Old 03-02-2012, 06:39 PM   #41
chrisharbin
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 16,031
Default

I dunno, but Lawrence is pretty savvy so I'm thinking there is something I'm not understanding.
chrisharbin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 07:08 PM   #42
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dea-man View Post
...why anyone would work at a latency/buffer of 2048? Is it because of low CPU power? Or wait, is latency different than buffer?

I have never set my buffer at anything other that 128 or 256. 256 is only for particularly CPU heavy VSTi's.
Why would I run my PC at 64 samples when I'm not monitoring anything through the software? That would be a complete waste of cpu juice. Making the cpu work much harder for no practical reason at all.

I play midi in at 256 sample buffers. The other 90% of the time I'm at full buffers, 2048. I never track audio through software plugs and I monitor via direct hardware, at 2048.

So... let me understand your logic. You mix and when your cpu starts peaking - because you're running 128 sample buffers - you freeze rather than just... raise the buffer? Because you never go higher than that?
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 07:11 PM   #43
Jason Brian Merrill
Human being with feelings
 
Jason Brian Merrill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Northeastern PA, USA
Posts: 20,833
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glennbo View Post
Why? I record midi only on all the drums in all my songs. Press record, play something on V-Drums that are triggering Superior Drummer 2 in Reaper. Rewind, hit play, and it sounds like what I played while recording.

If I don't like the way it sounds, then I use Reaper's killer midi correction tool, "<Ctrl-Z> <W> <Ctrl-R>".
there are quite a few different threads about it...
__________________
Beliefs do not require respect. People do.
Jason Brian Merrill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 07:13 PM   #44
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC USA
Posts: 7,168
Default

And yet they keep ignoring it? I can't think of anything more important atm honestly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Argle View Post
+11111111111111111

As a person who uses MIDI primarily, this is the #1 workflow killer for me. Every time I load up a new midi clip, stop and fix the zoom level. Leave the zoom level alone, Reaper. Don't change it. If they would just fix this very simple problem, I would have little complaint about Reaper's MIDI.
Coachz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 08:24 PM   #45
Tod
Human being with feelings
 
Tod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Just outside of Glacier National Park
Posts: 12,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
I play midi in at 256 sample buffers. The other 90% of the time I'm at full buffers, 2048. I never track audio through software plugs and I monitor via direct hardware, at 2048.
I have a feeling Lawrence that the buffer settings do matter, even in the ME when editing or playing the piano keys. I don't know for sure, Im using a pretty fast computer with lots of RAM and set it up for low latency the first day and haven't touched it since.

For the heck of it, out of curiosity put it at 256 and check it out.
__________________
Kontakt Vid Tutorials->Create Outputs / Create Templates -|- SMDrums Free drums -|- Elk Video Productions -|- Tod's Music
Tod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 08:46 PM   #46
chrisharbin
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 16,031
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
Why would I run my PC at 64 samples when I'm not monitoring anything through the software?
Well, I don't want to brag but........freeze? What is "freeze"? hehe. I use it for quick stems when I want that to be effected separately.

I was just wondering. I'm certainly not trying to criticize your methods.
chrisharbin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 09:05 PM   #47
dea-man
Human being with feelings
 
dea-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,131
Default Let me explain....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
So... let me understand your logic. You mix and when your cpu starts peaking - because you're running 128 sample buffers - you freeze rather than just... raise the buffer? Because you never go higher than that?
Your question sounds a little pointed and maybe that's because my comment to you, about buffers, sounded pointed, to you, in the first place.

The reason I don't switch my buffers often is because it does not interfere with my workflow. When I play music, I want absolute response as if I were playing live. This is what has been important to me.

I am no Reaper or recording or engineering guru. I live and learn. So, for me, I always just thought of low latency as "better" than high latency, thus my comment about latency.

I have a Win 7, 64-bit machine with AMD Phenom II Quad 3.2 processor and 6 GB memory. Just a middle of the road machine, so I never deceive myself into thinking I can have 100 VSTi's and FX running at the same time.

I have been arranging music since I was 15 and I am 49. I know what I want, sound-wise.

