Go Back   Cockos Incorporated Forums > REAPER Forums > REAPER Feature Requests

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-21-2020, 10:36 PM   #41
mschnell
Human being with feelings
 
mschnell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Krefeld, Germany
Posts: 14,686
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magicbuss View Post
If I want to affect a stereo track or submix as dual mono I just use a plugin that has dual mono capability.
Or two "normal" plugins "in parallel" via pin routing in a "normal" (two channel) track.
-Michael
mschnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2020, 10:40 PM   #42
mschnell
Human being with feelings
 
mschnell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Krefeld, Germany
Posts: 14,686
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klangfarben View Post
I think the biggest thing the professional user who does this for a living is looking for is efficiency.
IMHO, it's much more "professional" to strive for efficiency on the long run then for learning curve efficiency on the first sight.
-Michael
mschnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2020, 11:29 PM   #43
Pink Wool
Human being with feelings
 
Pink Wool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,501
Default

Has there ever been a poll here on the forums on how many users consider themselves "pro"? I know that the forum isn't everyone using Reaper (I would think maybe 20%, if that!) but it would be nice to know.

I also want to add that many of the features that people seem to want or demand to be added to Reaper, stem from the usage of previous DAW's. So what made these people move away from that daw in the first place? Now THAT would be interesting to know!

Again, I'm including myself in this. I came from using Cubase and for the longest time tried making Reaper act like Cubase. Then I actually went back to Cubase and remembered why I moved away from it in the first place! And now I'm learning to use Reaper the Reaper way. Because that's what Reaper does best! And the scripters here do an AMAZING job helping people to use the workflow they're used to, or wanna use.

But I think it's unfair to DEMAND Reaper to be like other DAW's. Sure, many of us want new features added. But there's two people who make the decisions on what gets implemented. And they've been more than GENEROUS with their time. Perhaps that shouldn't be taken for granted?
Pink Wool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 03:39 AM   #44
Multibomber
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 560
Default

I'm not sure if I understand the multi-edit groups thing you're referring to. I just select any number of tracks, group them with Alt+G ( and then I can edit all of them no problem. I do this for drums, Bass DI + reamps, Guitars + reamps, multiple piano tracks, etc etc.

But holy crap playlists would be great! I actually think the way that PT does playlists is kinda wonky and not intuitive. Like if you have a track with 3 playlists below it, and you wanna comp them together, its a huge pain. But if you could do a type of Playlist and Lanes Inception, that would be great! Basically we need a quick way of saving a track in its original form before messing around with it, so we can go back when we screw something up or quickly compare it to something else. Duplicating a track and muting it makes the project way too messy. You end up losing your place. And we need a way visual way to see it and completely or partially drop it in or out of the active track
Multibomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 08:08 AM   #45
Klangfarben
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pink Wool View Post
But I think it's unfair to DEMAND Reaper to be like other DAW's.
No one is demanding anything. All we are saying is that there are features that are standard in the industry, and across DAWs, that are absent from Reaper. And that those omissions are glaring. I can like using Reaper (and I do) and also not like the fact that pro features that are industry standard are missing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Multibomber View Post
I just select any number of tracks, group them with Alt+G ( and then I can edit all of them no problem. I do this for drums, Bass DI + reamps, Guitars + reamps, multiple piano tracks, etc etc.
When you group tracks, it does not group the items in those tracks. You have to use SWS for that and it only works for items that are recorded at the same time. There is also no sub-grouping.
Klangfarben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 08:42 AM   #46
Multibomber
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 560
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klangfarben View Post

When you group tracks, it does not group the items in those tracks. You have to use SWS for that and it only works for items that are recorded at the same time. There is also no sub-grouping.
Ah! I must've made a SWS shortcut for it... But it still works just like you'd imagine... I select the ITEMS with the right click box, hit Alt+G and they're grouped. I do it all the time. It works great!
Multibomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 09:13 AM   #47
Klangfarben
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Multibomber View Post
Ah! I must've made a SWS shortcut for it... But it still works just like you'd imagine... I select the ITEMS with the right click box, hit Alt+G and they're grouped. I do it all the time. It works great!
But you have to explicitly group them every time. That's just not feasible in a pro environment when you have items everywhere. There is no automatic item grouping of any kind beyond the SWS function on newly recorded items. The expectation is and always has been that if the tracks are grouped, so are the items on those tracks - unless specifically excepted. To my knowledge, there is not another DAW that doesn't work that way.
Klangfarben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 09:25 AM   #48
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klangfarben View Post

All we are saying is that there are features that are standard in the industry, and across DAWs, that are absent from Reaper.
I'm going to have to disagree with that. Not that there aren't some features "missing" but that there's any kind of "standard in the industry".

