|
Avid Pro Audio CommunityHow to Join & Post • Community Terms of Use • Help Us Help YouKnowledge Base Search • Community Search • Learn & Support |
#541
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Moving to Reaper?
Quote:
Shane
__________________
Pro Tools Power User Editing Give your plug-ins a facelift...and skin 'em! __________________ "Music should be performed by the musician, not by the engineer." Michael Wagener 25th July 2005, 02:59 PM __________________ Pro Tools|HD Native 9.0.1 | Pro Tools|HDX 10.2 | Studio One | REAPER 4.22 | HD OMNI | HoboMac Pro 2.26Ghz Quad-Core | W7 Ultimate 64-bit |
#542
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Moving to Reaper?
Quote:
Well, currently I run a template for writing film music which has 8 instances of Kontakt, each running from 10-16 different instruments (about 100 instruments total). I have an additional track for each instrument (about 150, since I use additional sounds other than Kontakt) which sends midi to Kontakt, and then receives the audio back from Kontakt onto the same track. Then, for each section (strings, brass, FX, etc.), the tracks are within a folder, which allows me to bounce stems of each section simply by record enabling the section folder and hitting record. To get this to work within ProTools would require a very high end HD system, if it would work at all. LE just doesn't have the buss capabilities to route that many tracks. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I can understand that Reaper may not be the best tool for everyone, but for the most part, what impresses me so much about Reaper is that it is so customizable in ways that most programs aren't, with very minimal knowledge you can make it do almost anything. Heck, there is even a layout for Reaper which almost identically recreates the look and layout of ProTools. Don't get me wrong, I think ProTools does what it does very very well, and I still use it from time to time (I'm about to start mixing an alt-folk record in ProTools this week), but to me it seems like ProTools has been the same thing for a decade. There have certainly been improvements in each version, but even with PT9, there are still limitations which don't need to be there which are present for the sole purpose of selling the higher end hardware. That is a fine business model, and it is obviously working, since people still consider ProTools to be the standard, but I find it very refreshing to use a program like Reaper where, for the most part, it is designed to do almost whatever you want. Sure, you may not know instinctively how to do it when you first start using the program, but that is no different than any other DAW. I found that it only took me about 2 weeks with Reaper before I was comfortable enough with it to no longer have to look into the manual to figure things out, and within a month I was using it without having to think twice about what I was doing. Now, I have custom keyboard commands to automate sequences of actions that I do regularly, I have a few templates setup for different types of sessions (one of which has over 200 tracks, all color coded and in folders to keep perfectly organized), and the only real problem I have is the fact that the 003 drivers for Win7 don't allow me to change buffer settings within Reaper without restarting the program afterwards. I haven't ever had Reaper crash, or tell me my buffer was too large/small, or stop working after an update because I didn't pay my Waves update fee and my plugins are one version back. I have even done some recording on my laptop onto the internal 5400RPM system drive, and nowhere on the Reaper boards are people telling me that in order to even get the software to work I have to have 2 hard drives (which is what I see a lot of on the digi boards). To me, Reaper does more than ProTools does minus a very few things, all at a significantly lower price and with far fewer limitations. Heck, I can download it, install it, and start working on a random computer almost faster than I can login, find, and start downloading the newest version of ProTools (not to mention the huge wait time, since ProTools is such a large file). Now, having said all of that, I will still most likely upgrade to PT9, since Avid has obviously listened to some of the complaints people have had over the years, and I am excited to see what PT10 will bring to the table now that the company seems to be heading in the right direction. |
#543
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Moving to Reaper?
Ahhh...
