Login

Nebula Reaper workflow

Tips & tricks, working results, technical support

Nebula Reaper workflow

Postby xyxxjx » Sat Dec 26, 2015 11:31 pm

I was wondering if anyone else is running a Nebula/Reaper combination. How do you handle cpu restrictions, meaning what do you do when you have too many nebula instances. Do you freeze or do you render? Maybe something else? Also do you normalize to something like -18db?
xyxxjx
User Level VII
User Level VII
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Nebula Reaper workflow

Postby beingmf3 » Sat Dec 26, 2015 11:49 pm

I have "written" several macros for this. 'Render (mono/stereo) selected area and set plugins of the original track offline' is likely the most frequently used here.

Normalizing not really. Most of the tracks are already recorded like that. But a trim plugin sure is handy from time to time.
User avatar
beingmf3
Member
Member
 
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 12:32 pm

Re: Nebula Reaper workflow

Postby xyxxjx » Sun Dec 27, 2015 12:05 am

beingmf3 wrote:I have "written" several macros for this. 'Render (mono/stereo) selected area and set plugins of the original track offline' is likely the most frequently used here.

Normalizing not really. Most of the tracks are already recorded like that. But a trim plugin sure is handy from time to time.


So you prefer render over freeze? What type of macros did you write?
xyxxjx
User Level VII
User Level VII
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Nebula Reaper workflow

Postby beingmf3 » Sun Dec 27, 2015 3:04 pm

It depends. If I know that the basic track won't be changed anymore, then I might as well freeze. When I "have that feeling" that the EQ or dynamic settings might change with future mix decisions, then I will render - just in order to see what exactly I put on the track.

I've set up 4 "render" macros, which all do more or less the same. IIRC, for Nebula tracks it's (1 for mono, 1 for stereo)
- save track selection
- render selected area ...
- recall track selection
- set all FX to offline

For ReaInsert tracks (with outboard) it's basically the same, just with render speed set to "1x online". If you're interested, I might post them, but it's no witchcraft to do them yourself :)
User avatar
beingmf3
Member
Member
 
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 12:32 pm

Re: Nebula Reaper workflow

Postby xyxxjx » Tue Dec 29, 2015 5:27 am

beingmf3 wrote:It depends. If I know that the basic track won't be changed anymore, then I might as well freeze. When I "have that feeling" that the EQ or dynamic settings might change with future mix decisions, then I will render - just in order to see what exactly I put on the track.

I've set up 4 "render" macros, which all do more or less the same. IIRC, for Nebula tracks it's (1 for mono, 1 for stereo)
- save track selection
- render selected area ...
- recall track selection
- set all FX to offline

For ReaInsert tracks (with outboard) it's basically the same, just with render speed set to "1x online". If you're interested, I might post them, but it's no witchcraft to do them yourself :)



Yes I've noticed the render times are kind of slow even though there's plenty of cpu power unused.
xyxxjx
User Level VII
User Level VII
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Nebula Reaper workflow

Postby Mercado_Negro » Tue Dec 29, 2015 6:51 am

beingmf3 wrote:It depends. If I know that the basic track won't be changed anymore, then I might as well freeze. When I "have that feeling" that the EQ or dynamic settings might change with future mix decisions, then I will render - just in order to see what exactly I put on the track.

I've set up 4 "render" macros, which all do more or less the same. IIRC, for Nebula tracks it's (1 for mono, 1 for stereo)
- save track selection
- render selected area ...
- recall track selection
- set all FX to offline

For ReaInsert tracks (with outboard) it's basically the same, just with render speed set to "1x online". If you're interested, I might post them, but it's no witchcraft to do them yourself :)


That's interesting, I do the opposite. In fact, I don't use track rendering anymore (stems actions) since freezing was implemented because I can process tracks in stages with it (render up to certain insert slot) and if I need to check what plugins were used I just see it in the Track View window.
i7 3770k :: Asus P8H77-V LE :: 16Gb DDR3 @1600MHz :: Geforce GT 520 :: OCZ-Vertex 128Gb :: WD Black Series 1Tb and Green Series 1Tb :: F*******e Liquid56 :: REAPER 64bit and StudioOne 64bit (both latest versions) :: Win 10 64bit
User avatar
Mercado_Negro
Beta Tester
Beta Tester
 
Posts: 1353
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 9:30 am

Re: Nebula Reaper workflow

Postby xyxxjx » Thu Dec 31, 2015 6:19 am

Mercado_Negro wrote:
beingmf3 wrote:It depends. If I know that the basic track won't be changed anymore, then I might as well freeze. When I "have that feeling" that the EQ or dynamic settings might change with future mix decisions, then I will render - just in order to see what exactly I put on the track.

I've set up 4 "render" macros, which all do more or less the same. IIRC, for Nebula tracks it's (1 for mono, 1 for stereo)
- save track selection
- render selected area ...
- recall track selection
- set all FX to offline

For ReaInsert tracks (with outboard) it's basically the same, just with render speed set to "1x online". If you're interested, I might post them, but it's no witchcraft to do them yourself :)


That's interesting, I do the opposite. In fact, I don't use track rendering anymore (stems actions) since freezing was implemented because I can process tracks in stages with it (render up to certain insert slot) and if I need to check what plugins were used I just see it in the Track View window.


I was thinking the same thing. Do you mean the track manager window? Could you give an example of this work flow?
xyxxjx
User Level VII
User Level VII
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:05 am


Return to Working with Nebula

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests