Go Back   Cockos Incorporated Forums > REAPER Forums > REAPER General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-12-2010, 08:50 AM   #41
bullshark
Human being with feelings
 
bullshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: traîne mes guêtres en Québec...
Posts: 5,390
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
Getting past just arguing for arguments sake, can you give some specific examples of that in Studio One? Where things weren't where you expected them to be and didn't function in a intuitive way? Not to make it a vs.
Wouldn't it be beside the point I was making? I know S1 is your personal favorite, but it isn't mine, not in the least; doesn't mean it's bad software, in fact it mean nothing more than what is written.

Quote:
I say "elevate" because of things like "...being the king of intuitiveness and efficiency." which I'm pretty sure nobody actually said here. It does seem to be a bit of defensiveness, your turning his comments into something far beyond what he actually said... which was (for him) "immediately useable and powerful".
well, was just paraphrasing "That DAW is so dang usable it's almost criminal".

Last edited by bullshark; 11-12-2010 at 08:58 AM.
bullshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 08:51 AM   #42
strunkdts
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,565
Default

honestly man, I dont know what youre bitching about. It took me ages to get this baby up n running and im seriously glad of it too. Theres a learning curve for sure, but where im at now is miles ahead of where i was.

Its the first DAW on which ive felt that the way im working is mine alone.

REAPER has given me production autonomy!

And anything you really need/miss can easily be requested, with a good chance of it being introduced as an option, at worst, in a future update.

REAPER kicks ass!
strunkdts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 08:52 AM   #43
ngarjuna
Human being with feelings
 
ngarjuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Miami
Posts: 2,298
Default

Honestly, I'm getting kind of tired of this rant. No offense to the OP, but I think you're overlooking a really important consideration:

recording has always been highly technical. In fact, in a recording studio (a proper old analog studio), not only do you have highly technical interfaces (mostly not designed for ease of use), you also rarely had:

-clear and complete manuals
-guides to maintenance of your equipment
-the internet/google
-discussion forums that cover a plethora of related subjects
-video tutorials
-wikis

Unlike now, you actually had to learn how to calibrate your decks, how to replace wonky electronics in your gear, how to adjust and mod your equipment; there weren't pages and pages of indexed, searchable discussions to reference and you basically had to know a thing or two about electronics just to make it through some of the manuals that did exist.

In some ways it's nice that modern technology has made it so that you don't need advanced electronics knowledge to record (in some ways it's horrible, engineers today seem to know a tiny fraction of what used to be basic knowledge for engineering including [especially] how to listen). But that shouldn't imply that the entire learning curve needs to be eradicated or even that it can be. In fact, the ease of use of modern software is, in my opinion, one of the things that has degraded the average engineer's ability to listen, assess and make wise decisions behind the "console": nobody wants a learning curve, everyone wants immediate results. This "right now or never" attitude doesn't benefit someone trying to hone their craft.

If REAPER seems hard, it seems to me that a person is lacking in engineering knowledge and that the problem has little to do with REAPER at all. As someone who learned and grew up in the old style studios, REAPER was a snap. Sure, I don't know where everything is (still to this day) but I know enough about what I'm trying to accomplish to find it quickly between the forums and the manual. I don't see that as a problem, I see that as a sign of a powerful piece of software; it is, after all, a representation of what used to be a LOT of pricey gear all in one concise UI. It's not that REAPER is complicated per se, it's that a studio is complicated and REAPER is a damn good studio (meaning it has many if not most of the features one would have hoped to find in one).

Again, I mean no disrespect to people who are learning, we all didn't know these things once upon a time. The difference is that some people spend time criticizing all the things they feel are difficult to learn and others spend that time learning. Only one of those is going to lead to better results regardless of whether or not the devs take this kind of advice under consideration.
ngarjuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 09:02 AM   #44
bullshark
Human being with feelings
 
bullshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: traîne mes guêtres en Québec...
Posts: 5,390
Default

Beside, didn't we go through this like, a few weeks ago? A poster setting down his personal preferences, why reaper doesn't meet those all set under the guile of universal truth, and then disappearing?
bullshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 09:07 AM   #45
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bullshark View Post
Wouldn't it be beside the point I was making?
Not at all. You specifically pointed to things like I/O and adding a track and routing that are actually clearly labeled directly on the main UI with rather big letters and icons. There are valid examples of your intended point in some other hosts where those specific things you mentioned aren't really all that clear (Cubase VST Connections) but Studio One isn't one of them.

It's kinda like you just picked those things out of the blue. Or just picked some very bad examples to make the point.

