Go Back   Cockos Incorporated Forums > REAPER Forums > MIDI Hardware, Control Surfaces, and OSC

View Poll Results: Does Reaper need more MIDI love?
Yes, and I use MIDI a lot 111 76.55%
No, and I use MIDI a lot 13 8.97%
Yes, and I don't use MIDI much or at all 11 7.59%
No, and I don't use MIDI much or at all 10 6.90%
Voters: 145. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-28-2010, 12:19 PM   #41
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,489
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amazed View Post
Door knobs is for ??? Why do you want to turn a 1 click X close into 2 clicks hide/close? Better new icon for hide yes?
I tend to agree with this sentiment.
EvilDragon is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 12:23 PM   #42
Amazed
Human being with feelings
 
Amazed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Perth, W.A.
Posts: 1,649
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gwok View Post
well ive never used mmpiano (kontakt guy), though there's actions for midi transpose by octaves. Also, it seems patch changes is more of an issues with the softsampler, not the host.
When you can transpose a midi track in the track view by selecting the track and then pressing ] let me know how.
Amazed is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 12:24 PM   #43
DarthFader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 324
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gwok View Post
I think most of the negative reactions i see people have, are people just not wanting to adapt. I keep seeimg people saying things in the line of - we dont want innovation, we want want were used to. WHAT IS THAT! Then go back to cubase. There's so much wicked innovation in Reaper, all's one has to do is jump in, stop hating on minor issues, and make some music -
It isn't a minor issue it's a major issue.

The ones not wanting to adapt is reaper developers. They don't want to adapt the program to do midi the way midi people want, they want to force the users to adapt to the program through the use of JS third party hacks.

That's the bottom line.

This blame the users stuff doesn't fly with me.

Go to a Stanford MBA school, for example, and tell the professor that your business plan starts out with "The customer is always wrong!" and see what they think of the proposal.

It's popular around here to bash people who are (rightfully) unhappy with the way midi is done in reaper.

That isn't going to help reaper get better midi, it's just going to excommunicate all the people who are unhappy with it.

DF
DarthFader is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 12:28 PM   #44
chrisharbin
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 16,031
Default

Hmmmmmmmmmmm.

In reading this I am mostly confused about what exactly is needed. "midi love" is too subjective. What specifically is it with the midi that is so bad?

I find midi clunky to work with in all hosts. But I haven't noticed anything in reaper yet that is terribly hard to work with.

Finger groove extract/quantize solves that riddle (though it takes a while to understand it.......and I'm still not even close to realizing it's true power)

One particular thing I'd love to see is the tool pallet like cubase
chrisharbin is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 12:28 PM   #45
Amazed
Human being with feelings
 
Amazed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Perth, W.A.
Posts: 1,649
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthFader View Post
It isn't a minor issue it's a major issue.

The ones not wanting to adapt is reaper developers. They don't want to adapt the program to do midi the way midi people want, they want to force the users to adapt to the program through the use of JS third party hacks.

That's the bottom line.

This blame the users stuff doesn't fly with me.

Go to a Stanford MBA school, for example, and tell the professor that your business plan starts out with "The customer is always wrong!" and see what they think of the proposal.

It's popular around here to bash people who are (rightfully) unhappy with the way midi is done in reaper.

That isn't going to help reaper get better midi, it's just going to excommunicate all the people who are unhappy with it.

DF
I like this It' why I wont work in IT anymore. And you write concisely Sir.
Amazed is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 12:30 PM   #46
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,489
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amazed View Post
When you can transpose a midi track in the track view by selecting the track and then pressing ] let me know how.
The WHOLE MIDI track, as in, all items that are on that track?

Shouldn't be a problem with ReaScript.
EvilDragon is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 12:34 PM   #47
Amazed
Human being with feelings
 
Amazed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Perth, W.A.
Posts: 1,649
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
The WHOLE MIDI track, as in, all items that are on that track?

