Please help - big decision to switch to Reaper from other DAWs for post + scoring - Page 3

danknugz · 02-23-2018, 06:09 AM

when i get the chance ill give more detail, maybe get a screen capture

EvilDragon · 02-23-2018, 06:17 AM

Yes, definitely make a screen capture! Use the free LICEcap program:

https://www.cockos.com/licecap/

fetidus · 02-23-2018, 07:19 AM

@ airon -- Awesome, will take a closer look at the markers in the renders of the subprojects... not sure I understand yet, but will continue to experiment. I did see markers inside the subproject itself, but didn't play with them yet. Subprojects really change everything. I haven't tested limits yet either... have you hit a limit on how many subprojects you can use?

@ semiquaver -- Great to hear you've made a full transition. I'm used to an ingest process with PT, so I may not even have to use AATranslator. But will cross that bridge later...

@ danknugz -- I haven't seen big issues with the MIDI editing per se, or problems dealing with automation, but I'll pay more attention to that and hammer it more. If anything, I think Reaper's automation, at least, is quite good, if not brilliant in some ways. For example, most people don't know this (and I just found out about it), the fact that you can put automation envelopes on *individual takes*, and you can also have "automation items" (which I'm still wrapping my head around) is really incredible... in fact no other DAW can do Take FX automation envelopes that I can think of, and I've used or tested just about all of them. It's pretty insane, when you dig into that feature, and in that department Cubase, Pro Tools, etc., don't come close. So I would definitely appreciate if you can post a screen capture example as you and EvilDragon discussed. Having said all that, I am still not super confident in the MIDI/scoring aspect of Reaper. I think I'll have to spend a lot more time with it to get my sea legs. And the MIDI is definitely not at the level of Cubase, but there are so many "hidden" or "not-so-obvious" aspects, plus the whole scripting capability, that I feel it should be able to do the job. Obviously, there are many people here who feel that it does totally fine for them, I'm just not there yet myself. As for general sound design kinds of tasks, and their flexibility with where automation can go, however, Reaper is absolutely killer, and I need no convincing of that.

fetidus · 02-23-2018, 08:01 AM

BTW, been playing with Subprojects this morning... and so far I have inserted about 15 subprojects into one parent project, with several nested sub-subprojects too, and it seems to work pretty well. But the tabs are getting REALLY congested. Would be really nice if I could rename a subproject... any suggestions?

Also, let me know if you guys have ever reached limits. This is the tip of the iceberg for me, and I can imagine many dozens or even hundreds of subprojects in a massive project.

fetidus · 02-23-2018, 08:06 AM

Also, any suggestions on reducing the lag with the video window when selecting regions or navigating around the timeline? Pro Tools is much faster navigating for me with a similar video file. There seems to be a little lag before Reaper decides to update the video window when moving around the timeline. Not a HUGE deal, but would love the update cycle of the video window to be faster. (Edit: Also, everything is on SSD drives with tons of CPU headroom too, so there is no system bottleneck.)

The Byre · 02-24-2018, 02:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fetidus

DaVinci is definitely one viable pathway, I wish them luck! I haven't yet played with it, but a couple people I trust have used it, and one loves it. As for surround in Reaper (or any stereo DAW), that's one reason why I keep PTHD around, but more for ingest and delivery, etc.

They keep being about to release their render/accelerator card for about $1,000 (that was announced two years ago!) and if they fulfil their various promises, it would make their system unbeatable and completely change that part of the market where HD-X is sitting today. You need a really good computer of course to run 4K films, even if you break them down into 10m reels.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fetidus

As for Cubase, as I mentioned, I'm very, very tired of Steinberg, after many years. They are right next to Avid in my list of least favorite companies.

I keep hearing that!

Quote:

Originally Posted by fetidus

As for Avid, I agree that they are a terrible company, but Pro Tools will likely never disappear IMO. It's just too embedded in the industry, far too important for workflows for so many big budget kinds of projects, I just can't see it die.

We used to hear that about Sony switchers and NLE rigs. I am of that generation that heard that about Steenbeck editing tables. I was told in no uncertain terms by several people in many broadcast institutions, that Sony DASH recorders were the only real option, if you wanted to go digital. Avid? "Toys for hobby players!" I was told - and more than once!

Two directors told me in the past few weeks that they have absolutely no intention of dumping 35mm and 70mm film in favour of digital. They are (IMO) making the same mistake that many made back in the 90s, when they said that 2" reel-2-reel was far superior to digital. Yes it was, compared to first generation Avid stuff that had horrible clocking errors and therefore distorted at HF range. They are looking at first generation Arri boxes and comparing it with the best film stock - so of course it doesn't look as good!