Anyway, Reaper is really great and none of them are perfect so discussing *potential* avenues for improvement (in any of them) shouldn't always result in DAW war III.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 09:10 AM   #46
bullshark
Human being with feelings
 
bullshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: traîne mes guêtres en Québec...
Posts: 5,390
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
but Studio One isn't one of them.
Yes, to me it is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
Or just picked some very bad examples to make the point.
Again, see answer at the top. Yes, recording to a track in S1 gave me major headache, part of which was not finding how to setup my audio, something you actually helped me with at the time if I recall
bullshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 09:14 AM   #47
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bullshark View Post
Yes, to me it is.
No offense intended, love ya like a play cousin, but if you couldn't find the I/O or how to add a track or how to assign an input routing, you are in the small minority or just arguing for arguments sake. All of it is right there in plain view... with tooltips...



Please have the final word so this thread can get back on the rails. Love ya man...

Last edited by Lawrence; 11-12-2010 at 09:23 AM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 09:17 AM   #48
MetricMike
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ngarjuna View Post
Honestly, I'm getting kind of tired of this rant. No offense to the OP, but I think you're overlooking a really important consideration:

recording has always been highly technical.
I am not sure anyone has been ranting, in fact your post is probably the closest to a rant in this thread. Of course recording is difficult I for one didnt expect it to be easy but take relational database software as an analogy. Oracle and sql*server, both highly technical both doing similar jobs. I prefer to use Oracle more powerful, easier to customise to a particular job etc., but there are often times when I wish it had the intuitive user front end that sql*server has for doing some jobs. One (sql*server) looks likes like it has been carefully designed, the other (Oracle) like it has been put together by developers on a caffeine binge!

You complain about being tired of this sort of thread, maybe the subject keeps coming up because there is at least a core of truth in it. Its a great product but the user interface does not live up to its other strengths.
MetricMike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 09:23 AM   #49
bullshark
Human being with feelings
 
bullshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: traîne mes guêtres en Québec...
Posts: 5,390
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
No offense intended, love ya like a play cousin, but if you couldn't find the I/O or how to add a track or how to assign an input routing, you are in the small minority or just arguing for arguments sake. All of it is right there in plain view...



Please have the final word so this thread can get back on the rails. Love ya man...
Sooo, basically, you're saying I'm stupid for not getting on with how S1 work? Gee, thanks man.
bullshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 09:24 AM   #50
ngarjuna
Human being with feelings
 
ngarjuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Miami
Posts: 2,298
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MetricMike View Post
I am not sure anyone has been ranting, in fact your post is probably the closest to a rant in this thread. Of course recording is difficult I for one didnt expect it to be easy but take relational database software as an analogy. Oracle and sql*server, both highly technical both doing similar jobs. I prefer to use Oracle more powerful, easier to customise to a particular job etc., but there are often times when I wish it had the intuitive user front end that sql*server has for doing some jobs. One (sql*server) looks likes like it has been carefully designed, the other (Oracle) like it has been put together by developers on a caffeine binge!

You complain about being tired of this sort of thread, maybe the subject keeps coming up because there is at least a core of truth in it. Its a great product but the user interface does not live up to its other strengths.
There's a difference between genuine and useful suggestions on updating the UI (which there are a lot of threads about) and a rant-ish post about how hard everything is. Nobody, least of all me, has any objection to well thought out feature requests, even feature requests I don't personally like (just because I don't like/need it doesn't mean it's not useful to lots of people). What's getting old is this tired claim that REAPER is unintuitive when, as I suggested, it's recording that's actually unintuitive.

Maybe the subject keeps coming up because it's true? Maybe so. But maybe, as I suggested, it keeps coming up because it's easier to complain than it is to learn a difficult and contextually complex subject.
ngarjuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 09:30 AM   #51
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bullshark View Post
Sooo, basically, you're saying I'm stupid for not getting on with how S1 work? Gee, thanks man.
Not at all. I think you're quite intelligent. I'm saying that in your rush to defend Reaper (which doesn't need defending in this case) you picked some very bad examples. If you couldn't find the I/O matrix it's not because you're stupid, you most certainly are not stupid.

The only logical explanation is that you actually didn't really even look since it's right there labeled "I/O". The actual grid looks and works pretty much like Reaper's for I/O.

So, I have much respect for you and the only reason I'm responding to the above(when we should both really move on?) is to make it very clear that I do not think you're stupid.

Last edited by Lawrence; 11-12-2010 at 09:36 AM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 09:31 AM   #52
bluzkat
Human being with feelings
 
bluzkat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Northern Michigan
Posts: 6,919
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MetricMike View Post
I am not sure anyone has been ranting, in fact your post is probably the closest to a rant in this thread.\
Lately there seems to be an influx of why can't Reaper do this, or why can't Reaper be more like this program. Why do I have to read the manual, etc.

