monitor inputs without recording

[xackley]

When you hit that, not only are you arming a track, you are also saying " Hey, ASIO stream, Im calling you up. With all the attendant issues, problems and considerations that entails"

and clicking on the Input Monitor button cannot do that, why? How is this a subtle thing. It's the obvious thing that needs changed. That's what the thread is about.

4: cubase and every other DAW software, because it makes sense.

5: No argument has been presented as to why it should not be fixed except it used to work like that, when it was too expensive to wire old hardware mixing boards to Input Monitor without the workaround of pressing the Record Arm button to make the old mixer work correctly.

6: post 33 laid out a workable solution that would make the Input Monitor function in reaper make sense, and allow anyone who can figure out a reason to require the Rec Arm to be actived to enforce the Rec Arm+Input Monitor rule to do so.

7: When it is fixed, it will then be possible to Disarm All Track when audio recording is finished, without accidently disabling Input Monitoring functionality on VSTi tracks.

CTRl+ click on the Rec Arm button will be usable
The keybinding to disable recording on all tracks will be usable.

Alt+click on the Rec Arm too.

[Tedwood]

I'm with Pipe on this one, It's not easy to think of a solution if you don't have clear idea of what the problem is.

It doesn't help much when people talk about the record disable being hidden when it's not for one thing, or refer to the "record arm" button as the record button - the only record button is on the transport.

When record is disabled the bottom most button indicates it, if it's not clear enough maybe try a different theme. Monitor has it's own status button too, so try looking at these buttons when you look at the record arm button. Note I said "record arm button and not record button these three buttons indicate how your channel is set up, If you want one button to indicate all of these things it's going to need a lot more status conditions for you to remember - and then most of us will end up having to right click menu to see what they all mean, that's more complicated isn't it?

[Lawrence]

Originally Posted by pipelineaudio

Im trying to make sure I understand the objections:

1: It takes more than one click to get input on with record disabled

2: Some people think it looks weird

3: Record light is the same color whether its really recording or not

4: because cubase does it different

hehe

I finally realize that the point is just not getting across... so (edit snip edit) ...

Carry on.

Not that important.

[xackley]

Tedwood, no one said, as far as I can remember, that the Input Monitor Button should not be there. I think the argument is that it should actually do what the button says, turn on input monitoring, without the cobble of also having to activate the Rec Arm button.

[pipelineaudio]

Originally Posted by Lawrence

In those old days you didn't put your recorder into record just to hear something through the mixer, you "monitored" the mixer channel. Sometimes I only use the daw mixer and not the recorder.

Only if you had an el cheapo mixer and a recorder without auto-input. When you had pro gear, if you wanted to hear the input, you armed the track.

Now I am trying like hell to avoid being guilty of the Argument From Antiquity, that's why I'm trying to figure out a workable solution

Your idea to *at the very least* make the record arm button a different color when it is in record disable, but armed is an excellent one for instance. IMHO

[Tedwood]

If all that is being said is that input monitoring button should turn input monitoring on regardless of anything else I agree.
That should be the problem solved I would think

Edit: Just to clarify, at the moment if you left click monitor input the input select menu pops up - change that to left click monitor enable/disable

When you want to select inputs right click and select from menu.

Forget about what the record arm button looks like - it's just indicating that record is armed - I don't think that is too difficult for people to get used to

I only really joined the topic because other people were talking about the record button being on when not recording and the monitor button being hidden though, which is either irrelevant or untrue.

If that's all there is to it I'm happy with that.

[Guido]

Hi,

I might be missin the point but,I find the way Reaper displays record status, Monitoring Not Recoding,what channel on the meter, very cool. Im not bein a fanboy here...
My only change would be being able to have the menu that comes up when u right click on the tracks record button stay open or "sticky" until ur done with it.
Just one "old man's"..er..veteran sequencer jock's opinion.

I know no one asked me,

Guido

[Guido]

I hate those meeces to pieces...


Hitem with the fryin pan Pixie!

