[REAPER] v 5.50 new features (automation items, more..)

[xbitz]

I like how the topic is REAPER 5.50 and the discussion is about Cubase and FL Studio.

we are talking about automation items other DAWs vs Reaper, not fully off

[SJ_Digriz]

yeah, back to my original response ...

Cudos to Reaper for at least trying, but still no cigar.

[nineofkings]

Automation items are whatever. Spectral editing, now that's where it's at. Most natural de-essing and de-breathing I've ever heard, takes 5 minutes, and that's just scratching the surface.

[elxsound]

Automation items are whatever. Spectral editing, now that's where it's at. Most natural de-essing and de-breathing I've ever heard, takes 5 minutes, and that's just scratching the surface.

Whoa, that's a nice feature. I haven't upgraded to 5, but I might just go this route as I finish up a couple projects. I have spectral editing tools and I have adobe audition, but this looks easier to work with.

[elxsound]

Just realized that this is Stillwell's Spectro as a native/inline Reaper tool. That's just nice. It won't replace RX, but many times RX is overkill and Spectro could be tedious to work with at times.

[soulone82]

I like how the topic is REAPER 5.50 and the discussion is about Cubase and FL Studio.

Hell yeah, Jon!

[yellowmix]

Basically you could make an MIDI event with the automation you want to save. You can then save the event as a MIDI file in Mediabay. No drag to desktop required. You could do the same with an audio archive. It's a ridiculously tedious and cumbersome approach to do something simple. Especially all the steps and no use tracke creation required to bring the events back to use in your project.

Am I missing something? Reaper Automation Items can be saved/loaded and aren't bound/linked to a specific Media Item. I skimmed the Advanced Automation video and the only difference seems to be specific workflows.

[SJ_Digriz]

Basically you could make an MIDI event with the automation you want to save. You can then save the event as a MIDI file in Mediabay. No drag to desktop required. You could do the same with an audio archive. It's a ridiculously tedious and cumbersome approach to do something simple. Especially all the steps and no use tracke creation required to bring the events back to use in your project.

Am I missing something? Reaper Automation Items can be saved/loaded and aren't bound/linked to a specific Media Item. I skimmed the Advanced Automation video and the only difference seems to be specific workflows.

oh, you meant how in Reaper ... sorry the question came after my explanation of the limitations/cumbersomeness of Cubase in this regard.

[brainzistor]

FL Studio : It's so simple even he can use it.
Cubase / Reaper : The contrary.

Imagine you have 32 tracks and automate each volume with FL Studio.
It's totally a nightmare.

If someone only automate a few Cutoff knobs, then FL Studio can be a choice.

You are obviously a beginner who doesn't even know how to do basic stuff.
Unlike traditional DAW's in FL Studio tracks in playlist are not locked to mixer, which means you can drag patterns/clips and automation clips up and down in playlist and organize them however you want which is advantage. You can put them on top of each other if you want.
You can group them and shrink them so that they don't mess your working space, here are 32 automation clips shrinked:



If you want to edit them, you can expand the group and do the editing.
Additionally, if you want to control volume of let's say 5 synths at the same time but you have them on different tracks in mixer (different effects), you can press ctrl+shit and click on their tracks in mixer and route them to another track (by choosing "route to this track only" and then create automation clip for volume of that track and that way to control volume of 5 synths at the same. The same thing you would do if you want to apply same the reverb or effects to a group of instruments.
Now, when people are beginners and don't know basics like this or they don't use their brains, they will create 5 automation clips for each synth and then start drawing same automation clips for 5 synths and call that a nightmare.

[xbitz]

If you want to edit them, you can expand the group and do the editing.
Additionally, if you want to control volume of let's say 5 synths at the same time but you have them on different tracks in mixer (different effects), you can press ctrl+shit and click on their tracks in mixer and route them to another track (by choosing "route to this track only" and then create automation clip for volume of that track and that way to control volume of 5 synths at the same. The same thing you would do if you want to apply same the reverb or effects to a group of instruments.

but in this case their send levels remain same, isn't it ... this is why traditionally DAWs use VCA faders

in this case the send levels also gonna change, grouping doesn't solve this

[Trancit]

If you want to edit them, you can expand the group and do the editing.
Additionally, if you want to control volume of let's say 5 synths at the same time but you have them on different tracks in mixer (different effects), you can press ctrl+shit and click on their tracks in mixer and route them to another track (by choosing "route to this track only" and then create automation clip for volume of that track and that way to control volume of 5 synths at the same. The same thing you would do if you want to apply same the reverb or effects to a group of instruments.

but in this case their send levels remain same, isn't it ... this is why traditionally DAWs use VCA faders

in this case the send levels also gonna change, grouping doesn't solve this

I wouldn´t say, that the mixer routing is ahead of traditional DAWs, but the automation system for sure...
The biggest advantage of FLS´s sytem is, that 1 automation source can be used for as many targets as you want...
I.e. you used a plugin on 20 different tracks and want to set it bypass at a given point in time...
In FLS you need 1 automation source (there are many different one can use for this task) let´s say an automation clip... this clip can be linked to a every single instance of this plugin ... track and mixer independent...
In a traditional DAW, you have to make an automation lane for every single instance...

1 clip against 20 automation lanes...

On top of that, you got complete (mathematical and user defineable) control, how one and the same source can control how many and whatever parameter you like in this project...

Bitwig is the only other DAW offering a similar flexible system, mostly copied from FLS imho...

[xbitz]

yepp, it's problematic in S1, Sonar, Reaper, but Cubase has quite free MIDI routing (with MIDI CC based automation clips) system and VST linking so with those VSTfxes which have useful macro based modulation system (with MIDI learning) like Serumfx, Reaktor Blocks, Zebirfy etc. it's not epic fail compared with FL

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qioxtbp8_ZE

[inkwarp]

press ctrl+shit

my favortist FL shortcut.

[brainzistor]

but in this case their send levels remain same, isn't it ... this is why traditionally DAWs use VCA faders
in this case the send levels also gonna change, grouping doesn't solve this

Their send levels don't remain the same, you just don't have animation of moving faders and literally nothing else.
If you have one track at 20% and the other one at 80% and you route them to 3rd track, that ratio remains the same if you use fader of 3rd track to control their volume or send levels. The only difference is that you don't see their faders moving.
If you choose "route to this track only" those tracks FL Studio disconnects automatically from master, the track you routed them to becomes their master.
So, what you are saying is not even making any sense because it would be like saying that if you start moving down master fader that send levels of tracks in mixer remains the same.

[xbitz]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9z5zgKWs2I

"The only difference is that you don't see their faders moving."
that't the point of the whole VCA fadering, they should move if u want independent send levels