It's the wild west. I can list feature after feature that is a part of Pro Tools that isn't in Logic. Or that's in Studio One, that isn't in Pro Tools. Or that's in REAPER that isn't in any of the others.

They're tools. And like any professional, you need many to include in your toolbox. My hammer is terrible for driving screws and my drill is a pretty bad straight edge.

When I shoot my videos, I need to use a screen capture program. REAPER doesn't capture the screen. So I use another program for that. Then I go back to REAPER for other things, back to another program for some things and back to REAPER again.

It would be great if REAPER could also make my coffee and my lunch.

Create a toolbox. Get stuff done.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 09:53 AM   #49
androo
Human being with feelings
 
androo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 211
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post

Create a toolbox. Get stuff done.
...and WRAP!
androo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 09:59 AM   #50
juan_r
Human being with feelings
 
juan_r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 1,075
Default

I agree with some of the OP gripes, although they mustn't be so important for me as for him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thermos View Post
- Multi edit groups.

- Playlists.

- Post Fader insert.
Multi edit groups would be convenient, agreed. I have different priorities though.

Playlists would be handy for me, because I don't like Reaper's take system, so I usually resort to multiple tracks, which isn't a breeze either. One day I'll give another go at takes - who knows? I might grow to like them eventually.

I agree post fader inserts can be really useful, for example when you have some tracks in a folder, nonlinear FX on the folder track and external FX tracks, auxes or whatchacallthem. There are tested workarounds, though. A bit inconvenient, agreed, but they do work. Nothing to ragequit on, but again it might just be me.

Some of the OP's issues, on the other hand, I can make little sense of.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thermos View Post
- Dual Mono plugins. YES, I know the workaround is to use 2 and just run 1 on the left and 1 on the right
Quote:
Originally Posted by thermos View Post
Again in PT/Logic it goes like this: select dual mono plugin, link or unlink controls. DONE. I almost never run a stereo compressor linked, and most people I know work this way as well.
If the plugin will only run linked, there's no DAW that can unlink it - not even the almighty PT or the trendy Logic. Two plugin instances are required in any case. So where's the issue? You can set up a FX chain to have two instances with suitably wired I/O pins. Save it and you're done. Or am I missing something?

As for the "missing" sample packs, I am grateful I don't have tons of factory rubbish in my HD. Not everything makes it there. I like to pick my own content!
juan_r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 10:01 AM   #51
serr
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 12,558
Default

If professional is to be synonymous with working quickly...

Just how the heck is waiting 5-7 minutes for Protools HD to load a project - and then sometimes it comes up already crashed so you have to repeat that - how the heck is that professional?!

I can redo a lot of group assignments in that kind of time!

There's an intuitiveness in Protools with the linked timeline and item selection thing for sure. But what do when you want those separate? Editing in Reaper was an upgrade with all kinds of expanded abilities. I thought PTHD was all that and was worried about losing editing abilities at first too! Turned out to be a huge upgrade and sped everything up.

Or how about just the ability in Reaper to undo things like making an item selection? Ever make a fat finger selecting 17 items on the 16th click? A quick ⌘z and back at it in Reaper. Throw a temper tantrum and start over in Protools!

Stability?
OK, I'd never try to run live sound with Protools or do anything with low latency. Obviously not appropriate! (PTHD likes its maxed out block size!) But here Reaper comes along and lets you do just that. While recording all the raw multitrack. So everything from studio to live to performance rig is just slick now!

That's the stuff that hits me first and makes a few missing features kind of a moot point. No argument over said missing features! Stability = professional IMHO.

Last edited by serr; 10-22-2020 at 10:42 AM.
serr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 10:09 AM   #52
juan_r
Human being with feelings
 
juan_r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 1,075
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by serr View Post
Ever make a fat finger selecting 17 items on the 16th click? A quick ⌘z and back at it in Reaper. Throw a temper tantrum and start over in Protools!
But but, it must be very simple to implement, surely! We can ask for new features on the ProTools friendly user forum, and they will add them in the next public pre-release... can't we? Won't they?

BTW, very few of my friends use PT these days, and none of the younger ones. Logic seems to be all the rage, even among "Pro Studio" people - of which fewer and fewer are left anyway. When I evangelize for Reaper, the first reaction is "hm... unglamorous..." (I can read their faces). But after a bit, most of them go "Uh, this thing is quick. No EQ on a channel? Ah, I see, easy! What's the stock EQ called again? Yes yes I understand how it works, thanks."
juan_r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 10:13 AM   #53
bucca
Human being with feelings
 
bucca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: near my POB
Posts: 388
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
... "standard in the industry".
what sets '(industry) standards' are laws and regulations.