OK Dixie!



oy

[Lawrence]

Originally Posted by Tedwood

If all that is being said is that input monitoring button should turn input monitoring on regardless of anything else I agree.
That should be the problem solved I would think

I only really joined the topic because other people were talking about the record button being on when not recording and the monitor button being hidden though, which is either irrelevant or untrue.

If that's all there is to it I'm happy with that.

The other stuff being disscussed was just other reasons why it *might* help other ways but yeah... the basic idea is just to optionally hear stuff when you press the monitor button. That's all.

I suppose if you use external FX now you can just create a project template with those already switched off and monitoring already set so no biggie there.

[Lawrence]

Originally Posted by pipelineaudio

Only if you had an el cheapo mixer and a recorder without auto-input. When you had pro gear, if you wanted to hear the input, you armed the track.

We're going way off topic but and we're on apples an oranges ...

We tracked through analog consoles with the recorders hooked to the either the console's busses or direct outs. In those cases the recorder doesn't even have to be powered on (or no busses even assigned) to hear live signals coming through the mixer.

That's kinda where I was going with that analogy. Using the mixer and not the recorder or any part of it. With any recording function not even being a part of the equation. The "input" you hear is the console input, not the recorder input.

That's all this FR really is ... to optionally switch on the daw mixer's input monitoring independent of the daw's recorder path.

Of course for confidence monitoring when you *were* recording to tape you'd listen to the consoles tape returns during tracking, through the recorder and yeah, you'd have to put those recorders in record ready to do that. Yup.

Point taken... but we were talking about different things.

Maybe the monitor "circuit path" in Reaper is physically placed *after* the record circuit points. If that's the case, I see why it's that way.

It seems to me most monitor paths in daws are after the fader path but *before* the recording point. I'll sketch what I mean or what I assume.

[Silicon/Silicium]

just adding a stupid second button could be enough: monitor on/off
somewhere, a menu 'monitor when record" so the two ones are on when you arm for record, and that's enough. need to record, click arm and monitor and arm are on. need to monitor, click monitor only, and track is only monitored. need to record without monitoring, click arm, unclick monitor, or uncheck "monitor when record" in the track menu. not easy enough?? one more icon, for extra intuitivness.

[xackley]

Originally Posted by Guido

Hi,

I might be missin the point but,I find the way Reaper displays record status, Monitoring Not Recoding,what channel on the meter, very cool. Im not bein a fanboy here...
My only change would be being able to have the menu that comes up when u right click on the tracks record button stay open or "sticky" until ur done with it.
Just one "old man's"..er..veteran sequencer jock's opinion.

I know no one asked me,

Guido

That's an entirely different topic of Menus vs Dialogs.
Menus should be used when the user select one item on the menu, and is done.
Dialogs are for when the user typically makes multiple changes.

So if the Input monitor was changed to display the options on LeftClick, like the IN and Meter buttons, Then a menu would be appropriate, as the user would usually be turning it on, or turning it off. Once in a while changing the option to Hear the existing takes when recording.
As it is now, the long menu you get when RightClicking any of the TCP record options, or LeftClicking the IN button should be a dialog, as the user has to keep opening the menu to set more of the hardware input options.

[Lawrence]

Here, maybe I should've done this early on as it (I hope) clearly shows the differences. They do seem (to me) to work basically this way as illustrated below.

This is not meant to be a real flowchart of any particular daw. This is only my impression of the result of how they work, most daws and Reaper, for input monitoring.

Notice how they're seperated on the left.



On the left, the record button can throw all 3 switches and close the recording and monitoring paths at once (like Reaper) or only it's own switches and leave the monitor path open (when DM?). But the monitor button also operates it's own switch to the feed independently.

The meter has it own switches pre and post in this case but share signal with the monitor in this sketch - which is not accurate as metering is actually independent - you can monitor post-fader and still meter pre-fader and vice versa. I didn't feel like sketching all that out since it's mostly irrelevant to the topic at hand.