Shouldn't be a problem with ReaScript.
See. I get what you are saying. You can transpose the track but where is the visual indicator? It's like cloud computing? I need to see that the track is +5 semitones. That's the thing. Any ideas? And further as an end user I need to write script?
Amazed is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 12:38 PM   #48
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,489
Default

Gofer has it - you can use MIDI Tool JS effect as the first effect in your FX chain, and you can show those parameters as track controls. There's your feedback AND direct control.

Naturally, this doesn't visually change notes, only when playing. If I do this with ReaScript it WILL change actual MIDI notes, but you won't have a visual confirmation, other than seeing that the notes were moved...
EvilDragon is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 12:41 PM   #49
DarthFader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 324
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amazed View Post
See. I get what you are saying. You can transpose the track but where is the visual indicator? It's like cloud computing? I need to see that the track is +5 semitones. That's the thing. Any ideas?
See that's the whole problem with reaper midi.

Reaper and it's users developers see midi as data. Mostly data that they don't care about.

Real midi people, like you and me, see the midi as MUSIC. So, like your +5 semitone example, ok, you're harmonizing something with a 5th. Or whatever. +12 to shift octave on bass samples, etc.

So you want to SEE that.

In Reaper, Midi is like the retarded cousin they keep in the basement. The people doing the features don't (seem) to understand the musical implications or workflow of what real midi users are trying to achieve.

It's just data to them.

What we want is useful ways of dealing with this MUSICal data that we so dearly love.

Making everything look like a nail and hammering into various subwindows to find out what is really going on is just not productive, it's distracting and it distracts brain availability from focusing on the music to mousing and clicking around.

There are countless examples of this. Having to click to open midi to quantize as an example. It's like they themselves have never done a keyboard project in midi, they just read about midi on the internet and throw out some dog food to placate those dang midi users.

Having to click into ReaControlMidi just to change the PATCH on a hardware synth is truly insane.
I mean, the patch needs to be right there on the TCP. Heck, just to SEE what patch you have you'd have to open up a window with ReaControlMidi, instead of having it right on the TCP.

It's insane. Or is it inane? Maybe both.

It's like if you had to click your heels three times while rubbing your head just to delete a paragraph in microsoft word for example.

The purpose of these programs should be to STREAMLINE what people want to do, not throw up more and more roadblocks, pop up windows and barriers.

Not trying to be mean here -- but it really looks like the core devs are not big users of midi.

I think the core dev team could really use someone who LOVES and BREATHES midi and keyboards to really get that ship pointed in the right direction.

DF

Last edited by DarthFader; 06-28-2010 at 12:47 PM.
DarthFader is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 12:46 PM   #50
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,489
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthFader View Post
Not trying to be mean here -- but it really looks like the core devs are not big users of midi.

I think the core dev team could really use someone who LOVES and BREATHES midi and keyboards to really get that ship pointed in the right direction.
I seem to see the same picture you are. And I agree that if Cockos ever introduces another member of the dev team, he should be deeply tied with MIDI and improve greatly on that part of Reaper. There's so much that needs to be done to, yes you have the correct word, STREAMLINE working with MIDI in Reaper!
EvilDragon is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 12:50 PM   #51
Amazed
Human being with feelings
 
Amazed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Perth, W.A.
Posts: 1,649
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
I seem to see the same picture you are. And I agree that if Cockos ever introduces another member of the dev team, he should be deeply tied with MIDI and improve greatly on that part of Reaper. There's so much that needs to be done to, yes you have the correct word, STREAMLINE working with MIDI in Reaper!
++++++1
Amazed is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 12:53 PM   #52
Susan G
Human being with feelings
 
Susan G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Putnam County, NY, USA
Posts: 3,938
Default

Hi-

I appreciate the improvements I've seen in REAPER's MIDI handling so far. Definitely a +1 for me that it needs more "love", though!

Setting aside the missing tools and actions (for now ), the way REAPER handles split items in the MIDI editor still feels very awkward to me. I'd like to be able to open all items on a track in one editor without all the blank and disabled areas, so I could just move smoothly through the time line.