I don't understand alot of this, guess I'm getting *old* (damn kids!! ).

When I start using a new piece of software, I expect to have to 'learn' it.


__________________
Peace...
bluzkat
bluzkat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 09:45 AM   #53
fogpeople
Human being with feelings
 
fogpeople's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 161
Default

@bullshark: well, that is also exactly what a defensive person would say to be fair :-)

And sure, we can all say without any need to justify that any DAW out there, even one which is lauded for its "usability" is actually totally alien to us, making it somewhat of a moot topic, but I didn't start this thread to get into another variety of "my DAW rox, this DAW sux" believe me, I've participated in millions of those from nearly every angle over the years and while they can be fun to smoke out trolls it's certainly not what I'm getting at.

I just read everything so forgive me for not citing where various bits came from...

Re: Reaper does it different being the core problem
My posts don't directly address that, and to be honest sure it might be the core problem ultimately, but what I'm specifically addressing is the wall I'm running into trying to bridge that gap. Hey man, I used to use SAW+, which I LOVED. But it was as non-Windows standard as you can get and still be a program run on Windows. Learning a different way basic stuff works (including basic drag selection, which ironically is how Reaper works) is not necessarily a turn-off to me. What I'm finding the problem to be is that there's no obvious pathway to overcome it. And hey, I'm not a usability designer or any such thing, so I'm also sorry I can't supply the answer but my instincts as a user who WANTS to overcome the hurdle keep screaming at me that the problem is a bloated set of menus and obtuse commands, vague and inelegant dialogs, and a text-driven, computer-speak way of building commands up. I could be wrong, but I'm not selling the solution, I'm trying to navigate my problem.

And, is it really so hard to believe that? I would not think it comes as a surprise that Reaper's options and actions are somewhat overwhelming, relentlessly text-based, and use a unusually large amount of unique terminology, much of it written from a programmatic standpoint as opposed to a user standpoint. Some users cite it as a positive thing, as all the commands they need are one click away. (Ugh to that, I say). Otherwise what's the other option, that Reaper is perfect, I'm crazy, and no changes are necessary? Hogwash, there isn't a program out there that can't be made better. (except maybe for Pong).

Re: The Manual and the Custom Toolbar thingee
Good call, the manual PDF I had was for v3.0. I downloaded the most recent and it does have a slightly better enhancement of the toolbar stuff, and thankfully a short intro blurb about the floating toolbar and what it is. Now the second item up in a basic "toolbar" search hits the target. As for my methods, I pinged the manual as I was trying to wrap my head around the colorpicker toolbar, I ended up finding the install directions (on a Wiki) faster than I could background prep myself from the manual. I don't present my own methods as proof I'm flawless but instead as a means of backtracking through my mistakes to find where I made wrong turns. My major comment regarding the colorpicker install was that the info is far from centralized and the install process is not trivial. For something that is quoted as being part of what users consider a "normal" install, it's not easy.

Re: quantizing MIDI
Everything in that post is news to me. You cannot quantize MIDI data from the TCP? Fer realz? Oh yes, you appear to be correct. That is the first actual tip I've gotten from this thread yo.

Re: Tired of this discussion
Um.... if you guys have this discussion a lot isn't that in itself somewhat verification?

Re: d00d recording is actually hard, sack up and deal (paraphrasing here)
Again, I'm not denying it is, and nor am I a kid who decided he wanted to be a rock star and is frustrated Reaper won't write my songs for me. I'm 40, and I've been a sound designer for film and stage for almost 20 years. I've used what I consider to be a decent helping of DAWs out there, some of them for long years across owners and product revampings, so I'm not just a person who pees his pants when a menu option gets moved.

So, again, I'm not a usability designer or any of that crap, but where I run into session-stopping roadblocks with the program is in a pathway to solve my own problems. With other programs, or even with the simpler functions in Reapers, there's an obvious and easy to way to suss it out yourself. Any advanced processing or editing though and you're shuffled off to a massive and incoherent menu list that is simply very inelegant. That makes converting downloaders into users a big, uneccessary hurdle (at least for me). And I'm reporting this data back because it's actually where I found the problems for me to be. Now you can say "No it isn't", "Too Bad" or some other variant, or you can say "Hrm, maybe he's right" or "Yeah we know, but we love our mentally handicapped child because he has super-strength and x-ray vision" (that's not a dig, it's a joke).