Quote:
It would be great if REAPER could also make my coffee and my lunch.
frankly, this is serious bullshit.
no need to push back in such a manner.
in your vids, quite times i hear you say... 'but there is a workaround'. that's pretty close to use a hammer for screwdriving.

a floorlight dislike doesn't mean you don't like the building. you're simply better of with ceiling lamps. that's why we have em. most of the time. seems to be useful. so why no ask for if there aren't.

but c'mon. i lean back. it's their product. they can do whatever they want.
__________________
who's gonna water my plants ... if not you
bucca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 11:24 AM   #54
Klangfarben
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
I'm going to have to disagree with that. Not that there aren't some features "missing" but that there's any kind of "standard in the industry".

It's the wild west. I can list feature after feature that is a part of Pro Tools that isn't in Logic. Or that's in Studio One, that isn't in Pro Tools. Or that's in REAPER that isn't in any of the others.
You can disagree all you want, but let's take a look at those 4 specific features to which OP is referring in the major DAWs as that is the purpose of his thread.

Here are what I consider the major DAWs in terms of usage in pro environments:
Pro Tools, Logic, Cubase/Nuendo, Digital Performer, Studio One, Harrison Mixbus

I'm not trying to specifically exclude any, more so just highlight ones that are used more often in pro environments (for example Ableton is a popular DAW but not often used as a main DAW by pros). Of the list below, I've used all but Studio One fairly extensively.

Item grouping linked to track grouping
Yes: Pro Tools, Logic, Cubendo, Digital Performer, Studio One, Harrison Mixbus
No: None

Playlists/Takes
Yes: Pro Tools, Logic, Cubendo, Digital Performer, Studio One, Harrison Mixbus
No: None

Post-Fader Track Inserts
Yes: Pro Tools, Cubendo, Digital Performer, Harrison Mixbus
No: Logic, Studio One

Dual Mono Plugin Support (without having to explicitly load and route two plugin instances)
Yes: Pro Tools, Logic, Digital Performer
No: Cubendo, Studio One (afaik), Harrison Mixbus

So, here is the tally of those features in the major DAWs.

Item Grouping Linked to Track Grouping:
6 yes, 0 no - all the major DAWs support

Playlists/Takes:
6 yes, 0 no - all the major DAWs support

Post Fader Track Inserts:
4 yes, 2 no

Dual Mono Plugin Support without having to load and route two instances:
3 yes, 3 no

No one in this thread is bashing Reaper. Or thinking it should make our coffee. What I'm saying is that OPs argument is right on the money. Three of the four features discussed are supported by most of the major DAWs, with two of the features supported in ALL of the major DAWs. And one was a tie. So if you are working in a pro environment, those are features that you not only expect, but that you also rely on. Again, their omission is pretty glaring and I hope the devs add them to the roadmap as the majority of them are indeed standard across the major DAWs.
Klangfarben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 11:30 AM   #55
fakemaxwell
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 586
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by serr View Post
If professional is to be synonymous with working quickly...

Throw a temper tantrum and start over in Protools!
Not to mention- project tabs and subprojects have been a m a z i n g for doing cut downs to shorter versions of projects, or doing multiple cues for a film and not having to have an insane single project.

That's the thing that's killing me with all these posts- they keep talking about "industry standards" like dual mono (???) that appear fairly nitpicky, while the meat of what Reaper is actually good at is tossed aside, as it is only compared to other DAWs in a negative direction.

Oh well, what can you do.
fakemaxwell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 11:34 AM   #56
fakemaxwell
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 586
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klangfarben View Post
(for example Ableton is a popular DAW but not often used as a main DAW by pros).
Uh...what? Pretty sure every EDM artist of the last idk 15 years has used Ableton in some or all of their capacity. So can you or anybody else please, please explain what "pro" means? Otherwise stop using the terminology as some appeal to a fake authority.
fakemaxwell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 12:03 PM   #57
Klangfarben
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fakemaxwell View Post
Uh...what? Pretty sure every EDM artist of the last idk 15 years has used Ableton in some or all of their capacity. So can you or anybody else please, please explain what "pro" means? Otherwise stop using the terminology as some appeal to a fake authority.
Pro means you make your living working in the industry - record industry, film/tv, gaming etc. And the EDM market is a very tiny niche of that. I don't know a single engineer, mixer or film/television composer that uses Ableton as their main DAW. EDM artists use it more often as do some of the synth programmers out there but on the whole it is not tailored for pro mixing, editing or composing - mainly loops and synth programming, which it's great for. I used to use it as a rewire slave to Logic but I could have never considered using it for the day job.
Klangfarben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 12:14 PM   #58
superblonde.org
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 1,035
Default