I see no problem in freezing a track since, in the virtual world, everything is non-destructive. It's very easy (and a good habit to develope) to plan ahead.

I track first and mix second, no problem. My projects involve on the average 30 to 50 tracks, many time much less, so I just don't run into the problem.

My personal focus is on crafting song material, rather than computer science. However, now that you have taught me that the buffer can be raised and lowered at will, and for purpose, I have become that much more knowledgeably richer!

Now, I understand.

Thanks.
__________________
Please check out my REAPER produced music here: http://soundcloud.com/dea-man

Last edited by dea-man; 03-03-2012 at 09:54 AM.
dea-man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 09:06 PM   #48
mintwaxed
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10
Default

the #1 wrong with MIDI on reaper is the #1 thing wrong with everything in reaper: the basic functionality is there, but it's a complete painintheass to use. the interface is loaded with obscure shortcuts no other app uses, uses names for things that no one else uses, and menu items placed in places where no other app places them. it's like learning a game that uses 7-y-u-h (for example) for cursor movement. and to compound the aggravation, everything is buried like 3 menu levels deep.

so reaper devs, forget adding new features, MAKE REAPER USER FRIENDLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i've never used an app before where i had to work so hard just to do the most meager tasks. constantly referencing the manual, and little luck there because the manual, despite telling me everything, assumes i know all the terms & items it's talking about. for example: it mentions a button out of the blue and doesn't tell me where the button is. then i have to hunt down where that button is but hunting it for in the gui, since the manual doesn't say what screen a button is on, or what the requirements are for that button to show up. just mega hours wasted doing nothing... except looking for pocket lint magic spell to do a meager task like transpose midi notes one octave. screw that. what a total waste of time. make reaper easy to use. that's all i ask. why is it so f-ing hard? i've used both cubase & sonar for like a decade with no problems, but when i come to reaper, and all it's stupid gibberish secret handshake crappola, i just think, screw this, i might as well try learning chinese because i know that will be infinitely easier.

and finally, reaper development has ground to a virtual stand still. it's all stuff that's behind the UI, with shortcuts that are buried 55 levels deep, about things i will never give a crap about. some esoteric crap about someone's pet peeve that only 2 people even care about.

i forgot one last thing: TURN OFF THE F-ING VST SCAN AT STARTUP, GODFCKINGDAMMIT!!!
mintwaxed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 09:08 PM   #49
dea-man
Human being with feelings
 
dea-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,131
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
So... let me understand your logic.
My "logic"? Don't use it. I use Reaper!
__________________
Please check out my REAPER produced music here: http://soundcloud.com/dea-man
dea-man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 09:12 PM   #50
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisharbin View Post
I was just wondering. I'm certainly not trying to criticize your methods.
For sure Chris. I didn't take it that way.

Strange conversation really. What I described is exactly what the larger buffer settings were designed for... to ease the load when you don't need low latency. Which is for me and most others, most of the time. Sure, with smaller projects I could stay at 256... but why? Like I said above, it just unnecessarily eats up CPU headroom and it takes all of 10 seconds to change it.

Running unnecessarily heavy, wasting cpu headroom, cpu fan kicking in more often wearing more, etc, etc... for no really good reason. Anyway... to each his own.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 09:28 PM   #51
chrisharbin
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 16,031
Default

Quote:
So... let me understand your logic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dea-man View Post
My "logic"? Don't use it. I use Reaper!


haha!
chrisharbin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 09:29 PM   #52
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dea-man View Post
YMy personal focus is on crafting song material, rather than computer science. However, now that you have taught me that the buffer can be raised and lowered at will, and for purpose, I have become that much more knowledgeably richer!

Now, I understand.

Thanks.
It's not "computer science". Again... it's what it's there for but nobody has to use it. You said you didn't understand why and I explained why.

Many people do that.

My personal focus (when mixing anyway) is using every bit of CPU I have available before I have to bounce anything... and the most you'll ever get is at the highest buffer setting.

Jeez.... how did we get here? Am I honestly to believe that you guys actually weren't aware that many people raise their ASIO buffers when they don't need low latency?