I haven't checked on videos for Reaper in a long while (since I devoured the Pipeline stuff a ways back) but one thing the SONAR forum peeps harped on Cake for was some better support in that area. Finally they put out a "Drums Masterclass" video that specifically walked through using their processors and workflow to build up a drum track from zero. It's was quite good. Ableton is pretty well-known for having very good vidz to walk through an actual project. I don't recall Reaper having similar ones, just videos describing specific functions inside a processor. I'll go see if there's any development there.
__________________
=========
fogpeople.org
=========
fogpeople is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 09:53 AM   #54
MetricMike
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ngarjuna View Post
There's a difference between genuine and useful suggestions on updating the UI (which there are a lot of threads about) and a rant-ish post about how hard everything is.

Maybe the subject keeps coming up because it's true? Maybe so. But maybe, as I suggested, it keeps coming up because it's easier to complain than it is to learn a difficult and contextually complex subject.
I dont think that you will ever get a situation where you get many suggestions about updating the UI. Using another analogy, most cars contain a similar array of controls, knobs, switches and dials. If one is missing from a particular model it is easy to identify and highlight it. What is much more difficult is to identify why one car dashboard looks and "feels" better than another, despite having exactly the same functionality. That is where the designers ability and flair have given it that extra undefinable something.

What is it that made me buy an ipod nano rather than something from another manufacturer? it isnt the sound quality or the features it is again that indefinable quality that makes it look and feel like a desirable object (and I don't mean marketing!!!).

My instinct tells me that are places where Reaper lacks that indefinable user friendly characteristic (if I could articulate the reasons I would). I think as a consequence you will always get (especially from us newbies) the occasional frustrated post.

Anyway taking your point on board about it being a "difficult and contextually complex subject", I am off now to go and do some more climbing up that steep learning curve!
MetricMike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 09:55 AM   #55
bullshark
Human being with feelings
 
bullshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: traîne mes guêtres en Québec...
Posts: 5,390
Default

There's no magical way to present functions, either they're in a textual menu, or you load them up as icon on the interface. Either way will get you fired by the crowd who prefer the other.

Well, there was once an app who pushed context sensitivity; was called Tracktion and in it was a Window that changed the option presented depending on what was selected. Was a great concept IMO, but it never really took on.
bullshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 10:02 AM   #56
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

Back on topic with (hopefully?) relevant suggestions... tiny things that may help in some cases, where is the I/O (launch the matrix?) on Reaper's toolbar or UI for the "new guy"? If it's not there, maybe it should be... a Matrix button?



Just a suggestion as most new users will "mouse over" all of the various UI icons initially to learn what they do if the graphic isn't really clear and go "...okay...". Setting up I/O is the first thing you'll do.

In fairness, Cubase doesn't have it on the main UI either so new users would only discover it, or the shortcut for it, via reading the manual or via exploration of the menus or by exploring the icon tooltips on the mixer. But at least - by default - there's one less command to remember or one less customization to make. But why that isn't also in the main toolbar in Cubase which is customizable? No idea.

At least in Reaper you can manually add one there, so that's good.


Last edited by Lawrence; 11-12-2010 at 10:09 AM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 10:06 AM   #57
ngarjuna
Human being with feelings
 
ngarjuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Miami
Posts: 2,298
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MetricMike View Post
I dont think that you will ever get a situation where you get many suggestions about updating the UI. Using another analogy, most cars contain a similar array of controls, knobs, switches and dials. If one is missing from a particular model it is easy to identify and highlight it. What is much more difficult is to identify why one car dashboard looks and "feels" better than another, despite having exactly the same functionality. That is where the designers ability and flair have given it that extra undefinable something.

What is it that made me buy an ipod nano rather than something from another manufacturer? it isnt the sound quality or the features it is again that indefinable quality that makes it look and feel like a desirable object (and I don't mean marketing!!!).

My instinct tells me that are places where Reaper lacks that indefinable user friendly characteristic (if I could articulate the reasons I would). I think as a consequence you will always get (especially from us newbies) the occasional frustrated post.

Anyway taking your point on board about it being a "difficult and contextually complex subject", I am off now to go and do some more climbing up that steep learning curve!
I appreciate what you're saying and, again, I don't disagree that there are viable (and even worthwhile) changes that can and will take place. But you might be surprised, there are loads of cogent feature requests here, they get made every day. You see far less of the kind of reaction ("Learn the program!") to those threads because, in many cases, the request itself is analyzed and discussed and improved upon. To me, that's the anatomy of a good thread seeking to improve the interface.

It's less useful to see a thread which complains about all the things that are wrong without any notion of a solution. For example, the menus. Okay, so let's assume for a moment that the menu organization is problematic. What's problematic specifically? The usual claim is that the menus have too much stuff in them; but what's the alternative? Removing those features from REAPER?

