Old 10-10-2018, 04:38 PM   #1
nofish
Human being with feelings
 
nofish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: home is where the heart is
Posts: 8,040
Default v5.96+dev1010 - October 10 2018

  • + Takes: make take changing behavior consistent independent of take-lane visibility option
  • # Takes: use reconcilation option on activate under mouse option [p=2043771]
  • + VST3: fix color byte ordering for plug-ins that use IContextInfoHandler [t=211988]
  • + VST3: revert to 5.95 behavior relating to latent VST3 parameter changes and state saving
Changelog - Pre-Releases

Generated by X-Raym's REAPER ChangeLog to BBCode

Last edited by Justin; 10-10-2018 at 07:00 PM.
nofish is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 02:36 AM   #2
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 22,003
Default

Branches. Yay!
EvilDragon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 08:57 AM   #3
Yanick
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 12
Default

I would like to have a new feature to work with takes. As for now, after having recorded the last take, the next take splits the previous one if its length is not the same. Is it possible to make the next take not splitting the previous one? So the source length of the next take would be the same as the source length of the previous one?
Yanick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 09:05 AM   #4
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 22,003
Default

That is not an easy change and won't happen probably, I'd say. Takes in Reaper work as a subset of item. For what you want, you should probably use Free Item Positioning mode instead of takes.

Last edited by EvilDragon; 10-11-2018 at 09:11 AM.
EvilDragon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 09:19 AM   #5
Yanick
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 12
Default

It can be done by drag-and-dropping a new clip over the previous one and saving the new clip as a take
Yanick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 10:04 AM   #6
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 22,003
Default

That's a completely different thing though, not exactly compatible to natively do what you want. FIPM is much more in line with that.
EvilDragon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 10:12 AM   #7
Yanick
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 12
Default

FIPM cannot work as overlapping take
Yanick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 10:18 AM   #8
inarisound
Human being with feelings
 
inarisound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yanick View Post
I would like to have a new feature to work with takes. As for now, after having recorded the last take, the next take splits the previous one if its length is not the same. Is it possible to make the next take not splitting the previous one? So the source length of the next take would be the same as the source length of the previous one?
I highly agree on this one...
There were multiple threads created in FR for that 'feature'....

I really think that splitting previous takes as a default is just horrendous...if a person needs a portion or a segment from a different take he/she will be more willing to do that by themselves and not have +100 small chops on each lane at the end of most takes just because you hit stop earlier or later.


This part of recording process is very weak and must be revised.
Don't get me wrong, it's not unusable, but it's absolutely not optimal or comfortable for majority of users...

I know that ED will jump on my generalization of 'majority' so here is Google search that will show you a lot of threads on the same subject dating from 2014 up till 2017/18:
https://www.google.com/search?q=spli...the+end+reaper


_________________

If something is not broken it doesn't mean it's not cumbersome.

Overdubbing needs to be overhauled and now is the perfect time to do it.

___________________________________________
p.s

My take on it (no pun intended) that by default Reaper will not split takes and just prioritize the top lane.

So when you have multiple takes they will sit in one track and the only parts will play that are selected and by defult we will prioritize only the highest recorded takes.

There is no need to split anything if user dose not want to do that...

By prioritizing highest lane we can solve the splitting issue.

Last edited by inarisound; 10-11-2018 at 10:34 AM.
inarisound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 10:27 AM   #9
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 22,003
Default

There are clear benefits to the current take system, as outlined by Robert in this post:

https://forum.cockos.com/showpost.ph...&postcount=214

Reaper doesn't remove features or existing workflows often (or at all), so anything that happens regarding takes how some other DAWs are handling it is not going to be based on the current take paradigm in Reaper, but instead enabling FIPM to do better and easier comps, for example. At least that would be the easiest way of implementing this, as far as I can see.