On the right the monitor can only get a signal through the record button function which can then be disabled from the record engine. It's only after that the monitor button can open and close anything that you can actually hear.

The "Record Disable" in this drawing is the red switch that opens / closes the path to the record engine there on the right. I had trouble even figuring out how to diagram this whole thing (on the right)... and it still doesn't look quite right.

The monitor button does own it's switch but it can't go get audio by itself, only from the record button, not directly from the channel path.

It might be better to optonally give the monitor switch a path directly to the audio feed and still allow the record button control of both switches so it still behaves like it does now when you hit record.

Or not...

[zappsunzorn]

Originally Posted by kneelherring

if you use the input monitoring function regularly then a quicker way of getting there must be good.

You can create a macro to do almost everything. For example

Select track or tracks


Use Macro for..

Input monitoring only
Record monitoring on
Toggle record arm/disarm


Select track input

[pipelineaudio]

Im from the school that says "always start by listening THRU the ENTIRE chain"

If there's a problem, then go back and find it.

I do NOT want to hear input when I hit the monitor button, I only want that to happen when the track is armed AND the monitor mode is such that I'll hear it.

So we are at an impasse. If we do it the way it is now, then for you guys it takes two clicks.

If we change it to the way you guys suggest, then it takes *me* two clicks

So what do we do?

I hope you guys understand theres nothing "dumb" about how reaper does it as has been suggested, it just so happens that this is a traditional way of working that has served us well.

It is true that we SHOULDNT be shackled to an ancient paradigm if a better one can be found, let's find that better one, but lets not toss the baby out with the bathwater

[Lawrence]

"Dumb"? Who said "dumb"? I heard illogical a couple of times but not that.

Anyway... the end of the digital audio input chain is the bottom of that blue line there in the sketch. ?? That's it... the entire chain. It doesn't do anything else after that but play and/or record.

I'm very confused now.

With that confusion in mind... I'm changing my vote. +1 for keeping it like it is. I'm convinced that it's probably not a very good idea after all.

That was easy. Can you -1 an FR?

-1.

[xackley]

No, you will hear exactly the same thing.

The only difference is how the switch is set up before the fx bin.

As it now the switch goes

Sound -> Record Arm button ON -> Input Monitor button ON -> FxBin -> Monitors
Sound -> Record Arm button ON -> FxBin -> Tape

Recommended and as drawn by Lawrence

Sound -> Input Monitor button ON -> FxBin -> Monitors
Sound -> Record Arm button ON -> FxBin -> Tape


So pipeline is saying he wants to hear what happens when the Record Arm button is in the chain.

As is, it's like having every light in the house having 2 switches wired in series that need to be turned on to get a glow.

Edited: to add the to Tape, and of course the FXBin can be bypass for the To Tape diagrams.

[Lawrence]

Who are you guys picking in the NBA finals game 5?

Pipe? X? Anyone? I got the Lakers.

[gofer]

Just a thought: wouldn´t everybody be happy if the record button would toggle between three modes:
off / record(any source you selected) / record disabled(monitoring only)?

So people would just need to double click if they want only input monitoring? The record button should of course be able to show this third mode anyway as was proposed earlier in this thread.

I am new to Reaper and don´t know if that would have unwanted consequences, but to me it seems a good idea at first glance.

Frank

[technogremlin]

Originally Posted by gofer

So people would just need to double click if they want only input monitoring? The record button should of course be able to show this third mode anyway as was proposed earlier in this thread.

Although this seems like a simple solution, it still doesn't take care of the fact that there is a button for 'monitoring' but we have to click the button for 'record arm' to actually hear something.

For me it's simple: the 'monitor button' should handle 'monitoring'
and the 'record arm button' should handle 'record arming'. Both with whatever steps/clicks needed.

When I put a VSTi on a track I have to switch 'record arm' AND switch 'input monitoring' (AND set the input midi-channel, but that's another discussion). Currently I handle the default midi-channel with a track-template and I have a macro that toggles the buttons together, but that's a lot of workarounds just to get sound from a VSTi.