If so... uh... yeah... many do... many don't... erhmm... so what?

Strange discussion. It reminds me of PTHD users telling me that changing my buffer settings every 4-6 hours was "just too much hassle" while they printed real time track stems.

Last edited by Lawrence; 03-02-2012 at 09:47 PM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 11:52 PM   #53
Viente
Human being with feelings
 
Viente's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mintwaxed View Post
i've used both cubase & sonar for like a decade with no problems, but when i come to reaper, and all it's stupid gibberish secret handshake crappola, i just think, screw this, i might as well try learning chinese because i know that will be infinitely easier.
Why you quit using Cubase & Sonar then?
Viente is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 11:55 PM   #54
Viente
Human being with feelings
 
Viente's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mintwaxed View Post
so reaper devs, forget adding new features, MAKE REAPER USER FRIENDLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:facepalm:

Its the most user friendly DAW i ever used! dont feel it? make it user friendly for yourself

For the first time devs gave you the ability to customize just almost everything for your own needs and you call it "user unfriendly"?? sorry i can't stand your moaning...

Of course there are things to be improved but the general concept MUST preserve

If someday REAPER will become "just another DAW" because of the users who lazy/can't understand its concept i will quit using it

Last edited by Viente; 03-03-2012 at 12:19 AM.
Viente is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 02:27 AM   #55
joelsampson
Human being with feelings
 
joelsampson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 907
Default

The lack of a built-in step editor is why I am using FL Studio quite a bit. it's much easier to program in a drum track in FLS. But I am primarily MIDI based.

I would NOT record a band in FL Studio, but I guess you could. I pretty much am going with FLS for MIDI and Reaper for audio and perhaps light MIDI work.

joel
__________________
Trying to get work out the door. . .
My resource links: http://www.djemberecords.com/links.html
joelsampson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 06:07 AM   #56
bilsner
Human being with feelings
 
bilsner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: croydon UK
Posts: 253
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viente View Post
:facepalm:

sorry i can't stand your moaning...
To be fair, Reaper can seem a bit daunting at first, that user custom-ability you refer to doesn't translate to user friendly to a fair few users at first. While the ability to have Reaper do things your way is welcome, it can take a while to get one's head around it.

To mintwaxed I would say stick at it and ask questions on the forum. Posters here are knowledgeable and helpful (in my case Gofer has been very helpful indeed.. thx). You will find ways to do what you want and in the end it will likely be an easier experience once you have things customized to your taste.

Good luck

Last edited by bilsner; 03-03-2012 at 06:13 AM.
bilsner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 06:13 AM   #57
bilsner
Human being with feelings
 
bilsner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: croydon UK
Posts: 253
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viente View Post
It can be set up in actions menu, but i can't figure out how to duplicate a time range not just selected notes
Yeah I guess my point is why isn't it just CTRL D like on the arrange page, other DAWS seem to stick with that convention, would seem simple really, that said, it's not going to kill me hehe
bilsner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 06:16 AM   #58
Viente
Human being with feelings
 
Viente's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bilsner View Post
Easy brother, this sounds a bit Steinberg forum. To be fair, Reaper can seem a bit daunting at first, that user custom-ability you refer to doesn't translate to user friendly to a fair few users at first. While the ability to have Reaper do things your way is welcome, it can take a while to get one's head around it.

To mintwaxed I would say stick at it and ask questions on the forum. Posters here are knowledgeable and helpful (in my case Gofer has been very helpful indeed.. thx). You will find ways to do what you want and in the end it will likely be an easier experience once you have things customized to your taste.

Good luck
Never been on Steinberg forum

Sorry for being a little bit harsh, but serious...people complain about Reaper unfriendly interface becuase its too complex with all this customization business, but its the unique thing about this DAW! If it wasn't so, what would be the differences between other DAW's then? Why somebody quit to use Cubase or Logic and come to Reaper?
Viente is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 06:42 AM   #59
Fex
Human being with feelings
 
Fex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Portsmouth, UK
Posts: 3,370
Default

I've hardly customized Reaper at all. My experience is totally at odds with those who find its interface to be unfriendly. I quit Cubase to use Reaper because I had Reaper doing basic tasks within minutes which I hadn't figured out in Cubase after several months, largely because I have limited patience, I expect software to work intuitively, straight out of the box, and I read manuals only as a last resort.

