OK ... getting to use REAPER more, but STILL trying to address several aspects/ workflow.
I am certain that, you being a NEBULA user, can fully appreciate where this goes as for EFFICIENTLY working within the REAPER environment.
So, for those of us shy of the 'nuclear' computer, the need to 'render' or 'freeze' tracks is usually mandatory.
I would like to ask the 'experienced-ones' for helping to get others [myself] up to speed
The are some important criteria that I would like to maintain in the workflow ... one of which is maintaining a 'clean' workspace WHILE also maintaining a project history [or best can].
To note ... the work entails outside clients ... which means, THEY can change their mind IRRESPECTIVE of what we/I may think. So tracks need to be able to 'back-track' to earlier renderings. [within reason using Nebula].
To start ... is it 'rendering', or is it 'freezing' ?!?
Is there a way to render/freeze into a, type of, sub-track ... where the original track is muted, efx are disable/removed. and the new render is active and ready to be further NEBULized.
... let me just leave it here for the moment so that this all makes sense.
OK ... in the, 'trying to keep the track layouts' clean & manageable department ...
You mention putting 'original' tracks into a folder ...
OK ... I like that idea ... but ... How does this 'Parent/ Child' thing go ???
I mean ... CAN we, basically, just HIDE a track inside the 'working' folder thing, and have it just stay dormant ?? In other words, if we MUTE then UN-Mute ... will this 'original' track just stay out of the way ???
2. You mention lowering the fader. hmmm ... will a MUTE work ??? Thereby leaving the original fader level in place should we need to go back ?
I know these are very basic operation questions. But I'm having to re-think how I worked in things like SONAR, Samplitude, Cubase, etc. There are several things that REAPER has much promise for ... especially the customizing factor. The OTHER thing nice is that they seem to have more upgrades on going.
A third reason being that Giancarlo mentions that REAPER is the selected app for Nebula ... so THAT has to carry significance.
Anyway ... to continue, my hope was that some strategies & workflow ideas/ technique may be shared among us Nebulites due to the unique workflow we must have.
Normally I was just doing mastering ... but NOW things are also including mixdown. So I need to have much more workflow design [in a new program] without having to invent the wheel in a vacuum
Again ... thanks for sharing ideas, concepts and insights!
I had my Neb/REAPER workflow running prior to my i7 and before the Freeze feature was implemented so I still work with Render/Glue+Apply. I tend to prefer the Apply as new take feature because it leaves my history right up on screen as a previous lane. If I want to redo something, even from 2 steps ago, just delete the two most recent takes and you're ready to go.
Render isn't worse than that, it just creates a whole new track and mutes the old one. I found that Apply takes up less space and provides a more ergonomic view of the project; if you use just renders (as I used to) you end up with a new track for every time you render. One warning, though: Apply will apply the FX to a new take for each item you've selected. So if you have it split up into a bunch of little pieces and try, for example, to compress that, you can get different results than a flat render which takes the whole channel/stem as a single piece. For those occasions I often just render out a new stem.
RJ, since Reaper is so highly customizable, I think that every user has adapted to a different workflow. If I was you, I'd try to imagine the most convenient behaviour, and then find the commands to build the macros.
I think I'd prefer something like '1 keystroke a) creates a time selection from all items on that track, b) adds like 3 seconds tail, c) stem renders the time selection...
...and now you have the choice: either set the original track to "free item positioning", mute all the original items (snapshot?), move the rendered item to the same track (bypassed/offline'd FX) and delete the stem track OR go to next track (the original), set all FX offline and hide it OR mute the original track, turn it to a child of the (now folder) stem track, FX offline and mute and collapse OR...
Another keystroke should show you the original track(s).
Maybe also have a look at the SWS thread on the Reaper forum, I'm sure another idea might be found there. My guess is something with "snapshots".
ETA: In addition to Render vs. Apply, there's also the matter of Mono vs. Stereo vs. Multitrack for both as well as Whole track vs. Selected range. So it's very easy to use the Render/Apply tools to end up with precisely the audio files you wanted.
To throw in another method.... I admit that this is probably overkill, but like the OT, I am finicky about organization. I always have a non-nebulized project folder copied and saved, and then I start Nebulizing the tracks. I used to render new takes, put the originals in a folder (clearly labeled) and hidden from view with the SWS tracklist. But lately I have been processing tracks with Nebula in a new way for my workflow. I add the Nebula instances to the track, tweak them until I like the sound, then remove the instances from the actual track and add them to the fx browser in the batch processor and process them that way. The processed tracks go into a folder called "Neb" (you can name it anything, of course!), where they are then used to replace the files in the project folder. This has been a huge time-saver for me because if I don't like the way they sound later, I can always copy/paste the original unprocessed file (from the pre-nebula folder) right into the project folder and when I go back to the project, the file is magically back to it's original state with no need to drag them into the project from the open project. The other cool thing is that if I do ALL of my processing through the batch processor, the actual file names of each track don't change and I can open multiple versions of the project with the same rpp file, so they all have the same fader/pan/fx etc settings. They are basically identical projects with differently processed sounds. It sounds complicated but it has actually been much easier, faster, and more creatively productive for me in my Reaper/nebula work. I could map it out more clearly if you want.
1st ... ngarjuna, what you described is exactly the issue I've been dealing with. This 'APPLY' function. I've NOT seen that in REAPER This is definitely something I need to look at!
Also, Richie ... I've read many post of your's at the Reaper site, and YES, I would be very interest in ANYTHING you would share/explain on this !
Thanks to everyone offering insight/ suggestions on this. Even though this REAPER can be customized in ways that other DAWs limit ... it is enlightening to read what everyone does to handle their workflow, just so that these other possibilities are, at least, realized. Like they say, 'Ignorance may be bliss', but that is not how I want to be. This transition from a fully analogue/ console/ hardware scenario to a DAW environment has required a different way of thinking/ working.
One COOL thing that others helped on ... I now have 3 separate speaker selections available in REAPER that allows me to instantly switch between different speaker systems ... JUST like I had in the old dayz
1st ... ngarjuna, what you described is exactly the issue I've been dealing with. This 'APPLY' function. I've NOT seen that in REAPER This is definitely something I need to look at! ...
Have a look in the Actions Menu. I went ahead and made myself a toolbar (the menu locations changed a bit between 3 and 4 for render etc.) with all of the choices that I use regularly: Apply Mono, Apply Stereo, Render Track Mono, Render Area Mono, Render Track Stereo, Render Area Stereo, Glue...I don't have my studio machine set back up yet from my move, unfortunately, but it's something like that.
It was a big pain to get used to, I have to admit. But now I tend to render/apply off effects that are barely using any CPU just to keep things tidy and in line with my paradigm. Once you get a good workflow going that makes sense to you visually it starts to pick up significantly.