Just as Sony was arrogant and blind to developments in the market, back in the 90s, so too are Avid today.

Back in the early 90s, Avid could be found in the innovation hall, with boxes on trestle-tables covered in table-cloths at NAB and AES. Sony was huge and the crowds at their stands came with their cheque-books!

I went to IBC and the Sony stand was pretty deserted - but you had to fight to get near the Blackmagic-Design stuff!

The difference is that Sony is a huge and profitable company with a market cap of nearly $7 trillion and over 120,000 employees and has interests in anything and everything, from banking to telecommunications, from film distribution, to video games. Avid is a $200m one-trick minnow, heavy in debt and losing money.
_______________________

But in answer to your basic question - smaller private companies run by one or two guys have proven to be far more stable and reliable than the big players, who (Harmon, Sony) play with pro-audio for a while and when it gets difficult, dump it. Just look at iZ-Tech (Radar) Newtek (LightWave 3D and other products) and of course, right here Cockos. Blackmagic-Design is another private company, run by one guy, but now worth over $300m.

fetidus · 02-24-2018, 05:50 AM

Thanks, The Byre, for your insights! Between your comments and the others in this thread, I'm now convinced I don't need to sweat it that Cockos is going to disappear any time soon. At the very least not any more than I would re: any other DAW. So the risk factor IMO is comparable (and perhaps even favorable towards Reaper), and I can focus on other issues that are more important. I'm feeling more confident every day!

Re: Avid - I do think that Pro Tools is in a different position than many other examples of industry change, since it is at least in the *neighborhood* of where the innovation is going on. I mean, Avid has all the right puzzle pieces to make the next big contribution to the market again, but they are mired in idiocy and poor management, and now saddled with the legacy of poor business decisions. It must be very frustrating working at Avid right now.

But assuming Avid crumbles, the Pro Tools assets will get sold off in a heartbeat for the going market price (could be pennies on the dollar) and someone very smart will swoop in and keep it going, and perhaps inject some real innovation back into its DNA. Case in point, look what happened to Cakewalk yesterday. If some deep-pocketed young entrepreneur is willing to swoop in to rescue Sonar, think of who will line up to rescue Pro Tools!

By contrast to the other industry shake-ups you mentioned, those companies/products weren't in the same ballpark of where innovation was headed (in hindsight), let alone the right neighborhood. And it's easier (relatively speaking) to buy up the kind of IP that Pro Tools has and repackage and launch a new generation under better leadership far more quickly. The brand, market penetration and IP are still very strong, and they are not too far off from where the innovative action is happening. So my only scenario of Pro Tools actually fading away is through attrition, which could indeed happen if Avid follows its current path. In fact, it would be far better for Pro Tools users for Avid to go bankrupt NOW, sell off the Pro Tools IP to some ambitious, innovative company, and let them go wild revitalizing it. In fact, why not Black Magic for that role? Pro Tools could be integrated into the DAW module of DaVinci. :-)

fetidus · 02-24-2018, 06:06 AM

Woo-hoo! I just found yet another great feature of Reaper!!! I'm sure most of you know this, but the project files are easily-readable TEXT files! Fantastic!

Depending on how much I want to hack those files, I could do file-wide changes, such as basic REGEX file/path renaming or other simple tweaks, search/replace!

For example, I've been wondering what happens when the tabs get too cluttered with subprojects with long cryptic names... and it seems like there is no way to rename them inside of Reaper (BTW, that is a feature request if the developers are listening, please!). However, I can at least just open up the save file and do a search and replace to my heart's content. It does lead to chances of human error, but if I'm careful I can now rename all my subprojects!!!!

fetidus · 02-24-2018, 06:26 AM

Some thoughts this morning on my potential transition to Reaper. Just trying to work through my game plan. Feel free to share feedback!

First, thanks again for your time to read and reply to this thread. There's a ton of useful info, and you guys have helped me out a lot!

I'm working through the scenarios where Reaper will work for me, and I've been doing a lot of testing and digging. Still much more to do, but after building test projects, etc., and doing a lot of reading, I now have a pretty decent feel for how Reaper will fit in my studio.

