Old 04-01-2018, 08:08 AM   #41
stamp
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 30
Default

Yes, please!

+1
stamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2018, 10:10 AM   #42
RJHollins
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,159
Default

Personally ... I would like to have an option to INSERT a new plugin BELOW
a currently HIGHLIGHT plugin. [rather than always at the bottom of a chain].
RJHollins is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2018, 12:26 AM   #43
ivan.lt
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 499
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luster View Post
The alphabetic numbering and fixed slots would add better possibilities to get a flexibel (so it works for everyone) shortcut system to reach the inserts.
Slots don't work for me so they wouldn't "work for everyone". Spent many years in other software with slots, never liked it. A lot has been written about slots in this forum, lots of opinions, but one thing is clear, slots can be both a benefit and a hindrance, depending on the workflow.
ivan.lt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2018, 03:06 AM   #44
Luster
Human being with feelings
 
Luster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivan.lt View Post
Slots don't work for me so they wouldn't "work for everyone".
You misunderstood me. I said added slot system. So everything is like before but you can use it. This was meant in regards to themes (MCP layouts) and especially in regards to the newly added shortcut system which is IMHO a little bit rough or not so well thought through.
Luster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2018, 09:56 AM   #45
solarfall
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 74
Default

+1!!!!!!!!!

I need this so bad. I want certain plugins to appear in a certain slot with a simple drag&drop.

Hope Santa is listening
solarfall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2018, 10:18 AM   #46
Skorobagatko
Human being with feelings
 
Skorobagatko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Ukraine, Kyiv
Posts: 545
Default

+1! Would be very nice!
Skorobagatko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2018, 09:14 AM   #47
artao
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 134
Default

+ a billion

Why this isn't already implemented baffles me. The usefulness is just obvious.
artao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2019, 02:52 AM   #48
puddi
Human being with feelings
 
puddi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 375
Default

+1

This would help a ton in many situations.
puddi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2019, 03:10 AM   #49
deeb
Human being with feelings
 
deeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,812
Default

+ 1 yes
deeb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2019, 05:31 AM   #50
cool
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Sunny Siberian Islands
Posts: 954
Default

+1!

And +1 reserved "zero" slot for the ARA instance.
cool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2019, 11:40 AM   #51
Gass n Klang
Human being with feelings
 
Gass n Klang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Cologne
Posts: 1,634
Default

+11111
Gass n Klang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2019, 02:40 PM   #52
Tone Ranger
Human being with feelings
 
Tone Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 532
Default

I love the fact that in Reaper the slots are more fluid (as opposed to in Pro Tools where you can't insert a plugin between others, you have to drag them one by one to make room). Also love the fact there is no set limit on slots. But to be able to assign a plugin a slot number in the FX chain that it will keep, or a position (such as 'always last' or 'always first') would be amazing. To be able to click between two plugins to insert one between them (rather than inserting one at the bottom of the chain and having to drag it up into place) would also be a welcome feature.

Being able to 'lock' a plugin to a certain slot number or position relative to the others....yes please!!
Tone Ranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2019, 06:59 PM   #53
deeb
Human being with feelings
 
deeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,812
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tone Ranger View Post
I love the fact that in Reaper the slots are more fluid (as opposed to in Pro Tools where you can't insert a plugin between others, you have to drag them one by one to make room). Also love the fact there is no set limit on slots. But to be able to assign a plugin a slot number in the FX chain that it will keep, or a position (such as 'always last' or 'always first') would be amazing. To be able to click between two plugins to insert one between them (rather than inserting one at the bottom of the chain and having to drag it up into place) would also be a welcome feature.

Being able to 'lock' a plugin to a certain slot number or position relative to the others....yes please!!
In some way that is why this request - "req: Pre Chain and Pos Chain":
https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?p=2053644
deeb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2019, 08:28 PM   #54
silksow
Human being with feelings
 
silksow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 37
Default

+1
Reaper has led in so many ways, there's no shame in adopting this standard.
__________________
i7-4790K - 16 GB - Manjaro Linux Xfce - RME UFX
"Recording engineers do not die. They are dragged into the earth by the sheer weight of their balls." -- Malcolm Chisholm 1929-2003
silksow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2019, 04:59 PM   #55
artao
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 134
Default

Bumping so this maintains visibility. Cuz this NEEDS to be added.
artao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2019, 02:39 PM   #56
MRMJP
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 2,063
Default

How dare you request that REAPER have features like any other DAW. You must accept the convoluted workaround that isn't really what you're asking for anyway.

