Reaper's take system sucks, but rather than vaguely bitch about it...

[JohnnyMusic]

-I use takes when recording live instruments or vocals, doing multiple takes of the same part (though may try variations on the composition of a part). It may be one or two tracks, or occasionally a drum kit.

-As others have suggested, I try to record the same length takes every take as much as possible, because I don't like the auto splitting that goes on, but would like to be able to do partial takes that don't split the other takes yet stay in their own lane and don't mess up the alignment of the other takes.

-I know others have said they like the splitting, but I don't quite grasp that.(can anyone explain to me why it auto splits and how that is helpful?) I would rather do all the takes, of any length, without the splitting, with every take numbered sequentially whether the same length or not, staying in their own lane, then split them where I want to comp, after I am done tracking.

-I've tried dragging the edge of a part to get rid of the splits,but it doesn't work smoothly, and at least for me leaves this tiny 1-2 sample wide slice of a take that I sometimes can't even select, its so small (and if I can't delete it, I can't see the knobs and icons of the other take next to it for some reason)

-I wouldn't care if the mode "splits existing items and creates new takes in lanes" or one of the other modes was modified,for the features added as long as it could do what I describe easily.

-So to summarize, a few small changes to the takes system that would make the takes system much faster and easier for me to use(though I acknowledge they may not be small from a programming perspective), :
-remove auto splitting or make it optional
-allow different length takes to stay in their own lane (ie, not affect the alignment of the other takes vertically or horizontally), or alternatively, add silence before and after to make it match the other takes or some other predetermined length if that would be necessary).
-Insure that it works with grouped items across tracks (say a multitrack recorded drum kit)

-I don't know how this compares to play lists because I have never used playlists in pro tools for example. Again they seem like small changes, but may be difficult to implement, I don't know. They would really speed up/simplify comping for me though. Perhaps they could be added to V6? I think I'll post this in feature requests.

-Would this make the takes system easier/faster/more intuitive for any of you?
-Any thoughts on work arounds using takes or layers that are not overly complicated would be welcomed.
Thanks!
John

[nofish]

Originally Posted by JohnnyMusic

-allow different length takes to stay in their own lane (ie, not affect the alignment of the other takes vertically or horizontally), or alternatively, add silence before and after to make it match the other takes if that would be necessary).

Have you tried enabling 'Options -> Take lane behaviour -> Display empty take lanes'?
That 'pads' shorter takes with silence and so prevents the vertical resizing, i.e. takes stay in their original lane.
Sounds to me like what you're looking for, but maybe I misunderstood.

[JohnnyMusic]

Yes, I do have the display empty lanes checked. My biggest issue is the auto splitting, though. Thanks for the reply Nofish!

[mehmethan]

A script Guru who will write a script which will glue TAKES of selected items according to their recording order can solve all problems.

ITEM
_________________
take1|take1|take1|
take2|empty|emtpy|
take3|take3|empty|
__________________



ITEM AFTER GLUE :

_________________
|*****TAKE1*****|
|*****TAKE2*****|
|*****TAKE3*****|
__________________

[nofish]

Originally Posted by mehmethan

A script Guru who will write a script which will glue TAKES of selected items according to their recording order can solve all problems.

ITEM
_________________
take1|take1|take1|
take2|empty|emtpy|
take3|take3|empty|
__________________



ITEM AFTER GLUE :

_________________
|*****TAKE1*****|
|*****TAKE2*****|
|*****TAKE3*****|
__________________

Then if you play the item after glue and say take 3 is active, you'd hear silence instead of take 1 at the end, because it's masked by take 3, which is empty at the end, no? How'd you solve that?

[mehmethan]

Originally Posted by nofish

Then if you play the item after glue and say take 3 is active, you'd hear silence instead of take 1 at the end, because it's masked by take 3, which is empty at the end, no? How'd you solve that?

Script should count empty lanes and render a silence audio instead of empty lanes. So any of empty lanes will be rendered as silent audio and glued with non-empty takes. The result of the glue will be all equal length takes. I believe this way that chaos of a lot of splits in a recording will be gone and user can split that item later in the way he wants

[JohnnyMusic]

Originally Posted by mehmethan

Script should count empty lanes and render a silence audio instead of empty lanes. So any of empty lanes will be rendered as silent audio and glued with non-empty takes. The result of the glue will be all equal length takes. I believe this way that chaos of a lot of splits in a recording will be gone and user can split that item later in the way he wants

