How to create a new file every x seconds while recording?

[Hella Hepp]

Hey Guys!

I want to record several tracks and need a way to create a new file every x seconds. I am aware that reaper offers the filesize-based option "Start new files every x megabytes". But what I need is a time/duration-based version of it, e. g. "Start new files every x seconds". Does anyone have a clue how to achieve that?

Thanks in advance!
Hella

[Fex]

Are you recording multiple takes over the same song (or part thereof)?

I would think you could set the time selection to the desired length (x seconds), set Reaper to repeat and then....

Well, this might help....

https://forums.cockos.com/showpost.p...26&postcount=4

Oh, and welcome to the madhouse.

[Hella Hepp]

Hi Fex from the madhouse,

thanks for your ultra-fast reply (and for your welcome, too)! :-D

I record longer sequences. The suggested method of looped recording looks smart too me, but wouldn't fit to the subsequent workflow.

[poulhoi]

Hi Hella. I think I have a way to accomplish what you want. Basically you can use marker actions to run actions automatically at certain points in the timeline. You would then have to copy the marker action a few times depending on how often the new file should be created.
You want the following actions to run
-Start new files during recording, id 40666
-Add recorded media to project, id 40670

So if you have SWS extensions installed, you can just place a marker named "!40666 40670" and at that point a new file will be created.

[SonicAxiom]

action markers are not very accurate with regard to the timing of the action they trigger. If this is an issue for you, another option would be to first create a desired number of empty items (= dummy items), then set the recording mode to auto-punch into selected items, make sure all those items ARE selected and then hit record. You will get a bunch of new takes which are of the exact length of the respective pre-created items (actually, the underlaying recorded media file has the length of the entire recording from where you hit record to where you hit stop). If you prefer to have all takes as separate items/media files you could use "Breeder_spk77_GlueTools.lua".

.

[serr]

Originally Posted by Hella Hepp

Hey Guys!

I want to record several tracks and need a way to create a new file every x seconds. I am aware that reaper offers the filesize-based option "Start new files every x megabytes". But what I need is a time/duration-based version of it, e. g. "Start new files every x seconds". Does anyone have a clue how to achieve that?

Thanks in advance!
Hella

The simple math answer:

[x seconds] x [sample rate used] = [total samples]

[total samples] x 3 = [total bytes]

[total bytes] / 1000000 = target size in megabytes

[SonicAxiom]

Originally Posted by serr

[total bytes] / 1000000 = target size in megabytes

shouldn't it be:

total bytes / 1024^2 = target size in MB ?

.

[serr]

Originally Posted by SonicAxiom

shouldn't it be:

total bytes / 1024^2 = target size in MB ?

.

Um... I always get confused between using decimal and binary...
It's one of those...

[SonicAxiom]

Originally Posted by serr

Um... I always get confused between using decimal and binary...
It's one of those...

me too

either way, my Reaper refuses to accept very small MB values (like 1 MB or 2 MB) or values incl. decimals like 0.137 MB to start new files. Also, the option states "approximately" so one cannot count on file size or file length accuracy.

.

[Hella Hepp]

Thanks for your suggestions, guys!

I gave them a try and have to admit, that I like the idea of converting time into bytes most, due to its non-collision with my further workflow.

Unfortunately Reaper doesn't offer file sizes below 1 MB.

Maybe I should make a feature request?

[serr]

Originally Posted by SonicAxiom

me too

either way, my Reaper refuses to accept very small MB values (like 1 MB or 2 MB) or values incl. decimals like 0.137 MB to start new files. Also, the option states "approximately" so one cannot count on file size or file length accuracy.

.

I was throwing the suggestion out there to see if it would stick.
Sounds like the small values are out of scope for this though. (And I am aware of the "approximately" part. Kind of debunks my suggestion right off the bat too! Oh well.)