Most of this was to do with Reaper's audio routing, however. Its MIDI handling was appealing only in that it was similar to Cubase. It has improved dramatically since then, but it still has a little way to go.
Fex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 06:48 AM   #60
Viente
Human being with feelings
 
Viente's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fex View Post
I expect software to work intuitively, straight out of the box, and I read manuals only as a last resort.
i think its relative from person to person...
Viente is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 07:03 AM   #61
Fex
Human being with feelings
 
Fex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Portsmouth, UK
Posts: 3,370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viente View Post
i think its relative from person to person...
Yes, I think it must be.
Fex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 07:08 AM   #62
jnif
Human being with feelings
 
jnif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,042
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viente View Post
Sorry for being a little bit harsh, but serious...people complain about Reaper unfriendly interface becuase its too complex with all this customization business, but its the unique thing about this DAW! If it wasn't so, what would be the differences between other DAW's then? Why somebody quit to use Cubase or Logic and come to Reaper?
It is possible to improve usability a lot without removing any customization features. And even the customization features can be made a lot more user friendly without removing any flexibility.

And you can't solve every problem with customization. Just read again all the MIDI related problems mentioned in this thread. Most of those problems can't be solved with customizations. You might be able to get some kind of workaround after spending lot of time creating macros, writing ReaScripts or even developing your own extensions but the end result will not be as good as natively supported feature. Many Reaper users are also familiar with other DAWs and they will expect similar basic MIDI functionality and usability as in those other DAWs (and it is perfectly ok that Reaper does some things differently, but the different approach should still be user friendly).

That is why many Reaper users are complaining about unfriendly interface. It could be so much better and at the same time have all the customization possibilities.

jnif
jnif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 07:49 AM   #63
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 18,891
Default

took me a long time to come to terms with this so-called unfriendliness.
I felt that way as well for ages, till I stopped trying to do things the way I always had and started reading the manual, watching tutorials and THEN picking out the way I wanted MY reaper to behave.

Still not there yet and getting horribly distracted by cute themes, which doesn't help, but I AM becoming more and more productive.

The one and only place I still wind up giving up and leaving reaper is on any heavy duty MIDI stuff.
Just bought Johnny G's tutorial series so I am hoping that too will change with better understanding (and hopefully the devs paying attention to a couple of the more popular MDI FRs.)
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 10:01 AM   #64
dea-man
Human being with feelings
 
dea-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,131
Default What "works" for you.......works...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
Am I honestly to believe that you guys actually weren't aware that many people raise their ASIO buffers when they don't need low latency?
There is nothing wrong with raising or lowering the buffer, just as there is nothing wrong with freezing or unfreezing a track.

Just different focuses, due to different workflows.

It takes me the same amount of time to raise or lower my buffer as it does to freeze or unfreeze a track.
__________________
Please check out my REAPER produced music here: http://soundcloud.com/dea-man
dea-man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 10:09 AM   #65
CQ7String
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 89
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gofer View Post
Here's some of my niggles with MIDI in Reaper (quantization is not one of them, I can do without):
[LIST][*]The thing that bothers me most with Reaper's MIDI is how it handles item splitting through notes. Most often I don't want the note to be split, so I would wish for a possibility to let MIDI notes ring out until it's note of even if that note off comes after the right item edge and just let the note length intact instead.
+1 on this.
__________________
http://www.metalguitarist.org
CQ7String is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 12:19 PM   #66
korakios
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Greece
Posts: 98
Default

I never had experience with deep midi editing,so I don't know miss anything except that Reaper does not sync.I have a korg kp3 which has the nice tap tempo button and a rotary for changing the tempo on the fly and I sync other hardware...but I can't record the performance so Reaper becomes useless.
I went on AVLinux with Rosegarden
http://www.rosegardenmusic.com
but I need windows for using some editors of my hardware...and I miss Reaper!
__________________
No midi clock sync ? How about Ableton Link?
korakios is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 04:23 PM   #67
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dea-man View Post
There is nothing wrong with raising or lowering the buffer, just as there is nothing wrong with freezing or unfreezing a track.

