FX Container`

[operator]

Guys Guys.... Don´t we all waste time here... voluntarily... everybody who post in here and brings some kind of idea to the table is welcome.

IF we all can display our desired workflow or our vision for the FX-Container, the better picture we are drawing for the Devs, which then decide if it makes sense to implement it or not.

I also would rather have it like Ableton/Bitwig (Nested Channels inside a Track) than a Tool like BlueCat`s Patchwork or FL-Patcher... But in the end the best solution will be the one that will be realized, based on the benefits for the End-User.

As long as we give a palette of different concepts, I am confident to say that the Devs will choose and do the "rightest" of all soluions. They know best what fits Reaper.

[mschnell]

Maybe at first collecting some issues to be considered:

• Working virtually if possible: not necessarily adding Audio transitions vs a simple FX chain
• optional sample rate conversion
• parameter linking / versatile parameter-macro capability (container-parameter -> user definable function -> child parameter)
• Routing. Considering audio channels, Midi Buses, etc
• Containers should be able to be part of other containers
• FX chain presets
• Parameter modulation (see the [PARAM] menue for plugins)
• usable for binaries and JSFXs (mind different handling of midi Buses)
• PDC
• ...

-Michael

[operator]

Originally Posted by mschnell

Maybe at first collecting some issues to be considered:

• Working virtually if possible: not necessarily adding Audio transitions vs a simple FX chain
• optional sample rate conversion
• parameter linking / versatile parameter-macro capability (container-parameter -> user definable function -> child parameter)
• Routing. Considering audio channels, Midi Buses, etc
• Containers should be able to be part of other containers
• FX chain presets
• Parameter modulation (see the [PARAM] menue for plugins)
• usable for binaries and JSFXs (mind different handling of midi Buses)
• PDC
• ...

-Michael

Yes you might be right, some of them need to be taken into concideration on the road to a FX-Container. e.g. PDC, Parm linking and Macros.. the later one I can see implemented during creating a Container very elegantly.

[mtk]

Maybe containers could be able to handle macros and modulations like in Bitwig...

[mschnell]

IMHO, its perfectly obvious how Macros should work (provided the functions are restricted to linear).
And regarding modulation etc, containers obviously should work like usual plugins.
Hence no need to borrow something from somewhere...
-Michael

[operator]

Originally Posted by mtk

Maybe containers could be able to handle macros [...] like in Bitwig...

This would be such an amazing win for all the electronic artists and sound-designer (Film/Game) which work for a (Film)Composer, a Studio or similar.. e.g. Howard Scarr for Hans Zimmer --> He created Zebra Presets with Macro-Controls for Hans to play with later on in the creative composition process (XYmacros).

It is so NICE to be able to create a complex Preset with a free choice of several Synths/Samplers, Reverbs, Delays, Waveshapers, FXs, Routing(sidechain and SC-ducking) etc... And then control them later with 4 to 8 Knobs, which some of them control more than one Prameter spread over several FX.

The music/sound is coming so much alive so quickly with this kind of workflow. A FX-Container would therefore introduce new, faster and modern workflow methods which would benefit the creative process of so many artists spread over several disciplines (Like the Razor Edit that is being introduced at the moment. Everybody seems to benefit from it, as I can read in the Pre-Release forum)

[manthosdm]

Yes! +1 from me too! I have wanted something like this for a looooong time!

[tonalstates]

Yes PLEASE +1111111

[nzayirodrick]

Just chiming in on this thread as I posted a thread about this feature request on the Reaper DAW Facebook group and a reaper thread and I was directed to this one.


+1 With this feature request as the FX list can be become cluttered quickly. It's not fun scratching your head the next day when you have FX instances, alongside your chain of FX all dropping down on the same list. I resort to writing notes on where my chain ends or up until recently, making a dummy FX instance that's bypassed to create separation.

The possibilities with this feature would be endless with options for automation, parallel processing the FX containers, ease of access and an organised workflow.

Reference:

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=175197

Request:
- Ability to toggle groups of plugins with a single checkbox.
- Collapsible group toggle.
- Nesting - an FX group can be added within another FX group.

[Ideosound]

I would welcome this FR, especially if it was handled much like live's/bitwig FX racks & macro approach. I think it has be flexible but still FAST and easy to use rather than super complex like a full patcher. At least to start with.

[deeb]

Originally Posted by nzayirodrick

Just chiming in on this thread as I posted a thread about this feature request on the Reaper DAW Facebook group and a reaper thread and I was directed to this one.


+1 With this feature request as the FX list can be become cluttered quickly. It's not fun scratching your head the next day when you have FX instances, alongside your chain of FX all dropping down on the same list. I resort to writing notes on where my chain ends or up until recently, making a dummy FX instance that's bypassed to create separation.

The possibilities with this feature would be endless with options for automation, parallel processing the FX containers, ease of access and an organised workflow.

Reference:

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=175197

Request:
- Ability to toggle groups of plugins with a single checkbox.
- Collapsible group toggle.
- Nesting - an FX group can be added within another FX group.

but the visual flow of parallel and serial sequence would still be complicated. Probably this with FX rack FX would work nicely. Anyway manny approaches are good.

One good of them (simple!!) plus Pre, main and Post chain would be EVEN.

Or just this: https://www.bluecataudio.com//show_s...image=main.png

[ferropop]

For all their flaws, Waves Studio Rack feels super intuitive and can do some amazingly complicated things in a really visual and straight-forward way. Been using it a ton lately, and really cool to create your own multiband effects for things that were never designed to be used that way. ie, tape starts getting nasty really fast in the low end - so just dial it in on 200Hz+ only and leave the bass untouched -- yum.

[operator]

Originally Posted by ferropop

For all their flaws, Waves Studio Rack feels super intuitive and can do some amazingly complicated things in a really visual and straight-forward way. Been using it a ton lately, and really cool to create your own multiband effects for things that were never designed to be used that way. ie, tape starts getting nasty really fast in the low end - so just dial it in on 200Hz+ only and leave the bass untouched -- yum.

Yes the possibilities with such an FX Container are really mindblowing, especially if it would be native :-P. From just "monoing" the Lows (<200hz) to complex stuff which can be seen as almost a little Mixing-Plugin... -->

You can make all sorts of Crossovers things with it... for example: you also can seperate the Transients from the Body (phaseinversion) and treat them seperatly with different FX e.g. different Early Refelections, Dynamics and Waveshaper for the Transient part... --> Recipe for an extremly versatile Presence-/Transient-Shaper. And of course all the Mid-Side stuff could be made a little bit more convinient and more cleaned up.

And if you nest the Containers within each other you suddenly become more of a Plugin-Designer than a Sound-Designer. :-) --> Just look at all the super popular AbletonRacks which are out there. One major reason people choose ableton.
This concept would fit so very much with Reaper ---> Users could create Custom FX and share them... EVEN if you are a non-coder you suddenly can contribute an amazing Idea of yours and share it with the community.

The more i think about it, the more I see the unlimited potential... AND in some way it IS ALREADY THERE... BUT IT is soooo unconvinient to use the Channels, Matrix Pin Connector, etc. and the graphical representation is just missing....
So for the Devs the realisation of this Feature would bring maxium gain for the user and the effort for them would be relativly mild because it wouldn´t be a complete new thing...

Just a Splitter-Merger-Concept would change SOOO MUCH. Please Devs think about it. :-)

---

[tonalstates]

+1 to all this, I've seen great things done and shared from FL's patcher and ableton racks, I just love reaper to much to go for either, would be great.

[ferropop]

It's truly unlimited, and honestly seems more in Reaper's wheelhouse than any other DAWs, so it's ironic that it's the one missing it.

Use Waves Studio Rack for 5 minutes and you'll instantly feel a crazy amount of power and creativity to do and try anything at all. The issue is, it is limited to Waves plugins - and all the super fun stuff (for us producers) is from other software companies.

To be able to work Studio Rack style, using any plugin of our choosing, combined with the infinitely-flexible routing Reaper is known for, would come close to being the Ableton killer in all honestly. Especially now that we have Razor Edits.

[deeb]

and please add "Mid side to each instance" just like we have the amazing dry/wet

[deeb]

i really like how FX rack from eugeen works (but has bugs and not native!)

What it's wrong with that design?

[mschnell]

Originally Posted by deeb

What it's wrong with that design?

AFAI remember: lack of documentation.

-Michael

[Reflected]

it's really a shame that we still don't have it.

my projects are flooded with tons of tracks just to make an fx chain that should be done in one single track.

this was wrong in 2009 when this was requested and it is wrong in 2021!

really sad situation in the fx window.

[deeb]

Originally Posted by mschnell

AFAI remember: lack of documentation.

-Michael

it's that kind of plugins that are self explanatory just by looking

[Reflected]

Originally Posted by Reflected

would it be so bad to have something like these in our Modular Monster DAW so called REAPER????