Mono tracks.. if you place mono media on a track.. say, a mono sine wav.. it is actually being sent to BOTH channels. Using the "balance" control will simply determine how much is sent to each. To make it pseudo-mono, one would need to "re-wire it" under the hood, but even then the source track remains.. 2 channels, minimum. I am Autistic, so in my mind, this is similar to.. well, maybe like when a computer receives an illegal operation. If that computer could get frustrated, imagine hitting it with this EVERY SINGLE TIME the app is used. Sort of like when someone does the "I'm not touching you" game, over an dover, and over.. As for the Aux In thing.. I want to send the absolute output from a track to another track. I do not want to output the track to hardware. This is not possible in Reaper. While *they* suggest simply "disconnecting" the output of the track and utilizing a post fader (post pan) send.. it is still a send, and NOT an output. See above computer (poorly written) metaphor/analogy. I could actually deal with this if I could get proper panning and mono tracks. And, as for the Sends thing... yes, as you describe and use it, it does suck. If I were doing your work in that manner, it would be an addition to my "illegal operation" bits of frustration, lol.
__________________
nikki k Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines. On the other hand, you have different fingers. |
#544
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Moving to Reaper?
Quote:
Shane
__________________
Pro Tools Power User Editing Give your plug-ins a facelift...and skin 'em! __________________ "Music should be performed by the musician, not by the engineer." Michael Wagener 25th July 2005, 02:59 PM __________________ Pro Tools|HD Native 9.0.1 | Pro Tools|HDX 10.2 | Studio One | REAPER 4.22 | HD OMNI | HoboMac Pro 2.26Ghz Quad-Core | W7 Ultimate 64-bit |
#545
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Moving to Reaper?
Quote:
As for the sends, I again don't quite understand how it won't do what you want it to do. Every track by default sends to the master output, but by deselecting the parent track button in the I/O window, it no longer does that. If you make a send from that track to another track, it does exactly what you describe. The only difference I can see is how it is labeled. You don't see the "send" from the track to the master fader, but it is still there, and as I understand it, works exactly the same way as the sends assignments work. Alternatively (and this probably doesn't work the way you want, or you would be using it) you can just make whatever track you want to send to a folder, and put your original track within that folder, which makes it send by default to that folder track and nowhere else. Again, I don't mean to imply that you don't have valid points, I just don't see how Reaper is not doing what you want it to do already, or how the subtle differences between what you want and what it does have any real world implications. |
#546
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Moving to Reaper?
Interesting, I didn't think of this. So, does this apply to all plugins, or just ones that process specifically in stereo? For example, if I am running Auto Tune on a mono track in ProTools, will running it in Reaper use twice the processing power? (understanding of course that RTAS and VST plugins run very differently)
|
#547
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Moving to Reaper?
Quote:
Shane
__________________
Pro Tools Power User Editing Give your plug-ins a facelift...and skin 'em! __________________ "Music should be performed by the musician, not by the engineer." Michael Wagener 25th July 2005, 02:59 PM __________________ Pro Tools|HD Native 9.0.1 | Pro Tools|HDX 10.2 | Studio One | REAPER 4.22 | HD OMNI | HoboMac Pro 2.26Ghz Quad-Core | W7 Ultimate 64-bit |
#548
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Moving to Reaper?
Quote:
Shane
__________________
Pro Tools Power User Editing Give your plug-ins a facelift...and skin 'em! __________________ "Music should be performed by the musician, not by the engineer." Michael Wagener 25th July 2005, 02:59 PM __________________ Pro Tools|HD Native 9.0.1 | Pro Tools|HDX 10.2 | Studio One | REAPER 4.22 | HD OMNI | HoboMac Pro 2.26Ghz Quad-Core | W7 Ultimate 64-bit |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Moving audio region without moving automation? | tokolosh | Post - Surround - Video | 6 | 04-09-2014 06:11 AM |
Reaper 4 in Protools Help.. | egrideout | macOS | 7 | 12-23-2011 07:17 AM |
If you're moving to Reaper get on with it! | rqstudio | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) | 32 | 04-04-2010 03:44 PM |
Reaper! thats a bit embarassing! | Gravyblue | General Discussion | 78 | 10-26-2009 02:12 PM |
Reaper and Pro Tools 8? | jebwick | General Discussion | 50 | 09-23-2009 07:20 PM |