Quote:
Um.... if you guys have this discussion a lot isn't that in itself somewhat verification?
No, it's not. It's a small (if not tiny) fraction of the user base who start these threads. My patience for repetitive threads has nothing at all to do with verifying that something is or isn't really wrong with REAPER.
ngarjuna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 10:15 AM   #58
plamuk
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,221
Default

please be concise.

i'm not a power user by any stretch of the imagination...and i was still able to get a highly useful "power function" (see the "handy multiview macro" in my signature) with a little tinkering

a little tinkering goes a long way. don't get computer fatigue.
plamuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 10:29 AM   #59
fogpeople
Human being with feelings
 
fogpeople's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 161
Default

@Metricmike: thanks man, you took about 90% of what I've been trying to say did it using about 90% fewer words. Would you like to be my publicist? ;-)

Reading back over all this (oy) I want to clarify something: I am NOT against or ignorant of the learning process. Totally okay with it, and understanding of it. I remember teaching myself an early version of AVID's Media Composer... sheesh man.

And, I'm not just a digital-age blippy-bleepy guy, someone mentioned tape decks earlier, and one of my early gigs was demagnetizing the heads of the 1/2" decks in a NYC studio. I was around pre-digital revolution (I've got the student loans to prove it).

Someone several posts back used Oracle and SQL Server as a metaphor, which brings me to me next point. I may get my butt kicked for this but lets face it, Reaper was developed by a pretty badass (Read: l33t) programmer maverick. I think people from that world who gravitate to doing audio will be drawn to Reaper on that principle alone, if not its attractive price point. There's a certain pride in Reaper's "my way or the highway" approach to things. Heck, it even runs on Linux! As such, I don't suspect calls to revise with regard to usability will be met with cheers by most. But it's where I think there is a gap in the program and room for improvement.

The SONAR forums are rife with folks who are likely warez users who rant like crazy and demand help for what is considered obvious and basic things and that stuff generally drives me a little crazy. The got the program for nothing and want music made now and are resistant to learning the basics. This is not one of those cases.

The basics I got, the learning I'm comfortable, even enthused about. The price point is moot (srsly, $40? it's basically free and even that is "optional"). The "unlistable for easy responses" things I'm talking about is the gap and pathway to use the functions necessary to complete a mid-to-major sized project. Note I didn't say "become a power user of the program", because keeping the focus on that is somewhat problematic in itself. I don't want to be a badass with Reaper just to say I am, or attach a novelty value to it, I'm a person who wants/needs a workstation that will let me get my job done, even enhance my work speed and creativity. I'm not asking for tools to dumb anything down, I'm reporting where the program is getting in the way as opposed to letting me be a badass at my job. If it can help me get that done, that's the DAW for me. (uh, </rant>)
__________________
=========
fogpeople.org
=========
fogpeople is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 10:32 AM   #60
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 24,790
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
I mean, JBM, ED, Tallisman have been here from V1
Nope, I'm a v3 guy from the start
EvilDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 10:43 AM   #61
bullshark
Human being with feelings
 
bullshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: traîne mes guêtres en Québec...
Posts: 5,390
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
Back on topic with (hopefully?) relevant suggestions... tiny things that may help in some cases, where is the I/O (launch the matrix?) on Reaper's toolbar or UI for the "new guy"? If it's not there, maybe it should be... a Matrix button?
Was thinking more along the line of a wizard on first install that let you choose driver model, audio I/O and alias them, MIDI I/O, VST folders and default recording folder. Once that's done, even first time users should find the record arm and input button pretty easily.
bullshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 10:48 AM   #62
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bullshark View Post
Was thinking more along the line of a wizard on first install that let you choose driver model, audio I/O and alias them, MIDI I/O, VST folders and default recording folder. Once that's done, even first time users should find the record arm and input button pretty easily.
Sounds like a really good idea to me Bull.

If I could make any one specific change to the current hardware assignment model, I'd remove the relative "disconnection" between hardware I/O in preferences and the routing Matrix assignments.

Seems to me all of that should be done in one screen with re-callable preset I/O assignments. I'm not a big fan of the "first and last" thing for that in Preferences. IMO (ymmv) any connected hardware should always have all I/O available but you should be able to set the visible ranges (what you actually see in the menus when you assign I/O to a track, and what you see in the matrix) in the routing matrix.

Having to go to two different places to do that doesn't seem like the best way to me. I've never found the "first and last" thing all that flexible. You really should be able to randomly pick (view) any available I/O, not just a range in series.