[gofer]

You´re right with that, but I assume technical/strategical reasons behind this that I don´t see clearly yet.
It seems Reaper has to be in record arm (disabled or not) mode to be able to manage the track with lowest latency anyway. (Logic 5 behaves similar in that you have to select a track for it to be heard in "real time" without additional buffers.) So both are in some conjunction.

So i guess I think in the direction of combining the two buttons like if you switch monitoring on the record mode would (optionally of course) switch to "record disabled-monitoring only". And vice versa via the third record button mode I suggested.

Frank

[drew]

3-way toggles generally don't feel intuitive IMO - I'm with technogremlin.

[gofer]

well, i´d rather click two times on one button than one time each on two of them... As I tried to say in my last post i don´t really understand the need for a "record armed but disabled" (slightly contradicts for me) mode, but if Reaper needs it, so may be.

But then the record button needs to indicate the record disabled mode, for as it is now you can have the button showing "ready to rock" but if you start recording you´ll get no signal on the track. That´s what I´d call unintuitive.
So, when the button lits say yellow for that third mode, I should also be able to toggle it from there to go red for recording.

Anyway, I just wanted to throw that idea in to keep the topic rolling because i find the existing solution not very satisfying (though workable).If there are better solutions to this, they might come up sooner or later, but only if people keep thinking about it.

Frank

[xackley]

Why isn't clicking on the Input Monitor button enables Input Monitoring a workable solution. What better solution are you waiting to hear?

[gofer]

Thinking about it, I don´t really know... you´re quite right, if Reaper needs to be in "record arm but disabled" mode for monitoring, it could just switch into it behind the scenes and leave the record button out of that game. That way it would look like it behaves like any other DAW.


Frank

[Dstruct]

+1 for independent monitor button

[gofer]

Thing is, Reaper has got no input monitor button, but a record monitor button. It seems to be a question of signal chain and buffer logic. I´d love to have someone with insight chime in on that matter to exactly explain what happens under the hood, but I assume they did it like they did for some reason.

So the buttons obviously cannot be independent, but they perhaps could behave as if they were.

Frank

[willowhaus]

Honestly, I think I sympathize with the problem. It does seem kind of convoluted to have to put a channel in record & then tell it to not actually record, just to be able to monitor. If you're messing about with VSTi's a lot, then it does seem to be a PITA.

Can the Monitor button be programmed to toggle between Input Monitoring when the channel is not in record, and then switch to Record Monitoring when the channel is armed? You wouldn't have to change the look of the GUI at all this way - switch everything behind the scenes, you know instantly if you are monitoring or recording.

[xackley]

There is also the problem that as Input Monitoring does not turn on Input Monitoring, I have left it enabled. Then a few days later decide to really record on the track. But at sometime in between I have changed the routing in the mixer. Press the Rec Arm and instant feedback loop. This could be considered user error, but it would be obvious that the mixer needs to be checked for loops before Input Monitoring is enabled. It is not obvious (or at least a second) unintuitive thing to check), before pressing Rec Arm.

[Tedwood]

Absolutely no need for three way toggling

Xackley is dead right, here is the problem and the solution in a nutshell.

At the moment if you left click the monitor button a menu pops open, if you right click it - the same thing happens.....erm .... why?

All that needs changing is for left click to enable/disable monitoring.

[willowhaus]

Originally Posted by xackley

There is also the problem that as Input Monitoring does not turn on Input Monitoring, I have left it enabled. Then a few days later decide to really record on the track. But at sometime in between I have changed the routing in the mixer. Press the Rec Arm and instant feedback loop. This could be considered user error, but it would be obvious that the mixer needs to be checked for loops before Input Monitoring is enabled. It is not obvious (or at least a second) unintuitive thing to check), before pressing Rec Arm.

You changed something in the router? That does sound like user error to me, honestly. Such is the price of having full I/O access.

It would be nice if Justin could write in a "do what I meant to do instead" button, though...