Do you know how many tracks I need to spend/flood in reaper to make such a simple routing?
just look and think about it...

STUDIO ONE: FX CHAIN ROUTINGS:



FLSTUDIO-PATCHER:



I don't care about how beautiful it will be, i just want to route properly and ease of eyes and mind while creating an fx chain idea without flooding my project with unnecessary tracks just for making a bit more complex fx chains

Please give it attention

* I wish *

if you won't let the devs understand how powerful and important feature this is for you, they won't know...

[vitalker]

Originally Posted by Reflected

* I wish *

if you won't let the devs understand how powerful and important feature this is for you, they won't know...

You do understand desire isn't enought? Even if it the devs' desire. If it would be easy to implement, they implemented it already! They also have a roadmap, so you should wait. Another reason may be they don't see a much sense in implementing it.

[deeb]

at some point it's easy for them to be inside of a bubble. Area selection was a good example of that.

[deeb]

Quoting from other thread:

Originally Posted by Reflected

Visual unlimited fx routing is much more productive and inspiring feature that could improve you mixing and your music and everything in your sound design + clean your project from many send tracks that are not really "sends".

what could be more important than this for a DAW to have ?

a support for LV2???
If this is what you think, than this is really sad for you and for everyone here.

To remind you, this is an official feature request from 2009 that got elevated. so why not giving it attention :/

I agree

[ferropop]

Agreed on "sends not really being sends". This is super common.

Let's say you want to add reverb to a single vocal, but EQ the reverb and duck it while the signal is happening, this is an entire send dedicated to just one track.

You probably have saturation on that vocal and should probably "send" it to the verb "pre-saturation", but "post Vocal EQ/Compression". Theres no way to do this because all we have is PreFX/Post-Fader etc. What you need is the ability to send "between" two plugins.

The Waves Studio Rack example lets you "fork out" parallel/multiband effects at any stage of the chain without any sends, creating a workflow that is not just infinitely more usable, but is actually impossible with a linear chain.

[Reflected]

we have to bring it to front somehow.
this can't be ignored...

Honestly, this is currently the only reason I'm still watching out if other DAW's updates.

[operator]

Indeed. This is very important in my opinion too. We need to keep the discussion going. :-P Just keep it relevant... that is what I also try the last months. :-)

:-)

If we just keep the discussion in here (not Pre-ReleaseForum), we can talk about it AS MUCH AS we want. ;-) If you understand what i mean *twink* *twink*

[functionform]

+1. Containers are incredible feature productivity tools in other daws. I really think it's the only modern daw feature I miss in Reaper.

[functionform]

Originally Posted by Reflected

it's really a shame that we still don't have it.

my projects are flooded with tons of tracks just to make an fx chain that should be done in one single track.

this was wrong in 2009 when this was requested and it is wrong in 2021!

really sad situation in the fx window.

not sure about the history, but agreed on track pollution. If Reapers scrolling/zooming wasn't so incredible, I probably would have left Reaper as my primary, especially in tracks when doing a lot of drum related effects.

[deeb]

Originally Posted by ferropop

Agreed on "sends not really being sends". This is super common.

it should be super common, but in the end i avoid using them because it's very complicated to manage and i tend to want more the fun part of producing.

[Reflected]

Originally Posted by deeb

it should be super common, but in the end i avoid using them because it's very complicated to manage and i tend to want more the fun part of producing.

ouch that sucks giving up on your ideas because of the DAW's GUI can give you a clear view of what is going on.

I totally feel ya

[deeb]

yeah but same feeling go into manny manny other stuff for different people.
in my perspective this feature considering a pre and post chain and ableton sync would be super super amazing for my "sound" but well it's life i have to wait and "pray" that at some point it might come.

[ferropop]

Originally Posted by deeb

yeah but same feeling go into manny manny other stuff for different people.
in my perspective this feature considering a pre and post chain and ableton sync would be super super amazing for my "sound" but well it's life i have to wait and "pray" that at some point it might come.

I think we make similar music because we always agree on the same feature requests lol. They tend to be things that Ableton is very very good at, because Reaper is very very good at literally everything else.

I know 100% the types of chains you guys are trying to make, and I believe there's a plugin that can recreate an Ableton/Waves style rack, just not natively. Let me try and find it, I remember reading about it but not bothering to look further. Maybe now is time.

[deeb]

maybe! but this (just like AS) is just a very widely needed feature across manny music styles, probably predominantly in modern electronic.