Thanks for replying.
Mehmethan,
That sounds like a relatively easy work around, if someone were to write such a script.
To clarify what you are saying, I would do all my tracking, including partial takes if needed, with the display empty take lanes enabled. Then I would run the script and that would glue everything into nice non-split (glued) items.
If it works, that sounds like it would get me close to what I am looking for with just one extra step (as opposed to having it as a native behavior). I would have to split the items at the borders of my partial take so I could select other takes, in order to hear to the adjacent parts and not silence when auditioning how the partial take sounds with the rest of the part, (thanks nofish , I didn't think of that) but would be doing that anyway if I thought I needed to do additional takes of a partial section.
Who can write such a script?
Thanks,
John

[Gass n Klang]

Originally Posted by mehmethan

A script Guru who will write a script which will glue TAKES of selected items according to their recording order can solve all problems.

ITEM
_________________
take1|take1|take1|
take2|empty|emtpy|
take3|take3|empty|
__________________



ITEM AFTER GLUE :

_________________
|*****TAKE1*****|
|*****TAKE2*****|
|*****TAKE3*****|
__________________

which fades will you have between takes? splits inbetween one take should be linear =equal gain (as the addition of the same audio material will end up as there was no split) but comping between different takes should be equal power. Everytime you glue equal power splits inbetween the same take you will have volume bumps for the length of the split... You really have to take care splits only occur in breaks. That's a big disadvantage of the current take system...

[mehmethan]

Originally Posted by Gass n Klang

which fades will you have between takes? splits inbetween one take should be linear =equal gain (as the addition of the same audio material will end up as there was no split) but comping between different takes should be equal power. Everytime you glue equal power splits inbetween the same take you will have volume bumps for the length of the split... You really have to take care splits only occur in breaks. That's a big disadvantage of the current take system...

custom action :
1) transport : record
2) glue item takes

If we have that script and use it with a custom action like this, there wont be any trouble with crossfades. Because it will heal the previous take only and add empty silence audio if necessary to the newly recorded take or previous take.

By the way I'm not a scripter or good at math This is just an idea and I believe it can solve many problems if don't have native solution.We can disscuss about it here and maybe a script guru can hear us and write that script for us. I don't think we will have a native solution for this take system problem.

[nofish]

Originally Posted by JohnnyMusic

I would have to split the items at the borders of my partial take so I could select other takes, in order to hear to the adjacent parts and not silence when auditioning how the partial take sounds with the rest of the part, (thanks nofish , I didn't think of that) but would be doing that anyway if I thought I needed to do additional takes of a partial section.

That's the point I wanted to bring up, thanks for rephrasing.
So, to go back to the example from my previous post, in able to hear

|take3take3take1|

instead of

|take3take3silence|

after glueing, which I'd think would be the common use case here, user would have to split item manually after glueing to be able to select take 1. That's exactly what Reaper does automatically for me with the auto splits, so to be honest, personally I don't quite see the point having a script which glues first.

[mehmethan]

Originally Posted by nofish

after glueing, which I'd think would be the common use case here, user would have to split item manually after glueing to be able to select take 1. That's exactly what Reaper does automatically for me with the auto splits, so to be honest, personally I don't quite see the point having a script which glues first.

for me the biggest problem is that the chaos of many splits while recording."glue item takes" script will definetely solve the problem.
I think general record & edit worklow is like this :
First you record your audio.Then when you finish your recording now it is time to select best takes. So there is no need for auto splits while recording.Because anyway you will do later and you will definetly change that split points while editing in many places.

[mlprod]

Originally Posted by nofish

That's the point I wanted to bring up, thanks for rephrasing.
So, to go back to the example from my previous post, in able to hear

|take3take3take1|

instead of

|take3take3silence|

after glueing, which I'd think would be the common use case here, user would have to split item manually after glueing to be able to select take 1. That's exactly what Reaper does automatically for me with the auto splits, so to be honest, personally I don't quite see the point having a script which glues first.

Exactly, the whole point is to be in charge of the splits yourself.

[JohnnyMusic]

-Gass: would having autocrossfade enabled when tracking take care of the volume bump from glueing?

-Nofish: I hear you, but lets say I decide to do an extra couple takes of a chorus, after I have done several complete takes of the song. I don't want it to autosplit even if I punch in on the grid, cause I may want to just use part of the chorus that was already there and part of my new take, maybe not the whole thing- I just won't know until I do a few choruses, stop and go back and listen and choose the parts I want.
If I did one chorus at a time and stopped every time to check if it was acceptable, that might work, but that is not how I like to work. I like to play several choruses in a row over and over to get into a groove and then stop when I feel I have nailed it a few times and then choose the best parts.