In any case, post discussion regarding comping in the thread I linked above, not here.
EvilDragon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 10:45 AM   #10
inarisound
Human being with feelings
 
inarisound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
There are clear benefits to the current take system, as outlined by Robert in this post:

https://forum.cockos.com/showpost.ph...&postcount=214

Reaper doesn't remove features or existing workflows often (or at all), so anything that happens regarding takes how some other DAWs are handling it is not going to be based on the current take paradigm in Reaper, but instead enabling FIPM to do better and easier comps, for example. At least that would be the easiest way of implementing this, as far as I can see.


In any case, post discussion regarding comping in the thread I linked above, not here.


well just so you know... this sentence by Robert says it all

"I do agree that the current system is not that great for music. For the task of recording musicians performing, I personally think other systems allow you to achieve better results with less work."

That's exactly what we are trying to deliver here...

In the remaining portion of that post by Robert he is trying to say that the system can't be changed because it's gonna ruin existing workflows.

Well in that case Reaper is very flexible to solve that issue with a checkbox in preferences... that was always solution to most "debatable" features....

For instance ED, you might not use measure dividers?
But for me It was very significant visual improvement for my workflow.... though some people found it unusable and were saying "there is no need for that"...

And I agree with both arguments, so that's why devs just made a checkbox...if you want it, you use it.

Last edited by inarisound; 10-11-2018 at 10:51 AM.
inarisound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 10:46 AM   #11
Yanick
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 12
Default

Something like this.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/19_S...pfoWY6qs8/view
Yanick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 10:57 AM   #12
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 22,003
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by inarisound View Post
In the remaining portion of that post by Robert he is trying to say that the system can't be changed because it's gonna ruin existing workflows.

Well in that case Reaper is very flexible to solve that issue with a checkbox in preferences... that was always solution to most "debatable" features....
I don't think this is solvable with a checkbox in the preferences this time around - the consequences would be far too deep, resulting in a huge barrel of worms, not a can - a whole barrel! Which is why I'm saying FIPM is probably the next best bet to allowing these sorts of take-based workflows from other DAWs.
EvilDragon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 11:15 AM   #13
inarisound
Human being with feelings
 
inarisound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
I don't think this is solvable with a checkbox in the preferences this time around - the consequences would be far too deep, resulting in a huge barrel of worms, not a can - a whole barrel! Which is why I'm saying FIPM is probably the next best bet to allowing these sorts of take-based workflows from other DAWs.
Well I never mentioned any other DAWs... I've been using Reaper for ~4 years now, so I have some understanding what is the procedure here.

I'm just saying that if devs finally got to the realm of takes and overdubbing it's great timing to overhaul the system. It never was great, and seemingly every user here understands that.

I've been lurking enough to see that Justin and Schwa are pretty tough fellows and can solve very tough issues.


Either way... I think the discussion is over, I am sure devs also lurk on pre-release threads and if they find it feasible to address this long-dated issue they will do so.

Last edited by inarisound; 10-11-2018 at 11:21 AM.
inarisound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 11:39 AM   #14
Jack Ruston
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 185
Default

Yeah I’m afraid I also agree that the current system is... well let’s say that what we have is a potentially useful and interesting Item Takes feature. But we don’t have a track-based takes feature, which is, I think what most people are missing. I wonder if we can keep the current item takes as they are, and add:

The option to switch between different playlists on a given track - different items altogether. When recording you can choose to automatically create a new take, or automatically create a new item on a new playlist.

The option to switch between different insert and send lists would be an awesome and powerful evolution of that idea.
__________________
www.jackruston.com
Jack Ruston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 11:51 AM   #15
Yanick
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 12
Default

Either like this
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Z3...jQoohmrWV80ZyA
Yanick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 12:08 PM   #16
Triode
Human being with feelings
 
Triode's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 420
Default

When I know the next take is gonna be pretty much the same length I select the item(s) I'm recording over and use record-into-item-mode (or whatever it's called). I've got a macro that selects that mode and starts recording which feels less cumbersome.
__________________
Brush and Beater Drums Online: www.outoftheboxdrums.co.uk
Triode is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2018, 01:13 PM   #17
Yanick
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 12
Default

My request almost matches the mode "Record: Set record to selected item auto-punch". But this mode adjusts the take's length to the end position only
Yanick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2018, 12:01 AM   #18
bigjoe
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 65
Default

