# Building an Orchestral Template in Reaper



## composerguy78 (Jan 27, 2019)

I am planning on turning my Vienna Ensemble Pro machine into a my main Reaper DAW machine. It is a has an intel i7 Core 7800 CPU and 128 GB RAM.

I am new to Reaper and I am looking to build a large orchestral template.

Does anyone have any pearls of wisdom in this area? 

Some of the things I am considering are:
1. Loading orchestral virtual instruments internally within Reaper instead of using Vienna Ensemble Pro. 
2. Whether to load a single instance of kontakt per instrument vs loading a kontakt multi-instrument which then has 16 midi channels routing to it and then multiple stereo audio outputs from the kontakt multi instrument.
3. How to group instruments? 

I would really appreciate any suggestions!

Felix

P.s. I am also posting this on the Reaper forum!


----------



## robgb (Jan 27, 2019)

I have found that, rather than create a full template, it's much easier to deal with track templates instead. Set up an instrument on a track the way your prefer—for example, I have a violin track layering two different violin libraries, with Reaticulate for articulation switching—then save it as a track template. I've done this will all of my orchestral instruments and only load up the track templates I need for that particular project using the right click menu. This way I'm not constantly scrolling through a huge template looking for what I need.


----------



## Ivan M. (Sep 12, 2019)

composerguy78 said:


> 2. Whether to load a single instance of kontakt per instrument vs loading a kontakt multi-instrument which then has 16 midi channels routing to it and then multiple stereo audio outputs from the kontakt multi instrument.



Hey,


I started using one kontakt instance to host multiple instruments, but that proved to be very impractical and time consuming: it forces you to have separate midi and audio tracks for a single instrument, you can't copy instruments easily, you can't clean up instruments easily, you have to setup channels properly (and kontakt is not quite friendly there). 
Now that I use a kontakt per track, it's supper easy to manage, the track list is smaller, and it doesn't impose any noticable stress on the system, as far as I've measured on my machine. It does increase the memory footprint, but it's not too much.

I've created a big template in Reaper, all articulations in separate tracks, kontakt per track, and all fx offline. Having all fx offline means the template loads very quickly, almost 600 tracks in about 7 seconds. Then I just copy the tracks I need into a new project (don't really like working with endless tracks project, and most of the time, only a small subset is needed).
To preview a sound, I have a shortcut to bring a track online, which is when it actually loads the instrument script and samples.

Hope it's useful to someone. Cheers.


----------



## Quasar (Sep 12, 2019)

I agree with Ivan N. One instance of Kontakt per, and for large templates have unused tracks disabled, loading as needed. And Rob also has a point that the Reaper Track Template is a great and powerful feature. Your RTT can consist of one instrument track or several; the flexibility here is almost limitless.

Here's what I do (thanks to Tack's help) for enabling and disabling tracks in large templates.

By default all of the instrument tracks in large templates are disabled, and thus load very quickly. Using custom actions I created Alt+E to enable sel tracks and Alt+D to disable sel tracks. In addition, I have toolbar buttons to do this. The precise commands of the custom actions:

Disable:

Track: Set all FX offline for selected tracks
Xenakios/SWS: Bypass FX of selected tracks
Xenakios/SWS: Set selected tracks record unarmed
Track: Lock track controls

Enable:

Track: Unlock track controls
Track: Set all FX online for selected tracks
Xenakios/SWS: Unbypass FX ofselected tracks
Xenakios/SWS: Set selected tracks record armed

Because I typically don't want large numbers of tracks armed (usually only the one I'm playing into), and because it's easy to lose track of what is armed and what is not in large templates, I also have a toolbar button that disarms all tracks so that I can then easily choose the track I wish to record into and know that nothing else is recording.

Finally I have a key command (Alt+V) and a toolbar button for toggling the visibility of disabled tracks. So if I've only enabled 6 tracks out of my 300 or whatever, the rest of them can quickly disappear from view entirely. The command for this in Actions is: Toggle visibility of disabled tracks.lua

Finally, you can set the the locked track color as well as the translucency (or fill mode) in the Theme Development Tweaker. I like the disabled tracks to look different enough that they are obviously disabled, but also be entirely legible.


----------



## MauroPantin (Sep 12, 2019)

I use the same thing Quasar uses, courtesy of tack as well.