Previous to starting this thread, my studio DAW situation looked something like this:

The DAWs I currently use, in order of importance in my workflow, and the amount of time and number of projects I run through them:

1 - Cubase - for composing, sound design, and some post (however, I was in a transition from Cubase to Studio One until I hit some snags with Studio One as indicated earlier in this thread)

2 - Pro Tools - for ingest/delivery and some post as needed by clients

3 - Reaper - for almost all dialog editing, and as a sound "scratchpad" here and there

4 - Bitwig - for creative sandbox/inspiration. This slot was formerly occupied by Live and Reason

5 - Various other tools as needed

BUT NOW, my new configuration is shaping up to look like this:

1 - Reaper - for sound design, post, and as-yet-to-be-determined amount of composing - I need to continue testing and figuring things out, hoping for composing/MIDI improvements, maybe Reaper v6 or scripting now will fill remaining gaps?

2 - Studio One - for as-yet-to-be-determined amount of composing, keeping one foot in the Studio One world because a) I like it, and b) I'm hoping Studio One v4 will be coming out in the near future with big composing improvements

3 - Pro Tools - as before, for ingest/delivery and some post as needed by clients, hoping to phase this out entirely over time

4 - Bitwig - for creative sandbox/inspiration

5 - Cubase - for legacy/archive project access, eventually deleting it from my workstation and relegating it to an old backup laptop for emergency old client access.

6 - Various other tools as needed

svijayrathinam · 02-24-2018, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvilDragon

You mention sound design and post.

Reaper has seen increasingly more usage for sound designers, especially for games sound design!

Scoring for film and video - also possible. You might wanna check this out: http://otr.storyteller.im/

I cannot believe that in this thread you will say it's becoming popular among sound designers.. But whereas in my thread you talk like reaper don't care about film and game sound designers .. Why the double standard?

EvilDragon · 02-24-2018, 11:32 AM

You're completely misreading my posts and explanations. Nevermind.

svijayrathinam · 02-24-2018, 11:54 AM

Well.. Pls tell me about it.. I would really like to understand what you are saying at times. From this post and many other post users discussion thread it's very clear that reaper user base has a lot of post users. It's also very clear that post users are using hacks to get typical surround work done. So as one of the old reaper professionals why wouldn't you support for a more sophisticated surround workflow ?

If these basic necessities for surround mixing is full filled don't you think this will result in more post users for reaper ? Surely that's a good thing. Isn't it?

Freex · 02-24-2018, 12:11 PM

Protools is and has always been playing catch up with alot of "smaller companies".
Clients will expect it, but that's just their preconceived notion that THAT is what the pros use. Of course alot do, but imho that's down to hardware than desire or design.
For those clients, put a Protools theme up and 90% won't even know the difference lol.
Coming from Sonar, as I dumped Protools and Cubase many moons ago, I'd say Reaper is very misleading. Your initial thoughts (well mine anyway) were this is so basic, a toy, yet so complexed, nothing worked how I expected it to.
The big part there is my expectations, I was used to paying $$$ (well actually £££) for my daw, and there very modest price tag on Reaper, made me expect less.
Which is so far from the truth. There is so much to learn, which is daunting, everything can be customised. Once you poke your head into the rabbit hole, and tweak a few thkngs, you really start to see the potential, the possibilitis.
Yes there are going to be sacrifices, but these are cosmetic or visual. You'll not end up with a lesser end product, you may end up getting there faster.

EvilDragon · 02-24-2018, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by svijayrathinam

Well.. Pls tell me about it.. I would really like to understand what you are saying at times. From this post and many other post users discussion thread it's very clear that reaper user base has a lot of post users. It's also very clear that post users are using hacks to get typical surround work done. So as one of the old reaper professionals why wouldn't you support for a more sophisticated surround workflow ?

If these basic necessities for surround mixing is full filled don't you think this will result in more post users for reaper ? Surely that's a good thing. Isn't it?

Define "a lot of post users"... You can't because we don't have the numbers, but it's still unlikely they make up a great majority of Reaper users, which makes it a very specific sort of workflow. The overwhelming majority of Reaper users would be your regular mix engineers or composers, then people using Reaper for live sound reinforcement, field recordings and such, and only then come sound designers, podcasters and so on. Post and mastering guys I'd put at the smallest percentage of users. Just eyeballing it from the forum discussions and dissecting the forum userbase (I've been here for 8 years, so just a basic observation).

I personally don't work in surround (which I also think reflects the biggest part of Reaper userbase), so I don't feel the need to support a more sophisticated surround workflow. And devs are the same - they don't work in post, they use Reaper as your regular composition/mixing tool, so asking support for very specific use cases is not going to be an easy thing to accomplish.

