v5.0pre1 - December 21 2014

[Steven Jay Cohen]

Originally Posted by Gianfini

I tried Audacity. It opens up smoothly but then you have to save the WAV file and re-load it into Reaper track. No way to "...go straight back to Reaper" . Wavosaur same behavior.

I use OcenAudio: http://www.ocenaudio.com.br/en/startpage

I have it set as an Editor in Reaper. I right-click to open the file there. I make my edits. I hit save. I close OcenAudio.

Voila! The edited file is in the Reaper track -- no fuss, no muss!

And, OcenAudio runs on Windows, Mac, and Linux.

[planetnine]

Editors can be used to patch-up glitches (eg clicks) easier than REAPER, but saying that I also very rarely have the need for one.

I suppose if your workflow requires a lot of that type of process, or your NDE chops aren't that hot, then the separate editor method might get a bit wearing after a while...



>

[Win Conway]

An audio editor is great if you do a lot of sampling, the destructive workflow can be a godsend

[foxAsteria]

Originally Posted by planetnine

Editors can be used to patch-up glitches (eg clicks) easier than REAPER

Yes that's about the only thing I can think of, since Audition can pretty much do that with a single click. But it's a better argument for the sample drawing FR than a built in WE isn't it?

Originally Posted by gpunk_w

An audio editor is great if you do a lot of sampling, the destructive workflow can be a godsend

Record: Output is a godsend for sampling, imo.

[Win Conway]

Im more likely to use record input then edit to size and use destructive processes and looping in an audio editor for sampler use.

[Gianfini]

Originally Posted by PooFox

Maybe you miss something, maybe I just don't see the point of doing that much destructive editing on the fly. What's the purpose? Why not do it non-destructively and then commit when you're satisfied?

What's wrong with using undo in the editor? If you made a mistake, you just go back the editor, undo, save again and back to work. Undo convenience is half the point of non-destructive editing anyway.

If you need to make a copy, split or anything first, these actions are easily put into a macro for convenience. You could even assign the custom action to a double click on the item (mouse modifiers).

@buckman: You can separate time selection and loop selection and you can split the item first to "edit within a track" if i understand you correctly.

If you use the preferences to set items offline and release the audio device when reaper is not active, it's pretty straightforward and you don't have to do anything but save it in the editor and go back to Reaper.

Why not use a certain custom color to "keep track" of your edited items?

Personally I think wave editors are pretty obsolete. In 5 years with Reaper, I've had Audition set up as my external editor and haven't used it once.

But go ahead and prove me wrong. Give me one specific example of something you would need to do a lot which is "totally impossible" in Reaper + an external editor, and I'm pretty confident I can find a way...consider that a challenge.

This is the specific example I just tested. I opened a project, right-clicked on an Item, chose Open External Editor, opened in AUDACITY. Modified pitch, and something else. Closed Audacity: it asks for saving.
Here comes the problem, if I say YES it saves Audacity project format. It says "if you want to save over original WAV you should Export".
So I choose Export but I cannot overwrite existing WAV because it's in use.

So I have to rename, get back to Reaper and reinsert the renamed WAV (with modifications done in Audacity).

Is that clear enough? Not exactly a smooth workflow...

I then tried with Wavosaur, and that's better: I did 2 changes to the clip with the external editor and when I closed it they have been saved back into the original clip. But when I got back to Reaper it is impossible to UNDO the changes since the .WAV file has been overwritten, and when I open it again with the external editor no UNDO is available (because it opens as a new instance).
Yet again not exactly a perfect workflow... I'd like to undo each editing step I did in the editor even after going back to REaper

again clear enough?

This could be not a priority for you but it is for certain users

g

[foxAsteria]

Originally Posted by Gianfini

So I choose Export but I cannot overwrite existing WAV because it's in use.

Sure you're using the offline media preference I mentioned earlier in bold text?

Otherwise, a weak example, so no need to be snarky.

If you want to keep your undo for the wave edits, simply don't close the wave editor. I just installed Audacity, did what you described, had no problem overwriting the file through export, and Reaper used the updated version upon return. I will say this program does require too many steps to simply save a file. I'd use something else.

Also just tried Wavosaur, which works flawlessly. Open the file, edit, save, back to Reaper. Don't like it? back to wavosaur, undo, save, back to reaper. Took no time at all.

Again, you're doing destructive editing for what reason exactly? You only mention pitch shifting, which can be done non-destructively in Reaper with an item pitch envelope. If you insist on doing destructive edits, maybe accept that you will have to commit once in a while (that's why they're called destructive edits). If you want undo flexibility, stop doing destructive editing, or be more deliberate about. Or wait some years for the unlikely possibility of a native WE to appear. Or use some other, more bloated, more expensive DAW.

Reaper simply require more effort from the user. You want hand-holding, easy everything, you gotta pay for it.

I realize everyone's got different priorities, but a native Wave Editor merely represents a convenience, not a necessity, and imo, a waste of the devs' limited time.

You're asking a very small dev team to cater to the way you expect to work. I only ask you to look at the problem differently.

[Lokasenna]

*cough* thread is almost two years old *cough*

[EvilDragon]

TonE simply disregards those things and necros threads for exactly zero reasons out of nowhere. Annoying, yes.