I know this is an old thread, but just for posterity, the only thing I would add as a must for crafting templates quickly in Reaper is using the Routing Matrix (Alt+R on Windows). Shows every send, receive, input, etc. A very quick and powerful way to set everything up to the correct bus, etc.


----------



## jadedsean (May 24, 2020)

Interesting read, but I have to say lately I haven’t been too impressed with Reaper, don’t get me wrong it’s very customizable but when building large templates things become very laggy. I just finished building my template and it’s quite large but what i don’t understand is when I have all tracks disabled surely I shouldn’t still have a lag. I should be more specific, when I say lag I don’t mean in terms of recording but more on an navigation standpoint. Even just selecting tracks may take up to 5 seconds. I know 5 seconds isn’t a long time but when add up over the course of a day it’s a lot. 

I also don’t believe it’s my computer as it’s a new build, specs are, ryzen 3950x and 128gb ram. I have been also looking into VEPro but yesterday I just read a thread where Reaper turned out to be one of the worst in a VEPro daw comparison which surprised me, i have always believed it was one of the better daw’s for CPU consumption. Also, recently on my quest to fix these issues I stumbled across Guy Rowland VEPro vid which he outlines how to build a disabled VEPro template. This may help but I’m still unsure after reading VEPro and Reaper don’t play nice. Anyway I’m now considering a move to another DAW possibly Cubase in a bid fix these issues, although it would be a reluctant move as I really do love Reaper and I’m over the steep learning curve and I think I’m really getting a handle on things. Anyone else ever had this issue with large templates in Reaper.


----------



## sostenuto (May 24, 2020)

This started as full price product and has generously been offered recently as donation or Free.

http://store.storyteller.im/product/orchestral-template-for-reaper-otr/


----------



## MauroPantin (May 24, 2020)

@jadedsean

I had the issue you mention with a lot of tracks being selected and having lag in those situations but it was fixed as soon as I went into Reaper 6. Not sure how many tracks you have on your template, I am closing in on the 700 track count and still going good, with a similar build to yours. I have no lag here, although I don't use VEP. I imagine you are using SSD drives for everything including OS and Reaper installation? That's the other thing I changed around the same time I upgraded to R6 that could have been the issue for me.


----------



## jadedsean (May 24, 2020)

sostenuto said:


> This started as full price product and has generously been offered recently as donation or Free.
> 
> http://store.storyteller.im/product/orchestral-template-for-reaper-otr/


Haha that’s funny I’m actually using OTR, another reason I’m stumped. OTR is streamlined and very lightweight so I’m lost. I understand that track count can slow things down but when it’s disabled and my ram is at 6% and CPU not even breaking a sweat it must be a Reaper issue.


----------



## jadedsean (May 24, 2020)

MauroPantin said:


> @jadedsean
> 
> I had the issue you mention with a lot of tracks being selected and having lag in those situations but it was fixed as soon as I went into Reaper 6. Not sure how many tracks you have on your template, I am closing in on the 700 track count and still going good, with a similar build to yours. I have no lag here, although I don't use VEP. I imagine you are using SSD drives for everything including OS and Reaper installation? That's the other thing I changed around the same time I upgraded to R6 that could have been the issue for me.


So I’m on Reaper 6 since it came out and really happy with it too. My track would not be far of yours but if I’m honest I still would like to store a little more but this issue is driving me nuts so first I’ll deal with this problem, I have all my libraries on SSD drives so no issue there, regarding the OS I never changed this as I didn’t feel the need, it’s quite possible this could be a factor though. To be honest I couldn’t bare the thought of a fresh install and re-downloading my libraries a relocating everything, just seemed like a lot of hassle.


----------



## MauroPantin (May 24, 2020)

jadedsean said:


> So I’m on Reaper 6 since it came out and really happy with it too. My track would not be far of yours but if I’m honest I still would like to store a little more but this issue is driving me nuts so first I’ll deal with this problem, I have all my libraries on SSD drives so no issue there, regarding the OS I never changed this as I didn’t feel the need, it’s quite possible this could be a factor though. To be honest I couldn’t bare the thought of a fresh install and re-downloading my libraries a relocating everything, just seemed like a lot of hassle.



No need to reinstall everything and/or redownload. You can clone the OS disk and get up and running on a new SSD drive without a hiccup, I believe it is what most people do (or at least that's what I did, anyway). I used MiniTool Partition Wizard for this, but there are a ton of utilities out there that can get it done.