This is also why I think they thought it would be better to separate surround processing into ReaSurround, once when critical mass happened to make surround panning in Reaper, years ago. Also, now that they already did that work, I don't think they'd feel motivated enough to copy all that work into native track panners where there's a LOT more things that can break (themes, scripts, extensions, all sorts of actions, etc.)... Just a personal hunch, nothing more.

BTW, it's natural for everyone diving into Reaper community and seeing how devs operate to wish for all their pet feature requests to be fulfilled, but this is of course not possible, and you have to be realistic about it. White Tie (Reaper default theme creator) actually condensed it nicely into 5 steps. I've been in that cycle before when I was fresh on this forum

https://forum.cockos.com/showpost.ph...6&postcount=35

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Tie

Denial - My FR will happen any day now.
Anger - Dammit, where the hell is my FR? I need it, and these developers are supposed to be responsive. My FR is far more important than all that other stupid crap people are asking for! Bah, Grrr!
Bargaining - If I get enough support for my FR from others, the developers will be forced to action it immediately.
Depression - Its pointless. The developers don't listen any more / the community is now too big for my voice to be heard / the community is too ignorant to ask for the right things. Why bother even making FRs?
Acceptance - My FR may or may not happen today (FRs are actioned almost every day), or years from now (some FRs are years old). But by voicing my needs I can add to the active community consultation that continues, to this day, as best it can.

At any point in this a user might find a way to do without their FR, or leave Reaper behind, or their FR might be implemented. But at each stage the effect is exactly the same, and trust me: Step 5 is worth reaching, if only for your own personal peace of mind.

svijayrathinam · 02-24-2018, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvilDragon

Define "a lot of post users"... You can't because we don't have the numbers, but it's still unlikely they make up a great majority of Reaper users, which makes it a very specific sort of workflow. The overwhelming majority of Reaper users would be your regular mix engineers or composers, then people using Reaper for live sound reinforcement, field recordins and such, and only then come sound designers, podcasters and so on. Post and mastering guys I'd put at the smallest percentage of users. Just eyeballing it from the forum discussions and dissecting the forum userbase (I've been here for 8 years, so just a basic observation).

I personally don't work in surround (which I also think reflects the biggest part of Reaper userbase), so I don't feel the need to support a more sophisticated surround workflow. And devs are the same - they don't work in post, they use Reaper as your regular composition/mixing tool, so asking support for very specific use cases is not going to be an easy thing to accomplish.

This is also why I think they thought it would be better to separate surround processing into ReaSurround, once when critical mass happened to make surround panning in Reaper, years ago. Also, now that they already did that work, I don't think they'd feel motivated enough to copy all that work into native track panners where there's a LOT more things that can break (themes, scripts, extensions, all sorts of actions, etc.)... Just a personal hunch, nothing more.

BTW, it's natural for everyone diving into Reaper community and seeing how devs operate to wish for all their pet feature requests to be fulfilled, but this is of course not possible, and you have to be realistic about it.

Thank you and yesterday in my thread you certainly didn't come across like this ( reasonable ) ...

When I mean " a lot of post users" it means exactly what I say. The majority of the reaper user base might not be doing surround work but there is still a substantial number of die hard users who needs this feature. The reaper developers are so amazing that they make atleast 3 pre releases a week with new features. This is unheard of in any DAW market. Today without a shadow of a doubt I would say that reaper is the most happening DAW in the world. I would love to see it used more and more by being open to change and not becoming dimensional. I understand when you say it has not happened in 8 years. But this is a fast charging world. New workflows and ideas is what makes the creative industry flourish. Having used other daws for Surround work ( protools, Nuendo ) .. I can certainly see the benefits that reaper offers for post users. As far as I can see.. This Surround panner is the one of the very few missing links. Which is why many post users including myself are using hacks to get things done. And this is also the reason why some post users are staying away from Reaper. Having this will certainly make reaper more powerful than any other DAW for surround work I hope the developers are listening.

EvilDragon · 02-24-2018, 12:43 PM

Sounds like you're still at step 1 of that 5-step program, then

It's not just Reaper post guys who use hacks to get things done, it is also present in all other possible workflows (if you're using a script, you're using a "hack", technically

). Plenty of hacks are to be had because Reaper is not a singular experience from UI/UX perspective, everything is bolted on as time was progressed and things cobbled together because there's no clear picture or product roadmap for Reaper. Devs do whatever they want to do, however they want, whenever, sprinkling some user feature requests along the way, and it's been that way pretty much for as long as I can remember. Sure it's an agile development, but it's not a particularly well-managed one, I feel. If it were better managed, everyone would feel it through the consistency and congruency of the interface an UX, but that hasn't solidified for Reaper yet. I wonder if it ever will.