REAPER is perfect and cannot be improved upon.
__________________
REAPER, just script it bro.
MRMJP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2019, 12:04 PM   #57
shaun
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 9
Default

+1 - would be great!
shaun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2019, 06:46 AM   #58
sweben53
Human being with feelings
 
sweben53's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Western Sydney, NSW, Australia
Posts: 38
Default

Another reason for slots would be one that would help me. I have mapped a whole lot of channel strip effects to controllers, that mapping only relates to those controls if it is in the slot I had it in when I mapped. Say I want to add pitch correction before the channel strip, it will throw all of my mapping off. Slots would allow me to have the channel strip on say slot 3 and allow me to keep my mappings if I want to add fx before the channel strip
sweben53 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2019, 01:54 PM   #59
TobyAM
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Hollywood, CA
Posts: 125
Default

Now that v6 allows FX GUI's in the MCP FX strip, this feature would be amazing, for instance having an analyzer at the end of every channel.
TobyAM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2019, 08:49 PM   #60
Eraz
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 225
Default

+10000
Eraz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2019, 11:46 PM   #61
foxAsteria
Human being with feelings
 
foxAsteria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Oblivion
Posts: 10,248
Default

I want this feature for sends and mcp parameters as well. Fixed and freely moveable positions regardless of receiving track or fx order.

In all cases we should be able to arrange the slots visually in the mixer however we like, with blank slots in between if desired.

This would provide visual consistency, flexibility and improve readability, resulting in faster workflow.
__________________
foxyyymusic
foxAsteria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2019, 08:38 AM   #62
deeb
Human being with feelings
 
deeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,812
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxAsteria View Post
I want this feature for sends and mcp parameters as well. Fixed and freely moveable positions regardless of receiving track or fx order.

In all cases we should be able to arrange the slots visually in the mixer however we like, with blank slots in between if desired.

This would provide visual consistency, flexibility and improve readability, resulting in faster workflow.
Love it
deeb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2019, 08:58 AM   #63
Joe90
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 853
Default

Yes please! Or at very least, a new 'post fader' section on the mixer that has bunch of slots just like the main FX section, but it can be toggled to be shown or not, and can be resized with the little handles, just like we have for FX parameters... in fact I'd prefer this personally to just fixed FX slots, but either would be nice.

As someone else said, this is needed more than ever now that we have the embeddable plugin GUI's.
Joe90 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2019, 05:10 PM   #64
rncwalker
Human being with feelings
 
rncwalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: South Fl.
Posts: 793
Default

Why can't you just setup a track with all of the FX's you want in the order you want and make a template of that. That would accomplished what everyone wants. Just turn off or delete what you don't want.

I would not want to have to scroll down 20 slots to see my "XYZ" effect while slots 1 through 19 are empty.

I personally have a track template that I can load in my project and it has all of the VST's I use with them set how I use them (In Track controls)already. I just drag them to the tracks I want them on.

To me I would see slots more as a hindrance that an asset.


Robert
rncwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2019, 05:48 PM   #65
Joe90
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 853
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rncwalker View Post
Why can't you just setup a track with all of the FX's you want in the order you want and make a template of that. That would accomplished what everyone wants. Just turn off or delete what you don't want.
Robert
Nope - it wouldn't. For one thing, you might use the same set of FX on all tracks, or the same group of FX templates for all songs, but many users don't. Other users may have one or two FX that they know they always want at the end of the chain i.e. an airwindows console plugin (that has to be processed at the end of the chain) or in my case I like a post-FX channel EQ, and I'd like to know it's always post FX. I mostly use track templates too, with my channel EQ saved in at the end of the chain, but it's irritating that every time I add a new plugin to that track I have to then move it manually because I want it before the EQ.

Not to mention the advantage of having all your EQ's/compressors embedded in the exact same spot horizontally compared to scattered around - it's a massive workflow boon to quickly see if you've missed a HPF, or where problem frequencies are clashing - for this to work with your method then ALL FX in the chain need to be decided on before we've even started. I can see some workflows where this would work fine, but mine isn't one of them, and I'm guessing the other users asking for this would agree. Obviously new plugins loaded without clicking on a specific slot would just get added next in the chain like they do now, so if you don't want a plugin stuck in slot 20 that you need to scroll down to - then don't put one there!

I CAN see how fixed FX slots could be considered a potential hindrance though, only because I wonder if changing the way the main FX slots are ordered/handled could cause issues with scripts that currently deal with the FX slot system as it is now. That's why I suggested a hideable 'post fader' section of the mixer, where plugins that we need to stay at the end of the chain will stay there. There could even be an option to switch this section between 'post-fader' and 'post-fx' (so it would still be pre-fader, just always last in the FX chain). This seems like the best of both worlds - flexible FX slots as they are now, but still with the ability to place certain plugins at the end of chain and let them stay there.

Another issue I can foresee is that I (and many others) tend to use actions/scripts to load plugins, rather than clicking in slots. If you're adding an FX without clicking, is it going to add at the END of the chain, after that plugin you're trying to keep at the end, leaving a big gap in the middle? If so, doesn't it kind of defeat the point? This is another argument for a separate post fader section, as that could have it's own actions/scripts separate from the main FX section, just like the input FX section.
Joe90 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2019, 06:47 PM   #66
rncwalker
Human being with feelings
 
rncwalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: South Fl.
Posts: 793
Default

I guess the best option would be to have this Slot ability, but make the user select it. if they want to use it or not.