Just different focuses, due to different workflows.

It takes me the same amount of time to raise or lower my buffer as it does to freeze or unfreeze a track.
That's cool. You should try to recall that the discussion between us started when you stated that you didn't understand why anyone ever works at 2048. You sidetracked the thread with that, since the thread wasn't even about that other than me saying that Reaper has a delay in the UI when my buffers are high... and one thing (clicking the UI) should have nothing to do with the other (the system latency)

All I did was give you the reasons why I do that, work at 2048,, since you said you didn't understand it and it seemed to bother you for some strange reason, not knowing why, and .. well... . It kinda went to Disneyland from there.

Now it seems to be unnecessarily evolving into one of those "last word on the net" things.

If you feel there's nothing wrong with it, why bring it up (off topic) in the first place? That's a semi-rhetorical question.

Last edited by Lawrence; 03-03-2012 at 04:28 PM.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 06:41 PM   #68
dea-man
Human being with feelings
 
dea-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,131
Default Here's why....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence View Post
That's cool. You should try to recall that the discussion between us started when you stated that you didn't understand why anyone ever works at 2048. You sidetracked the thread with that, since the thread wasn't even about that other than me saying that Reaper has a delay in the UI when my buffers are high... and one thing (clicking the UI) should have nothing to do with the other (the system latency)

All I did was give you the reasons why I do that, work at 2048,, since you said you didn't understand it and it seemed to bother you for some strange reason, not knowing why, and .. well... . It kinda went to Disneyland from there.

Now it seems to be unnecessarily evolving into one of those "last word on the net" things.

If you feel there's nothing wrong with it, why bring it up (off topic) in the first place? That's a semi-rhetorical question.
I side-tracked the conversation because I did not understand why anyone would use such a high buffer and then wonder why their latency was so long. To me, it never occurred to raise my latency that high. To me, it didn't make sense. You have since answered the question and I learned something new. I did not understand and now, I do. I believe I already said, thank you.

Does that explain it for you?
__________________
Please check out my REAPER produced music here: http://soundcloud.com/dea-man
dea-man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 06:42 PM   #69
strunkdts
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,565
Default

no, lets bitch about the AUTOMATION!!!!
strunkdts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 06:44 PM   #70
dea-man
Human being with feelings
 
dea-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,131
Default Alright...

..OK.
__________________
Please check out my REAPER produced music here: http://soundcloud.com/dea-man
dea-man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2012, 04:54 AM   #71
gofer
-blänk-
 
gofer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,154
Default

I don't think it's common for DAWs to tie MIDI to audio latency settings like Reaper does. That in mind I do understand people are scratching their head when they get aware of it and add it to a list like this.
gofer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2012, 07:00 AM   #72
mikeroephonics
Human being with feelings
 
mikeroephonics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,484
Default

+ MIDI Filter Events Box: Allow multiple MIDI Items across Tracks to be selected, edited, simultaneously. All this within a single MIDI Editor.
Vote here:
http://forum.cockos.com/project.php?issueid=2573

This would be an amazing improvement. Anyone who uses multiple Media Items across multiple tracks for a common instrument would benefit from this. (Example: a sampled viola with 3 playing techniques: long, short, pizz. Track 1=long, Track 2=short, Track 3=pizz.)

This would allow you to move/edit all 3 tracks in any way, all at the same time with a single mouse motion.

The votes for this speak for themselves. This is one of my very few gripes with REAPER. I love it for audio. MIDI is pretty good now. The MIDI could be amazing, someday...
__________________
Please check out these MIDI requests: http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=103192
Thanks.
mikeroephonics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2012, 07:10 AM   #73
ugh
Human being with feelings
 
ugh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: earth
Posts: 1,379
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quest The Wordsmith View Post
I constantly see posts on the forums here either trashing Reapers MIDI capabilities, or begging users to support some MIDI feature request. In a nutshell, what's so bad about Reapers MIDI?