BTW this is not a jab at devs, it's a fact of how things are as far as Reaper development is concerned, and anyone coming from a properly managed agile development team would say the same.

svijayrathinam · 02-24-2018, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvilDragon

Define "a lot of post users"... You can't because we don't have the numbers, but it's still unlikely they make up a great majority of Reaper users, which makes it a very specific sort of workflow. The overwhelming majority of Reaper users would be your regular mix engineers or composers, then people using Reaper for live sound reinforcement, field recordings and such, and only then come sound designers, podcasters and so on. Post and mastering guys I'd put at the smallest percentage of users. Just eyeballing it from the forum discussions and dissecting the forum userbase (I've been here for 8 years, so just a basic observation).

I personally don't work in surround (which I also think reflects the biggest part of Reaper userbase), so I don't feel the need to support a more sophisticated surround workflow. And devs are the same - they don't work in post, they use Reaper as your regular composition/mixing tool, so asking support for very specific use cases is not going to be an easy thing to accomplish.

This is also why I think they thought it would be better to separate surround processing into ReaSurround, once when critical mass happened to make surround panning in Reaper, years ago. Also, now that they already did that work, I don't think they'd feel motivated enough to copy all that work into native track panners where there's a LOT more things that can break (themes, scripts, extensions, all sorts of actions, etc.)... Just a personal hunch, nothing more.

BTW, it's natural for everyone diving into Reaper community and seeing how devs operate to wish for all their pet feature requests to be fulfilled, but this is of course not possible, and you have to be realistic about it. White Tie (Reaper default theme creator) actually condensed it nicely into 5 steps. I've been in that cycle before when I was fresh on this forum

https://forum.cockos.com/showpost.ph...6&postcount=35

Again... You are missing the point totally. This is not a petty feature request. Obviously many people have complained about this. Just because you don't use surround it doesn't make it a petty feature... Jog on...

P. S.. I have a fairly decent workflow thanks to cockos and third party developers like AATranslator and Vordio. Think what you want.. even going by that rating you put... I am on level 5. Bringing important issues to the community to discuss.

EvilDragon · 02-24-2018, 12:49 PM

Of course, no FR is "petty" ever in the eyes of the one being vocal about it. Again - step 1 of the 5 step program!

You didn't have to quote me twice to say that

Jog on

(Also I never said it's a petty feature. Those are your words, not mine.)

svijayrathinam · 02-24-2018, 12:56 PM

"it's not a particularly well-managed one, I feel. If it were better managed, everyone would feel it through the consistency and congruency of the interface an UX, but that hasn't solidified for Reaper yet. I wonder if it ever will."

Looks like you are in level 4 mate 😂🤣🤣🤣🤣

EvilDragon · 02-24-2018, 12:59 PM

Nope, step 6, actually.

Wouldn't you wanna know what that one is?

svijayrathinam · 02-24-2018, 01:02 PM

" (Also I never said it's a petty feature. Those are your words, not mine.)"

Thats exactly what you come across like when you say things like " won't happen" when you are not the developer.

svijayrathinam · 02-24-2018, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvilDragon

Nope, step 6, actually.

Wouldn't you wanna know what that one is?

Oh... Well... That step is probably your double standardness...��

fetidus · 02-24-2018, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freex

Protools is and has always been playing catch up with alot of "smaller companies".
Clients will expect it, but that's just their preconceived notion that THAT is what the pros use. Of course alot do, but imho that's down to hardware than desire or design.
For those clients, put a Protools theme up and 90% won't even know the difference lol.
Coming from Sonar, as I dumped Protools and Cubase many moons ago, I'd say Reaper is very misleading. Your initial thoughts (well mine anyway) were this is so basic, a toy, yet so complexed, nothing worked how I expected it to.
The big part there is my expectations, I was used to paying $$$ (well actually £££) for my daw, and there very modest price tag on Reaper, made me expect less.
Which is so far from the truth. There is so much to learn, which is daunting, everything can be customised. Once you poke your head into the rabbit hole, and tweak a few thkngs, you really start to see the potential, the possibilitis.
Yes there are going to be sacrifices, but these are cosmetic or visual. You'll not end up with a lesser end product, you may end up getting there faster.