I may not want it today, but later I may find I can't live without it.

Robert
rncwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2019, 12:12 AM   #67
foxAsteria
Human being with feelings
 
foxAsteria's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Oblivion
Posts: 10,248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rncwalker View Post
I guess the best option would be to have this Slot ability, but make the user select it. if they want to use it or not.
Changes in Reaper are only extremely rarely not backwards compatible. If it happens it would be an option, so as not to break old projects.

People want this because it's very inconsistent to use the same plugins across all tracks, but they don't always line up with each other. Same with the other things I mentioned.

And yea, I keep all my fx at the top of the list as a workaround, even though it would be more intuitive for me to keep them at the end of the list, but then it's hopeless trying to line them up if any other track has a unique send.

We have many actions which target the fx in a certain slot, but have no real control over which slot they go in. Same with sends but to a lesser extent. Parameter order depending on fx order and the order you add them in is total crap imo.
__________________
foxyyymusic
foxAsteria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2019, 12:55 AM   #68
Eraz
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 225
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxAsteria View Post
Changes in Reaper are only extremely rarely not backwards compatible. If it happens it would be an option, so as not to break old projects.

People want this because it's very inconsistent to use the same plugins across all tracks, but they don't always line up with each other. Same with the other things I mentioned.

And yea, I keep all my fx at the top of the list as a workaround, even though it would be more intuitive for me to keep them at the end of the list, but then it's hopeless trying to line them up if any other track has a unique send.

We have many actions which target the fx in a certain slot, but have no real control over which slot they go in. Same with sends but to a lesser extent. Parameter order depending on fx order and the order you add them in is total crap imo.
Agree 100%. This would enhance a lot of already existing actions and ofc it would bring more structure to the fxlist.
Eraz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2019, 07:33 AM   #69
deeb
Human being with feelings
 
deeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,812
Default

This could probably be solved with a pre fxchain and a pos fxchain which there is already a feature request.
deeb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2019, 11:52 AM   #70
Luster
Human being with feelings
 
Luster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rncwalker View Post
Why can't you just setup a track with all of the FX's you want in the order you want and make a template of that. That would accomplished what everyone wants.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luster View Post


Pretty much every positive aspect of the FR was aleady written. Please read.
And yeah, we want it optional too.
Luster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2020, 09:09 AM   #71
artao
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 134
Default

*bump*
Not sorry for the necro. I still want this, and I'm sure lots and lots of other people do too.
C'mon Reaper devs, please? Pretty please?!??
Its benefits far outweigh the negatives (of which I can't think of any, particularly if it's a user-choosable option)
artao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2020, 01:29 PM   #72
Phazma
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 2,872
Default

+1 - and like most things in Reaper it's best if the user can enable or disable it.
Phazma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2020, 08:25 AM   #73
BlackBlast
Human being with feelings
 
BlackBlast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Austria
Posts: 38
Default

+1 this feature would be great to utilize a workflow like shown here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nM3cjFmjOi0

Even a fixed first and last plug in slot would be sweet, enabling you to fit as many FX in between as you wish.
Perfect if paired with the option for the user to enabled/disabled the feature.
BlackBlast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2020, 11:29 PM   #74
Ann-82
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: Berlin
Posts: 166
Default

+1 A fixed slot would be a great improvement!
Ann-82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2020, 08:00 AM   #75
mrrenard
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 55
Default

+1000

Thanks to everyone who shared their tricks !
Any news about that ??

I would love to have this feature !
Let's say for example you like to mix every drum track with the same vintage compressor, but you're not quite sure yet if you want to use compressor A or B for a given track. With this we could put compressor A in say slot 5 and compressor B in slot 6 and then bypass them all at once with an action like 'bypass slot 5 FX for selected tracks'

Doing it by fx name is far from being as useful, as you may have the same tool somewhere else in the session and you don't want them to get bypassed too for a meaningful A/B check

So yeah, I know nothing about programming but it would be amazing if the great Reaper could allow me to implement this in our workflow !
mrrenard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2020, 07:26 AM   #76
Melodeath
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 79
Default

+1 for this!
Melodeath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2020, 07:46 AM   #77
valy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 1,927
Default

Gimme
valy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2021, 02:28 AM   #78
artao
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 134
Default

*bump*
SERIOUSLY!
Why do the devs refuse to implement this simple and incredibly useful idea?
artao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2021, 02:36 AM   #79
vitalker
Human being with feelings
 
vitalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 13,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by artao View Post
*bump*
SERIOUSLY!
Why do the devs refuse to implement this simple and incredibly useful idea?
Do you see any comment from them? If not, why do you say they refuse?
vitalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2021, 02:51 AM   #80
artao
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 134
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vitalker View Post
Do you see any comment from them? If not, why do you say they refuse?
Cuz they've never commented on it. This has been requested for years, yet they haven't done it.
Surely they're aware of the request.
So, since they have neither commented on the request nor implemented it, I think it's fair to say they refuse to do it.
artao 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 12:21 AM.


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