It feels very disjointed the way it is, and even though I know I can glue the items together first or click on different items to enable them as I go along, neither solution is ideal, IMO. I like being able to see split items in the arranger, but in the ME I'd like to be able to insert, move, or lengthen notes wherever I want without having to stretch the MIDI item manually or go back to the arrange pane to create a new one.

Coming from SONAR, REAPER's approach to this feels very clunky. MIDI data on a track should be a stream, but sometimes it feels more like I'm jumping from rock to rock!

BTW, I posted an FR that would add "View: Size to fit time selection" to the View options, which would make it a little easier to focus on one area of a longer MIDI item: http://forum.cockos.com/project.php?issueid=2630

Thanks-

-Susan
Susan G is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 12:55 PM   #53
Sid Chip
Human being with feelings
 
Sid Chip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 180
Default

Having recorded both live performances, and manually tracked things in Reaper's midi editor, for me, there really has only been two things that I, personally have missed / wished it had.

1) Delete duplicate notes.
I was experiencing an oddity where (I believe after quantizing) duplicate notes (same start position, usually same end position)

2) Delete tiny notes.
Recording a midi kick I was noticing a bucketload of these midi notes. In hindsight I probably had my TD3 set to wrong trigger type but, I really wished I could have easily done away with them.

That said, I dunno, I'm a musician, and a programmer (uh oh!) And I find myself being rather proficient in the midi editor. I come from the days of using FastTracker and I have to say it's miles ahead of tracking I can whip up drum beats very quickly, cutting and pasting away, creating glued chunks that I then pick and choose to make my song.

$0.02 thrown in, keep the change
Sid Chip is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 12:57 PM   #54
gwok
Human being with feelings
 
gwok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Nelson, BC
Posts: 3,313
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthFader View Post

The ones not wanting to adapt is reaper developers.

DF
I dont get that vibe at all. As I've said, Im not in disagreement about improving things, though based on what Reaper already is, it's seems to me the developers are right in line.
gwok is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 12:57 PM   #55
pcartwright
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 955
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by osranakurwa View Post
2-midi needs it's own track type instead of hammering it into the audio track type. it's pounding a square peg into a round hole. this must include selection boxes for choosing midi channel, bank, preset, etc for each track.
I also have to disagree with this one. Having specific tracks for just audio or just MIDI could compromise plugins that use audio to trigger MIDI events or vice versa.
pcartwright is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 01:00 PM   #56
DarthFader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 324
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gwok View Post
I dont get that vibe at all. As I've said, Im not in disagreement about improving things, though based on what Reaper already is, it's seems to me the developers are right in line.
What hardware synths do you own? How well do you play keyboards? How long have you been using reaper?

The fact that there is clearly a need for a track type that is dedicated to hardware midi and for years reaper has continued down the "one and only one" track type gives me that vibe.

DF
DarthFader is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 01:03 PM   #57
DarthFader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 324
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pcartwright View Post
I also have to disagree with this one. Having specific tracks for just audio or just MIDI could compromise plugins that use audio to trigger MIDI events or vice versa.
Having a dedicated track type for MIDI would not eliminate the ability to do that.

You could still have the (original as it stands) combo midi audio tracks etc.

What we want is the OPTION to have A NEW track type that is dedicated to midi and especially hardware midi.

One that shows the patch name, where the volume and pan controls send midi, where you have transposition at a click on the TCP.


Constantly, it gets thrown out here, that if they give us apples, they have to take away the oranges.

That isn't true at all. We want apples AND oranges, not apples OR oranges.

We want to streamline the visualization and working with MIDI data.

The fact is, MIDI note data is just plain different than a track that is just an audio recording.

There are different things you want to see and do in each case; unifying them refuses to acknowledge the fact that they are in fact different, at least in terms of how the controls, etc, should be presented.