-Also, it just gets visually messy and confusing with the splits all over. It gets really confusing to tell where you punched in on purpose and where it was autosplit. Especially with a drum kit.
-I already commented on what happens when I try to drag out the partial takes, it is really messy.

-mlprod: I don't follow what you mean by be "in charge of the splits". I don't think autosplit puts you in charge of the splits, does it? It forces them on you and makes a bloody mess of it.

-I tried messing around with recording in layers yesterday just cause I have never tried it to see if it could be a work around, but it appears you would have manually mute and unmute each one and that would be much slower than scrolling through takes with T and shift T. Perhaps there are some custom actions that would unmute the item clicked on and mute the others- hmm will have to check on that but still no takes numbers on the items(and I have no desire to layer a bunch of different instruments or parts on one track, prefer to have separate tracks for that) BUT... It creates lanes just the way I would like the take function to do it. I wish takes would record just like layers with no splits, but with the take numbers and default to playing only track at a time, no autosplits, no dragging, no mess. Seems so simple!

[mlprod]

Originally Posted by JohnnyMusic

-mlprod: I don't follow what you mean by be "in charge of the splits". I don't think autosplit puts you in charge of the splits, does it? It forces them on you and makes a bloody mess of it.

That is what I meant. I do not want the auto splits.
Layers as they are working now is just not useable as a workaround.

[Nardberr]

I was wondering if a script could be written to make a track to behave like a monophonic synth giving priority to only one note at a time with emphasis on the last played note?

In that case if you were doing multiple takes at the same spot only the last recorded item would play and without needing splits. Don’t know if I’m making sense.

[Joe90]

Regarding Kenny's protools style playlist solution - this seems like an awesome solution for editing multiple takes of big multitrack recordings. However, this would not solve the issue of being able to comp 'take' style whilst still being able to move separate takes around individually or swap them in and out easily. It also doesn't solve the issue of the mess of fades that appear when recording multiple takes that start and stop at different times (unless I'm missing something).

Somebody mentioned that all these additional fades make it very difficult to see where drop in's have actually occurred, this is important and shouldn't be understated. Ferro's proposed solution solves all of these.

For what it's worth, here is my own clumsy solution to the messy take splits, a custom action that leaves me with a clean set of healed takes on a new track. Here is a gif, at the end of it you can see me undo/redo the process so you can see what's actually happening -

https://media.giphy.com/media/hu7CU7...WXMv/giphy.gif

I'm fairly new to Reaper, so I expect there's probably a far more elegant way of doing this, but it's working ok for me. If I have a take that was recorded in pieces but I want it to be editable as one take, then I break the custom action up - I explode and heal, then move the parts I want as one take onto one track, crossfade/edit if needed, then implode them all back to one track. All the original recordings are saved on the original 'recording track' and untouched, so nothing is lost or misplaced. It would be nice of none of this was necessary though.

I'm sure there's a perfectly logical answer to this that I've missed, but wouldn't providing us with an option of whether we want splits on new take recordings be a step in the right direction? So when the option is checked and you record an overdub in take mode it just sits cleanly on top of the one below, and when you promote the longer take from beneath it is still in one piece?

[Gass n Klang]

I'm editing a vocal add lib duet that is improvised during a gospel track. We did several takes. I'll now have to recompose it, move the single phrases and combine them to a nice and flawless duet. My stomach hurts thinking about how that will look in the end:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2x1ar7o5yy...sucks.jpg?dl=0

#EverydayTask

[karbomusic]

I respect what you guys want/need but send ^that to me, based on what I see I could knock that out really quickly (based on what you are describing). No I'm not joking.

[citizenkeith]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

I respect what you guys want/need but send ^that to me, based on what I see I could knock that out really quickly (based on what you are describing). No I'm not joking.

Like I’ve said in this thread and in the FR, it’s about coming up with a new option to do it differently. We know you are good with the current state of Takes, but there can be a different workflow.

Whether or not you can do that quickly now isn’t really a part of the issue, no matter how many times you make that point.

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by citizenkeith

Whether or not you can do that quickly now isn’t really a part of the issue, no matter how many times you make that point.

That literally makes no sense at all to me based on the OPs comment, but I'll accept it since I thought this was about getting the job done quickly and efficiently. If that isn't the goal, then obviously I have no valuable input for you guys - the only relief is now I know that isn't the goal, there's no temptation to help out at this point. Take care.