"6 yes, 0 no - all the major DAWs support"


Sibelius uses "the ribbon" but that doesnt make it right.
__________________
discussing music theory & analysis on an internet forum like this one is similar to discussing shakespeare with someone who is illiterate yet claims to be a poet and wordsmith.
superblonde.org is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 12:49 PM   #59
Joe90
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 853
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klangfarben View Post
I think the biggest thing the professional user who does this for a living is looking for is efficiency. I will pay just about any amount of money to be even the slightest bit more efficient because it's the difference between being stuck in the studio day and night and being able to leave and you know, occasionally live the rest of your life. Also, deadlines are pretty crushing so the more efficient you are, the more minutes you can put on the board a day which is key. That's why some workarounds simply aren't a solution to the pro user. If the workaround takes twice as long, it's a no go.

And I don't think it's a matter really of DAW envy or anything like that. There are established features and workflows that have been adopted by just about all of the major DAWs that are specifically tailored to professional users. Editing linked to track groups, playlists (also linked to track groups), post fader effects and dual mono plugins are some of these. So I really don't think anyone is saying "X" DAW is better. Just that the omission of these features in Reaper is glaring.

While one could make the argument Reaper is for tinkerers, I've paid for a commercial license as I use it for my day job, and while the license costs less than some DAWs I do expect common professional features such as those above to be at least on the development roadmap. Otherwise, if this is just for amateurs, why even have a commercial license?

P.S. Also as a pro user I could give a crap about included loops, synths and samples. The average pro user already has a frightening amount and is certainly not looking to the DAW for even more.
Agree 100%.

And I'd add to the original list -

1) proper item/track locking that actually works as expected.
2) An undo/redo function that doesn't cause constant audio interrupts whenever it's used.

However, as someone else who is also working professionally in this industry full time, Reaper still wins for me. I used Cubendo for YEARS, as well as Studio One for a year or two, and am also familiar with Logic and Protools (although not as well) and Reaper still 100% wins out for me. Just simple things like scripts to make a plugin appear centered over your mouse cursor when you float it, or optional mousewheel control of everything, pooled automation items, item FX envelopes, are things that I miss so much when I need to go back to an old project in Cubase or S1 to render stems. I feel like I'm dragging my feet through sand in other DAW's now.
Joe90 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 01:15 PM   #60
vsthem
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 652
Default

Want to add that Heda Track Inspector adds many functions, including track versions, that make it indispensable, and it works nicely with takes too. It also does mute groups, track tags, and a million other things.

I think the only way to use Reaper is to embrace user created scripts. I wouldn't have stuck with reaper if I didn't make the jump to these scripts. As such, I think you need to include them in any discussion as to whether Reaper "has these features" or not.

Should these features be incorporated into Reaper? Yes. Are they available, functional, and reasonably easy to install/setup? Also yes.
vsthem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 03:06 PM   #61
Klangfarben
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vsthem View Post
Should these features be incorporated into Reaper? Yes. Are they available, functional, and reasonably easy to install/setup? Also yes.
Actually none of the features in question currently have a scripting solution.

Item Grouping Linked to Track Grouping: No current scripting solution. Sexan's PT Playlists script did this, but unfortunately it does not work in Reaper 6 and has not been updated. Amagalma started one but afaik he did not finish it. Heda's Track Inspector (which is awesome) grouping features do not include items currently. There's also this - https://www.admiralbumblebee.com/mus...in-Reaper.html - but that entails a lot of extra work every time you set up a new project.

Playlists/Takes: No current scripting solution. Again, Sexan's PT Playlist script did this but it does not currently work in Reaper 6. Heda's Track Versions in Track Inspector duplicates the entire track (as in creates a new one). So for example, if you have a really large Kontakt instrument loaded or FX chain, you now have a second track with all the same FX and instruments being loaded. As opposed to just the track items changing versions. This is problematic in large sessions because you are increasing your track count, cpu and memory usage. I have high hopes Heda is going to add an option that doesn't duplicate the track, but again currently there is no scripting solution for this in Reaper 6.

Post Fader Track Inserts: No current scripting solution. The best solution I know of is to insert a JS Volume plugin before the plugins and either midi learn the JS Volume fader or automate the JS volume parameter. There is no solution scripting or otherwise that works with the track fader.

