v6.70+dev1116 - November 16 2022

[vitalker]

v6.70+dev1116 - November 16 2022

• * Includes feature branch: razor edits on master track envelopes
• * Includes feature branch: selected media item appearance changes
• * Includes feature branch: track grouping manager dialog
• * Includes feature branch: CLAP plugin support
• * Includes feature branch: track media/razor edit grouping
• * Includes feature branch: improve experimental silent-track CPU reduction option to include FX tail length
• * Includes feature branch: media item fixed lanes
• * Includes feature branch: internal pin management overhaul for future extension
• + JSFX: support log-scaled sliders for controls, specify :log or :log=offset after step size
• + Localization: support localizing layout category names [p=2599980]
• + Localization: support localizing wiring diagram labels [p=2599980]
• + Localization: support longer action names in action dialog/custom actions editor
• + Media items: arrange overlapping items by the order the items were added to the track [p=2613674]
• + Metadata: fix possible mislabeling of generic metadata in source properties dialog and media explorer
• + Render: support rendering BW64 files
• + WAV: support importing BW64 files (ADM metadata is ignored)
• # ReaScript: change get_action_context() runcontext to contextstr
• # ReaScript: mark FX dirty when using TrackFX_GetNamedConfigParm param.X etc [t=272617]
• # ReaScript: update get_action_context lua docs

This thread is for pre-release features discussion. Use the Feature Requests forum for other requests.

Changelog - Pre-Releases

Generated by X-Raym's REAPER ChangeLog to BBCode

[cool]

Originally Posted by vitalker

v6.70+dev1116 - November 16 2022

• + JSFX: support log-scaled sliders for controls, specify :log or :log=offset after step size

Very good cool! This is a very useful feature.

[vitalker]

Originally Posted by cool

Very good! This is a very useful feature.

No, you should say "cool".

[vitalker]

Originally Posted by vitalker

[*]# ReaScript: mark FX dirty when using TrackFX_GetNamedConfigParm param.X etc [t=272617]

Shouldn't it be for TrackFX_SetNamedConfigParm?

[cool]

Originally Posted by vitalker

No, you should say "cool".

Fixed

[tohubohu]

Originally Posted by vitalker

v6.70+dev1116 - November 16 2022[*]+ JSFX: support log-scaled sliders for controls, specify :log or :log=offset after step size

does this mean that it would now be possible, for example, to design a JS volume on a logarithmic scale?

[mawi]

+ JSFX: support log-scaled sliders for controls, specify :log or :log=offset after step size

Haha, works great! It would be very nice if the scaling is also applied to envelope automations and parameter modulations. Thanks!

[tohubohu]

Originally Posted by vitalker

v6.70+dev1116 - November 16 2022[*]+ Localization: support localizing layout category names [p=2599980]
[*]+ Localization: support localizing wiring diagram labels [p=2599980]

I can't check until the next version...

Originally Posted by vitalker

v6.70+dev1116 - November 16 2022[*]+ Localization: support longer action names in action dialog/custom actions editor

that works. thank you

[Phazma]

Originally Posted by vitalker

[*]+ JSFX: support log-scaled sliders for controls, specify :log or :log=offset after step size

Amazing, thanks!

Originally Posted by mawi

It would be very nice if the scaling is also applied to envelope automations and parameter modulations.

Agree, that's actually a very important point!

[mawi]

Agree, that's actually a very important point!

That's right! I have still forgotten the FX parameters in the TCP and MCP. There the scaling should be taken over also.

[Tale]

• + JSFX: support log-scaled sliders for controls, specify :log or :log=offset after step size

Nice, but while playing with this I noticed that this way we only shift the midway point to the right, but not to the left (unless I'm missing something). Now, I couldn't quickly reverse-engineer the exact formula used here, but if you use f(x) = (exp(a*x) - 1) / (exp(a) - 1), then you can have both concave up and down curves.

Here is a little JSFX plug that demonstrates what I mean:

desc:Log scale slider test

slider1:x=0.5<0,1,0.0001>x
slider2:y1=0.5<0,1,0.0001:log>y1
slider3:y2=0.5<0,1,0.0001>y2
slider4:a=0.7<-10,10,0.0001>a

@slider

y1 = x;
y2 = a != 0 ? log((exp(a) - 1)*x + 1) / a : x;

Just move the x slider, and the y1 slider will move with :log, but y2 will move according to the value of a, where a < 0 will shift the midway point to the left, and a > 0 will shift it to the right. A value of a = 0.7 gives you more or less the same curve as :log.

