but for some odd reason you refused to just take my word (as a long time owner and user and fan of both products) for that. Not sure why exactly.

It seems like you just must defend Reaper at all costs, unnecessarily so, even when it's not being attacked. The fact that it can't do some things seems to really bother you and you appear to go to really unusual lengths to dispute or dismiss or minimize anything like that, demand that people prove it to you or explain it to you so you can somehow figure out a workaround to salvage it. You didn't even bother to (for yourself) go learn how the thing being discussed actually works before engaging others about it at length.

There is no workaround. "It can not", as i said on page one. I don't need to wait for you to exhaust yourself trying to find one to know that's true.

Then you said we were dancing around your later questions because you (I suppose) couldn't be bothered to just go search the forum for those answers. I told you a true thing. I had no personal interest in explaining it to you in detail here, off topic, when i've had those discussions here with others already that you can just go read for yourself.

Anyway, it's all over now so, "spilled milk" and all that proverbial stuff. No sense in us going on and on about it anymore. Maybe it's all my fault for using the W word. Being "wrong on the net" is the catalyst for 20+ page threads everywhere. Next time i'll say "incorrect" instead.

Thanks. No hard feeling on my end.
Lawrence is mostly right, it can't be done, I say mostly as though you could probably do a fair bit of it, but not without someone doing a hell of a lot of work or as easily as the Devs could, only way you could do this is to write DLL extension with the c/c++ SDK to render the tracks, media item, automation and editing functionality into another window. Which probably would be counter intuitive to workflow (think of it like the midi editor window) and not sure anyone would have that time or dedication to do that.

In a nutshell it's the automation envelopes been visually layered on top of each other on a track below the main track. You can select the envelope you wish to edit, possibly multiple envelopes at the same time, not a studio one owner and didn't watch all this video, but from 2:38 is automation tracks for those who don't understand the concept https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZHNPKXIKAQ from 2:38.

The advantages would be nice as it's to akin to like either having layers in photoshop or having the layers in separate windows etc.
__________________
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://soundcloud.com/chilled-panda
chilledpanda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 08:37 AM   #56
SamuelC
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 232
Default

As I left on the last part of my post:

These features will not break Reaper, they will enhance it.

I use both Reaper and Studio One together

Reaper runs the FX processing over a LAN cable and remote stuff+ background tracks

Studio One runs the main Project during live usages.

All working quite well together.

Studio One on a laptop and Reaper on a PC desktop running in the back.
SamuelC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 09:12 AM   #57
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chilledpanda View Post
The advantages would be nice as it's to akin to like either having layers in photoshop or having the layers in separate windows etc.
The main advantage, and every workstation has a few of those kinds of things that are maybe unique to them, is really the sheer flexibility of it.

The track class is dedicated to automation so any automation can exist anywhere, alongside any other automation. If you want an automation track with all of your volume envelopes from every track in the song on one track, you can do that. If you want to folder up all of your automation from all of your reverbs and delays, you can do that. It's really nothing more - the track class - than a folder track for automation, any automation.

If you're scoring to video or something and you've collected a "scene" of automation moves from 15-20 different tracks and plugins to one automation track, you can copy / duplicate it on the one track lane and paste it somewhere else without opening up 30 automation lanes across 20 tracks... and the automation tracks can be visible and editable even when the track(s) the automation originated from isn't.

It's just really flexible. Not mandatory though, as evidenced by the legions of people doing great work without it.

P.S. The reason I avoided getting into all that here is because any FR to duplicate that is pretty clearly a non-starter in Reaper. It's pretty clear to anyone paying attention that the Reaper devs will likely not be doing any dedicated track classes and most users seem to hate the idea of dedicated track classes, so asking for that same exact thing in Reaper, an automation track class, seems rather pointless to me.

Last edited by Lawrence; 07-20-2014 at 10:16 AM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 10:16 AM   #58
chilledpanda
Human being with feelings
 
chilledpanda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 28
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
It's just really flexible. Not mandatory though, as evidenced by the legions of people doing great work without it.
Not mandatory by a long stretch, just has the flexibility to improve automation workflow under certain circumstances (certainly be useful for something I'm doing atm lol). But while Reaper has great flexibility/customisable wise which is one of it's strong points, it's also one of it weakness in the fact the start up out of the box workflow experience is not intuitive for the new user and possibly why Reaper users are generally users for life, because it takes time and investment to realise you can bend most of it to how you want your workflow.
__________________
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://soundcloud.com/chilled-panda
chilledpanda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 10:26 AM   #59
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

Yeah.

