Reaper ... what i like/dislike

[EvilDragon]

I hate this one Media browser docks and blocks the mixer .... ouch ?

Nope, you can dock them side by side, that's not a problem at all. Watch:


http://i.imgur.com/p9Kp1.gif

No paint , No scissor , or No eraser tool ..... what get outta here ?

Use mouse modifiers... It's easier and FASTER.

[RunBeerRun]

I run Wasapi with 50 samples buffer, 3ms latency. It goes so super low!

[LawrenceF]

Likes: Smooth audio editing and mixing. Portability. General stability. Low price. Quick fixes. Great user base. Fantastic wildcard export rendering. Easy clip and track bouncing. Great track templates.

Dislikes: Midi editing. Lack of a track inspector. Too wide use of edit dialogs. Too many gaps in drag and drop functionality. Inability to directly edit automation across multiple tracks and can't move automation lanes around. Non-editable frozen bits.

Great for mixing stems or recording and mixing audio. Not so great for more conventional midi work. Universal tracks have multiple advantages as relates to putting any media on any track but have disadvantages as relates to track filtering since there is only one track class.

[lfm]

Dislikes: Midi editing. Lack of a track inspector. Too wide use of edit dialogs. Too many gaps in drag and drop functionality. Inability to directly edit automation across multiple tracks and can't move automation lanes around. Non-editable frozen bits.

Great for mixing stems or recording and mixing audio. Not so great for more conventional midi work. Universal tracks have multiple advantages as relates to putting any media on any track but have disadvantages as relates to track filtering since there is only one track class.

A few things comes to mind:

Track inspector: There is a thread on cockos forum that one guy had a video how to do track inspector as screen set. Sonar style kind of.

Edit dialogs: Either you get more hidious menues or you get dialogs. I think balance is better now than when I got 3.6. It was like reading a novel each time you open a menu. And I like the clever search/find thingy in some dialogs to find what you want in any tab.

Automation lanes: I try to plan structure with track folders to only run automation where needed, and not duplicate.

Or select a number of tracks and adjust fader and all are adjusted automations as well(if having the default trim+read style). This would work for any automation that has a control in TCP.

And you can easiliy collaps and expand child tracks as needed and save space. Working with stems I guess you already use that a lot.

Track filtering: I like the filter by track name in track manager. So keep something in trackname that tells what kind of track it is. I never use both audio and midi in one track, unless plugins demand it anyway.

I am to investigate to use the property Audio:none Midi:none stuff to do things. Are there command actions or SWS extentions already for that, maybe?

[LawrenceF]

Yeah, unfortunately that's not a track inspector, it's just a mixer channel. People point to that when it comes up but it's not the same thing.

[lfm]

Yeah, unfortunately that's not a track inspector, it's just a mixer channel. People point to that when it comes up but it's not the same thing.

What exactly do you mean by track inspector?

You have plenty layout options( 8 ) for mixer as well.

Is Sonar your reference - or what?

Thanks.

[EnGee]

Yeah, unfortunately that's not a track inspector, it's just a mixer channel. People point to that when it comes up but it's not the same thing.

What exactly do you mean by track inspector?

You have plenty layout options( 8 ) for mixer as well.

Is Sonar your reference - or what?

Thanks.

Maybe LawrenceF means this?
http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=64915

I agree that cubase has a very good track inspector. It would be nice to have something like this in Reaper. All (or most of) the functions for the track in one place.

[JoseC.]

Universal tracks have multiple advantages as relates to putting any media on any track but have disadvantages as relates to track filtering since there is only one track class.

I've always failed to understand why universal tracks are a "feature". A track is just a container for data. There are, like, TWO kinds of data, so having a container specifically tailored to each seems better than having a single generic one. Calling it "universal" (for a universe of two) sounds like bad marketing to me.

[EvilDragon]

Universal is because it can be an audio and a MIDI track, and send and receive AND instrument AND effect track at the same time. Oh, AND a folder, too. All at once. Doesn't matter if you'll actually going to do it or not, but you can.