Maybe i'm alone, but i like the actual take system as is.
Coming from PT with a track-based take system, i discovered that i faster and much more easier comping different section of a song with a "per-item" take system when you're not editing all in one pass.
It's just faster than: switch to playlist view, listen, split, promote to comp, listen, split promote, listen split promote...ecc..
bigjoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2018, 02:24 AM   #19
mlprod
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 566
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yanick View Post
My request almost matches the mode "Record: Set record to selected item auto-punch". But this mode adjusts the take's length to the end position only
Exactly, dont think its hard to implement an option to not split takes by default, but rahter fill the missing parts with "nothing".
__________________
Magnus Lindberg Productions - VRTKL Audio - Redmount Studios
magnuslindberg.com
mlprod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2018, 03:46 AM   #20
drichard
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 393
Default

Mostly I like it as is as well, and I like it better than other DAWs as well. It's faster to use. Visually, I do wish each take would stay in its own lane instead of the lane splitting visually when it is longer than previous takes. It gets a bit confusing to keep track of which take is which. But the important thing is each take remains a single item, so its's very workable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjoe View Post
Maybe i'm alone, but i like the actual take system as is.
Coming from PT with a track-based take system, i discovered that i faster and much more easier comping different section of a song with a "per-item" take system when you're not editing all in one pass.
It's just faster than: switch to playlist view, listen, split, promote to comp, listen, split promote, listen split promote...ecc..
drichard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2018, 04:48 AM   #21
nofish
Human being with feelings
 
nofish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: home is where the heart is
Posts: 8,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by drichard View Post
Visually, I do wish each take would stay in its own lane instead of the lane splitting visually when it is longer than previous takes.
You can turn this off by enabling Options -> Take lane behaviour -> Display empty take lanes.
https://forum.cockos.com/showthread....35#post2010135
nofish is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2018, 06:41 AM   #22
Robert Randolph
Human being with feelings
 
Robert Randolph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Posts: 740
Default

I think you guys should probably take this take discussion (hehe) to the thread for whining about it: https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=210747

This thread should be for direct feedback about the specific changes in the pre-release.

I'd like it changed as much as anyone else, but there's correct places for these sort of things. Annoying Justin and Schwa won't get us anywhere.
__________________
http://www.admiralbumblebee.com
Audio/DAW stuff, Woodworking, Programming and more... new posts every weekend.
Robert Randolph is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2018, 07:09 AM   #23
Robert Randolph
Human being with feelings
 
Robert Randolph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Posts: 740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nofish View Post
[list][*]+ Takes: make take changing behavior consistent independent of take-lane visibility option
Perfect! Thank you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nofish View Post
[*]# Takes: use reconcilation option on activate under mouse option [p=2043771]
This seems "better", but I'm still a bit confused by the smart reconcile introduced in +dev1009



The behaviour seems to be that later takes are only picked up as you approach, then pass, the lane with the later takes.

To me the is a bit strange based on part of your original explanation:

Quote:
The use case of the reconcilation mode is that you would often start by recording a performance, as the first take. Then, you'd overdub various parts multiple times.

In this case, if you select multiple items and choose a take lane, you'd want to use the media in that lane if available, and if not, use the previous lane that has media (since in that instance the overdub applied in that lane did not modify that item other than adding an empty lane).
To me it seems most useful that all of the take lanes are filled. So here's an animation of how I would expect the take switching to occur:



I'm pointing this out because sometimes overdubs have slight earlier overlaps, or late releases that are important to the whole take to sound right. Performers rarely nail that onset and exit perfectly right.
__________________
http://www.admiralbumblebee.com
Audio/DAW stuff, Woodworking, Programming and more... new posts every weekend.
Robert Randolph is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2018, 09:55 AM   #24
Justin
Administrator
 
Justin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 11,433
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Randolph View Post
I'm pointing this out because sometimes overdubs have slight earlier overlaps, or late releases that are important to the whole take to sound right. Performers rarely nail that onset and exit perfectly right.
Ah yeah, I think I can fix that...
Justin is online now   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 02:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.