It's like if you had only a vehicle track and it could be a horse or a car. Well, horses and cars are just different. Same with Midi and audio. Refusing to acknowledge the obvious and having to click into subwindows to feed grass to the horse or stick a hose in the car instead of having those controls on the TCP (based on being able to select car or horse) is really nonsensical.

Sure, it "works" and it "can be done" but it is not productive or convenient.

DF

Last edited by DarthFader; 06-28-2010 at 01:12 PM.
DarthFader is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 01:04 PM   #58
gwok
Human being with feelings
 
gwok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Nelson, BC
Posts: 3,313
Default

I routed midi to a hardware device the other night no problem, and saved it as a Patch?, and can recall it now too! No Problm
gwok is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 01:05 PM   #59
chrisharbin
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 16,031
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sid Chip View Post
Having recorded both live performances, and manually tracked things in Reaper's midi editor, for me, there really has only been two things that I, personally have missed / wished it had.

1) Delete duplicate notes.
I was experiencing an oddity where (I believe after quantizing) duplicate notes (same start position, usually same end position)

2) Delete tiny notes.
Recording a midi kick I was noticing a bucketload of these midi notes. In hindsight I probably had my TD3 set to wrong trigger type but, I really wished I could have easily done away with them.
good suggestions
chrisharbin is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 01:11 PM   #60
gwok
Human being with feelings
 
gwok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Nelson, BC
Posts: 3,313
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthFader View Post
We want apples AND oranges, not apples OR oranges.

DF
i dont disagree with that at all, I just really woudn;t want to see reaper become less flexible, in order to adhere to conventions that are addressed already in a really powerful way.
gwok is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 01:18 PM   #61
technogremlin
Human being with feelings
 
technogremlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2,607
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthFader View Post
What hardware synths do you own? How well do you play keyboards? How long have you been using reaper?

The fact that there is clearly a need for a track type that is dedicated to hardware midi and for years reaper has continued down the "one and only one" track type gives me that vibe.
I don't get this. When I set up a track to hold midi then it IS a midi-track. Same with audio, it becomes an audio track. Yes, when you have midi on a track then it would be nice to have some native midi-tools active on that track. For example I should be able to switch the channels fader to midi-volume control. However, this is the 'old' way of doing it; as soon as I pick up my m-audio fasttrack ultra R8 I'll be patching my hardware into dedicated inputs and I'll be mixing my outboard synths ITB as audio. Those things change. My Atari with Cubase can still do things that any current DAW including today's incarnation of Cubase can not do... but in many cases that is because we now have better ways to do it. Especially with all the digital audio routing we can get our hands on for cheap.

Note: YES, something like a fasttrack ultra IS cheap... if you know how much Cubase for Atari bundled with a Midex for SMPTE-sync would have cost you back in the days.
technogremlin is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 01:21 PM   #62
Tod
Human being with feelings
 
Tod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Just outside of Glacier National Park
Posts: 12,663
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
I seem to see the same picture you are. And I agree that if Cockos ever introduces another member of the dev team, he should be deeply tied with MIDI and improve greatly on that part of Reaper. There's so much that needs to be done to, yes you have the correct word, STREAMLINE working with MIDI in Reaper!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Susan G View Post
Hi-

I appreciate the improvements I've seen in REAPER's MIDI handling so far. Definitely a +1 for me that it needs more "love", though!

Setting aside the missing tools and actions (for now ), the way REAPER handles split items in the MIDI editor still feels very awkward to me. I'd like to be able to open all items on a track in one editor without all the blank and disabled areas, so I could just move smoothly through the time line.

It feels very disjointed the way it is, and even though I know I can glue the items together first or click on different items to enable them as I go along, neither solution is ideal, IMO. I like being able to see split items in the arranger, but in the ME I'd like to be able to insert, move, or lengthen notes wherever I want without having to stretch the MIDI item manually or go back to the arrange pane to create a new one.

Coming from SONAR, REAPER's approach to this feels very clunky. MIDI data on a track should be a stream, but sometimes it feels more like I'm jumping from rock to rock!