Have you also tried hiding the inactive and/or disabled tracks with the track manager? I always try to keep the visible tracks down to a minimum as I work. I use the Track Tagging script and a few custom actions to hide all inactive tracks minus their parent folders.

Also, are all your tracks enabled at all times? Working with disabled tracks also helps. Re-enabling them with SSDs takes like a second at most. Trevor Morris recently said in his Youtube channel that he ditched VEPro for this method. Using SSDs (and particularly NVMEs, which is what I have on mine) makes loading a breeze.


----------



## jadedsean (May 24, 2020)

MauroPantin said:


> No need to reinstall everything and/or redownload. You can clone the OS disk and get up and running on a new SSD drive without a hiccup, I believe it is what most people do (or at least that's what I did, anyway). I used MiniTool Partition Wizard for this, but there are a ton of utilities out there that can get it done.
> 
> Have you also tried hiding the inactive and/or disabled tracks with the track manager? I always try to keep the visible tracks down to a minimum as I work. I use the Track Tagging script and a few custom actions to hide all inactive tracks minus their parent folders.
> 
> Also, are all your tracks enabled at all times? Working with disabled tracks also helps. Re-enabling them with SSDs takes like a second at most. Trevor Morris recently said in his Youtube channel that he ditched VEPro for this method. Using SSDs (and particularly NVMEs, which is what I have on mine) makes loading a breeze.


Yes I originally cloned my hard drive from my laptop on to my SSD drive so that’s all good. I thought you meant a complete install. Yes I also hide tracks when not in use, I mainly work on tracks that have midi or audio the rest are hidden and disabled. Just watched the video now very cool vid, it’s actually the way I wanted to work, I actually just bought a new 1tb NVME drive and I am running 2 1tb Samsung evo’s And a 2tb Evo. I think it’s weird that have I this issue but it could well be a windows issue, although I have Reaper setup on a separate drive so I can’t see how.


----------



## coppi (May 26, 2020)

i am considering to give a try to OTR myself. my system (i7 with 16gb ram) will run out of ram at about 15 active kontakt instances. how you guys menage to handle 600 tracks is a mistery for me. the OTR manual is all about "you don't have to think about it!" and i cannot actually understand what exactly it is supposed to do with tracks, and which approach to kontakt (whether 1 or 16 instruments per instance) is adopted...


----------



## MauroPantin (May 26, 2020)

I have tried OTR, but I ended up creating my own (simpler) template instead. I am not sure it would help save RAM in any way, I don't understand why the manual says that (and looking at it, I can't find those explicit claims, so I think it might be a misunderstanding). You do have to think about it, you have to disable tracks you are not using and you have to purge samples from memory in Kontakt before saving your track templates. All the same rules apply.

OTR is a great product, though. It's very clever. I will explore the possibility of re-including into my workflow in the future but I found it too far from what I normally do, at least for the time being. 

Back to topic: The instruments need the same amount of RAM regardless of the structure of your template. The only way to get going with limited RAM is by using commands to disable tracks, freezing them, purging samples, and running a lean OS. SSDs are a must. That's how you manage 600 tracks. Also, not all tracks are enabled at the same time, I think my record is to have 60 tracks active at one point, for one cue, a year or so ago.


----------



## coppi (May 26, 2020)

i am actually referring to this passage:






these claims are quite challenging at least, and i am led to think that it must do something very, very clever to manage it. there is no "minimum requirements" sheet anywhere, by the way.
i was also interested in test OTR just to understand some basic principles and develop my own, simpler template from scratch (by the way OTR is not a "template", it is a full Reaper install with custom theme and a number of custom actions etc.)


----------



## averystemmler (May 26, 2020)

jadedsean said:


> Interesting read, but I have to say lately I haven’t been too impressed with Reaper, don’t get me wrong it’s very customizable but when building large templates things become very laggy. I just finished building my template and it’s quite large but what i don’t understand is when I have all tracks disabled surely I shouldn’t still have a lag. I should be more specific, when I say lag I don’t mean in terms of recording but more on an navigation standpoint. Even just selecting tracks may take up to 5 seconds. I know 5 seconds isn’t a long time but when add up over the course of a day it’s a lot.
> 
> I also don’t believe it’s my computer as it’s a new build, specs are, ryzen 3950x and 128gb ram. I have been also looking into VEPro but yesterday I just read a thread where Reaper turned out to be one of the worst in a VEPro daw comparison which surprised me, i have always believed it was one of the better daw’s for CPU consumption. Also, recently on my quest to fix these issues I stumbled across Guy Rowland VEPro vid which he outlines how to build a disabled VEPro template. This may help but I’m still unsure after reading VEPro and Reaper don’t play nice. Anyway I’m now considering a move to another DAW possibly Cubase in a bid fix these issues, although it would be a reluctant move as I really do love Reaper and I’m over the steep learning curve and I think I’m really getting a handle on things. Anyone else ever had this issue with large templates in Reaper.