Last edited by Lawrence; 11-12-2010 at 11:01 AM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 10:58 AM   #63
Gizzmo0815
Human being with feelings
 
Gizzmo0815's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bullshark View Post
Wouldn't it be beside the point I was making? I know S1 is your personal favorite, but it isn't mine, not in the least; doesn't mean it's bad software, in fact it mean nothing more than what is written.

well, was just paraphrasing "That DAW is so dang usable it's almost criminal".
If it's me you were paraphrasing, I didn't say anything of the sort. And paraphrasing other people's words is the quickest way to misinterpret what they actually said.
Gizzmo0815 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 10:58 AM   #64
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 24,790
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
You really should be able to randomly pick (view) any available I/O, not just a range in series.
I agree with that, too.
EvilDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 11:01 AM   #65
bullshark
Human being with feelings
 
bullshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: traîne mes guêtres en Québec...
Posts: 5,390
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
Having to go to two different places to do that doesn't seem like the best way to me.
Agree, you should be able to do all assignment from the matrix, including hardware, aliasing AND export those settings for instant recall. Made such a request about what, 2-3 years ago?, which was completely ignored.
bullshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 11:02 AM   #66
bullshark
Human being with feelings
 
bullshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: traîne mes guêtres en Québec...
Posts: 5,390
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizzmo0815 View Post
If it's me you were paraphrasing
Actually, no.
bullshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 11:04 AM   #67
Gizzmo0815
Human being with feelings
 
Gizzmo0815's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ngarjuna View Post
In some ways it's nice that modern technology has made it so that you don't need advanced electronics knowledge to record (in some ways it's horrible, engineers today seem to know a tiny fraction of what used to be basic knowledge for engineering including [especially] how to listen). But that shouldn't imply that the entire learning curve needs to be eradicated or even that it can be. In fact, the ease of use of modern software is, in my opinion, one of the things that has degraded the average engineer's ability to listen, assess and make wise decisions behind the "console": nobody wants a learning curve, everyone wants immediate results. This "right now or never" attitude doesn't benefit someone trying to hone their craft.
This point is all well and good. But it's mostly just an excuse. Yes, historically recording was a complex and largely unsupported art form. Few manuals, and usually a lot of self-teaching.

But that doesn't mean that it SHOULD be complex and difficult. Especially with all of the power that modern computing (and information technology) affords us. Reaper doesn't have to remain as difficult as it is to learn. It's entirely possible that there are some significant things that could be done to hone and streamline the program so that newer users can grasp the concepts of how it works more quickly. And all of the same functionality can remain in place. I don't think anyone here is saying that Reaper should be "cut down", just that it needs to be organized, and there are a lot of fantastic suggestions about how to do that, all over the board.

There IS, however, a defensive quality to the most dedicated users here. It becomes immediately apparent in threads like this. The funny part is, that's attitude is the one that will hinder progress.
Gizzmo0815 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 11:10 AM   #68
Glennbo
Human being with feelings
 
Glennbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 9,055
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MetricMike View Post
What is it that made me buy an ipod nano rather than something from another manufacturer? it isnt the sound quality or the features it is again that indefinable quality that makes it look and feel like a desirable object (and I don't mean marketing!!!).
What is it that made me buy Reaper and start using it exclusively over other DAW software I own?

An audio engine that runs circles around those other DAW software packages I have, a very small footprint in memory, very light system requirements (although I have an i5), and innovative stuff like parameter modulation, drag-n-drop routing, and the ability to send incoming midi to multiple destinations. I saw someone asking on another forum if that would be possible in their new version, but they were greeted with the same old tired, "clone the midi track after the fact" response. That doesn't cut it for me. I want to *HEAR* multiple stacked instruments while I'm recording them. Not sometime afterward.
__________________
Glennbo
Hear My Music - Click Me!!!
--
Glennbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 11:11 AM   #69
bullshark
Human being with feelings
 
bullshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: traîne mes guêtres en Québec...
Posts: 5,390
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizzmo0815 View Post
The funny part is, that's attitude is the one that will hinder progress.
Actually, no. Your personal view of what the "attitude" is does absolutely nothing.

If you want to be productive and promote progress, this is where to post and discuss things: http://forum.cockos.com/forumdisplay.php?f=23

And here: http://forum.cockos.com/forumdisplay.php?f=37
bullshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 11:14 AM   #70
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
I agree with that, too.
Thanks.

Look, Cubase's "VST Connections" is kind of a convoluted thing to initially setup manually, but it's way more flexible than Reaper's current audio hardware setup. Once you get your custom I/O presets stored you're good to go and you can randomly pick and choose from any single I/O to make those custom I/O preset configs.

But it comes with a bunch of I/O presets already so those will use your hardware in series unless you customize them.

Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 11:23 AM   #71
Gizzmo0815
Human being with feelings
 
Gizzmo0815's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fogpeople View Post
Someone several posts back used Oracle and SQL Server as a metaphor, which brings me to me next point. I may get my butt kicked for this but lets face it, Reaper was developed by a pretty badass (Read: l33t) programmer maverick. I think people from that world who gravitate to doing audio will be drawn to Reaper on that principle alone, if not its attractive price point. There's a certain pride in Reaper's "my way or the highway" approach to things. Heck, it even runs on Linux! As such, I don't suspect calls to revise with regard to usability will be met with cheers by most. But it's where I think there is a gap in the program and room for improvement.
And...swish...that's the game.

Here is a key point that users, particularly new users need to come to terms with before they dive into Reaper. It's a different type of environment than other DAWs for the above reason...it's that simple.
Gizzmo0815 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 11:25 AM   #72
fogpeople
Human being with feelings
 
fogpeople's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 161
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizzmo0815 View Post
But that doesn't mean that it SHOULD be complex and difficult. Especially with all of the power that modern computing (and information technology) affords us. Reaper doesn't have to remain as difficult as it is to learn. It's entirely possible that there are some significant things that could be done to hone and streamline the program so that newer users can grasp the concepts of how it works more quickly. And all of the same functionality can remain in place. I don't think anyone here is saying that Reaper should be "cut down", just that it needs to be organized, and there are a lot of fantastic suggestions about how to do that, all over the board.
This post ftw. (haha)

Srsly, someone earlier mentioned people complaining about the menus and it being moot because what's the other option, taking features out? Heck no to that I say.

I'm not a software designer, so I can't comment with qualifications on what is the best way, but off the top of my head I'd say item #1 should be to change to right-click menus from being a mass storehouse of every command and re-think them. Some of it can be solved with simple sub-menu navigation, but other things might be moved to a general options page, others to dedicated dialog boxes where a long and confounding description can be changed to a tick box or some such. Or changing certain functions to graphical tools that use UI paradigms instead of "oh god I feel like I'm doing my taxes" lists that are very prominent in the program.

Centralizing the external stuff, rolling a bunch into the core install, and a better UI integration for core functions. At least that's where I'd start looking.

Re: the S1 paraphrase: that was me he was paraphrasing, and since he cited it was a paraphrase I'm cool with it, there's no real misinterpretation there. And given how S1 is being lauded across the board for it's speedy workflow and elegant design I'd say that even though these things are somewhat subjective, that the data speaks for itself. If someone found S1 to be more confounding than any DAW out there I'd wonder if it's really that they're a statistical anomaly or if they just don't want to like it. I don't own S1, I'm not a user of it, but I was impressed with the demo and jealous of a few features. It's the most recent DAW to come out, so it benefits from all the things that came before it. I don't see any reason not to see the good parts of any software program really.
__________________
=========
fogpeople.org
=========
fogpeople is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 11:31 AM   #73
Veneteaou
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 155
Default

Quote:
There IS, however, a defensive quality to the most dedicated users here. It becomes immediately apparent in threads like this. The funny part is, that's attitude is the one that will hinder progress.
Not that I disagree, but you are going to find a healthy amount of that in any online community. There will be all-knowing users who feel that their all-knowingness can be attributed to their hard work, and that other people should be working harder instead of trying to work smarter. There are blind fanatics who worship the software and it's creators. When it comes to software that can be used in a professional/business setting, there are people who feel their professional experiences are paramount to everyone else's.

Now is that a bad thing? I don't think so. Even an idiot can help you find your direction (which hopefully is going to be opposite of theirs). The quality of the software is going to come down to what kind of people are making it. If in this case it was a recording engineer from the 70's who holds hopelessly to the glory days, odds are good that the software will reflect that and cater to those kinds of people. If it was someone who was programmed to adore PT, it might be very PT like. If it is made by someone who would rather tinker their DAW for maximum ability rather than meet deadlines, it may reflect that too. But the overall quality of the software is going to come down to developers realizing that they are a certain way, and having a desire to cater to people who don't think the way they do.

All in all, this thread is very similar to threads about Linux on Linux forums. Reaper, like Linux, is most definitely NOT for everyone. Does that mean it isn't the best DAW? No. Does it mean there are probably short-comings that could be addressed? Sure. I agree with Fogpeople on most of his concerns, mostly because I think they could be addressed without hurting the experience for those already content. But the single strongest quality of Reaper in my mind is how quickly it improves upon itself, which is why most of us will stick with it for as long as we can.
Veneteaou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 11:35 AM   #74
Gizzmo0815
Human being with feelings
 
Gizzmo0815's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bullshark View Post
Actually, no. Your personal view of what the "attitude" is does absolutely nothing.

If you want to be productive and promote progress, this is where to post and discuss things: http://forum.cockos.com/forumdisplay.php?f=23

And here: http://forum.cockos.com/forumdisplay.php?f=37
I'm not sure why you're picking a fight. But continue if you need to.