[Glennbo]

Glad I disabled the takes system the first week I used REAPER back in 2008. If I record something and it sounds good, then that was the take. If it sucked, then it gets nuked and I try again.

[karbomusic]

People who record others for a living have to do things differently than ^that if they want to stay in business - I respect that.

The quickest way to shut me up is to create a proper thread asking for a PT style playlists - because saying the take system sucks is inaccurate (even G&Ks gif is entitled takesystemsucks.gif) - I've said this many times and I think Kenny said the same recently up ^there > ask for playlists. But if someone says it sucks and then presents something as an example, that I can do with my eyes closed as fast as anyone here, it's very difficult to let that inaccuracy stand without correcting it.

I'm trying hard to stay out of it but the best way is to start a thread for Playlist behavior instead of making inaccurate claims.

[citizenkeith]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

That literally makes no sense at all to me based on the OPs comment, but I'll accept it since I thought this was about getting the job done quickly and efficiently. If that isn't the goal, then obviously I have no valuable input for you guys - the only relief is now I know that isn't the goal, there's no temptation to help out at this point. Take care.

No need to take offense, and I apologize if I came off too bitchy.

I thought the discussion here was how to make Reaper’s take system better, not how fast somebody can get it done with the existing system. That makes sense to me.

I just feel like we’re running in circles with this discussion. People say “we want a different option” and you keep saying they don’t need it.

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by citizenkeith

I thought the discussion here was how to make Reaper’s take system better, not how fast somebody can get it done with the existing system. That makes sense to me.

I just feel like we’re running in circles with this discussion. People say “we want a different option” and you keep saying they don’t need it.

I didn't take it as bitchy - The only thing that annoys me (which you didn't do) is when someone disparages the system due to ignorance or not taking any time to learn it which does happen a lot.

We are on the same page, different options are really better in a properly named thread - I'm 1000% fine with the PT Playlist type feature as it seems handy and good....

...but this thread is entitled that the takes system sucks (it doesn't) - there are bullets in the original post that are real issues, a handful that aren't real issues, but to your very good point - wanting a different feature added to the system, needs to be in a thread dedicated to it. If that is completely bypassed and someone starts saying takes suck while in reality are asking for playlist type stuff, it's really difficult to remain silent knowing otherwise.

[serr]

Well, it's like someone is asking for hammer-able screws.
Karbo keeps suggesting to use a screwdriver because it works fast for him.
I'll chime in every now and then and mention I like a cordless drill with a driver bit.

Hammer-able screws is still a fair request. That would in fact let you use a hammer.

It might very well turn out that some adapted "hammer" style workflow could turn out to be even quicker for someone and if it was realized correctly it wouldn't seem like someone trying to hammer screws at all.

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by serr

Karbo keeps suggesting to use a screwdriver because it works fast for him.

It works fast for anyone who takes literally an afternoon to learn it, it's a technical reality, not a subjective one - but.... requests for additional features for competing popular workflows should be posted as additional features - drivebys like... "system sucks, make it work like I'm used to" isn't going to work. It's going to take some effort and footwork IMHO.

TBH, I wish I could hide this thread from me, then I wouldn't be so tempted.

[Glennbo]

Originally Posted by serr

Well, it's like someone is asking for hammer-able screws.

$16.95 at Home Depot.

[mschnell]

Originally Posted by citizenkeith

We know you are good with the current state of Takes, but there can be a different workflow.

Do other DAWs support multiple workflows to be selected ?

-Michael

[citizenkeith]

Originally Posted by mschnell

Do other DAWs support multiple workflows to be selected ?

-Michael

I don’t know. Reaper already has a few, but many people feel they are not ideal. It’s all been stated numerous times in this thread.

[mschnell]

IMHO "a few" and extensible by configuration and add-ons in many cases is better than a single predefined one.

Michael

[citizenkeith]

Originally Posted by mschnell

IMHO "a few" and extensible by configuration and add-ons in many cases is better than a single predefined one.

Michael

What kind of configurations and add-one are you speaking of?

[mschnell]

Who said "Reaper already has a few (workflows)" ? I assumed that you meant that those would be implemented by configurations and add-ons.

-Michael

[citizenkeith]

Originally Posted by mschnell

Who said "Reaper already has a few (workflows)" ? I assumed that you meant that those would be implemented by configurations and add-ons.

-Michael

Default
Tape Mode
Layers

A few workflows.

[Gass n Klang]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

I didn't take it as bitchy - The only thing that annoys me (which you didn't do) is when someone disparages the system due to ignorance or not taking any time to learn it which does happen a lot.