Dual Mono Plugin Support with link/unlink and without loading two plugin instances: No current scripting solution. The best solution I know is to load two instances of the same plugin and use the plugin pin routing to route one only to left and one only to the right. To link/unlink, you would have to use one of the linking scripts like MPLs mapping panel or something similar and then run/terminate when you want to link/unlink. Quite a bit less efficient than in Pro Tools or Logic where you simply load a dual mono plugin, it automatically loads it as dual mono and there is a link/unlink button right on the interface.

User created scripts are basically the reason I use Reaper as my main DAW and will continue to do so. The scripting community here is incredible. Unfortunately though, at this time user scripts don't address these specific 4 feature omissions.

Last edited by Klangfarben; 10-22-2020 at 03:11 PM.
Klangfarben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 03:35 PM   #62
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klangfarben View Post
What I'm saying is that OPs argument is right on the money.
And what I'm saying is that there's NO industry standard. Just because a few other DAWs do things one way, doesn't mean REAPER has to copy it.

As I explained, every DAW is a tool. They all do some things better than others. There's no way to make one that solves every problem in the way you prefer. I would argue that REAPER comes the closest because you can create custom actions and scripts etc.

But Logic is still better for certain things. Pro Tools is better for certain things. Studio One is better for certain things.

Pick one, and deal with it. Or pick a few and bounce around. I still use Logic once in a while and I work for REAPER.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 03:40 PM   #63
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fakemaxwell View Post

That's the thing that's killing me with all these posts- they keep talking about "industry standards" like dual mono (???) that appear fairly nitpicky, while the meat of what Reaper is actually good at is tossed aside, as it is only compared to other DAWs in a negative direction.
Many people obsess about what they don't have. Instead of appreciating what they do have.

Happiness is wanting what you do have.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 04:09 PM   #64
Klangfarben
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
And what I'm saying is that there's NO industry standard. Just because a few other DAWs do things one way, doesn't mean REAPER has to copy it.
I think you are missing the point on a couple fronts here. First, there are indeed industry standards. Like for example, every major DAW having playlists. Every major DAW linking item grouping to track grouping. Those are standards. Depending on the feature they may get implemented slightly different, but they are there. They aren't omitted completely.

Second, it's not that I want Reaper to be like another DAW. I don't. I started on Digital Performer, then Logic, then Cubase/Nuendo with a heavy dose of Pro Tools mixed in there throughout before I moved to Reaper. I made each of those moves for specific reasons and I don't plan on jumping again anytime soon. But even though those 4 DAWs I've used throughout my career are all different, they had common features I relied on. So, for those features to be omitted from Reaper is jarring. There just isn't a good substitute for not having proper track edit grouping. There isn't a good substitute for not having independent playlists also linked to track grouping. Or for not having actual locked items/tracks that can't be modified as Joe pointed out. Those are indeed standard across all the major DAWs.

Again, I don't know how many different ways I can say it. No one here is bashing Reaper. I'm well aware of the many things Reaper does that other DAWs don't. It's why I use it. Just pointing out that in a professional environment, those 4 specific feature omissions OP mentioned are both notable and glaring and I sincerely hope that they are addressed at some point.
Klangfarben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 05:09 PM   #65
valy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 1,927
Default

Another thing I really, really miss is a native ability to link FX parameters. The PT implementation of that is quite robust, allowing you to choose the exact insert slot to link for tracks within the group. There's workarounds, but they all fall short in some critical way.

REAPER wouldn't be able to do it like PT since it doesn't label the FX slots or differentiate them really, but I still hope to one day see this functionality in native form.
valy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 08:22 PM   #66
Kenny Gioia
Human being with feelings
 
Kenny Gioia's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klangfarben View Post
I think you are missing the point on a couple fronts here. First, there are indeed industry standards. Like for example, every major DAW having playlists. Every major DAW linking item grouping to track grouping. Those are standards. Depending on the feature they may get implemented slightly different, but they are there. They aren't omitted completely.

Second, it's not that I want Reaper to be like another DAW. I don't. I started on Digital Performer, then Logic, then Cubase/Nuendo with a heavy dose of Pro Tools mixed in there throughout before I moved to Reaper. I made each of those moves for specific reasons and I don't plan on jumping again anytime soon. But even though those 4 DAWs I've used throughout my career are all different, they had common features I relied on. So, for those features to be omitted from Reaper is jarring. There just isn't a good substitute for not having proper track edit grouping. There isn't a good substitute for not having independent playlists also linked to track grouping. Or for not having actual locked items/tracks that can't be modified as Joe pointed out. Those are indeed standard across all the major DAWs.

Again, I don't know how many different ways I can say it. No one here is bashing Reaper. I'm well aware of the many things Reaper does that other DAWs don't. It's why I use it. Just pointing out that in a professional environment, those 4 specific feature omissions OP mentioned are both notable and glaring and I sincerely hope that they are addressed at some point.
To be clear, I would also like to see every feature request requested, granted at some point.