This reminds me of a specific Reaper bug I encountered. I don't know if it has been addressed in the most recent updates, but for the longest time, I was getting ridiculous, unworkable GUI lag (including many seconds long record-arming hangups) in large sessions.

After much head scratching, I found that having a plugin with any amount of internal latency on a send that was then routed to its parent via the master-send option caused MASSIVE, unjustified UI performance problems. If I removed the plugin or routed the track to its parent via a discrete send instead of the "master" button, everything worked as expected, even in large projects.

It might be worth having a look to see if you have anything in your template that fits this description.


----------



## MauroPantin (May 26, 2020)

coppi said:


> these claims are quite challenging at least, and i am led to think that it must do something very, very clever to manage it. there is no "minimum requirements" sheet anywhere, by the way.
> i was also interested in test OTR just to understand some basic principles and develop my own, simpler template from scratch (by the way OTR is not a "template", it is a full Reaper install with custom theme and a number of custom actions etc.)



I see. As I understand it, the minimum requirements to run OTR are the same as Reaper and as the sample libraries you are planning to load into it. I don't think Storyteller claims his product will make Hollywood Orchestra Diamond run on 16GBs of RAM with the "Powerful System" patches. I have it and have tested it, it is not a magic bullet. The workflow it entails, which includes disabling tracks, is what will help maximize the memory usage. 

Still, at 16GBs of RAM you are likely to encounter limitations, I am sorry to say. The operating system alone for most PCs already takes about 4GB. My advice would be to learn to freeze, purge samples, disable tracks, etc. Even people at the top of the game with significant budgets have to do this.



averystemmler said:


> After much head scratching, I found that having a plugin with any amount of internal latency on a send that was then routed to its parent via the master-send option caused MASSIVE, unjustified UI performance problems. If I removed the plugin or routed the track to its parent via a discrete send instead of the "master" button, everything worked as expected, even in large projects.



@jadedsean This is very likely to be the solution you are looking for. It might be a coincidence, but when I re-did my template I disabled all the "parent send" checkboxes and entered discrete sends as @averystemmler has described. This was at the same time I upgraded to R6 and I stopped having the GUI lag you are referring to. Amazing find!


----------



## jadedsean (May 26, 2020)

Thanks guys for the heads up i will try this later, could you explain how to setup discrete sends i never heard of this within Reaper. Also is there a way to uncheck all parent in one go rather than manually doing it?


----------



## MauroPantin (May 26, 2020)

Discreet sends would be assigning a send instead of relying on the folder structure. Just like you would send to a reverb bus or anywhere else, but you do it with the parent folder as a destination.

The fastest way to uncheck parent/master send is through the routing matrix. ALT+R is the shortcut on Windows. The routing matrix is a very powerful tool for and I recommend getting familiar with it, you can do a lot and it's also a great birds-eye view of the entire template or project. The first column is the "parent/master" send, just click until the first checkbox for the first track is empty and then, without releasing, drag the mouse down through to the end. It should clear the entire column for you in a single pass. 

Keep in mind that after that you'll need to reactivate the send for your mixbus or stems tracks. Otherwise you'll get no sound output.


----------



## jadedsean (May 26, 2020)

MauroPantin said:


> Discreet sends would be assigning a send instead of relying on the folder structure. Just like you would send to a reverb bus or anywhere else, but you do it with the parent folder as a destination.
> 
> The fastest way to uncheck parent/master send is through the routing matrix. ALT+R is the shortcut on Windows. The routing matrix is a very powerful tool for and I recommend getting familiar with it, you can do a lot and it's also a great birds-eye view of the entire template or project. The first column is the "parent/master" send, just click until the first checkbox for the first track is empty and then, without releasing, drag the mouse down through to the end. It should clear the entire column for you in a single pass.
> 
> Keep in mind that after that you'll need to reactivate the send for your mixbus or stems tracks. Otherwise you'll get no sound output.