BTW, I posted an FR that would add "View: Size to fit time selection" to the View options, which would make it a little easier to focus on one area of a longer MIDI item: http://forum.cockos.com/project.php?issueid=2630

Thanks-

-Susan
Yes Midi needs some lovin'...........
Tod is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 01:23 PM   #63
DarthFader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 324
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by technogremlin View Post
I don't get this. When I set up a track to hold midi then it IS a midi-track. Same with audio, it becomes an audio track. Yes, when you have midi on a track then it would be nice to have some native midi-tools active on that track. For example I should be able to switch the channels fader to midi-volume control. However, this is the 'old' way of doing it; as soon as I pick up my m-audio fasttrack ultra R8 I'll be patching my hardware into dedicated inputs and I'll be mixing my outboard synths ITB as audio. Those things change. My Atari with Cubase can still do things that any current DAW including today's incarnation of Cubase can not do... but in many cases that is because we now have better ways to do it. Especially with all the digital audio routing we can get our hands on for cheap.

Note: YES, something like a fasttrack ultra IS cheap... if you know how much Cubase for Atari bundled with a Midex for SMPTE-sync would have cost you back in the days.
It could really just be a different presentation of the same track type, and perhaps you could toggle it back and forth if you switch from hardware to vsti.

Even with a vsti one might want the volume and pan be sent as midi, and not affecting the output of the vsti.

So certainly toggling track types would be useful, and clean up the presentation.

Traditionally, it's been easier to transpose midi versus audio data. Certainly, midi can be transposed with far fewer audible artificats than audio.

Transpose is something that most people would want to see on a midi track, less so for audio tracks especially audio tracks that are polyphonic.

Eg, midi users would want to see transpose on the TCP, and audio people might not want the clutter. There are many areas like this that are the EXACT reason that there are different track types in most DAWs.

But I guess I could live with a transpose button that would affect either audio or midi based on the track type toggle.

But certainly patch name is just not useful for a pure audio track; therefore what's displayed on the TCP should be different for midi and audio, and perhaps that could be a toggle and one could change the track "type" (mostly presentation) at will to change the presentation and behavior of the controls.

I think toggling track type will clean up the presentation without ruining the feature set.

DF

Last edited by DarthFader; 06-28-2010 at 01:32 PM.
DarthFader is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 02:00 PM   #64
gofer
-blänk-
 
gofer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,172
Default

That's exactly what I have right now...
Each track has exactly the knobs I need. Btw, I control hardware just fine here. Each MIDI hardware itself needs it's own set of track widgets, for example my Prophecy cries for CC91 up to CC95 for it's FX section. I could build me some SysEx knobs if I liked. Some pre-cooked MIDI track with the most used parameters just wouldn't cut it, IMO.
gofer is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 02:14 PM   #65
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,489
Default

Yup, that's where track templates are really handy. You are in charge on how much "clutter" there would be on such track. You can make a separate track template for each piece of hardware you own, and isn't that just great?
EvilDragon is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 02:15 PM   #66
DarthFader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 324
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gofer View Post
That's exactly what I have right now...
Each track has exactly the knobs I need. Btw, I control hardware just fine here. Each MIDI hardware itself needs it's own set of track widgets, for example my Prophecy cries for CC91 up to CC95 for it's FX section. I could build me some SysEx knobs if I liked. Some pre-cooked MIDI track with the most used parameters just wouldn't cut it, IMO.
That's nice that you did that, but I don't think that absolves the fact that the out of box reaper doesn't do even the basics.

And what about putting those knobs on the MCP? Can it even be done?

So its like oh, I can't use the MCP at all now, since I have to use the TCP just to get midi pan and volume, with custom added knobs.

And even if you did put them on TCP and MCP now you waste space of the original volume and pan since yuo have two volumes and pans (the original and added for midi). Forget about using it on a laptop.

Yes people can and do hack around reapers limitations in this area but I don't think that means the limitations shouldn't be removed.