What I fundamentally disagree with you about, specially, is this idea that REAPER is going to change anything BECAUSE it's a "standard". I disagree that standards exist and I disagree that REAPER cares about conforming to them.

Feature requests are incorporated into the program when the dev team wants to address them because it will help their users. That's it. If people want them and they feel like putting them, it will happen.

But you calling it a "standard" has no value in the conversation.
Kenny Gioia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 08:40 PM   #67
robgb
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 373
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
But you calling it a "standard" has no value in the conversation.
I love it when people say "industry standard" as if this "industry" has standards...
robgb is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 09:00 PM   #68
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robgb View Post
I love it when people say "industry standard" as if this "industry" has standards...
Especially this industry.

However, there is some fairness in considering there are things that someone sees as a "standard occurrence or expectation" vs something that is "a standard", those aren't the same thing. The latter is usually documented or more formal such as the dimensions of an XLR connector or EIA RS-297-A which describes using them with balanced audio. The former is a thing some significant number uses, follows or assumes and if that number is significant, they aren't 'that' wrong in what they are trying to say.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.

Last edited by karbomusic; 10-22-2020 at 09:10 PM.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 09:14 PM   #69
Klangfarben
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Gioia View Post
What I fundamentally disagree with you about, specially, is this idea that REAPER is going to change anything BECAUSE it's a "standard". I disagree that standards exist and I disagree that REAPER cares about conforming to them.

Feature requests are incorporated into the program when the dev team wants to address them because it will help their users. That's it. If people want them and they feel like putting them, it will happen.
The reason certain features are standard in the major DAWs is for the exact reason you say feature requests are incorporated into Reaper - because they greatly help the users. If they didn't, they would not be standard across DAWs. So I'm not even sure why you are arguing or showing such concern about the word. If you have such a problem with it, call them "common" features. Or "shared" features. I don't care. But when a majority of DAWs incorporate the same feature it is not to copy one another. It is because their users will benefit from it.

So, rather then arguing semantics vs content, I would ask that if you also would like these feature requests implemented as you say, then help make the argument for their inclusion. Otherwise, you are just derailing the topic which isn't particularly helpful.
Klangfarben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 09:20 PM   #70
Steviebone
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 809
Default

If you are really going back to Logic as your title suggests, why post this here? There is a features request place in the forums that covers most of this. I know the developers routinely keep up with what's in that forum and some portion of those requests often end up included in future releases.

Every DAW is different. No one DAW is probably the best choice for every type of project or every type of approach. Kind of the difference between a Porsche or Ferrari, or a Kia and a Datson, pickup truck or sports car. It all depends on whatever it depends upon.

As I stated earlier, the scripting side of reaper is enough to make this my primary toolset. Even if you don't code yourself there is a deep well of exceptional talent available in the community to accomplish almost anything you might need. Everybody's needs are different though. If the workflow in Logic is better for you then you should by all means use it.

Not sure what the purpose of this thread here is though. Do you want someone here to try and talk you out of it?

It's not the tool anyway, it's what you do with that tool. No one tool does everything.

I used to think I needed all the latest everything. One day I realized that instead of focusing on what I DON'T have and what I CAN'T do, I could instead focus on what I CAN do with what I've got.

I was immediately surprised at what a better use of my time that was.

Last edited by Steviebone; 10-22-2020 at 09:26 PM.
Steviebone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2020, 11:12 PM   #71
Pink Wool
Human being with feelings
 
Pink Wool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,501
Default

I find leaving out Live from "the PROS" funny!

But whatever fits the narrative, right?
Pink Wool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2020, 12:02 AM   #72
bobobo
Human being with feelings
 
bobobo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,356
Default



Wrong tool
bobobo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2020, 12:22 AM   #73
Chvad SB
Human being with feelings
 
Chvad SB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 42
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by serr View Post
Stability?
OK, I'd never try to run live sound with Protools or do anything with low latency. Obviously not appropriate! (PTHD likes its maxed out block size!) But here Reaper comes along and lets you do just that. While recording all the raw multitrack. So everything from studio to live to performance rig is just slick now!