I'm rather interested in your workflow for my given situation.

[chip mcdonald]

Originally Posted by Gass n Klang

I'm rather interested in your workflow for my given situation.

I'd be interested in both.

In your screenshot I see looped takes that need to be comped? I'd just do splits (via clicking) and drag what I want to keep to a Keeper Track.

Otherwise split measures ("S)a nd click on the ones I want to keep, "Crop to active take".

BUT..

Looking at your screen shot it appears that one of the loops is actually a part that is really two different parts being played/sung over a single looped section? An A and B part, maybe even an A B and C part?

Is that the gist of the "problem" here, people want to assemble "songs" by tracking an 16 bar part by looping a 4 bar part?

[Gass n Klang]

It's an improvised part, so there is no given melody. Every take is totally different. The "keeper track" will work in this case. If you've go a whole jazz band wihtout any click information an with more tracks than in my example, it's much more confusing, cause you have to scroll a lot to post parts into your keeper tracks.

[chip mcdonald]

Originally Posted by Gass n Klang

Iit's much more confusing, cause you have to scroll a lot to post parts into your keeper tracks.

You're saying it's visually confusing, and playlists solve that?

If you've got that many takes you're having to scroll up/down, reducing the track lane width won't help?

If you create your "keeper track" immediately above the instrument track, and explode to tracks you can just delete the exploded track you've auditioned (or minimize it) as you go along, keeping the most current take at the top of the pile.

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by chip mcdonald

If you've got that many takes you're having to scroll up/down, reducing the track lane width won't help?

I pretty much refuse to work without collapsing the takes (CTRL+L), it's so much better collapsed (by leaps and bounds), I never expand them unless it is some rare corner case that requires me to check something - which is almost never. Anyone who works with them expanded should be annoyed, that's a terrible mess, just collapse them and navigate forward/backwards with T and SHIFT+T, here's the difference... 64 takes below, I know which one I'm using - collapsed...



Regarding keepers... a nice hint is that you can split/edit etc. then activate takes you want by selecting them (easy when collapsed since active is the one you see), then create a new take of those, rinse repeat then the bottom most takes are your potential keepers.

Notice below there are 65 takes, I right click and choose Take > duplicate active takes, which now copies all the selected takes and puts the copy on their own new takes contiguously on the same lane at the bottom which as you can see changes to 66 takes. I find this better than reaper comps (not as good as playlists) and may not fit all needs but quicker and easier than reaper comps. To be fair, I don't use comps of any type very often, by the time I'm done auditioning and editing takes, I know which one the keeper is, thus I don't really have the need.

Basically, I could quickly audition multiple different comps as new take sets at the bottom of the stack, then if I choose the keeper I can crop to active, create a keeper track, leave them as-is, whathaveyou - You can also custom color those potential keepers so you know they are keepers and not the original takes.

[Gass n Klang]

Karbomusic, it's not the expanded status that kills me. It's the many splits. Your technique works well as long as the musical material within different takes is the same. Not in my case where every take is different and splits cut through phrases. Or in situations where music doesnt follow any fix click at all. The take system gets messy and I don't see anything I could do against it. So I wanna have a playlist system where my recorded playlist never get touched, trimmed or split.

In my last recording I did 5 takes with 2 different singers at the same time. One of them did 3 further takes alone and the other one did just 2 more. So 8 vs 7 takes. In a playlist system with grouped tracks, both singers had 8 playlists but the last one of the second singer was empty. So no problems with skipping through the takes they did simultaneously. With take system you always have to work around these kind of things.

[chip mcdonald]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

Anyone who works with them expanded should be annoyed, that's a terrible mess, just collapse them and navigate forward/backwards with T and SHIFT+T,

A quibble (going wayyy back...) I have with Reaper would be I wish I could define 3 default widths: tracking, editing, comping, and not have to fiddle with the scroll bars. I know I can customize it to do this, but haven't gotten to it...

My problem with your method is that I use the visual differences in each take as a way of remembering/identifying it. Having to flip through them negates that.

...and I don't ever have 64 takes, maybe 5-6 tops, so ... I just keep it onscreen, and just slice up/active take it.

Basically, I could quickly audition multiple different comps as new take sets at the bottom of the stack, then if I choose the keeper I can crop

My methodology is to go through 1 pass and chop out what I know is NOT a keeper, which leaves me a jigsaw puzzle that I then come back and decide what is the comp - so the visual depiction of what is available makes it easier to go "oh yeah, that bit right there was the best part" instead of having to flip to it and listen again to get my bearings.