Granted, I'm not a heavy MIDI user. I play a groove on the keyboard, maybe quantize a bit here and there, edit a note or two's velocity, and I'm done. What are you MIDI power users looking for that Reaper fails at? Am I unaware of a world of MIDI possibilities that would make my creative process bloom? Tell me!

~Quest~
The Piano-Roll editor is a bit clumsy imo, but apart from that I am quite satisfied.
My music ist mostly midi based and I get along well.
It could be better, but I don't mind too much.
ugh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2012, 07:18 AM   #74
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ugh View Post
...My music ist mostly midi based and I get along well.
It could be better, but I don't mind too much.
The MIDI editor or the music..?



>
planetnine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2012, 09:40 AM   #75
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 18,891
Default

Behave, Nathan!

I have to say that most of the MIDI moans I have are covered in the outstanding FRs, but overall I am slowly coming to terms with the shortcomings.
It is STILL usually quicker to limp along in Reaper than fire up my Amiga1200 and BPP, although if it gets to be anything than the most basic cut n paste, that is STILL what I do.
Reaper is worth putting up with the bad bits, regardless.
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2012, 09:45 AM   #76
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dea-man View Post
Does that explain it for you?
Yes, thank you. A simple misunderstanding my friend.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2012, 09:46 AM   #77
ThePriest
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Tuscany (Italy)
Posts: 144
Default

About latency and buffer size IMO a big buffer is nonsense.... we should have 1 sample buffers, not 2048.
16 buffers of 16 samples are probably better than 1 buffer of 256 samples.
Quote:
Quoted from VolumeShaper VST manual.

Due to limitations of the VST specification, parameter changes (via
automation, via drawing in the wave area or via moving of knobs)
do not happen on a per-sample basis. Instead, parameters are only
updated once before an audio buffer is processed. The next parameter
update happens before the next audio buffer is processed.
In short, parameter changes are quantized to the size of the audio
buffer, which is set in the preferences of your VST host or in the
settings of your audio interface.
So setting small buffer sizes gives you a smoother control, but might
drastically increase the CPU consumption for some plugins. This is
also true for VolumeShaper, especially when moving points in the
wave area.
If i remember correctly something similar is said in the VST SDK.

Last edited by ThePriest; 03-04-2012 at 09:54 AM.
ThePriest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2012, 09:51 AM   #78
Lawrence
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gofer View Post
I don't think it's common for DAWs to tie MIDI to audio latency settings like Reaper does. That in mind I do understand people are scratching their head when they get aware of it and add it to a list like this.
That was something that bothered me early on with Reaper but honestly, I don't use my midi hardware modules that much anymore so it's not that big a deal anymore. The other UI thing is a really minor thing at best.

But when sequencing midi hardware it was a bit shocking for me (again, I was working at full buffers with hardware midi devices being monitored through a console, not being monitored through the daw audio inputs) to have latency when playing midi into the sequencer and have to lower the DAW buffers in that particular case.

Yeah, that was really unusual for me personally. I'd never had to do that before. In most cases the incoming midi goes directly "through", passes from the input directly to the hardware output like ASIO DM or something, it doesn't travel through the daw buffers.
Lawrence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2012, 05:28 AM   #79
fullcircle
Human being with feelings
 
fullcircle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Posts: 28
Default

Honestly, my major grip is the lack of a line tool so that I can step parameter changes. Like volume changes.

I can do drumrolls in Geist with volume increases and such, but I shouldn't have to!

Other little things bug me too, but I can deal with them. Having to attempt to set the volume of 64 little notes manually ... not fun.

Noob question: is there a macro/action/something that can slope MIDI CC from one point to another?
__________________
My Soundcloud
TAFKA Full Circle ... "One day I'll get time to finish a track!"
Reaper 4.awesome - Intel i7-980 3.33 GHz Six Cores, 4GB RAM, Win 7 x64
fullcircle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2012, 05:59 AM   #80
btodd
Human being with feelings
 
btodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 20
Default

If you take your mouse and click and hold while holding the shift key, you can drag the pointer and make a straight slope.
btodd 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 03:26 PM.


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