That's the stuff that hits me first and makes a few missing features kind of a moot point. No argument over said missing features! Stability = professional IMHO.
Just as a counterpoint, I've used PTHD systems exclusively for live productions daily for the past 15 years and in that time have had one failure during a production. I'm not an Avid fan and I prefer to use Reaper whenever possible, especially creatively but 100% of my bread and butter comes from Pro Tools and has for the better part of 20 years. I'm not suggesting it's "better" but there's no question that the thousand plus students I've taught audio production to... PT lands jobs faster. I even taught the two side by side for a while but all the great granular stuff I dig about Reaper is also it's nail in the coffin for most utility users. Hell, out of spite I edit all of my PT tutorial vids ON Reaper just out of spite to Avid lol. Still... I get all the points the original poster has. No question though that PT is bulky. So for contrast... on STAGE... if I need a DAW there, I'll probably be using Reaper. It's light weight, stable, and gets the job done. Reaper is awesome but like others have said... use the right tool for the right job.
Chvad SB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2020, 02:44 AM   #74
White Tie
Pixel Pusher
 
White Tie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Blighty
Posts: 4,950
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klangfarben View Post
I would ask that if you also would like these feature requests implemented as you say, then help make the argument for their inclusion. Otherwise, you are just derailing the topic which isn't particularly helpful.
That's what he's doing. If the main thrust for a feature request is "because other DAWs do it", that historically has been extremely ineffective here. If a) there's something you want to do and Reaper makes it impossible/difficult/slow and b) another DAW has a solution to it, then yes, sure, sharing b) might be useful. But its all about a).
__________________
The House of White Tie
White Tie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2020, 03:23 AM   #75
mozart999uk
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,721
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fakemaxwell View Post
That's entirely what I'm saying, there isn't a "pro" user that's going to be turned away by Reaper because it doesn't have some drum loops included, so it's silly to claim that as a feature request to "compete" with "pro" DAWs.
I do have to take issue with this. I am a "pro" user. I'm a full time media composer. Having sounds and loops integrated into Cubase was a Godsend for me. When you work on really tight deadlines (although I don't do that so much anymore thankfully) you need to be able to reach for a loop or something quickly and having them integrated into Cubase (very easy to search and to implement) is much better than relying on third party samples and samplers / synths which aren't always as easy to search.

When moving from Cubase to Reaper, this was a big issue for me and one I'm still struggling with a little. I moved to Reaper for it's reliability and efficiency but I agree with the OP - there are some things that I feel should be native and I shouldn't need to search for complicated work arounds to do them.

However, there are lots of little things in Reaper that I prefer to any other DAW I've used and that's why, currently I'm staying.... that and the generally AMAZING community!

I know another "pro" media composer (with a lot of credits to his name) who uses Logic exclusively (inc native samples, EXS24 and the synths) and he creates stuff so quickly because he doesn't have to faff around with Kontakt or third party stuff. It's amazing to watch.

Both he and I are "pros" - highly trained and experienced musicians and composers.... so yes, there are "pro" users who are and would be turned away from Reaper because "it doesn't have some drum loops".
mozart999uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2020, 03:28 AM   #76
mozart999uk
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,721
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steviebone View Post
If you are really going back to Logic as your title suggests, why post this here? There is a features request place in the forums that covers most of this. I know the developers routinely keep up with what's in that forum and some portion of those requests often end up included in future releases.

Every DAW is different. No one DAW is probably the best choice for every type of project or every type of approach. Kind of the difference between a Porsche or Ferrari, or a Kia and a Datson, pickup truck or sports car. It all depends on whatever it depends upon.

As I stated earlier, the scripting side of reaper is enough to make this my primary toolset. Even if you don't code yourself there is a deep well of exceptional talent available in the community to accomplish almost anything you might need. Everybody's needs are different though. If the workflow in Logic is better for you then you should by all means use it.

Not sure what the purpose of this thread here is though. Do you want someone here to try and talk you out of it?

It's not the tool anyway, it's what you do with that tool. No one tool does everything.

I used to think I needed all the latest everything. One day I realized that instead of focusing on what I DON'T have and what I CAN'T do, I could instead focus on what I CAN do with what I've got.

I was immediately surprised at what a better use of my time that was.
I think forums are and should be a place to vent.

The thread is also useful to those looking for any negative aspects of Reaper before buying / trying......

There's a great, positive feeling about Reaper on these forums, which is wonderful but sometimes its shortcomings can get masked by these.....good to have an alternate view IMHO
mozart999uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2020, 05:08 AM   #77
Steviebone
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 809
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mozart999uk View Post
I think forums are and should be a place to vent.

The thread is also useful to those looking for any negative aspects of Reaper before buying / trying......

There's a great, positive feeling about Reaper on these forums, which is wonderful but sometimes its shortcomings can get masked by these.....good to have an alternate view IMHO
I don't totally disagree with you but there is a place on these forums for this type of discussion. If you really want these features implemented in reaper you should specify that in the appropriate forum intended for that purpose.