Definitely feeling what Reaper is all about now... I just simply didn't understand it over the last 9-ish years (can't remember when I started) that I've used it for basic tasks! And now that I started looking deep, I keep on discovering fabulous features here and there that people in my shoes would LOVE, but the features are so buried, it took me YEARS to find out about them! Kind of crazy, but I get it now. And as for getting there faster, no question that for a large number of my tasks, Reaper will do that, hands down.

Bri1 · 02-24-2018, 02:29 PM

Quote:

This Surround panner is the one of the very few missing links. Which is why many post users including myself are using hacks to get things done. And this is also the reason why some post users are staying away from Reaper. Having this will certainly make reaper more powerful than any other DAW for surround work I hope the developers are listening.

Allo- sorry to reasuggest-- but tbch once you have 8 mono tracks going to 8 channels >io< --that's all 1 needs to create surround sound.
Panning initself for audio is technically incorrect term--it's actually an imaging term--panning with audio is nothing more than volume.up+down...going to 1 or 8 channels.simplex.
For post or scoring,reaper will do the jobs.it really depends on the operators abilities ++ computer/softwares stabilities. =)

fetidus · 02-24-2018, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvilDragon

It's not just Reaper post guys who use hacks to get things done, it is also present in all other possible workflows (if you're using a script, you're using a "hack", technically

). Plenty of hacks are to be had because Reaper is not a singular experience from UI/UX perspective, everything is bolted on as time was progressed and things cobbled together because there's no clear picture or product roadmap for Reaper. Devs do whatever they want to do, however they want, whenever, sprinkling some user feature requests along the way, and it's been that way pretty much for as long as I can remember. Sure it's an agile development, but it's not a particularly well-managed one, I feel. If it were better managed, everyone would feel it through the consistency and congruency of the interface an UX, but that hasn't solidified for Reaper yet. I wonder if it ever will.

BTW this is not a jab at devs, it's a fact of how things are as far as Reaper development is concerned, and anyone coming from a properly managed agile development team would say the same.

GREAT comment, thank you! I appreciate your honest assessment. Really made me think. This is one of the things that I couldn't express well in my OP but was bugging me about Reaper. But I think I'm starting to come to terms with it, and understand. I think that any serious, deep Reaper user probably has to eventually come to terms with this whole vibe about how Reaper is developed. For some people, it naturally fits their perspective, so there's no friction there... if anything, it might resonate for them on a fundamental level. But for other people, it can be a surprising, unexpected, unpredictable, maybe a little uncomfortable, or foreign, or even disconcerting adjustment. And for those expecting a normal "corporate" kind of relationship, be prepared for a little surprise.

And I have been deciding what that means for me, personally. There's part of the vibe of Reaper that is just not my style, to be honest, but there's another part of the vibe that I really like -- sort of a giant renegade FU to the DAW universe in which the developers are going to develop what the hell they want to develop, when the hell they want to develop it, and how they hell they want to develop it... and in so doing by their unique approach, they have ended up solving long-standing DAW paradigm issues along the way, that still plague other DAWs, and have created something incredibly deep and flexible, and definitely something unique! It's kind of a great story, actually. So that part of it -- sort of the "expression" of the developers' personal ethos embedded into their very development process -- is ever-present in Reaper. It is both its greatest asset IMO and, for some people, I can see how it may be its greatest limitation (or frustration).

And as I've finally more or less figured out this "vibe" I have to ultimately decide if I want to accept it or not... because I sure as hell won't be able to change it. Because Reaper IS Reaper, and it ain't gonna be anything different. Reaper, in its DNA, will NEVER be Pro Tools. Or Cubase. Or fill-in-the-blank. It is Reaper. Period.

And thus, it's not really even a product. It's an expression. It's a fascinating experiment in software development and frankly, a social statement or even piece of art done up in code. And honestly, I think Justin is really on to something very meta and very 21st-century. The Cockos team is NOT a normal development team, and it seems they attracted a core group of passionate users who resonate with their philosophy, plus the normal cadre of folks who just want a tool to get their stuff done, plus plenty of people who mistakenly think this is a "normal" company. And while I will admit that initially it made me a bit nervous, I think if I can shift my perspective a little, and let go of "normal" business expectations, Reaper could become much more than just a tool, but a slightly different way of thinking in general. And for that, I have to give huge kudos to Justin for what he's been doing.