[lfm]

Maybe LawrenceF means this?
http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=64915

I agree that cubase has a very good track inspector. It would be nice to have something like this in Reaper. All (or most of) the functions for the track in one place.

Thank you.

But maybe with some selectable levels of info then.

If every darn property of a track and all items with separate fx in the track, and all dialogs into one gui - your lost.

In Sonar X1 they have added a lot of clumpsy stuff like prochannel, destination track with faders and I hated it. And they moved insert fx bay to track inspector only if I remember correct - so when in TCP you had no idea what was running on the tracks.

That post was from 2010(updated 2011).

Now in MCP you have track Insert FX and sends(Pro Tools style kind of) if you increase size upwards on MCP. And show fx parameters as well if size permits.

You can choose to have fx insert as sidebar or protools style above.

And with a button for a command action to select a screenset you switch between what you use the most. Overview of what is running is pretty good in my world. Only thing I always miss is what tracks have envelopes with a quick look even when hidden as such in lanes(but it could be something I missed in settings).

When talking about Reaper features I look at what is showstoppers and what is "nice to have".

[EnGee]

In Sonar X1 they have added a lot of clumpsy stuff like prochannel, destination track with faders and I hated it. And they moved insert fx bay to track inspector only if I remember correct - so when in TCP you had no idea what was running on the tracks.

Actually I like how Sonar X1 looks. Pressing "i" shows me the inspector with a very nice and organised info. Pressing it again, it folds to the side. I use the "i", "c", "b", "d" and "m" (I linked "m" to the mixer) all the time and became a second nature. I don't feel the interface is clumsy at all.

Anyway, in reaper I also can't see the info of the effects unless pressing the customised "/" key to show the mixer. So, almost the same when seeking more info for the track.

For about one week I'm evaluating Sonar, Studio one and reaper (besides some others) and those three are my finalists.

In my opinion:
Sonar wins in midi editing, additional features like step sequencer and matrix view. Also I like how it looks more than the others.

Studio One wins in ease of use. It is very well organised and has very good design. I didn't need any manual or had any question about it! It is also very stable.

Reaper wins in cpu usage, price and how small the download size while offering the most for the money.

In the end I will choose the most I feel comfortable with (money is an issue also!)

When talking about Reaper features I look at what is showstoppers and what is "nice to have".

Sorry i didn't understand what you mean. Do you mean that for you "Nice to have" is not "showstopper"? Or do you mean people (or me) don't understand the difference?

-

[EnGee]

double post!! sorry

[hibidy]

If I follow, I know what you mean about the sonar keys and then having that right there. But actually I ended up liking reaper better.

Once you get to where all plugs and windows open in the docker, "alt-d" changes that view. I have my mixer, all plugs, performance, etc. Of course you can change it too, doesn't have to be docked the same. You can have things docked pretty much however you want. But like anything else, it's preference. For me, mostly, reaper docking is good. ymmv.

[manducator]

Nope, you can dock them side by side, that's not a problem at all. Watch:


http://i.imgur.com/p9Kp1.gif

I don't get it. What do you do on the left part of the screen, double click, drag?

EDIT: I got it, dragging.

[EnGee]

If I follow, I know what you mean about the sonar keys and then having that right there. But actually I ended up liking reaper better.

Once you get to where all plugs and windows open in the docker, "alt-d" changes that view. I have my mixer, all plugs, performance, etc. Of course you can change it too, doesn't have to be docked the same. You can have things docked pretty much however you want. But like anything else, it's preference. For me, mostly, reaper docking is good. ymmv.

The docking is nice and flexible. However, the midi editing defaults is strange for me (like double click to add a note). Is there a choice also to have the no "smart" way of editing?
Maybe I need to assign shortcuts to add/delete/split/mute.. notes.

I think I need to spend some time to assign some shortcuts! I just don't know why they designed it this way?
I remember it when it was 0.xx version. I thought it was Acid Pro clone, but with time it took another direction. It was an audio app only, so midi was added later (maybe this is why midi is not in the same league with audio).

Anyway, I still like it a lot and it is definitely a good buy.