That said, I am but one of many voices here whose perspective is no more or less valid than any other. And it's just that on a fairly routine basis I see post here all about what they don't like about reaper. And I don't really see the point.

However, looking back at it now my post sounded a little harsh. My apologies for that. This is one of the better communities I've ever run across.

I do stand by my credo that it's better to concentrate on doing what you can with what you have than on what you can't with what you don't, and a much better use of time than complaining about something you can't change. Put your feature requests in, and if they turn up at some point great, kudos to the developer who DOES have a track record of listening to their users. And if not, you can always go back to Logic.

But for the money, reaper is still the best deal out there, not just by a little bit, but on order of magnitude IMO.

As usual that's just my two cents worth half a penny. No offense was intended.
Steviebone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2020, 08:10 AM   #78
Swi
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 358
Default

I support Thermos and Klangfarbem on this. This should be viewed as valuable information to the dev team.
Swi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2020, 08:30 AM   #79
Klangfarben
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by White Tie View Post
That's what he's doing. If the main thrust for a feature request is "because other DAWs do it", that historically has been extremely ineffective here. If a) there's something you want to do and Reaper makes it impossible/difficult/slow and b) another DAW has a solution to it, then yes, sure, sharing b) might be useful. But its all about a).
I must have missed his arguments for the inclusion of these features then, but I look forward to it.

In addition, just as Kenny is right when he says no DAW will fill everyone's needs, it is possible to make point a) while also mentioning b) which is exactly what OP did. It seems every time someone mentions another DAW here people lose their minds. Saying a) this is important in a pro environment and b) this is how DAW "X" accomplishes that is both helpful and informative. It doesn't mean someone thinks DAW "X" is the greatest thing ever and hates Reaper. It is simply providing an example of how a feature is implemented and how it is useful to those who may not understand the concept or the need for that concept. (It's also very hard to show an example of a specific behavior in a DAW that doesn't support it)

And Schwa seems to disagree with you on your assessment. Back in September a user made a very informative 20 minute video comparing Reaper's Area Selection to how it functioned in other DAWs and the pros/cons of the current implementation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mosaic Music View Post
I did a comparison to the area selection functionality in a few other DAWs (Pro Tools, Samplitude, Studio One), and came up with a few ideas and suggestions. I'm a bit of a DAW nomad, and have used at one time or another nearly every major DAW for an extended period of time, so it was interesting to analyze Reaper's currently developing implementation of area selection compared to other DAWs.
Pretty much the exact thing you and Kenny are telling people not to do. This, however, was Schwa's response to that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by schwa View Post
This is really great -- expect a number of changelog items in the next +dev build that refer to this post.
So, if you don't mind, I'm going to take it directly from the horse's mouth and keep discussing these features.
Klangfarben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2020, 09:34 AM   #80
thermos
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 120
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klangfarben View Post
I think the biggest thing the professional user who does this for a living is looking for is efficiency. I will pay just about any amount of money to be even the slightest bit more efficient because it's the difference between being stuck in the studio day and night and being able to leave and you know, occasionally live the rest of your life. Also, deadlines are pretty crushing so the more efficient you are, the more minutes you can put on the board a day which is key. That's why some workarounds simply aren't a solution to the pro user. If the workaround takes twice as long, it's a no go.

And I don't think it's a matter really of DAW envy or anything like that. There are established features and workflows that have been adopted by just about all of the major DAWs that are specifically tailored to professional users. Editing linked to track groups, playlists (also linked to track groups), post fader effects and dual mono plugins are some of these. So I really don't think anyone is saying "X" DAW is better. Just that the omission of these features in Reaper is glaring.

While one could make the argument Reaper is for tinkerers, I've paid for a commercial license as I use it for my day job, and while the license costs less than some DAWs I do expect common professional features such as those above to be at least on the development roadmap. Otherwise, if this is just for amateurs, why even have a commercial license?

P.S. Also as a pro user I could give a crap about included loops, synths and samples. The average pro user already has a frightening amount and is certainly not looking to the DAW for even more.
Thanks, thats exactly what I'm saying.

The reason some of these features seem easy to add is because reaper users HAVE coded them themselves in some cases. All it would take is for Justin to adopt these hacks and make them part of the code base.

And yes, I'd pay $1,000 for a Reaper license even in its current form based on what it can do in a mastering context. Coming from Sonic Soundblade (and mastering probably 100 releases a year), switching to Reaper probably made my work 10x more efficient, and thats a conservative estimate.

I say other pro users would adopt this immediately with these elements added because when I tell people about Reaper but then I say stuff like "it doesn't have track editing groups," there response is always like "why would I waste my time with that then?"
thermos 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 07:19 AM.


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