Congrats, Justin and all the team, contributors, and the whole Reaper community -- you guys have made something totally, utterly unique, something extraordinarily powerful and useful, but something more than that too -- the very DNA of which is about personal expression, from the coding right down to how the user can forge it into his/her OWN expression. And in that sense, this is something far more than just another DAW.

I get it now.

EvilDragon · 02-24-2018, 02:48 PM

Yep. You got it exactly right, 10/10.

fetidus · 02-24-2018, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvilDragon

Yep. You got it exactly right, 10/10.

And to think it only took me 9+ years! ;-)

machinesworking · 02-24-2018, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvilDragon

Sure it's an agile development, but it's not a particularly well-managed one, I feel. If it were better managed, everyone would feel it through the consistency and congruency of the interface an UX, but that hasn't solidified for Reaper yet. I wonder if it ever will.

BTW this is not a jab at devs, it's a fact of how things are as far as Reaper development is concerned, and anyone coming from a properly managed agile development team would say the same.

To be fair, (and you're not being at all unfair here, just pointing out the obvious elephant in the room), no DAW I know of has a 'properly managed agile development team', and of course none of them are solely concerned with the existing user base.

An example would be MOTU and DP, it's biggest audience is film and TV composers, who often use scoring software because DAWs don't offer enough for staff sheets to be printed for classical musicians to play out the parts written in DP etc. DP gets new guitar FX... That theme gets played out a lot in other DAWs, everyone is competing with Logics huge built in instrument and FX collection. I'm pretty happy that Reaper has a horribly simple synth built in, it means they're worrying about improving what's there, not embedded FX to attract new users.

EpicSounds · 02-24-2018, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fetidus

BTW, been playing with Subprojects this morning... and so far I have inserted about 15 subprojects into one parent project, with several nested sub-subprojects too, and it seems to work pretty well. But the tabs are getting REALLY congested. Would be really nice if I could rename a subproject... any suggestions?

Also, let me know if you guys have ever reached limits. This is the tip of the iceberg for me, and I can imagine many dozens or even hundreds of subprojects in a massive project.

I don't think you're really getting the performance benefit if you're keeping all those subprojects open. Just close the project tabs.

Renaming, in the main project you can right-click, item properties. Rename file.
This will make the file offline in the project and need to be rendered again. so not ideal.
In finder you can rename both the .rpp and .rpp-PROX files the same, and then item properties-choose new file in your main project. don't have to render again.

fetidus · 02-24-2018, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EpicSounds

I don't think you're really getting the performance benefit if you're keeping all those subprojects open. Just close the project tabs.

Right, I can close tabs, but I'm not so much talking about limits of open tabs, but rather limits of total number of subprojects inside a parent project. I'm assuming there is NO limit, but I've only tested up to about 20 now. And I definitely wouldn't keep all the tabs open, but was wondering if anyone hit some sort of practical limit of subprojects in general.

Quote:

Originally Posted by EpicSounds

Renaming, in the main project you can right-click, item properties. Rename file.
This will make the file offline in the project and need to be rendered again. so not ideal.

Fantastic! This is great, and I didn't know you could that! I was searching all over, and I already had submitted a feature request, but updated to ask the mods to delete it: https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=203692

Thank you!

Quote:

Originally Posted by EpicSounds

In finder you can rename both the .rpp and .rpp-PROX files the same, and then item properties-choose new file in your main project. don't have to render again.

Yep, and you can also edit the filenames INSIDE the Reaper save file manually with a text editor... so there are a few ways to do this! Thanks for the heads up that rename feature already exists!

fetidus · 02-24-2018, 03:52 PM

Just added a Feature Request for something I think film/video folks could really benefit from:

Add ruler option: Measures.Beats / Hours:Minutes:Seconds:Frames or add multiple, movable rulers with unique settings per ruler.

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=203691

Hopefully the devs see it... the most simplistic version of that FR seems like it could be fairly quick to implement since there's an option already very similar to it in the menu.

svijayrathinam · 02-24-2018, 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bri1

Allo- sorry to reasuggest-- but tbch once you have 8 mono tracks going to 8 channels >io< --that's all 1 needs to create surround sound.
Panning initself for audio is technically incorrect term--it's actually an imaging term--panning with audio is nothing more than volume.up+down...going to 1 or 8 channels.simplex.
For post or scoring,reaper will do the jobs.it really depends on the operators abilities ++ computer/softwares stabilities. =)

Hahaha.... Great joke... Keep going...🤣🤣🤣

zookthespook · 02-24-2018, 10:25 PM

Since I moved to reaper three years ago, I have scored 5 film scores. Over a hundred commericals and about 10 songs.
Reaper almost and beyond does everything that other Daws can or cannot do. There are a few things I miss in reaper from other dates
1. Retrospective record.
2. Playlist function (protools)
3. The range tool (protools/cubase)
4. Selecting multiple lanes of automation and edit them at the same time .
5.tempo track (protools) /time warp (cubase)
6. Thumbnail view of video ( though I don't miss it much now)
7. The behaviour of ctrl+d in midi editor is very different from cubase and other daws.