My comment about attitude is regarding another person's post, about a fairly commonly held view that there's a kind of "core" set of users that will do just about anything to defend Reaper. Even in the midst of a good discussion. One which was begun by an OP with a clear explanation of the purpose of his post...to document his learning process.

Yet people still feel the need to fill his thread with comments about lack of initiative and the need for an attitude adjustment. It's bafflind why people on the internet feel the need to defend a computer program so veheemently.

If you disagree, that's cool, but there's a difference between telling someone thatyou disagree, and making it clear that you think they're wrong about an opinion.

I think the points made by the OP hold a lot of weight, mostly because it's clear that he's not just a "beginner" when it comes to recording. Which is one of the arguments that was brought up here. That perhaps the OP doesn't take the time to learn his craft...I don't know...it still sounds defensive.
Gizzmo0815 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 11:44 AM   #75
bullshark
Human being with feelings
 
bullshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: traîne mes guêtres en Québec...
Posts: 5,390
Default

I'm not picking a fight, I'm not defensive, I just don't agree with you.

Sorry if that put a dent in your view of the universe where everybody that doesn't has some kind of character flaw, or a deficiency of some kind, or need to be attributed some kind of emotional state, but in the real world that I know, people can and do disagree without the above.
bullshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 11:44 AM   #76
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fogpeople View Post
I don't own S1, I'm not a user of it, but I was impressed with the demo and jealous of a few features. It's the most recent DAW to come out, so it benefits from all the things that came before it. I don't see any reason not to see the good parts of any software program really.
As an avid S1 user I can say with 100% certainty that it's FR list is as long as Reapers, relatively speaking. Users want what they want. It just happens to be in that case that very few of those FR's are UI related... but some actually are UI related.

I can (and do in those FR's) point to some things that could be (if not should be) done to the interface that would speed things up even more. The general concept being (imo) that no group of devs have "omni-vision" so no single product will ever have all of the best ideas or methods.

The best you can ever hope for is implementation of things that...

1. Makes sense to the majority using it.
2. Doesn't interfere for those for which it doesn't make sense, or who don't understand it,... e.g., "optional".

Either way, you can't know what "may make sense" to active users who choose to participate in a public manner without them talking about it and comparing it to other methods. If 75% of FR's here and anywhere else aren't born from the functions or methods of another product, I'm not sure exactly where they're coming from.

Last edited by Lawrence; 11-12-2010 at 11:49 AM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 11:46 AM   #77
bullshark
Human being with feelings
 
bullshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: traîne mes guêtres en Québec...
Posts: 5,390
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
As an avid S1 user
Fanboyz!



bullshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 11:56 AM   #78
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bullshark View Post
Fanboyz!

I'm a Reaper fanboy too.

I think the real difference (with mature fan-boyism ) may be that I'm acutely aware of most of the subjective flaws in all 3 of my hosts, S1, Cubase, and Reaper... and don't try to diminish or minimize them. Studio One's take comping kinda currently sucks balls. Anyone who says so will be greeted with a "yep, it does" by me.

Just because I love something doesn't mean it's perfect, or even necessarily "better" than something else for someone else.

Roll me a joint and I can rant all day about the flaws in Cubase.

Last edited by Lawrence; 11-12-2010 at 12:05 PM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 12:03 PM   #79
Gizzmo0815
Human being with feelings
 
Gizzmo0815's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bullshark View Post
I'm not picking a fight, I'm not defensive, I just don't agree with you.

Sorry if that put a dent in your view of the universe where everybody that doesn't has some kind of character flaw, or a deficiency of some kind, or need to be attributed some kind of emotional state, but in the real world that I know, people can and do disagree without the above.
Ok...confrontational. That's a better word to describe your tone. :-)
Gizzmo0815 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 12:24 PM   #80
jnif
Human being with feelings
 
jnif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,111
Default

Some Google statistics:

Sonar
unintuitive site:forum.cakewalk.com
About 912 results

Reaper
unintuitive site:forum.cockos.com
About 647 results

Cubase
unintuitive site:www.cubase.net
About 490 results

Logic Pro
unintuitive site:www.logicprohelp.com
About 233 results
"logic pro" unintuitive site:discussions.apple.com
About 237 results

Digital Performer
unintuitive site:www.motunation.com
About 26 results

Pro Tools
unintuitive site:duc.avid.com
About 26 results

SAW
unintuitive site:www.sawstudiouser.com
9 results

FL Studio
unintuitive site:forum.image-line.com
9 results

Studio One
unintuitive site:forums.presonus.com
5 results


Interesting but does not prove anything.....


jnif

Last edited by jnif; 11-12-2010 at 12:31 PM. Reason: fixed sorting error
jnif is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 03:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.