[Justin]

Originally Posted by Tale

Nice, but while playing with this I noticed that this way we only shift the midway point to the right, but not to the left (unless I'm missing something). Now, I couldn't quickly reverse-engineer the exact formula used here, but if you use f(x) = (exp(a*x) - 1) / (exp(a) - 1), then you can have both concave up and down curves.

What's a use case for the other shape?

The advantage of plain log()/exp() is that when we expose these as parameters for automation, they can exist in a non-normalized range, so e.g. if you increase the range of a JSFX parameter, those values will remain mapped to the correct values. Though perhaps we can do the same for these.

[Tale]

Originally Posted by Justin

What's a use case for the other shape?

Mostly volume sliders, e.g. if the slider goes from e.g. -60 to 0 dB, then you might want more resolution near 0 instead of -60.

Originally Posted by Justin

The advantage of plain log()/exp() is that when we expose these as parameters for automation, they can exist in a non-normalized range, so e.g. if you increase the range of a JSFX parameter, those values will remain mapped to the correct values. Though perhaps we can do the same for these.

I was assuming you would convert to normalized first, then apply the curve, and then go back to non-normalized. But yeah, then extending the range could be problematic.

[Justin]

Perhaps we should add a volume-fader scaling mode too then (since that wouldn't be a log curve anyway).

Or a fader that is 0..1, and a separate dB readout

Hmm given it is EEL, we could allow the user to specify some code to convert to/from fader/envelope scaling...

[Phazma]

Originally Posted by Justin

Perhaps we should add a volume-fader scaling mode too then (since that wouldn't be a log curve anyway).

Or a fader that is 0..1, and a separate dB readout

If we could have volume faders in jsfx that behave like volume faders in the mixer (in terms of scaling/resolution and range, ideally going down to -inf/silence) that would be super awesome! Probably a ton of jsfx would get updates.

Originally Posted by Justin

Hmm given it is EEL, we could allow the user to specify some code to convert to/from fader/envelope scaling...

Wouldn’t it be simpler to just automatically switch the envelope to respond the same way as the fader (whether that’s linear, logarithmic, volume mode or whatever..)? I can’t think of cases where a mismatch between fader and envelope response would be desirable.

[tohubohu]

Originally Posted by Phazma

If we could have volume faders in jsfx that behave like volume faders in the mixer (in terms of scaling/resolution and range, ideally going down to -inf/silence) that would be super awesome! Probably a ton of jsfx would get updates.
.

+1

[mawi]

If we could have volume faders in jsfx that behave like volume faders in the mixer (in terms of scaling/resolution and range, ideally going down to -inf/silence) that would be super awesome! Probably a ton of jsfx would get updates.

+1

Wouldn’t it be simpler to just automatically switch the envelope to respond the same way as the fader (whether that’s linear, logarithmic, volume mode or whatever..)? I can’t think of cases where a mismatch between fader and envelope response would be desirable.

+1 I also think that the envelope should have the same scaling as the jsfx slider (linear, logarithmic, exponential, volume etc.). Maybe you could still define a zoom range in the envelope panel to get even more resolution in a certain scaling range.

Edit:
Also the normal included Reaper plugins (ReaComp, ReaEQ etc.) have partly non-linear sliders (attack, release, frequency etc.), which are linearly controlled in track controls, track envelopes, parameter modulations. This would also need to be adjusted.

[Justin]

hmm simple pow() scaling might be good enough for volume faders, and a lot of other controls. Going to add :log and :sqr (optionally :sqr=4 for 4th power) as separate modes, I think

[IXix]

Originally Posted by vitalker

+ JSFX: support log-scaled sliders for controls, specify :log or :log=offset after step size

Cool! I assume changing existing sliders to use this won't break any saved projects?

[mabian]

Originally Posted by mawi

Haha, works great! It would be very nice if the scaling is also applied to envelope automations and parameter modulations. Thanks!

Check this out

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=251684

- Mario

[Justin]

Originally Posted by IXix

Cool! I assume changing existing sliders to use this won't break any saved projects?

If you are modifying an existing effect, you should use :log! which will keep it linearly-exported for envelopes/etc. for new FX (or new parameters) you can use :log without the ! which will use log scaling for envelopes.

[mawi]

Originally Posted by mabian

Check this out

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=251684

- Mario

Great idea, I will check this out! Thanks!

[wol]

Originally Posted by vitalker

v6.70+dev1116 - November 16 2022

• # ReaScript: change get_action_context() runcontext to contextstr
• # ReaScript: update get_action_context lua docs

Really we can get the shortcut that triggered the action now?

[IXix]

Originally Posted by Justin

If you are modifying an existing effect, you should use :log! which will keep it linearly-exported for envelopes/etc. for new FX (or new parameters) you can use :log without the ! which will use log scaling for envelopes.

Thanks Justin, good to know.