You can always customize a nicer car too, it's not like you can only customize a Yugo.

DF
DarthFader is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 02:17 PM   #67
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,489
Default

Yes, you can extend the MCP and make it higher, that makes provisions for FX parameters, which are in fact the same track controls which show in TCP.
EvilDragon is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 02:20 PM   #68
DarthFader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 324
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
Yes, you can extend the MCP and make it higher, that makes provisions for FX parameters, which are in fact the same track controls which show in TCP.
OK good to know, but there is still a lot of wasted space with the redundant controls.

DF
DarthFader is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 02:22 PM   #69
technogremlin
Human being with feelings
 
technogremlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2,607
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthFader View Post
Yes people can and do hack around reapers limitations
I think it's not 'hacking limitations' but instead it's 'using available options'.

The way you look at it determines in large part of what you will be able to do with it

The fact that Reaper can be customized almost endlessly to fit MY workflow and work style largely outweighs the fact that it does take some time to actually do those tweaks myself.
technogremlin is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 02:26 PM   #70
gofer
-blänk-
 
gofer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,172
Default

Of course they can be visible in the mixer. Have you even bothered to try a bit? It's far from a hack, it's customization.

About the "out of the box" bit, Templates and FX chains could be done and delivered with the install. No need to change the basics of Reaper for that.
I wouldn't be against an option to make volume/pan faders send MIDI data, but that's really no biggie to me at all (I know it is to some and voted for that request).
gofer is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 02:26 PM   #71
DarthFader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 324
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by technogremlin View Post
I think it's not 'hacking limitations' but instead it's 'using available options'.

The way you look at it determines in large part of what you will be able to do with it

The fact that Reaper can be customized almost endlessly to fit MY workflow and work style largely outweighs the fact that it does take some time to actually do those tweaks myself.
Look, when people like FNG have to write their own plugins to do basic features like groove quantize, I call it hacking limitations.

Sure it's nice that Reaper has an SDK and this and that and JS and yadda.

But it's not nice that users have to essentially become part time unpaid employees to have the features they need.

Most people have a limited time to work on music, and want immediate productivity, not a 10 month learning curve on the minutiae just to do the basics.

So, out of the box, the first thing a user has to do is find all the third party essentials they need (SWS, FNG, Klinke, et al), and get up to speed on that, because "Reaper is so great" that half the stuff you really need isn't in the base program.

I think it's great that it's customizable, but it's not great that "lots of assembly is required" on the part of users.


DF
DarthFader is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 02:27 PM   #72
Jason Brian Merrill
Human being with feelings
 
Jason Brian Merrill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Northeastern PA, USA
Posts: 20,865
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gwok View Post
I dont get that vibe at all. As I've said, Im not in disagreement about improving things, though based on what Reaper already is, it's seems to me the developers are right in line.
yes, 100 percent. Some people just tend to get pissy when things dont work exactly as they feel "it should."
__________________
Beliefs do not require respect. People do.

Last edited by Jason Brian Merrill; 06-28-2010 at 02:53 PM.
Jason Brian Merrill is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 02:37 PM   #73
Kundalinguist
Human being with feelings
 
Kundalinguist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,587
Default

What annoys me more than any missing MIDI ingredient is the tone of "dickishness" that so quickly erupts from some posters when they encounter disagreement from others. I don't know how creating a diversion of hurt feelings and anger helps to address the MIDI problem or any other, unless the original intent is to create a diversion of hurt feelings and anger.

If that's the case, then the formula is working well.
__________________
Success is just one more plugin away! And happiness is as close as your next upgrade.
Kundalinguist is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 02:45 PM   #74
DarthFader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 324
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kundalinguist View Post
What annoys me more than any missing MIDI ingredient is the tone of "dickishness" that so quickly erupts from some posters when they encounter disagreement from others. I don't know how creating a diversion of hurt feelings and anger helps to address the MIDI problem or any other, unless the original intent is to create a diversion of hurt feelings and anger.