They all do some nice things the others don't necessarily do but this particular thing is based specifically around something Reaper has never done and probably won't ever do, a purpose built individual and separate track class. I could see Cubase ripping that idea directly, not so much Reaper.

I can certainly see Reaper getting similar functionality via another route with the universal track, but not via that particular route. They don't do track classes so any FR related to that would have to be framed around the universal track, and automation lanes and envelopes would have to be movable in the arrange space before any of that could happen.

So it seemed a little pointless, for now.

Quote:
...and possibly why Reaper users are generally users for life.
That's quite a comment given that Reaper has only been in existence for 8 years.

Last edited by Lawrence; 07-21-2014 at 06:38 AM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2014, 10:31 AM   #60
zacki
Human being with feelings
 
zacki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Germany
Posts: 239
Default

Hello,

can someone please check this behavior?

Thanks
zacki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2014, 01:33 PM   #61
SEA
Human being with feelings
 
SEA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: By The Sea
Posts: 2,238
Default

Having major issues with loading multiple plugs in Reaper. Loading 64bit plugs in Reaper 64 and it acts like my CPU is overloading (crunch, crackles, fuzz, etc.,) but my CPU is running at 5% and memory at 3%.

Using Windows 7 64. Dual Xeons, 12 cores, 32 gigs of ram
__________________
JamieSEA

http://www.facebook.com/jamieseamusic
SEA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2014, 09:59 AM   #62
chilledpanda
Human being with feelings
 
chilledpanda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 28
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
Yeah.

They all do some nice things the others don't necessarily do but this particular thing is based specifically around something Reaper has never done and probably won't ever do, a purpose built individual and separate track class. I could see Cubase ripping that idea directly, not so much Reaper.

I can certainly see Reaper getting similar functionality via another route with the universal track, but not via that particular route. They don't do track classes so any FR related to that would have to be framed around the universal track, and automation lanes and envelopes would have to be movable in the arrange space before any of that could happen.

So it seemed a little pointless, for now.



That's quite a comment given that Reaper has only been in existence for 8 years.
LOL Just meant that they tend to stick with Reaper.
__________________
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://soundcloud.com/chilled-panda
chilledpanda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2014, 02:03 PM   #63
plush2
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Saskatoon, Canada
Posts: 2,110
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chilledpanda View Post
LOL Just meant that they tend to stick with Reaper.
I don't suppose you recall the iKey/AutoHotKey scripting lengths some would go to with PT. My point is any power user will want to customize and optimize things eventually. Reaper, to some extent forces everyone to be a power user. I suppose that is exactly your point. Can a software be internally flexible like Reaper and internally predictable like PT at the same time?
plush2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2014, 05:48 AM   #64
chilledpanda
Human being with feelings
 
chilledpanda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 28
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by plush2 View Post
I don't suppose you recall the iKey/AutoHotKey scripting lengths some would go to with PT. My point is any power user will want to customize and optimize things eventually. Reaper, to some extent forces everyone to be a power user. I suppose that is exactly your point. Can a software be internally flexible like Reaper and internally predictable like PT at the same time?
Yes, that was exactly my point, imo Reaper ui/workflow isn't intuitive to new user out of the box as some other daws, most things drop into place after a lot of use and trying to figure out, this community forum is great for that, which is probably why it's 90 days trail period, tbh if it wasn't for that and Kenny Gioia's superbly helpful videos I might have not persisted.
It's not so much about been internally predictable, Reaper is still internally predictable, probably just not as restricted in it's approach, but it is more of what you present externally to the user, not everyone may want to delve in so deep from the get go. So yes in a sense you can wrap the "internal flexibility" with presentable predictability until the user is Ready to use the flexibility. Because that is simply a workflow configuration/setup presented to the user.
I think it boils down to what range of audience you want to cater for and the fact to support something more presentable would take time away from other developments, when most will eventually configure Reaper to their own way of working. ATM I would prefer them to spend time on Midi improvements .
__________________
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://soundcloud.com/chilled-panda
chilledpanda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2014, 06:12 AM   #65
Sound asleep
Human being with feelings
 
Sound asleep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 9,048
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chilledpanda View Post
Lawrence is mostly right, it can't be done, I say mostly as though you could probably do a fair bit of it, but not without someone doing a hell of a lot of work or as easily as the Devs could, only way you could do this is to write DLL extension with the c/c++ SDK to render the tracks, media item, automation and editing functionality into another window. Which probably would be counter intuitive to workflow (think of it like the midi editor window) and not sure anyone would have that time or dedication to do that.