It's all about layers of sounds that are logically organised in a single track, and ability to freeze in a single track what i consider to be a single instrument/sound so that during project development i can free resources (mostly CPU) and have my precious latency as much as possible in minimal values. All this still being manageable.

Maybe you refer to: https://www.bluecataudio.com/Product...ct_PatchWork/?

if so that is what eugene copied the idea for FX rack, looks and principles are basically the same.

[operator]

To get the maximum potential out of such a concept, it just needs to be nativly integrated in my opinion.

MOSTLY it is a WORKFLOW specific tool similar to Subprojects. It unloads the cognitive load during working on a complex subject and therefore allows more detailed, defined and sophisticated structures. You suddenly start to do stuff you wouldn´t normally do because of how cumbersum something would be. A lot of stuff I did in Bitwig I only do nowadays when it is super, super necessary. Working fast as an electronic music producer is very important, especially when designing own sounds etc.. You constantly need to be in the "flow-state" and complex routigs aren´t the best friend of productivity.


It is a way of cleaning up and grouping different complex constructs you are working on or with e.g. Mixing-Tools, Multiband Everything, complex sounddesign, complex sends/sidechains and all related routings to this specific sound right where it needs to be --> at the sound source not on a 2nd and 3rd send track..

Imagine, only with the most basic FX-Container solution you already can create a Multiband Everything or you could easily access the Sidechain signal of a Compressor with an EQ. Or you can make every Reverb or Delay plugin filtered, gated, compressed right on the track super fast.

I ll bet noone of you is doing this regularly with all of your compressors or Reverbs... but when you got a container you suddenly start to do stuff like that. Because it is EASY

---> BTW... This kind of things are the new standard in modern music productions (ducked Verb and Delay, etc.)...

[mschnell]

Originally Posted by ferropop

Let me try and find it...

Supposedly it will not support JSFX, not Midi Buses, rather likely not 64 Audio channels, ...
-Michael

[ferropop]

Originally Posted by operator

To get the maximum potential out of such a concept, it just needs to be nativly integrated in my opinion.

MOSTLY it is a WORKFLOW specific tool similar to Subprojects. It unloads the cognitive load during working on a complex subject and therefore allows more detailed, defined and sophisticated structures. You suddenly start to do stuff you wouldn´t normally do because of how cumbersum something would be. A lot of stuff I did in Bitwig I only do nowadays when it is super, super necessary. Working fast as an electronic music producer is very important, especially when designing own sounds etc.. You constantly need to be in the "flow-state" and complex routigs aren´t the best friend of productivity.


It is a way of cleaning up and grouping different complex constructs you are working on or with e.g. Mixing-Tools, Multiband Everything, complex sounddesign, complex sends/sidechains and all related routings to this specific sound right where it needs to be --> at the sound source not on a 2nd and 3rd send track..

Imagine, only with the most basic FX-Container solution you already can create a Multiband Everything or you could easily access the Sidechain signal of a Compressor with an EQ. Or you can make every Reverb or Delay plugin filtered, gated, compressed right on the track super fast.

I ll bet noone of you is doing this regularly with all of your compressors or Reverbs... but when you got a container you suddenly start to do stuff like that. Because it is EASY

---> BTW... This kind of things are the new standard in modern music productions (ducked Verb and Delay, etc.)...

I'm unfortunately doing all of this regularly lol, have had to create a bunch of "fast as possible" workflows so that I don't get bogged down wasting time and not being creative. It barely does the job but I just have a hard head (and deadlines) lol.

[deeb]

With Area selection not so manny people was actively supporting the feature, and devs numb about its benefits but after implemented everyone says "best thing ever", "i can't leave without it now", blableble.

This one i think is kind of the same.

[operator]

Originally Posted by deeb

With Area selection not so manny people was actively supporting the feature, and devs numb about its benefits but after implemented everyone says "best thing ever", "i can't leave without it now", blableble.

This one i think is kind of the same.

Definitly. Same opinion over here. Workflow related Features are always a win for almost all users (even the ones who are a little bit conservative and primarly dislike unknown and new concepts).

[ferropop]

Originally Posted by operator

Definitly. Same opinion over here. Workflow related Features are always a win for almost all users (even the ones who are a little bit conservative and primarly dislike unknown and new concepts).

I think I was the most annoying person on the forum about Area Selection lol. In the end though, I think now that people have tried it they can't believe they've lived a single day without it.

I would recommend to anyone to try Waves Studio Rack (among many other good options). If you use it for 5 minutes I think that eureka moment will happen to literally everyone, of how powerful and easy it is - and how it's crazy we went so many years without it.