Great MauroPatin thank you for your help i will try this when i'm back in the studio.


----------



## jadedsean (May 26, 2020)

averystemmler said:


> This reminds me of a specific Reaper bug I encountered. I don't know if it has been addressed in the most recent updates, but for the longest time, I was getting ridiculous, unworkable GUI lag (including many seconds long record-arming hangups) in large sessions.
> 
> After much head scratching, I found that having a plugin with any amount of internal latency on a send that was then routed to its parent via the master-send option caused MASSIVE, unjustified UI performance problems. If I removed the plugin or routed the track to its parent via a discrete send instead of the "master" button, everything worked as expected, even in large projects.
> 
> It might be worth having a look to see if you have anything in your template that fits this description.


Hey dude thank you for the heads up its much appreciated.


----------



## rudi (May 26, 2020)

Quasar said:


> Here's what I do (thanks to Tack's help) for enabling and disabling tracks in large templates.
> 
> By default all of the instrument tracks in large templates are disabled, and thus load very quickly. Using custom actions I created Alt+E to enable sel tracks and Alt+D to disable sel tracks. In addition, I have toolbar buttons to do this. The precise commands of the custom actions:
> 
> ...


Great tip, thank you @Quasar and @tack - added to my custom scripts.
The more I use REAPER the more I love it!!!


----------



## tack (May 26, 2020)

rudi said:


> Great tip, thank you @Quasar and @tack - added to my custom scripts.


There are a couple more tricks I've learned along the way, such as also muting the track (which improves CPU utilization of "disabled" tracks). I have a script here for that.

(There was also a fix to an edge case involving record armed tracks. Not sure if that's still needed in Reaper 6.0, I haven't tested without it, but it doesn't hurt anything.)

And here's a link to my script for toggling visibility of disabled instrument tracks.


----------



## rudi (May 26, 2020)

Thank you so much @tack, some good scripts there!!!
It's also made me curious and wanting to explore REAPER script.
I'll have to make sure I don't get too drawn into instead of making music


----------



## mekosmowski (May 27, 2020)

On the VSL forums, a kind soul has provided a Reaticulate template for VSL.


----------



## DS_Joost (May 28, 2020)

I don't use Reaticulate, not because it's not good, but because it's too much head-scratching for me. This is nothing against @tack he did a wonderful job and it's better and more fully featured then even the expression maps in Cubase. I just can't wrap my head around it. I really really tried.

Luckily I found a jsfx that allows me to select channels via keyswitch, which can do everything that I actually want.

I friend of mine decided to build a very handy script allowing me to select everything within the midi editor except for notes below a certain note. So select all except or all notes beneath C0 for example. We already brainstormed about this perhaps even becoming a rudimentary logical editor type thing.


----------



## mekosmowski (May 28, 2020)

I'm working through setting up a template for the first time and when it comes to Reaticulate I feel like it will be almost trivial once I write my first script for an instrument, but there's a mental block for that first one.


----------



## tack (May 28, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> I just can't wrap my head around it. I really really tried.


Is it the cryptic syntax of the bank files or some other aspect you find cognitively overloading?


----------



## DS_Joost (May 28, 2020)

tack said:


> Is it the cryptic syntax of the bank files or some other aspect you find cognitively overloading?



Most likely yes. Anything that even remotely resembles programming pretty instantly sends my head spinning.


----------



## tack (May 28, 2020)

DS_Joost said:


> Most likely yes. Anything that even remotely resembles programming pretty instantly sends my head spinning.


Understandable. Not everyone is a silicon whisperer. 

It'll be more approachable in the future when I put a friendly GUI in front of everything. But in the meanwhile, yeah, I appreciate it can be daunting.


----------



## mekosmowski (May 28, 2020)

What are MSB and LSB?

Does the filename have to be data/Reaticulate.reabank or could I organize my banks, say data/VSLVIR.reabank and data/VSCO2.reabank?

Reaticulate is a track fx, right? So I need to have one instance of reaticulate per vst instrument. If I only load one of the reabank files, can there be the same MSB,LSB pair in different reabank files? If Reaticulate.reabank has to be monolithic, is / should there (be) a convention about which library is which MSB?


----------



## tack (Jun 24, 2020)

Sorry mekosmowski, I missed your questions here. (If I'm not tagged or quoted I stand a good chance of missing something during the busier times as these are for me.)



mekosmowski said:


> What are MSB and LSB?