In a nutshell it's the automation envelopes been visually layered on top of each other on a track below the main track. You can select the envelope you wish to edit, possibly multiple envelopes at the same time, not a studio one owner and didn't watch all this video, but from 2:38 is automation tracks for those who don't understand the concept https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZHNPKXIKAQ from 2:38.

The advantages would be nice as it's to akin to like either having layers in photoshop or having the layers in separate windows etc.
Right, it is not exactly something reaper can't do, from a musical standpoint. It is just a really convenient way to work for editing envelopes. Which I'll agree does seem very good and very powerful, and while it is not a crucial necessary feature, it is a very strong one, and although it's not something I would use terribly a lot for the style of music I make, I could see how it could be very useful for others, and it is something I would definitely use from time to time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
The main advantage, and every workstation has a few of those kinds of things that are maybe unique to them, is really the sheer flexibility of it.

The track class is dedicated to automation so any automation can exist anywhere, alongside any other automation. If you want an automation track with all of your volume envelopes from every track in the song on one track, you can do that. If you want to folder up all of your automation from all of your reverbs and delays, you can do that. It's really nothing more - the track class - than a folder track for automation, any automation.

If you're scoring to video or something and you've collected a "scene" of automation moves from 15-20 different tracks and plugins to one automation track, you can copy / duplicate it on the one track lane and paste it somewhere else without opening up 30 automation lanes across 20 tracks... and the automation tracks can be visible and editable even when the track(s) the automation originated from isn't.

It's just really flexible. Not mandatory though, as evidenced by the legions of people doing great work without it.

P.S. The reason I avoided getting into all that here is because any FR to duplicate that is pretty clearly a non-starter in Reaper. It's pretty clear to anyone paying attention that the Reaper devs will likely not be doing any dedicated track classes and most users seem to hate the idea of dedicated track classes, so asking for that same exact thing in Reaper, an automation track class, seems rather pointless to me.
That's why it is important, to distinguish what it is you like about the feature. What you want, in this feature, is a certain workflow, or experience. It doesn't necessarily have to implemented exactly like how studio one does it.

One example of how you could get it to work, is a envelope editor, similar to piano roll. Where you can see all envelopes on the right, in the same way that piano roll works with multiple midi items. Essentially this is the behaviour that is sought after here, if I understand. The same sort of layered power for editing envelopes as we have for editing midi.

Also linking envelopes like pooled items.

Or, integrating envelopes into items. I personally think that would be amazing. Then you could edit those in the piano roll as well, and integrate it into the midi editor.

That might become a bit of an issue if you want your envelopes to exceed the limits of your items though. Which sometimes could be solved just by stretching your items, but other times, you might have to glue items that you might not want to have to glue.

Reaper is often about "cutting corners" I don't like to use that word because it gives it implicit negative connotations, but reaper has a simple way of doing things.

Identifying exactly what you want out of a feature is important, so that you can figure out the easiest way reaper can give you what you want, which may not be exactly the way some other software does it.
__________________
Slava Ukraini
Sound asleep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2014, 02:39 PM   #66
egoadsr
Human being with feelings
 
egoadsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: In Space
Posts: 240
Default

To be or not to be... Does everything is relative to something...
egoadsr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2014, 01:02 PM   #67
AntonZ
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 24
Default

I tried to download the Win 64b version. Antivirus software refused, message was something to do with a suspected trojan. Most likely a false positive, but thought I should mention it in case anyone else sees this issue. My system: OS Win 7 64b, Firefox browser, Avast antivirus.
AntonZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2014, 01:39 PM   #68
lowellben
Human being with feelings
 
lowellben's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: They put me in a home.
Posts: 3,432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonZ View Post
I tried to download the Win 64b version. Antivirus software refused, message was something to do with a suspected trojan. Most likely a false positive, but thought I should mention it in case anyone else sees this issue. My system: OS Win 7 64b, Firefox browser, Avast antivirus.
Um, I have the same setup as you and there was absolutely nothing wrong with Reaper's installer. FYI. Sorry. False positive for sure. I guess I got lucky!
__________________
47.8% of statistics are made up.
lowellben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2014, 12:45 PM   #69
AntonZ
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 24
Default

Thanks for that. I downloaded again today and it worked just fine. Scanning the downloaded installer also showed "no threat". Looks like a false positive indeed.
AntonZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2015, 03:20 AM   #70
floyer
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 11
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
It is new -- if your device works with the non-polled exclusive mode, it should be preferable, but some devices we've tested with do not reliably work in that mode.
You said the non-polled is preferable, but with the "non-polled", I have the latency published as 3.2/7.1ms (on the right top of the Reaper Windows), and with the polled mode, I have 3.0/3.5ms.

Then the polled mode seems to give less latency which is preferable.
floyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.