Chris Hurst Music · 02-25-2018, 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zookthespook

Since I moved to reaper three years ago, I have scored 5 film scores. Over a hundred commericals and about 10 songs.
Reaper almost and beyond does everything that other Daws can or cannot do. There are a few things I miss in reaper from other dates
1. Retrospective record.
2. Playlist function (protools)
3. The range tool (protools/cubase)
4. Selecting multiple lanes of automation and edit them at the same time .
5.tempo track (protools) /time warp (cubase)
6. Thumbnail view of video ( though I don't miss it much now)
7. The behaviour of ctrl+d in midi editor is very different from cubase and other daws.

This thread is great. I’m in the process of transitioning from Logic to Reaper for film work and find the flexibility in Reaper really useful.

Regarding point one above, there is a script that does the Logic/Cubase type of retrospective record, in case you haven’t seen it. More info in this thread:

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread....pective+record

zookthespook · 02-25-2018, 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Hurst Music

This thread is great. I’m in the process of transitioning from Logic to Reaper for film work and find the flexibility in Reaper really useful.

Regarding point one above, there is a script that does the Logic/Cubase type of retrospective record, in case you haven’t seen it. More info in this thread:

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread....pective+record

Hi yes it is a fantastic script. But does not work exactly as cubase does.
Unless I don't hit play ..the midi notes are not recorded in the buffer. While in cubase.even if I don't hit play and I am practising something , it records everything and then puts it on the timeline ( though it may not be on time as no click reference exists while you are just jamming on ideas. However while just fleshing/figuring out a part , midi retrospective buffer has saved my ass if I accidentally worked out a phrase which I liked. This usually comes super handy when you have just opened a session and you are composing something without the intrusion of a click or a tempo bind.
Though the script is a lifesaver and there is a script for playlists

Though I personally feel reaper should officially support it.As many a times support on scripts gets abandoned half way in many cases.

EvilDragon · 02-25-2018, 01:40 AM

And warp grid is possible with SWS...

_Stevie_ · 02-25-2018, 04:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zookthespook

However while just fleshing/figuring out a part , midi retrospective buffer has saved my ass if I accidentally worked out a phrase which I liked.

Tell me about it, this function saved my life many times. I was just looking for a new theme and jamming around and Cubase had rcorded it.
I really wish there was fully featured retrospective record in Reaper.

And yes, timewarp is possible with SWS.

fetidus · 02-25-2018, 10:42 AM

Awesome info, guys, thank you again!

@ zookthespook -- I hear you about missing certain features, but so far I'm feeling the extra power of key Reaper features will compensate, and also make me look at my project management and workflow differently, or even replace a workflow I used to have with Cubase, for example.

For example, re: missing PT Playlist function (BTW, Cubase added something very similar in Cubase 7.5 called Track Versions), I agree, that would be great for Reaper. However, I think with subprojects, one can create a different but interesting workflow that picks up some of the slack of missing the Playlist feature. I'm still working through the ramifications of what Subprojects can do for me in real-world projects, but it can fill in some gaps of beloved "missing" features from other DAWs. i.e., I'm thinking it could cover a lot of interesting creative bases if you use Subprojects as little bins of ideas/variations and then you can slice/dice/edit the proxy WAV in the parent project to access the ideas/variations. Obviously, very different than playlists/track versions, but can be used very flexibly in ways that can also go beyond playlists/track versions in some ways, depending on how you use them. Just a thought.

Bri1 · 02-25-2018, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Hahaha.... Great joke... Keep going...🤣🤣🤣

^Lol? it's no joke m8--your obviously not understanding how it all works,yet you 'say' you work in film... now that's funnier bruv.

Can you describe why that suggestion is not valid?
Explain away..

EpicSounds · 02-25-2018, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bri1

^Lol? it's no joke m8--your obviously not understanding how it all works,yet you 'say' you work in film... now that's funnier bruv.

Can you describe why that suggestion is not valid?
Explain away..

you're just trolling now. he has explained many times already.