It's part of the MIDI specification for program banks. Reaper provides the underlying bits and pieces to support banks, and Reaticulate adds some customizations on top of it.

There's more about that in Reaticulate's documentation, specifically here.




mekosmowski said:


> Does the filename have to be data/Reaticulate.reabank or could I organize my banks, say data/VSLVIR.reabank and data/VSCO2.reabank?


It has to be in that one file. I didn't spend a lot of time allowing better organization because, to be perfectly honest, by now I had expected to have a proper GUI for managing all this stuff and so the underlying files would be invisible to users anyway.

Life has a way of throwing curve balls at one's free time, however.



mekosmowski said:


> Reaticulate is a track fx, right? So I need to have one instance of reaticulate per vst instrument. If I only load one of the reabank files, can there be the same MSB,LSB pair in different reabank files? If Reaticulate.reabank has to be monolithic, is / should there (be) a convention about which library is which MSB?


Reaticulate is a combination of a global Lua script that provides the GUI, some overall coordination, and most of the overall user experience, _plus_ an FX instance that needs to be installed on each track Reaticulate is to manage.

Just one FX per track is needed, so if you have a multi-timbral VST that supports multiple instruments (on different channels usually), you can map in multiple banks onto the track (on the channels that correspond to the VI) and the one Reaticulate FX instance can manage all of them.

(MSB,LSB) tuples must be unique across a given Reaper installation. Reaticulate itself doesn't so much care about MSB/LSB, but Reaper uses this information to resolve the program change event into a human readable name in the MIDI piano roll (or in the arrange view if you have that feature turned on). So if they aren't unique, Reaper could display the wrong name for a given articulation.

The only convention about MSB established by Reaticulate is that MSB 64 and above is reserved for factory banks. Otherwise it's not prescriptive.

I can understand an argument to establish a convention that assigns to different vendors to reduce the likelihood of collisions as users share more banks. But ultimately MSB/LSB is something I'd rather users not have to think about. It's a bit of an internal detail for Reaper.

To that end, I've got a design I'm working on for Reaticulate to identify banks a different way, and have Reaticulate randomly assign MSB/LSB so users don't need to worry about that. And then, instead of the banks being authoritative on the user's filesystem, they would be stored within the project when mapped in (with an option to synchronize system-wide changes to the project if Reaticulate notices a difference), which allows projects to be more easily shared without having to also pre-share banks.

Bottom line is that this makes the UX a lot nicer, even though it's _quite_ a lot more complex under the hood.

If you're interested in the gory technical details, those are here: https://github.com/jtackaberry/reaticulate/issues/63


----------



## Dementum (Jun 30, 2020)

tack said:


> There are a couple more tricks I've learned along the way, such as also muting the track (which improves CPU utilization of "disabled" tracks). I have a script here for that.
> 
> (There was also a fix to an edge case involving record armed tracks. Not sure if that's still needed in Reaper 6.0, I haven't tested without it, but it doesn't hurt anything.)
> 
> And here's a link to my script for toggling visibility of disabled instrument tracks.


Hey @tack 

May I ask what the improvement from using your script over using the four actions as described by Quasar is?


----------



## tack (Jun 30, 2020)

Dementum said:


> May I ask what the improvement from using your script over using the four actions as described by Quasar is?


The main differences are described in the part you quoted, but there's also a UX improvement too (at least in the way I personally work) in that it's a single script to toggle on and off, as opposed to having two separate actions. But if you just added mute toggling to Quasar's actions and combine it with the Reaper option "do not process muted tracks" you're most of the way there.


----------



## TimRideout (Nov 11, 2020)

@Quasar (and all) - would you be willing to provide a link to your template? I'd love to see the layout.



rudi said:


> Great tip, thank you @Quasar and @tack - added to my custom scripts.
> The more I use REAPER the more I love it!!!


----------



## Quasar (Nov 11, 2020)

TimRideout said:


> @Quasar (and all) - would you be willing to provide a link to your template? I'd love to see the layout.


I possibly could, but am not sure how to go about it, since these templates are large because they include all of the VSTs/VSTis in an .rpp file, and unless you had the same sample libraries etc. in the exact same location on your drives (which of course you wouldn't) the template would open with a ton of error messages... And in my case, it's nothing fancy. Just folder groups routing to a few effects tracks and then a sub master before the master... 

... You could open a template in Reaper in recovery offline mode, I suppose... I dunno.


----------