[willowhaus]

Originally Posted by Tedwood

Absolutely no need for three way toggling

Xackley is dead right, here is the problem and the solution in a nutshell.

At the moment if you left click the monitor button a menu pops open, if you right click it - the same thing happens.....erm .... why?

All that needs changing is for left click to enable/disable monitoring.

I assume you're referring to the button marked "in"? That's not the monitor button, that's the Recording Mode button.

It is rather redundant, however, that left- & right-clicking it brings up the same menu...which also comes up from right-clicking the monitor button, the Record Arm button, and the meters.

[xackley]

Originally Posted by willowhaus

You changed something in the router? That does sound like user error to me, honestly. Such is the price of having full I/O access.

It would be nice if Justin could write in a "do what I meant to do instead" button, though...

You completely missed the point.

[xackley]

Originally Posted by willowhaus

I assume you're referring to the button marked "in"? That's not the monitor button, that's the Recording Mode button.

It is rather redundant, however, that left- & right-clicking it brings up the same menu...which also comes up from right-clicking the monitor button, the Record Arm button, and the meters.

No it is the button directly left of the "in" button

[Glennbo]

Originally Posted by xackley

Ditto
The Record Arm Button should only be activated when it is time to Record. It makes no sense that it should be turned on, just to listen, that is the job of the Input Monitor button.

I use Input Monitor for Audio rarely, I use the zero latency monitoring on my Audio Interface.
But Input Monitor is an absolute requirement for recording (or just playing) VSTi.

Besides the clumsiness of having to Rec Arm a VSTi track just to hear it, there is also a loss of funtionality. The keybinding to "Unarm all track for recording" becomes useless, because it will also turn off the Rec Arm on the tracks with "Record Arm: Disable (input monitoring only" selected.

I guess I'm in the minority, but I *LIKE* having to arm a track to hear through it. I *DO* use input monitoring exclusively for audio and can't hear anything audio wise until a track is armed. I like being able to have a midi track armed, while some other track has focus, and I still hear my midi instrument. In Sonar, you didn't have to have a midi track armed, but the track had to have focus or you weren't playing through to it. I like Reaper's method much better, and I like the consistancy of both audio and midi needing to have a track armed before I hear anything.

[xackley]

Sonar Input Monitoring has 2 modes. The auto-select track, this Input Monitor Light will be blue and will play the track input only when it is the selected track. There is also a Global settting to turn the auto Input Monitoring off.

BUT! then Click on the Input Monitoring button in Sonar and it will turn White, then the track does not need focus to play.

[gofer]

Originally Posted by Glennbo

In Sonar, you didn't have to have a midi track armed, but the track had to have focus or you weren't playing through to it.

You don´t need to have focus on the track in Sonar, just enable the Input Monitoring button for each track you want to play your midi on. You confuse that with Logic (where you could work around that in the environment).

Frank

Xackley beat me and was more precise...

[Glennbo]

Originally Posted by xackley

Sonar Input Monitoring has 2 modes. The auto-select track, this Input Monitor Light will be blue and will play the track input only when it is the selected track. There is also a Global settting to turn the auto Input Monitoring off.

BUT! then Click on the Input Monitoring button in Sonar and it will turn White, then the track does not need focus to play.

I quit upgrading Sonar at V5, and I'm pretty sure you have to have focus on the track.

[xackley]

Still, even though this conversation is not about an auto-monitor the track in focus, it is a nifty feature. It allows you to play an organ on track 1, click on track 5 and the keyboard is automatically redirected to drums (or whatever VSTi.

But in reaper you will have the same functionality as you do now for VSTi. Except you would just click the Input Monitoring button to hear, and not have to also click the Rec Arm Button until you were really ready to record. When Input Monitor is engage, you will still hear V-drums, no matter what track(s) have focus.

[willowhaus]

Originally Posted by xackley

No it is the button directly left of the "in" button

That button does not give a menu when you left-click on it. It toggles thru the Record Monitoring modes.