If that's the case, then the formula is working well.
Exactly. People should be able to share their thoughts and I've been sharing mine about reaper.

When JBM tries to label people who don't like Reaper's midi implementation, as merely "pissy", it's a smear campaign and thread-jacking. We don't need that kind of behavior on the forums, there is a chat room for that I think.

DF
DarthFader is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 02:53 PM   #75
Jason Brian Merrill
Human being with feelings
 
Jason Brian Merrill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Northeastern PA, USA
Posts: 20,865
Default

i didnt label people who dont like the midi implementation, im labeling those who get pissy
__________________
Beliefs do not require respect. People do.
Jason Brian Merrill is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 02:55 PM   #76
technogremlin
Human being with feelings
 
technogremlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2,607
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthFader View Post
Sure it's nice that Reaper has an SDK and this and that and JS and yadda.

But it's not nice that users have to essentially become part time unpaid employees to have the features they need.
I would say that loading a plugin and configure some controls to show up on your mixer or track-view is miles apart from the stuff you describe here.

Just to make it clear, I'm not opposed to more midi-development. I'm a midi user myself and there is room for improvement. But at the same time I have seen several updates come by that have new midi-stuff in them. And the current feature set for midi is far from unusable. I also think that being humble towards the devs has nothing to do with 'fanboi-ism' and a lot to do with understanding that development needs time... and try to find another host-software that is being developed at this pace, and even if you do, check the pricetag on that package. Having some healthy expectations might help a lot.

I have used (or tried to use) other hosts, and while some of them didn't even give me anything close to the feature set of Reaper, none of them gave me the flexibility, development speed and awesome community that I enjoy now. For that, I can have some patience.

But, to each it's own, horses for courses, ymmv.... and all that jazz
technogremlin is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 03:02 PM   #77
Jason Brian Merrill
Human being with feelings
 
Jason Brian Merrill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Northeastern PA, USA
Posts: 20,865
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by technogremlin View Post
And the current feature set for midi is far from unusable. I also think that being humble towards the devs has nothing to do with 'fanboi-ism' and a lot to do with understanding that development needs time... and try to find another host-software that is being developed at this pace, and even if you do, check the pricetag on that package. Having some healthy expectations might help a lot.
this seems to be a balanced attitude.
__________________
Beliefs do not require respect. People do.
Jason Brian Merrill is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 03:02 PM   #78
DarthFader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 324
Default

I'm not saying the current implementation is unusable, what I've been saying is it's suboptimal and not streamlined.

I think many people, myself included, would like to see Reaper be the greased weasel for midi that it is for audio.

It's all about streamlining and making things more productive.

It's not at all unreasonable to wonder when things like notation editing, and streamlined integrated midi workflow will appear, if ever.

DF
DarthFader is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 03:04 PM   #79
Jason Brian Merrill
Human being with feelings
 
Jason Brian Merrill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Northeastern PA, USA
Posts: 20,865
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthFader View Post
I'm not saying the current implementation is unusable, what I've been saying is it's suboptimal and not streamlined.

I think many people, myself included, would like to see Reaper be the greased weasel for midi that it is for audio.

It's all about streamlining and making things more productive.

DF
and this has been happening for reaper since midi existed within reaper. If it is not happening at the pace you would like, or implemented how you would like, make some decent requests, vote for existing ones, link people to them when you see something lacking, or well.... go somewhere else!
__________________
Beliefs do not require respect. People do.
Jason Brian Merrill is offline  
Old 06-28-2010, 03:06 PM   #80
DarthFader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 324
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill View Post
and this has been happening for reaper since midi existed within reaper. If it is not happening at the pace you would like, or implemented how you would like, make some decent requests, vote for existing ones, link people to them when you see something lacking, or well.... go somewhere else!
Gee that's what I've been doing with this thread?

If you don't like it just go to another thread. Don't be obnoxious about this one.

DF
DarthFader is offline  
Closed Thread

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 12:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.